Larkham Edinburgh deal in trouble

[The EnForcer]

From what I can see, the SRU management has undergone some significant changes in recent times and for the better. Amateur rugby in Scotland, junior and senior, is going through a very healthy growth period due to the funding and strategies put in place by the SRU with support from the grass roots clubs. Yes the Reivers has closed down but with the support of the Borders clubs. (Interesting huh, why would the clubs support that?) The clubs are aware that Scottish professional rugby is at stake and with the SRU in financial strife, although there is light at the end of the tunnel due to the managements careful steering over the last few years, it was a decision that had to be made. The SRU could not afford to finance two teams as well as provide the needed continued support at amateur level.

OK, this is where it gets a bit sketchy and I think that a bit of spin doctoring and ego is involved.

With regards to Edinburgh Rugby Ltd. the company that runs the professional team, Edinburgh, and who took over the team a year ago today, well this is my reading on it.

Bob Carruthers who is the main stake holder and his brother Alex, the chief executive, are being portrayed by their own side as not interested in making money on the deal. However, part of the deal was that they became the Murrayfield concert promoters which is one of their primary business streams and where they have made millions in the past. So, they are making money out of the deal and their pure love of the game, as reported, may be slightly tainted. It is interesting to note that there was concern at the outset of this "deal" as a lot of the details were not released, especially pertaining to the amounts to be invested and the sweetener promotional portion of the deal. Where there is smoke there is normally fire.

I would be very interested to find out how the withdrawal of the Edinburgh Rugby team affects the promotional deal. My gut feel is that the SRU may have entered into a bad contract with a money hungry organisation. The Carruthers brothers are reputed to have invented copper wire while arguing over the ownership of a two pence piece, so you can imagine where their loyalty lies.

I'm with the SRU until proven wrong.

On a positive note; if Scotland ends up with one professional team for a while then so be it and we will survive as we have grass roots growth and a whole bunch of capable people in charge of the SRU who want to bring Scottish rugby back to life. However, I hope that we still have two teams and that a reasonable solution can be found for the benefit of Scottish Rugby. No one man, or company for that matter, is bigger than the game.

[Burgs]

The Carruthers-Murrayfield link may well be a motivating factor TEF however what would have been the carrot for him to offer to buy/bail out Border-Reivers prior to it going under?
Apart from the direct revenue potential of owning a second team/club you would have to think there is some loyalty to the code to make that offer?
Unless he knew they wouldn't accept the offer I suppose...

[Burgs]

From the Six Nations site:

McKie warning for Edinburgh

Scottish Rugby Union chief executive Gordon McKie has warned Edinburgh owner Bob Carruthers he will not allow him to disrupt his country's World Cup preparations.

Carruthers has told his leading players that redundancies are "inevitable" as the dispute between club and governing body continues.

Edinburgh stopped their Scotland players training with their international team-mates last week and transferred their registration to a sports management company.

Carruthers denied any breach of rules, claiming they are not obliged to release them until July 13, but the SRU reported the case to the International Rugby Board.

The move saw the financial dispute hit a new low, with Carruthers preparing for legal action over an alleged six-figure shortfall in the SRU's payments to the club.

Carruthers claims McKie threatened to close Edinburgh down if they took the matter to court - and he has now warned his leading players they may have to look for a new club.

That prompted an angry response from McKie, who told the Sunday Herald: "After everything that has gone on this week, we no longer feel obliged to act the part of the undignified governing body.

"We simply cannot allow our preparations to be disrupted by this kind of thing. Bob Carruthers' actions are a real cause for concern, and we have to deal with that."

McKie claimed Carruthers could not make any player redundant. "The way their contracts are written means he can't just release them," McKie said.

"Most of them would be entitled to a year's salary at least. He's just trying to hold them to ransom by issuing these threats, but you can't just ignore employment law."

Carruthers has been phoning player's agents to update them. "I told them 'if your man has somewhere else to go then tell him to take it'," he said.

"I can't keep writing cheques on the blind. With great regret, I have to say redundancies are inevitable.

"We can't all be Barcelona - if we're Stirling Albion then that's great.

"We are determined to stay in professional rugby. It's not the vision we started with. But there's not a lot we can do about that, given the threats against us."

[The EnForcer]

The Carruthers-Murrayfield link may well be a motivating factor TEF however what would have been the carrot for him to offer to buy/bail out Border-Reivers prior to it going under?
Apart from the direct revenue potential of owning a second team/club you would have to think there is some loyalty to the code to make that offer?
Unless he knew they wouldn't accept the offer I suppose...

The SRU regulations do not allow for control of more than one Club by an independant. Not sure what the motivation was to offer to buy out the Reivers but I smell a rat.

[Burgs]

Oh, I appreciate the reg however, you may think that as a bail out position they could have come to a short term arrangement with him for perhaps a season, even if just to buy some time on both the WC and the Edinburgh debate.
Best you wander down the shop and get some Ratsak...

[The EnForcer]

Well, whatever the reasons are for the offer and the rejection I'm glad of the outcome as it appears that Carruthers is a hard nosed businessman and you wouldn't want him having any more leverage than he is already weilding.

[Burgs]

Even if it means having only one Pro Team in Scotland?

[Em-Forcer]

I think Carruthers was trying highlight the issue that the SRU can run two clubs but an independent can only run one, so definitely a power struggle there. I have to agree with TEF, though - I think this situation shows exactly why that regulation is in place.
And there must be other problems bubbling under - French teams have withdrawn from the Heineken Cup, prompting English teams to follow suit, and payments from Heineken Cup appearances are linked to this Scottish situation. Coincidence?

