Devious England tortured by strife

There was a time in rugby football when a word meant a bond and when integrity and honour were of paramount importance. Those were the days when people in the game did not seek to involve themselves in clandestine meetings or dubious deals or hijack the game in their own self interest whatever the cost or consequences.

Some of the happenings in English rugby since the game went professional make one despair. We have been down the road of proposals for British Leagues, Anglo-Welsh Leagues and Anglo-French Leagues. Their proponents have come out with exaggerated claims and suggestions that have not been viable. It has been one wrangle after the other and these have had their knock-on effects here and elsewhere. Remember in the early days of the European Cup when attempts were made to stop Irish players' releases for the competition despite guarantees given when they signed? Those attempts were made by clubs not in the European Cup. Then we had the attempts to stop the Irish provinces from competing in Europe.

Those were the times, of course, when we were told by the new English club owners that theirs was the earth. Those of us who asked questions and cast doubts were classed as a bunch of old fashioned conservatives hidebound by tradition. What we have seen since in England has been chaos, with great old clubs either going to the wall or being consigned to the outer regions.

Last season we had the boycott of the European Cup by the English clubs. That was to prove very costly not alone in financial terms but in other respects too. It certainly did not help any of the home nations in the World Cup, it most certainly did not help the English clubs. For instance 12 of the Ireland World Cup squad were playing in England last season. All were deprived of European competition. And then we hear talk about standards and competitive structures. Was not one of the main aims of the European Cup to give players quality competitive rugby just below the internationals?

The English clubs wanted to run the European Cup, wanted to design it to suit themselves. When they did not get their way, they behaved like the spoiled child who took the ball home when he did not get his own way.

Now no sooner are the English clubs back in Europe - and they have hardly set the scene alight thus far with their results - than we are back to yet another controversy fashioned by most of those who are in the first division of the English League.

The latest proposal, the brain child of Tom Walkinshaw, the owner of Gloucester and a man more noted for his involvement in motor racing than rugby, has the potential to tear the game asunder in England.

He has come up with a formula for a 16 team British League, involving 10 clubs from England, four from Wales and two from Scotland. Did we not hear a similar suggestion in the not so long ago? What one may ask is wrong with Walkinshaw's proposal? Quite an amount in actual fact. Let us look at the possible consequences, but before that did I hear someone mention the famous Mayfair Agreement, that alleged great accord worked out between the English clubs and their parent the English Rugby Football Union (RFU)? Was there not a specific clause in that about organising competitions only with mutual consent.

Sadly the kind of wrangling and controversy we are constantly seeing is the currency of the game in England. Clubs were taken over by businessmen, who knew little and cared less about the game. Their objective was business and money and they failed miserably. Their track record is there for all to see. What has happened in England over the last four years has not alone revealed the mean, unprincipled baser instincts of some involved in the game but is a telling commentary on those who rushed the game into professionalism without any proper preparation.

Now when it appeared as if some semblance of stability was being brought to bear, we are back again in the depths of threats and controversy. We have been told that the proposed league would generate around £84 million over four years. Now does that not have a familiar ring to it too? Remember all those multi-million pound proposals of the not so long ago?

As there are currently 12 first division teams in England, Walkinshaw's proposals, for which he has apparently got the backing of most, would mean two of the 12 saying bye bye. Two more expendable among the many others.

Nothing new in that either, remember Richmond. But there is another crucial issue and here Ireland comes into play. A British League can only come into being if it is sanctioned by the Home Unions.

Unless that is forthcoming the clubs involved would have to openly defy their unions and the consequences of that could be immense for their players. An RFU spokesman has got it right for once when he said. "Such a league would have no legitimacy." Then we come to the core issue when he added, "Since the inception of professionalism rugby has been driven by short-termism."

So if those involved defy their unions, will it mean automatic suspension and all it involves?

Even if the league were to go ahead, how good would it be, how appealing for the public? Would it be any better than the overvalued Allied Dunbar? The presentation of the proposals to the RFU should be interesting.