Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Wednesday, 20th August 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Scotland On Sunday site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

SRU dropped the ball in London Scottish U-turn



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 08 June 2008
THERE'S MANY a slip betwixt cup and lip, as they say in the leafy South West London borough of Richmond. The London Scottish plan to re-launch themselves as Scotland's third pro-team has been seriously undermined after the SRU stepped back from the venture and cancelled their part of the funding, around one quarter of the total, which the club was led to believe was as good as in the bank.
The exile club has put together numerous other investors including such venerable supporters of Scottish rugby as Willie Purves, the former chairman of HSBC, and Tesco chairman David Reid but they were still relying upon a sizeable contribution from
Murrayfield in terms of both players and hard cash.

The club has every right to feel let down. The SRU chief executive Gordon McKie and chairman Allan Munro pored over the minutiae in six pages of a memorandum of understanding with club officials a few weeks back which is a strange thing to do before doing an abrupt U-turn. There are unconfirmed reports that it was the council, the club representatives, who persuaded the SRU executive board to change its mind. One Murrayfield insider gave his view of the affair last week: "The board is still 100% behind the venture in principle but there was a meeting with a group of the club's investors and we did not feel that their business plan stacked up."

When pressed on what exactly that meant, the source claimed that the London club couldn't guarantee a meaningful standard of rugby for Scotland's young professional players while they were lying in England's National Three (South). Perhaps more pertinently, he also admitted that any move by Murrayfield to throw several hundred thousand pounds at the London-based club in cash and kind when Premier One members are receiving about £1,000 per annum would provoke "a hell of a backlash from the clubs back home".

There probably would be a backlash of some sort although that is not to say the SRU should not be bold if they believe it the right thing to do and McKie has never been accused of courting popularity.

Another insider argued that there was not enough "clear water" between London Scottish and the best of Scotland's domestic clubs. He argued that if the exiles were to gain another promotion they would be in a far better position to return cap in hand to Murrayfield when they were in England's National Two, just one promotion away from National One. It seems that the SRU may be willing to support the club once they reach the elite rugby level but are unwilling to help them get there.

While the political difficulties of supporting the exile club with finance and players are obvious, the real risks lie not in acting but in failing to do so. There are moves afoot in England to make two fully professional rugby divisions (Premier One and Two) and then ring-fence them. The SRU has already blown a brilliant chance to support the exiles when the game first went professional and London Scottish were playing top-flight English rugby. To do so again courts ridicule, especially after travelling so far down the road over the last year.

Right now London Scottish are just three promotions away from the much-vaunted Guinness Premiership although there is probably a better return on investment by leaving them as a feeder/development club in England's national one, still a pretty handy level and several rungs above our own club rugby. Scottish rugby is already paying the price of only having two pro-teams.

The barrel was well and truly scraped when putting together the A-squad for the Churchill Cup this summer. The Union's need, Scottish rugby's need, is far greater than that of the exile club who were climbing the leagues very happily and who are now expected to go it alone and hope that the SRU jump on board at some point. They have already made several high-profile signings for next season.

Scottish rugby fans, and they include all of the London club's financial backers, will hope that the SRU come to their senses sooner rather than later and make the case to Scotland's club that supporting the exiles is not only a sensible move but a necessary one given the state of our national team.



The full article contains 739 words and appears in Scotland On Sunday newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 07 June 2008 9:52 PM
  • Source: Scotland On Sunday
  • Location: Scotland
  • Related Topics: SRU
 
1

Sir Saltire,

Elswhere 08/06/2008 01:41:34
Christ on a bike all these rugby articles are depressing this morning!
2

Honest Opinion 2,

Froggyland 08/06/2008 08:46:32
Just to lighten your day SS, how about bringing on some replacements, the hour mark is well past.
Off: Hadden, Parks, McKie
On as COACH: a battling Borderer - Barnsey comes to mind
On as Stand-Off; Steve Jones if he can guarantee a hat-tricl like yesterday's from time to time.
On as Chief BUmmer: You or I - at least we'll have someone who has the good of Scottish Rugby at heart and is capable of thinking outside the numbers box.
3

Phall,

Glasgow 08/06/2008 09:52:39
So "2" if we get of Mckie and the bank calls in it's overdraft, what is your Plan B. The Bank will only tolerate Mckie or another in a very similar mould.
4

Dave58,

Aberdeen 08/06/2008 10:59:34
If this is true, then it displays a complete lack of any joined-up thinking on the part of the SRU.

