The RFU has issued a statement (www.premiershiprugby.com/2023/02/01/allianz-
premier-15s-2023-24-season-update/) that leaves as many points in doubt as it solves.
It begins:
The Rugby Football Union (RFU) can confirm Sale Sharks Women and Worcester Warriors Women have been issued with a conditional offer to join the Allianz Premier 15s league for the 2023/24 season.’
My thoughts:
First, it gets the name of one of those two clubs wrong.
Second, they receive only a conditional offer. Even at this stage, after so many discussions, we are not allowed to see how next year’s league will look. Wouldn’t a firm statement along the lines ‘These ten clubs will form next season’s AP 15s’ have been far preferable?
UWW evidently came ‘very close’ to the demands set. They may well know where and by how much they failed, but the public doesn’t. Are those standards the same as set out in the regulations published in 2017? If not, how have they been adjusted? Are they more stringent now the RFU has a far better understanding of the challenges facing clubs?
Third, not a mention of the two clubs who are to be ousted from their presence, DMP Sharks and Wasps. Why not?
No surprise at all about the decision, but the statement makes repeated reference to the needs of northern England, while silently disposing of one of its two representatives. A single club cannot possibly represent the whole of the north.
As for the other club – Wasps, along with Richmond, ousted in 2020, represent two of the most senior women’s clubs in the land, in the world. No matter, they are out. And without a single mention, a single tribute. How does Sue Day feel about that?
And further:
‘The tender panel made a strong recommendation for the RFU and Women’s Premier 15 Ltd (WP15) to explore how greater geographical spread could be provided in the league.’
Exactly the same point was made in the previous statement. So we haven’t reached any further in that mystery. Why admit this failure so publicly?
My view: no improvement in geographical balance is achievable without major interventions by the RFU, for example, limiting (or enforcing!) the movement of players (probably contrary to employment law).
The statement continues:
‘The RFU has … developed a package of support to grow the game in the North, which coupled with a strategy for further investment will allow Sale Sharks to adequately address the feedback from the tender panel.’
Is that package the same one that last year failed to support DMP who now disappear from sight without a mention?
What will the ‘further investment’ be? Enough money to attract players the way that Exeter, Harlequins and Saracens can? That would be a start.
It would be fascinating to know what the ‘feedback’ was from the tender panel to Sharks.
Charlie Hayter, RFU Women’s Rugby Performance Manager, says: ‘we will work with clubs and WP15 to build an integrated system of opportunities to compete at every level.’
‘Integrated’ can mean a multitude of things, but among the most crucial issues is equality, of funding above all.
‘At every level’ presumably includes all the levels below the elite Prem 15s. But there is no indication of how the leading clubs in that sector (Championships North and South), could possibly be brought closer to acceptance within the elite league. We might wonder how many years it will take for their most successful clubs to jump that hurdle.
Finally:
Belinda Moore, CEO of Women’s Premier 15s Ltd says: ’It’s a really exciting time for women’s rugby at all levels, and we’re really pleased to see 10 clubs now moving forwards in their preparations for joining Allianz Premier 15s for next season.’
Still no mention of the grievous losses that accompany these advances. The phrase ‘at all levels’ doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.
In current circumstances, it’s not as if a club might be relegated one season and promoted the next. They are doomed, to coin a phrase. You can trace former Wasps and Richmond players all over the place – including the Red Roses squad (Abby Dow, Alex Matthews, Amy Cokayne, Bryony Cleall, Claudia Macdonald, Ellie Boatman, Ellie Kildunne, Leanne Infante, Maud Muir, Sadia Kabeya, Vickii Cornborough). Meanwhile, the leading lights in the Championship remain marooned there.
Funding
At present the disparities between most and least affluent are grotesque.
Some years ago, Gary Street advised clubs to go out and look for sponsors. But sponsors are easier to find in some parts of the country than others. And some have much deeper purses than others.
Who’s in charge?
I quote:
‘Once the Premier 15s NewCo Board is established, it will be the responsibility of the Board (and shareholders) to consider any league expansion for the 2024/25 season onwards and the process or system for entry.’
That is the first reference I have seen to a ‘Premier 15s NewCo Board’ which is still awaiting its baptism. Where does it fit into the system?
We already have the anonyomous tender panel (who made the latest choices), the Women’s Premier 15 Ltd (WP15) and the RFU; so that makes four layers of authority. Or is ‘Premier 15s NewCo Board’ just a renaming of the WP15?
Who will be the shareholders? You and me, or the great and the good? Perhaps just the ten clubs.
The mere fact that a company is taking over the AP 15s leads to questions of ultimate responsibility. How far does WP15’s authority run, and when will the RFU come peering over its shoulder to say ‘You can’t do that’?
The parallel example of the RFU and Premiership Rugby provides an awkward example of two bodies trying to agree every step forward and rarely succeeding.
The phrase ‘any league expansion’ begs one more question. If it means simply more teams being admitted to the league, will the calendar be kind enough to stretch itself out to accommodate them?
And we mustn’t forget World Rugby’s plan for a global calandar, which looks more likely to find completion within the women’s game than the men’s.
Expanding the league might well remove some of these terrible choices that have to be made, but experience tells us it is wise to limit the number of competing clubs inside a single league.
The new company means one more storey in the pyramid. And still we wait.
Peering into my rather misted crystal ball, I can still see four clubs struggling to compete next year: Ealing Trailfinders and Leicester Tigers (where do they get their players from?) and, to a lesser extent, Sale Sharks and UWW. They will no longer have DMP and Wasps to ensure they don’t finish at the bottom of the pile.
