By all accounts, it has been a superb first half of the Premiership season. As we are regularly reminded, the number of tries and points scored, as well as the number of fans flooding the gates at grounds, are up. For the most part, it is one of the most competitive seasons to date.
Newcastle’s exhilarating loss to Northampton last Friday night was a perfect example of the thrilling nature of the league: two teams at opposite ends of the table pushing each other right to the final whistle, with nine tries thrown in for good measure. It was a true spectacle and produced some of the scores of the season so far.
When all the back-patting has been completed, however, it does throw up some interesting questions. First and foremost, it makes a compelling argument for the salary cap. That the side in first and the side in 11th (at the time) can remain so competitive, certainly seems like an endorsement of a rule that is designed to stop those with more money pulling away from the rest.
As Conor O’Shea has said recently, it prevents an arms race. And it’s true – you only have to look as far as the Top 14 for proof of that. The French league – although there are upsets when teams perform poorly on the road (although is any home win really an upset in the Top 14 anymore?) – does not boast the same competitiveness across the board that the Premiership does.
Of course, there is an elephant in the room. And it’s an elephant that is becoming increasingly vocal this season. London Welsh have are sinking without a trace and although they would much rather be competitive, the fact is they just aren’t. But it could turn out to be a positive for English domestic rugby in the long term.
Welsh receive £1.7 million in central funds this season, whereas every other side in the league will get close to £4 million. As they rent their home ground, they can’t make up the difference through ticket sales, and although they will receive a parachute package when they are relegated (we are surely beyond the point of bothering with saying ‘if’ by now), what good is that to them at this point? It puts them at a sizeable disadvantage.
A comparison with the Top 14 in this situation is less favourable for the Premiership. French sides promoted from the PRO D2 receive slightly more central funding than the Top 14 incumbents, in a bid to keep them competitive. When you look at the successes of the likes of US Oyonnax and Brive in the past few seasons, relative to London Welsh’s struggles, it looks even worse.
The Exiles haven’t even come close to beating anyone this season, whereas the bottom side in the Top 14, La Rochelle (promoted this season) are only ten points off Montpellier in seventh. Competitiveness is all well and good, but it must apply at both ends of the table, not just the top.
Paul Rees wrote in the Guardian that this funding discrepancy is a ‘stain on the Premiership’, which is probably a touch harsh – you have to remember that London Welsh’s last stint in the Premiership was vastly more successful, despite being at exactly the same disadvantage as they are now. Some, if not most, of the Exiles’ problems are of their own doing (starting with the ridiculous influx of players over the summer).
They undoubtedly have a point though. For all of the debate surrounding the salary cap, and the self-inflicted back-patting that it keeps the Premiership more competitive than any other league, the ring-fenced nature of central funding needs to be addressed in order to avoid legitimate claims of hypocrisy. Combine the Premiership’s salary cap with the Top 14’s more even-handed funding, and perhaps we have the answer.
One final (admittedly hypothetical) thought. Imagine a world in which London Welsh received the same amount of funding as everyone else, had recruited in quality rather than quantity over the summer and as a result were locked in a dogfight with Newcastle, and potentially others, for relegation.
Would the Falcons have felt the freedom to throw the ball around with such abandon at Franklin’s Gardens on Friday night? I suspect not. Much more likely they’d shut up shop and grind away in the hope of a crucial bonus point, which are necessary to stay up – just as they did last year when battling with Worcester. You could say that London Welsh being down and out gives Newcastle the freedom to express themselves
It is almost an argument for scrapping relegation. Presumably an entirely ring-fenced Premiership would have to give equal funding to each of its participants. But that is perhaps a debate for another time.
By Jamie Hosie
Follow Jamie on Twitter: @jhosie43
Photo by: Patrick Khachfe / Onside Images
14 replies on “Salary cap, central funding, relegation: the Premiership and its baggage”
No relegation should not be stopped. Ever.
For me the premiership looks after itself, so a greater amount of RFU, TV and Premiership funding needs to go to the championship to enable the lower league clubs to sustain the level of infrastructure required to grow the clubs and enable competition.
Also there was an article written on this a few years back. (Fantastic author :-))
The money does need to be equalised, preferably with a promotion bonus and relegation cushion payments. BUT the other area to address is to finish the Championship before the Premiership season by doing away with the play-offs. Championship league top team gets promoted automatically.
As to your player churn theory at Welsh, once again for those who dont know already, this is just tosh, Welsh lost only six of the players who played in the play-offs over the summer. Four of these had already signed with new clubs before Welsh were promoted and would have been kept on if it were possible, one other was on loan and recalled by his premiership club and one was not retained. The other twenty or so who left were either long term injuries, were out of contract or not good enough to get regular game time in the Championship let alone the Premiership.
The big issues here were money and the timing of recruitment – not helped by the hype around Bristol which put players off from signing for Welsh.
