Heads in the sand on global season
Well looks like we can expect 2nd rate teams from NH for awhile :verysad:
Heads in the sand on global season
Bret Harris | December 04, 2007
THE IRB's decision not to introduce a global season is akin to ignoring the threat of global warming, according to Rugby Union Players Association chief executive Tony Dempsey.
And a financial report prepared by Deloitte for the IRB has warned southern hemisphere nations face a drop of up to 50 per cent of broadcasting revenue if northern hemisphere nations continue to send weakened teams on tours.
The world governing body held a three-day "integrated season forum" in England last week to debate a range of important issues, including calls for a global season.
There is a strong belief, particularly in Australia, that the seasons in the northern and southern hemispheres need to be aligned to maximise the growth of the game.
The southern hemisphere nations argued for the creation of a single international window in September/October/November to replace the two existing windows in June (south) and November (north).
But the European-dominated conference, which was attended by 90 stakeholders from major unions around the world, decided that the existing calendar was the best for the game.
Dempsey believes the decision will mean a continuation of European nations sending second-string squads on tour to the southern hemisphere, which has already damaged the standing of the game in Australia.
"We do not derive any comfort from the talkfest," Dempsey said yesterday.
"We were hoping for something far more substantial, something that would guarantee the quality of touring teams in the June-July window. It is crucial for the spectators to have confidence in the touring team's ability to compete.
"One would have thought they would have come up with something more adventurous than what they have. It is like saying there is no need to worry about global warming.
"This was a rare opportunity to do something substantial and meaningful that would bring some clarity to the convoluted global season. Instead we are just getting more of the same."
The main argument against the introduction of a global season was the the potential financial impact it would have on European club rugby, evident in a financial report prepared by Deloitte for the conference.
"Combining the June and November (inter-hemisphere matches) windows into one single window would not appear to create additional value for these windows in itself and raises player welfare concerns," the report says. "The key financial impact of combining (international) windows is likely to be the knock-on impact on other competition windows and the club/provincial game.
"Consultees in the (northern hemisphere) and (southern hemisphere) have differing views on scheduling. A majority of (northern) stakeholders were in favour of the retention of separate windows, particularly the November window, which has a strong attraction for spectators, broadcasters and commercial partners.
"A single international window was favoured by many (southern) stakeholders, since it creates an uninterrupted international match program and disaggregates the international match window from key club/provincial competitions."
The report says the November and June windows were "crucial revenue streams for unions, delivering approximately 40 per cent of direct international match net revenues for both northern and southern unions".
While the November window is performing strongly in financial terms, the June window is "suffering the greatest threat to its value, principally due to weakened touring teams".
"The financial impact of weakened international teams may only become fully apparent when key commercial and broadcast contracts are renegotiated.
"However, certain consultees believe broadcast income could be eroded by anything up to 50 per cent if weakened international teams continue to compete in the June window."
The conference was satisfied that a commitment from the privately owned English and French clubs to finish their competitions by May 31 would result in the best players being available to tour the southern hemisphere.
But while clubs' commitment makes the players available in theory, it still remains doubtful whether European countries, particularly England and France, will send their strongest squads on tour because players will rest and rehabilitate injuries over summer.
Deloitte was also sceptical of the proposal to create a new international competition that would link the November and June windows, making matches more meaningful, claiming it would have a detrimental effect on the World Cup, Tri-Nations and Six Nations.
Meanwhile, the Wallabies will play under two sets of rules against northern hemisphere nations and Tri-Nations opposition next year.
SANZAR will announce today Super 14 matches and Tri-Nations Tests will be played under experimental law variations. But the home Tests against Ireland and France in June and July will be played under the existing laws because the northern hemisphere countries do not have a chance to trial them.
ARU deputy chief executive Matt Carroll was confident the Wallabies could mix and match.
"That is an issue but we think it is something that can be overcome," Carroll said.
"We've had a good look at it and it's not that hard. It's easier to go back to the old ones probably than it is to go forward to the new ones.
"Australian rugby has always thought that the opportunity to introduce the law variations in the Super 14 is too good not to be able to overcome some of the issues we consider less major."
ARU chief executive John O'Neill's return to work has been delayed until after Christmas following surgery on his neck.
Additional reporting: AAP