So there's a problem with London Scottish being in National Three (South), take a look at the make-up of the U-20 team! The U-20 6N tournament highlighted that playing Scottish club rugby is no preparation for the step up to international rugby when they compete against semi-pro players with Magners’ or Guinness experience. London Scottish would offer an excellent development role for youngsters and older players on the fringes of Edinburgh/Glasgow teams. Future promotions would enhance London Scottish’ standing and competitiveness – and maybe even draw pro players from Scotland if they made the Guinness Premiership.

Scotland badly needs to expose more players to the professional environment if we are to have a long term future competing at international level.

I know it’s not what the clubs want to hear, but if we can’t develop a stronger professional playing pool to advance our standing, just look to Scottish football for our future.
5

The Leopard,

Capital 08/06/2008 11:08:08
There must be some solution to this, surely?

Clubs are clearly going to be reluctant to allow our, already limited, talent to play down south. However, there are far to many rugby professionals playing little 'meaningful' rugby. Just one example is Robertson. I was very impressed with his performance in the A-side but, with the arrival of Patterson, his opportunities with Edinburgh diminish further.

There is also value in allowing the 'cream' of club rugby to bolster London Scottish. One promotion would see them on a par with our top-flight, two, and it far exceeds anything currently on offer. Doubtless, much to the wrath of all 'nails, I look forward to watching Teague and McNeil making the switch.
6

Colt,

08/06/2008 11:58:16
This is just another sign of ineptitude at the highest level in SRU.
How many more people are just not up to McKie's ego? He has pulled the plug on the Grouse sponsorship for an inferior deal with Murray; could not work with the Borders set-up; nor Melrose re the World Sevens; nor Carruthers at Edinburgh; nor the Burgess investment at Stirling; nor the Simmers investment in Glasgow; now London Scottish.
He is indecisive but running every element of SRU - even keeps Hadden as coach so he doesn't have to pay real money.
#3 - get real. McKie could leave tomorrow (though given he has doubled his salary in 3 years it would be a tough call for him)and what would happen then? Bank walk away - yeah because that would make sense? They are only supporting SRU because of one man - really? You dismiss the bank's strategy as being every egg in McKies basket which is pretty ignorant.
If things carry on there will eventually be light at the end of the financial tunnel but no-one left to care. We are heading down the ratings in age groups, 7s and internationals, while the pro teams have won absolutely zero....ever. But no, we must keep going with no deviation from the current drift.
7

Animal82,

08/06/2008 13:18:12
scottish rugby is so depressing. is there anything be be happy about with it at the moment?
8

Rampant,

Gloucs 09/06/2008 09:37:18
The positive news is that LSFC will continue to build to the future regardless of the SRU pulling their funds. There is a good team in place to make this happen.

Its crazy that the SRU seem to forget that London Scottish have provided more international players than any other club.
And even in the lower leagues the club still manages to develop international squad players like Max Evans.
9

blueberry,

exile 09/06/2008 11:44:38
Damn right the SRU shouldn't fund London Scottish, not in the current financial circumstances.

I admire London Scottish for unearthing Scottish internationals, but the focus of the SRU should be on the game in Scotland. When the cash is as tight as it is at the moment it would be criminal to send a six-figure sum to a team in another union.

If the SRU has to invest in another pro team to give Scottish players more game time, let it be with pro sides based in Scotland. I know, I know, this has been a disaster so far, but it's the only long-term, sustainable solution for generating and nuturing talented Scottish players. Distractions like this won't help to encourage investment in the Scottish game. Funding a team in another union is an statement of a total lack of faith in our domestic set-up, and if we're prepared to do that we should jack in our professional ambitions, withdraw from the 6N, compete in the Nations Cup instead and be happy with a status akin to Romania.

