The Scotsman reports

Plans to overhaul league system dominate agm

Published Date: 26 June 2010
By DAVID FERGUSON
A DESIRE to reconstruct Scotland's "dysfunctional relic" of a league system will be the first talking point of today's Scottish Rugby Union annual general meeting at Murrayfield, with arguments over whether it should happen now or later.


• Currie finished top of the Scottish league last year winning the Premier 1 title, but at lower levels financial concerns have led to a call for regional leagues feeding just two national divisions. Picture: PA

With clubs in Scotland having handed over greater powers to an executive body in 2005, under a new system of twin-track governance, the agm may no longer carry the same weight as it once did, but still it represents the one meeting of the year in which clubs can come together and make obvious the weight of their support for the SRU and its direction, or not.

The arrival last year of Graham Lowe, pictured, as the union's first director of 'performance' rugby has further helped efforts to create a greater harmony between the administration and its member clubs, and lessen the likelihood of an attack at the agm. But, much as the SRU might have liked to, it has not wiped it out.

After the upbeat confirmation of improved financial and playing figures, and recording of a rare 'three-in-a-row' by the Scotland team, today's meeting will swiftly turn to the opening motions to restructure club rugby. Proposed by the Crieff and Strathearn, Preston Lodge and Kinross clubs, the first calls for a shift to more regionalised rugby with just two wholly national leagues of 12 teams each, instead of the current seven.

It then suggests splitting the next 24 clubs into east and west leagues, followed down the pyramid by three leagues representing east, west and the Caledonia region. The reserve leagues are also re-shaped in plans for all levels which their spokesmen will state have the potential to breathe new life into a struggling club game.

Roy Comfort, Chairman of the Forum of Scottish Rugby Supporters (FoSRS), who helped the club pull the proposal together, stated: "The motion is about fixing something that is seriously broke. The Scottish league system is a dysfunctional relic. Half the clubs play nationwide, creating fantastic travel mileage and costs. It loses players to the game, as not that many want to sit on a coach all day. It slows promotion. Its over-large leagues create a marathon nine-month season. We can go on and on.

"Other sports have mixed firsts and seconds leagues at regional level to add strength and depth, but not in SRU-land, which is generally about 50 years behind.

"But give the league system six tweaks and, hey presto, a modern, flatter one appears, with reduced travel and costs, faster promotion, greater regional depth and so on. It is fixable – but is it fixable by those running Murrayfield?"

That is the big question for delegates today. The SRU insist they like much of the proposal but have made it clear that they would have preferred for it to have come through the new channels they have set up in recent times, primarily a season structure working party chaired by Jim Fleming, the former international referee. As a result, they are urging clubs to vote against this motion today and instead back plans to allow a more in-depth debate. Fleming will speak against the motion today, and he told us why.

"We do see a fair amount of merit in what has been proposed by the clubs," he said. "Indeed, 18 months ago the season structure working party went out to the clubs with a similar scenario, suggesting two leagues and regionalisation thereafter. That suggestion was overwhelmingly rejected by the clubs two-thirds to a third and so it died a death.

"Obviously, people are entitled to change their opinion and there is a feeling out there that there is a requirement to change. What we would say is that rather than voting on this...we would rather get more discussion going with all the clubs to find out whether all the clubs are actually in favour of it.

"In the last reorganisation of the leagues and cup, we sent questionnaires out to all clubs to canvass their views and if the agm decide this year that they want the season structure working party and the council to look at this...we will go further and go out and meet with the clubs through various fora and find out exactly whether they are in favour of more regionalisation, want the status quo, or what they do want as far as club rugby is concerned in Scotland."

Fleming insisted this could happen swiftly and a report on a new league structure be presented by the end of the year, for consideration at the 2011 agm and implementation the following season.

"There are a huge amount of positives (in the motion]. For instance, if we can cut down on travelling expenses that's fine. Every club will tell you that they are short of money at the bar and need money, and if they're having to fork out three or four hundred quid on a regular basis for a bus it's not too good for them, so it's far better having local, regionalised games.

"My message to clubs will be to vote for the amendment, as it's a technicality, but vote against the motion because we think there's a lot more work requiring to be done on it and one or two loopholes in it we need to sort and the council have given an undertaking that they will work on it with the clubs over the next six months, come up with a properly reorganised league structure if the clubs so desire for presentation at next year's agm for implementation that season."

However, Comfort remains sceptical. He added: "The clubs putting the motion today have just undergone a month of bombardment and assault from the SRU, by email, press coverage and even through official web channels. Murrayfield is desperate to stop the scheme getting through. But now they want to take it in-house, as a basis for an SRU plan? The SRU and logical league plans are unfortunately not natural bedfellows. Their last attempt 18 months ago, led by Jim Fleming's committee, was not thought through, too narrow in scope and poorly explained. It also had a major structural flaw at its core.

"The idea that they'll do better next time is implausibly optimistic. The SRU's internal system means that 15 forums and committees have to agree every detail. Of course they won't, so no logical overall blueprint has a hope of emerging. Only the agm can impose order on the thing by backing this motion by two thirds."

The second motion of the day also calls for reconstruction, but only affecting the league programme of Premier One and Two and has the full support of the clubs involved and FoSRS, who also include it in their plan. The clubs have agreed on a new season structure for 2010-11 that has the top 24 teams play their first 11 games home or away, and then split into groups of eight to fight it out for the title, relegation to Premier Two and promotion to Premier One, and relegation to Premier Three.

The remaining eight motions involve changing rules allowing players to play for more than one club, expert guidance to prevent seemingly unworkable motions being passed in future, allowing representatives to remain on the Scottish Rugby Council and international bodies even when their time in office expires, in "interests of continuity and influence", the vice-president's position being restored, an increase in the number of supporting clubs required, to ten, for a motion to stand, the president to take over as chair of all general meetings whether he is the council chairman or not and a call for exile clubs such as London Scottish to be represented by the president on the council.

This article was originally posted on 26-Jun-2010, 06:42 by Hugh Barrow.
Last updated by Hugh Barrow on 26-Jun-2010, 06:47.