Henry Arundell (left) turned his back on England in favor of club rugby in France. Photo: Getty Images/Dan Mullan
My former England captain Will Carling recently suggested that for current players, playing for England is no longer seen as the pinnacle of their career ambitions. I agree with him when he says that this is how it should be. I do not accept the evidence he offers, citing players such as Joe Marchant, Jack Willis and Henry Arundell who chose to play in France and are unable to participate in international selection.
As my Telegraph colleague Charlie Morgan highlighted Steve Borthwick, the England manager, did not consider either of these players to be guaranteed starters. In addition, Willis and Arundell had to sign a contract when their clubs went bankrupt and became atypical. When your livelihood is on the line, inaction is unacceptable.
However, Carling is right to maintain his desire for international selection to be considered paramount for any player. Anyone who has played for their country will tell you that the experience is very different from playing for their club. The weight of responsibility, expectations, media attention and social media scrutiny all make this a very different task. It's more rewarding when everything goes right; It's much more painful when this doesn't happen.
Behind this debate is the fact that the men's game in England is currently in complete disarray. It is approaching the point where, without dramatic changes, it could slide down the list of minority sports.
So many viewers reflexively and, frankly, lazily say that it is the fault of the Rugby Union, without understanding what the RFU actually stands for. It is not a government that has the power to make laws that compel action and produce results. It is a mixture of conflicting interests that includes the members (mostly club members), the Board and the board of directors, which delegates control to the executive staff. When someone says: “Why doesn’t the RFU do something?”, he does not indicate which part of the RFU should do what.
Now our Premier League is at war with the Council over what money the RFU should give for the professional game. The Championship is at war with the Premier League and the Council with no credible plan other than «give us more money». The Rugby Players' Association is in conflict with clubs and the RFU over funding, and England players recently decided that splitting from the RPA would bring them more money.
The scale of rugby's problems has been established in a recent Ernst and Young report that, Although rugby is the fourth most popular sport in the country in terms of participation, it drops to 28th place for the 18 to 24 age group. Without improvements in this situation, the future of men's rugby is far from secure.
Amazon abandons Premiership TV
English Rugby also needs to note the reasons for Amazon Prime's reported decision not to commission the next Mud, Sweat and Tears series, which followed Premier League clubs in the build-up to the game. -off in the pilot.
Several sources have told me that Amazon has made the awkward but blunt remark that Premier League rugby is “a disaster, isn’t it?” The following is a non-exhaustive list of further criticisms: the game is too difficult for the casual fan; it stops and starts too often; the rugby calendar is too confusing and confusing; stadiums must be filled to attract spectators; in total, only 200,000 people regularly watch rugby coverage on TNT, and these are already die-hard fans; If I'm not a fan of rugby or a particular club, why should I care about a particular club's performance?
So, for all those advocating for the rule to be scrapped overseas, how do you propose to compensate for the absence of all the top players going overseas? How do you make the Premier League attractive enough for broadcasters? How do you propose filling stadiums without these stars?
Problems can be solved
Without filling out dozens of columns, I cannot give a comprehensive solution plan. These problems are solvable, but, despite what is said, they are not simple; nor are they the fault of only one party. However, I am confident that without a fundamental change in attitudes on all sides, men's rugby will continue to struggle. It may not be easy, but moving from exhaustion to cooperation is the most fundamental requirement, because without it you cannot solve any serious problem.
By all means, rugby can maintain its traditional point of view , according to which it should, in principle, be a game for the players, and its structure should not be dictated by broadcasters. If he does this, he cannot expect to make the maximum profit. If he wants that, he'll have to ask broadcasters what they want rather than tell them what they're going to get.
Свежие комментарии