I hear the arguments about giving budding Scottish internationals more meaningful game time, but I disagree with the approach that to raise the standard we should be trying to pull it up from the top by focussing solely on the needs of the elite: You don't build a taller pyramid by picking up the tip and lifting, you build it by laying bigger foundations. Keep the cash for the game in Scotland.

As for whether London Scottish represents a better option for Scottish players than staying in Scotland, "Right now London Scottish are just three promotions away" from the GP. Just three promotions! Wow! That's only as far as Stenhousemuir are from the SPL. They really are chapping on the door of the highest echelons of the game. How the mighty rugby playing nations of the world will quake in their boots when faced with a team of Scots forged in the white heat of lower division English rugby!

Not that the domestic Scottish game offers much more at the moment, but if there's no differe
10

blueberry,

exile 09/06/2008 11:46:12

... if there's no difference between them, keep the money to coax the Scottish game back into life. London Scottish will survive on its own if all these investors are serious.

And one final point about the investors - I believe their interest is in London Scottish as a club, not in the Scottish game generally. If it were the latter they would be looking to back pro-sides in Scotland, but instead they see this as an easy means of borrowing talented Scottish players to bolster their own club ambitions and getting paid for the privilege. Fair play to them, and good luck, but I'm cagey about the way Mr Morrison and others here are portaying them as the sole saviours of Scottish rugby. They have their own agenda.
11

Fast Phil,

09/06/2008 13:35:12
#10711 absolutly correct.

London Scottish's co-tenants Richmond have just been promoted this season and will be in the same league as them, and Scottish it must be said although near the top never looked like achieving promotion. Also their ground is not of a suitable standard for Prem rugby anyway.
The SRU should invest money in rugby in Scotland.

12

rugbyman,

09/06/2008 13:55:05
#10 - You seem to forget that the investors (i.e David Reid, Chris Rea and others) were the same investors who were trying hard to set up a pro side in London to compete in the Magners League. When the SRU told them to feck aff they then decided to put their money into London Scottish to try and help develop Scottish rugby. This is the second time McKie has told them to feck aff.

Another point - every side in London Three South is professional already. last season they were playing against recent Welsh international Lee Jarvis and in the previous season others such as Serevi and Chris Sheasby - can't see that lot turning out in a match between Ayr and Currie !
13

blueberry,

exile 10/06/2008 09:13:10
Rugbyman, I'm not arguing that the Scottish leagues are superior to London Three South, or that the two Scottish pro sides offer enough opportunities for young Scots to take up rugby professionally.

But the best long-term interests of the Scottish game would be better served by finding ways of increasing the number of pro sides in Scotland and improving the calibre of the amateur leagues that support them. This is extremely difficult, but all the more reason to put every effort (and penny) into these narrow objectives than to siphon of six-figure sums to support a team playing in another country for the sake of giving a dozen, maybe two dozen junior pro Scotland prospects some game time.

And I haven't forgotten the approach to set up a Magners League side in London. But wy would this have been any better or more "Scottish" than the current proposal? The team would still have been based in London, physically and psychologically separate from the club set-up in Scotland.

These guys want to be involved in a professional side in London. They clearly have a great deal of affinity or genuine love for Scotland, so London Scottish appeals to them and the like the idea of developing Scottish internationals and having them turn out for their side. Great. Excellent. I genuinely wish them every success.

But I stand by my argument that the SRU would do better to focus solely on clubs and teams in Scotland, because that way lies longer-term and more sustainable improvement in the quality of our sport, and consequently maximises the opportunities to nurture international-quality Scottish players year on year.
14

Upandunder,

10/06/2008 12:26:20
Another depressing Scottish rugby story.

I'm not even forty and I'm reduced to watching videos of stirring performances like 84, 90 and 99 to bring me a rugby smile.

Why's it all gone so horribly t!ts up?
15

THE DREADED SILVER CROC,

Chateau Croc, Mont Revard, Haute Savoie, France 24/06/2008 13:24:44
How could anyone ever trust these crapulous cringe-inducing SRU sleazeballs again? Nauseating numpties, indeed.

Only thing they've achieved is a GRAND SLAM of let-downs and lies! You wouldn't want any of that bunch holding the rope......

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.