IRFU Strategic Document "Taking Irish Rugby Forward"
Author: NULL
2003-10-24
IRFU Strategic Document "Taking Irish Rugby Forward"

Response of Clontarf FC

Introduction:

Clontarf FC have outlined below our position with regards to the Consultative Document Taking Irish Rugby Forward. This response has been put together following discussion on the matter by our Club Executive. In addition we made copies available at the Club Offices, advised members by notification on the Club notice boards and also advised members via our Web Site, inviting them to make written submissions to the Chairman of Rugby or indeed direct to the IRFU. We have put together our response using the template provided in the Consultative Document Feedback Form.



What do you most enjoy about your current participation in Irish Rugby?

Being a Club that is performing at the highest level of All Ireland Rugby with significant recent success while still maintaining a vibrant community based Junior club and youth/minis section. Seeing local players progressing through the ranks to a level where they are competing for professional places on Provincial panels.




What do you enjoy least about your current participation in Irish Rugby?

· The constant struggle to match income and current expenditure while at the same time having to incur necessary capital expenditure to maintain and improve Club facilities.
· The increasingly divergent interests of Club and Professional Rugby to the point that what used to be perceived as our Provincial Representative side is now becoming a direct competitor for sponsorship, players and spectators.
· The increasing administrative demands being placed on voluntary Club officials in the areas of registration (Minis/Youths) player eligibility (junior competition) etc.

What would you most like to change about Irish rugby?

· The narrow base from which we draw our Rugby players. The over dependence on ‘elite’ schools and Academies to produce and fast track representative players.
· The increasing bureaucracy and inherent expense in supporting professional rugby.

What do you think of the vision for Irish rugby articulated in the consultation document?

The vision in itself is laudable and difficult to argue against. However a couple of the strategic goals are unrealistic and if pursued will distort what might otherwise be achievable and realistic goals.

Ireland in the top 5 nations in the world. If, given our population size and potential playing numbers, we can use the resources available to us to maintain a position in the top 7/8 countries and aim to be number 6 on a consistent basis then that would be a realistic and achievable goal.

Having the best domestic program in the Northern Hemisphere. Our view and that of many other clubs is that we have the worst at present. We are so far behind France and England to also make this goal unrealistic and unachievable.

Concentrating a disproportionate amount of the available resources into the immediate needs of the professional game will prove short sighted, running the risk, as it will, of running down the numbers of people playing the game, referees, coaches, and administrators and perhaps even spectators.

It would be far better to have a specific, quantifiable and meaningful goal of broadening the base and increasing the numbers playing the game at all levels. By growing playing numbers, good leadership, a top class stadium and facilities, leading to a more vibrant and growing sport at all levels, we may be able to make the vision of excellence a reality.


What do you believe are the most important issues to address in Irish Rugby and why are they the most important.

Growth and retention of the numbers playing amateur rugby at all levels with particular reference to Schools and Youths rugby.

The critical issue for the game going forward, must be to grow the numbers playing and involved in our game. Without a critical mass being involved at all levels we will not have the vital resource, namely human resources, to play, administer and support the vision for the future. If a country with a population similar to New Zealand wishes to compete consistently at the same level then we must have the same penetration in playing numbers.

Closing the gap between AIL Division One and Provincial Rugby.

With the gap widening the pressure on Clubs, usually in direct competition with Provinces, to compete for sponsorship, players and support, is ever increasing. Long term the future of some of the more successful clubs may be under threat. What is needed is a viable and comprehensive Division One competition that offers a specific proposition to players, sponsors and supporters alike and is one that compliments the provincial game.

Furthermore the widening gap could be used as an excuse by provinces to fast track Academy players directly into the professional game thereby further narrowing the base of players from which our professional ranks are being recruited. There must be a natural progression from mini to youth to club, professional and finally international player. This progression is currently a rarity although it is pleasing to see a number of players in our international panel who have progressed down this route. This route is the most cost effective in that the expense in developing the player is minimal in the early stages and shared over time by club, province and country.

Stadium Facilities

Simply put the vision and strategic goals are unachievable in an environment where we have a 1940’s stadium and facilities in the 21st century.

What solution to these issues do you propose?

See comments under 6 action areas.


What are your views and suggestions in relation to the 6 action areas for Irish rugby identified in the consultation Document:

Domestic Game

Club Vs Schools

Clontarf FC strongly recommend that the position regarding Schools Section ‘B’ players being ineligible for club youth teams be reversed. This issue is a constant problem for our Youth Section organisers . Effectively, in Leinster at any rate, anyone in a ‘B’ school cannot play for a club during their secondary education, irrespective of whether they are involved in JCT and SCT panels. Given that many of these players have come through the ranks of minis rugby with Metropolitan clubs, this leads to player attrition, coach disillusionment, inability to enter competitions etc. It is developing into the most serious and worrying problem with regard to the Youth Section. Effectively it could make all of a Metropolitan club’s efforts in Mini Rugby come to nothing.

The irony is that more and more of our mini players are looking towards an education in rugby playing schools because of the interest in rugby gained while playing minis with us. If these players are lost for their most formative rugby years then all of the Club’s efforts at minis level amounts to nothing. From talking to other Metropolitan clubs, ours is a common experience. A recent study for the Leinster Branch shows that up to 75% of players that play rugby in their first year in Secondary School are lost to the game by the time they leave secondary education.

Providing continuity and choice through the option of playing with their club during their teens means that they are not forced to make yet another life decision at eighteen years of age, namely will I continue to play this game after school and with what club. The effort of having to find a club or reintegrate into a club at this stage means that more often the answer is no.