Anyway, perhaps it is best only to have two super-clubs in Scotland, it's not like we have that huge a population and while rugby's popular it lags way behind football in terms of support. Participation is quite high at local level, and I wonder if Borders clubs supported the decision to close Reivers not just for the good of the SRU, but because it might bring some players back to the traditional clubs? Difficult in the professional era, though - but perhaps that's where the SRU could better deploy some of their funding.

I suppose the ideal scenario is that the SRU supports grass-roots rugby up to the local clubs, then there are two independent franchises, but with the franchise rules requiring them to sgn a certain proportion of 'home' players, and leaving absolutely no doubt that players must be released for national duty (though not necessarily rested in the run-up to it). And of course Shasta's right, some sort of rugby calendar would be ideal. I think each hemisphere would need to have its own, and cross-hemispheral touring would then have to be fitted in when appropriate.

So the SRU would be responsible for spending money for the development of rugby and rugby players, and would get money back in contract fees when the players they'd developed made it into the franchise teams, and the franchises would use their commercial skills to attract star signings (like Larkham) for the remaining places and raise the profile of the game that way.
Hopefully then we'd have a win-win situation!!!

[Burgs]

Edinburgh owner calls for talks

From correspondents in Edinburgh, Scotland
July 11, 2007

BOB Carruthers, the owner of Edinburgh Rugby, wants talks to end the row between the club and the Scottish Rugby Union (SRU).
The dispute centres on the distribution of Celtic League and European Cup fees, with Edinburgh saying they are owed a six-figure sum - something the SRU deny.

Edinburgh prevented 12 of its World Cup-bound players training with Scotland last week and then resigned their associate membership of the SRU on Monday.

That led the SRU to say Edinburgh would be unable to play Celtic League or European Cup fixtures next season and that their players were uninsured "by the governing body scheme for the purposes of training or playing".

However, a frustrated Carruthers said Edinburgh would fulfil their fixtures and criticised the SRU for their handling of the dispute.

"At nine o'clock yesterday (Monday) morning they say we are not part of the jurisdiction of Scottish rugby, then at four o'clock in the afternoon they are saying they are going to take disciplinary action against us because we are part of the jurisdiction, it doesn't make sense," Carruthers told a news conference.

"Their press release was ill-considered and shouldn't have been sent out. It is very unfair to Edinburgh Rugby; it has caused us a great deal of anxiety for our staff, players and sponsors and has trashed the reputation of Scottish rugby around the world.

"It was mischief-making, cooked up over the weekend by somebody who didn't think it through. It was a very wrong thing to do but at the end of the day we are interested in Scottish rugby and are prepared to move forward.

"Clearly this is a dispute that needs to be resolved and resolved quickly. There are arbitration firms all around the place (Edinburgh), you could have this sorted in 10 minutes."

And he was adamant Edinburgh's fixtures were unaffected by the row.

Agence France-Presse

[frontrow]

He is right about one thing, Scottish rugbys reputation has certainly taken a battering around the world, fix it then you fool...

[Flamethrower]

http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,...-23217,00.html


Union backdown relief for Larkham

From staff writers
July 12, 2007


THE Scottish Rugby Union (SRU) has backed down in its bitter dispute with the Edinburgh club, where Australia fly-half Stephen Larkham is contracted next season.

The governing body accepted overnight it had got it wrong in kicking Edinburgh out of the game, and agreed to consider entering mediation to resolve the row with the club's owners.

The SRU revealed that Edinburgh is still affiliated to the union, and able to play matches, contrary to its statement on Monday.

It also softened its stance on the offer of mediation made by Edinburgh owner Bob Carruthers on Tuesday, in an effort to break the impasse, which earlier had been rejected by some its senior officials.

This development was warmly welcomed by Carruthers, who insisted he had never wished to move outside the jurisdiction of the SRU or International Rugby Board (IRB).

"I do feel vindicated and that maybe we are operating on the same planet, which for a while I was beginning to doubt," he said.

"Edinburgh are 100 per cent committed to the SRU jurisdiction and bye-laws, and IRB regulations, and that has always been the case.

"The SRU's statement on Monday did cause a lot of stress and worry for Edinburgh staff, including players who are currently on holiday with their families, but we are prepared to forgive and move on.

"Our players are back in the Scotland squad and preparing for the World Cup; they are and always have been fully insured, contrary to Monday's statement from the union, and we hope that the message that they will consider mediation can be followed through and we can sit down and work out a way forward that best suits Edinburgh and Scottish rugby."

[The EnForcer]

At least it's a move in the right direction, big climb down by the SRU though. Will be interesting to see what comes from the mediation.

http://www.planetrugby.com/Story/0,1...495831,00.html

http://www.scottishrugby.org/sru/cor...Method=article

Casts a different light on the issue. Here we see that during a disciplinary meeting Edinburgh withdrew there resignation not quite the big backdown by the SRU the previous report suggested.

Anyway, good to see Larkham is still going.

[jazza93]

so whats happening with larkham

im confused somebody explain it in 10 words if you can

[Flamethrower]

Larkham is going to Scotland after the World Cup. Beep.

[Burgs]

And it continues...

Bernie's club heads to court

From correspondents in Edinburgh, Scotland
July 18, 2007

SCOTTISH first division club Edinburgh and the Scottish Rugby Federation are poised to take their ongoing financial dispute to the courts.

The Edinburgh club, for which Australia five-eighth Steve Larkham has signed to play next season, says the SRU owes it several million euros for its participation in the Celtic League and the European Cup.

The SRU, which denies the claim, said in a statement that negotiations with the club were "no longer an option".

Edinburgh believes a court decision will eventually settle the dsipute and decide exactly how much is owed to the club.

The club added that legal proceedings would be undertaken "in the next two weeks".

Agence France-Presse