But I haven’t made the argument that Welsh lost a load of players. My point was almost the opposite – they signed far too many over the summer, and that ended up unbalancing what was an incredibly tight-knit, successful squad. The arrival of 26 players over the summer completely changed that, or so it seems.
I agree with Jamie here. The ludicrous number of signings completely destabilised the squad. They didn’t have faith in the team which got them so far. Fewer, higher quality, signings would have integrated better with the tight-knit squad which came up and also would ease the pain of a relegation if it still happened.
I’d argue keep the play-offs, but in a different form. Two-way play-off between the top two (instead of four) teams of the championship. The winner would then have a similar play-off with the lowest team of the premiership.
This would stabilise both leagues whilst retaining the threat of relegation for sides which aren’t good enough to stay up, ensuring that the side that does is better than the one coming down.
I think what the Premiership (and the RFU in fact) have been very good at, for a number of years now, is in focussing on long term sustainable growth and development and I’m not sure that simply giving promoted sides more money is in the same spirit. I think that the focus has to be on improving the Championship as a whole and creating a geuniely professional second tier (like in France) so that the chasm in quality between the two top leagues is reduced and any promoted sides would be more competetive.
I think this can be done firstly, by giving Premiership Rugby a stake in it, possibly even creating a Premiership 2. PR’s marketing expertise and commercial relationships could be exploited by more teams and the funding would be more equally split. Also there could be a weekly televised match. Sky’s current deal is to show a pathetic number of Championship games per season and they seem to do it only half heartedly. The LV cup could be replaced with one containing second division teams providing additonal exposure and income.
The RFU’s role should be to encourage amitious lower division clubs to improve their facilities and community involvement by offering low interest loans and it’s own expertise and influence.
A decent second division would also give more opportunities for young English players to develop, make the Premiership more competetive and make relegation quite so terrifying, encouraging more abitious rugby. It would take a lot more work than just tweaking the current settlement to help one promoted side but the benefits would be far greater to all.
To answer the basic question re relegation. This must always remain.The teams in lower devisons(in any sport) need incentives.Having said that you need the team(s) being promoted to be competitive. I myself have just returned to UK after many years in South Africa,however I am sure that likes of Exeter and Worcester(in top division last year) were not so long ago way down the pecking order. What I have noticed is that over the last ten years or so some big name players have made there way to,what,at the were not recognized big teams. One Chris Latham,Wallabies Fb around 2005 who I think went to Wocester.Perhaps Wocester had good club sponsor to pay for the likes of these guys cause there were a few more. Maybe clubs need to find more corporate sponsoship and in effect to buy the clubs,just like in soccer(and in France).Otherwise I think Hedley could be on right track.
Just as an after thought I also think we should relegation in Six Nations as well but that for another day!
How about relegation every other year? Perhaps with two sides being relegated. Obviously coupled with more support for the promoted clubs.
It’ll allow us to see any potential benefits from a relegation free season, and if none between clear we can revert to the status quo.
Oops, that should read:
“and if none become clear we can revert to the status quo”
Since Leeds went down the nearest premiership rugby to me is either at Sale or at Leicester, both over an hour away. If we have a closed shop then my region will be shut out of top level rugby forever. Alternatively we have a franchise system, and a club in the south or south west has to make way for Yorkshire Carnegie?
As a follower of Bristol, thats not an attractive idea to me.
However, purely pragmatically, Bath, Gloucester, Bristol and Exeter do not struggle to attract fans – ostensibly because the “choice” of Football clubs in the area is pretty slim. Of course the other attraction of RL is pretty much non-existent.
I am very much supportive of promoting the game in other areas of the country, but don’t believe it should be at the expense of other fan bases.
Can Leeds sustain a Top level team I wonder (I am not being provocative, I honestly don’t know)?
So as a Leeds follower, what is wrong with watching Leeds perform in the Championship, with the hope/expectation/belief that they will get another shot at the Premiership?
I actually live in SW London, and I am quite happy to watch Champ, and Nat 1 rugby in this area
There’s nothing wrong with watching Leeds in the Championship with a hope of getting promoted. The debate here is about the implications of doing away with promotion and then what comes in it’s place. A closed shop or a franchise system.
To be fair I’m from Kent so my nearest side is Quins which is well over an hour from me. And I’m a Wasps fan anyway and we all know how far I am from them now!
I don’t like the idea of carving up the country like that. There are a huge population of fans in the midlands and west country meaning that rugby is well funded in those areas – leading to more clubs performing at the highest level.
What about a 2 leg playoff between bottom of Premiership and top of Championship for the premiership place.
I absolutely agree that there should be relegation. But should we not expect theclub coming up to be better than the club it is replacing. This may result in stagnation for a few years, but would highlight the need to make the Championship more competitive. Then RFU or even PRL can focus on correct allocation of funding to ensure improvement of both leagues.
Mike,that’s what happens in South Africa.The bottom team in Currie Cup play top team in Division 2 to see who stays in top division.