The effect of this ruling impacts more directly on players in schools who do not make the JCT and SCT panels. They are left to play meaningless games at 2nd or 3 rd team level when they could be playing competitive youth rugby with their club and integrate with players who are not attending rugby playing schools. It is difficult enough retaining players through their teenage years without further compounding it by removing choice and forcing players in section ‘B’ schools to play with their schools exclusively.

This ruling also adds to a view commonly held that schools rugby is elitist and exclusive, hardly an impression the IRFU wishes to create at a time when they are trying to expand the game. The more choice we provide the more players we will retain. The problem is as much at Branch level as at the Schools.

The IRFU have to deal with this urgently and remove any such barriers to playing.


AIL competition

Clontarf FC supports the second option but with some adjustments. We suggest a Premier Division plays AIL for a full season home and away. This division should have a minimum of 10 and maximum of 14 teams with promotion and relegation on a meritocracy basis i.e. bottom team in the Premiership relegated and the top Division 2 Team (winner of playoffs) promoted.

We do not support any suggestion that each city or region is entitled to 2 or 3 places in the Premiership. It should be established and operate on a merit only basis.

Division Two and below should revert to provincial competition with All Ireland round robin/ knockout playoff to establish winners.

The Premiership should be significantly supported through proper promotion, full travel subventions, coaching subventions, significant payments to clubs in the event of players playing for provinces. The rewards for players playing with provinces should be ongoing and incremental if players progress to international level. The incentive should be there for clubs to produce players for the provinces either part time or as full professionals with the efforts of clubs properly rewarded financially. In addition a minimum level of facilities including floodlights and gyms would be a prerequisite and financially supported in addition to club academies.

A proper semi-professional Premiership would then be the exclusive stepping stone to the professional game with Academy players developing their game at this level. We would envisage a situation where provinces could retain say 25 full professionals and draw the extra players as and when required from the Clubs throughout the season. We acknowledge that this has the potential of causing issue with clubs but if the ground rules were properly set out from the start and there was financial compensation in place the net effect would be an infinitely more cost effective professional set up.

The end result of this proposal would be a Premiership that is semi-professional and a short stepping stone to full time provincial rugby. The financing of this initiative would come from the significant savings made in reducing full time professionals to 25 per province. In addition the return to provincial competition below Premiership level would create significant savings in travel subventions which could also be redirected into the Premiership. Finally, Premiership clubs would have a vastly improved product to sell to benefactors, sponsors and club supporters alike, raising the potential for further funding.

Finally we would support an initiative to create a Celtic League round robin at the end of the season involving the winners and runners-up in the National club competitions in Ireland, Scotland and Wales and also the possibility of an All Ireland cup with Premiership Teams seeded to enter in the latter stages.

Clontarf FC does not see any benefit in the creation of amateur representative teams. This may be appealing to clubs below Premiership level.

Professional Game:

Clontarf does not have a view with regard to the 6 options put forward by the document. We do not believe it is an ‘either/or’ situation. We will support the initiative that is the most financially viable while maintaining as much control as possible for the IRFU and will not further divert funds from being put into the development of the game at other levels.

Clontarf suggestions would include:

· Reducing the number of full time professionals to levels that are sustainable. If that necessitates semi professional players in Clubs being on standby to step up as required or indeed the reduction in the number of professional Teams then so be it. Clontarf would prefer a solution that maintained the four Provinces with the panel numbers reduced.

· Centralisation of the administration of professional rugby into the IRFU. There must be huge economies of scale and significant cost savings to be made from centralising such areas as Logistics, Medical, Finance, Legal and Administration into one unit supporting all provinces from the one location. This would remove the burden of administration of the professional teams from the four Provincial branches leaving them to focus on the grass roots game in their respective areas.

· There should be a cap on the number of foreign players eligible to play at provincial level. We would suggest a cap of 1/2. This will force provinces to look more closely at their own resources and focus more attention on player development domestically.

· The Celtic League is not in the best interests of Irish teams. We do not believe the restructured Celtic League is in the best interests of Irish Rugby being too big and more suited to the needs of the Welsh and Scottish. One of the main arguments for keeping Irish talent at home was to ensure that they were not over exposed to rugby in England or France, ie. having to play more than 25 games. Recent developments with the Celtic League have removed that benefit.


Facilities:

Clontarf would support an option, not actually proposed in the document, that Lansdowne be revamped to a modern 45,000 capacity stadium for lesser Internationals and that Croke Park be leased for the major matches. If this could be done in conjunction with the FAI, all the better. Waiting for a new National Stadium is not an option given Government procrastination and the likelihood that it would move from the City Centre.

Clontarf would not be in support of a National Training Centre on the scale outlined in section 6.1 unless significantly funded by Government aid.


Finance:

· We believe that the presentation of the financial information in the Strategic Document gives a distorted view of the position and is designed to support a particular point of view. In particular, it gives the impression that club rugby is a drain on the finances of the IRFU and that without the professional game the IRFU would be in difficulties. That is not accepted by us. Full audited accounts of the IRFU should be made available as a mater of course to each club that is affiliated to the IRFU and there should be full transparency in such accounts.

Leadership, Governance & Operations

· We repeat the point made regarding the centralisation of Operations for the four provincial professional teams (see Professional Game comments).

· In addition we wonder whether the IRFU committee is too unwieldy to be fully effective and wonder why the Deloitte and Touche report on this issue was not published.


As stated in our introduction the above are the views of Clontarf Football Club with regard to the IRFU Strategic Planning Group Consultative Document “Taking Irish Rugby Forward”. These have been collated following a comprehensive, consultative process within the Club.

We hope that you will give our views appropriate consideration and we would be happy to contribute further as required.



John Glackin Chairman
Terry Browne Chairman of Rugby

Clontarf Football Club

---