Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
NZ NZ

International Rugby Players to tackle World Rugby on its World League plans

(Photo by Getty Images)

The International Rugby Players Council is to meet again next week to further discuss any proposed global tournament, as well as plans to ensure a more meaningful and effective engagement with World Rugby.

ADVERTISEMENT

International Rugby Players CEO Omar Hassanein said: “Our players are incredibly passionate about having their voices heard, not just in relation to the proposed international season, but in respect of all player issues that impact the men’s, women’s, 15s and 7s game.

“We have an agreement with World Rugby which requires meaningful engagement on key player welfare issues. However, too often information fails to be provided in a manner that allows players to realistically influence the outcome.

“For the benefit of our game and to ensure we avoid situations where players feel they have to take a public stand, the relationship with World Rugby and the basis upon which we interact on key issues needs to be a lot more meaningful and effective. This will be central to our discussions when we meet as a team next week,” said Hassanein.

Ahead of this meeting, International Rugby Players will meet with World Rugby on Monday to discuss the relationship with the governing body as well as the specific issues raised by leading players last week.

Video Spacer

Johnny Sexton, Owen Farrell and Kieran Read have warned of serious “player welfare and integrity concerns” around World Rugby’s proposed competition structure for the global game. Their concerns were raised following the release of further details of the World League and how it will be run. 

While senior players have consistently voiced their support for the concept, ongoing concerns exist around the detail of the competition format that has been taken to market in recent months.

ADVERTISEMENT

The International Rugby Players Council of almost 40 players spoke via conference call last week to discuss the potential 12-year deal, with nine of the world’s top ten international team captains dialing in.

Senior players from around the globe were united in their concern about the proposed format, in relation to:

  • Player load challenges from multiple top-level test matches in different countries and time-zones in consecutive weeks;
  • Increased long-haul travel in short time frames;
  • A lack of real opportunities for tier two nations to progress;
  • Increased conflicts between country and club demands and regulation nine release periods;
  • Potential impact on Rugby World Cup and Lions tours;
  • The long-term quality and integrity of the international game.
Video Spacer
ADVERTISEMENT

Join free

LIVE NOW - Singapore SVNS Day 1

Fresh Starts | Episode 3 | Cobus Reinach

Aotearoa Rugby Podcast | Episode 11

Chasing The Sun | Series 1 Episode 1

The Breakfast Show | Episode 7

Abbie Ward: A Bump in the Road

Pacific Four Series 2024 | Canada vs USA

Japan Rugby League One | Verblitz v Eagles | Full Match Replay

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
Jon 10 hours ago
The case for keeping the Melbourne Rebels in Super Rugby Pacific

I have heard it asked if RA is essentially one of the part owners and I suppose therefor should be on the other side of these two parties. If they purchased the rebels and guaranteed them, and are responsible enough they incur Rebels penalties, where is this line drawn? Seems rough to have to pay a penalty for something were your involvement sees you on the side of the conned party, the creditors. If the Rebels directors themselves have given the club their money, 6mil worth right, why aren’t they also listed as sitting with RA and the Tax office? And the legal threat was either way, new Rebels or defunct, I can’t see how RA assume the threat was less likely enough to warrant comment about it in this article. Surely RA ignore that and only worry about whether they can defend it or not, which they have reported as being comfortable with. So in effect wouldn’t it be more accurate to say there is no further legal threat (or worry) in denying the deal. Unless the directors have reneged on that. > Returns of a Japanese team or even Argentinean side, the Jaguares, were said to be on the cards, as were the ideas of standing up brand new teams in Hawaii or even Los Angeles – crazy ideas that seemingly forgot the time zone issues often cited as a turn-off for viewers when the competition contained teams from South Africa. Those timezones are great for SR and are what will probably be needed to unlock its future (cant see it remaining without _atleast _help from Aus), day games here are night games on the West Coast of america, were potential viewers triple, win win. With one of the best and easiest ways to unlock that being to play games or a host a team there. Less good the further across Aus you get though. Jaguares wouldn’t be the same Jaguares, but I still would think it’s better having them than keeping the Rebels. The other options aren’t really realistic 25’ options, no. From reading this authors last article I think if the new board can get the investment they seem to be confident in, you keeping them simply for the amount of money they’ll be investing in the game. Then ditch them later if they’re not good enough without such a high budget. Use them to get Jaguares reintergration stronger, with more key players on board, and have success drive success.

24 Go to comments
FEATURE
FEATURE The era-defining moment that set Leinster on the road to success The era-defining moment that set Leinster on the road to success
Search