Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
NZ NZ

RFU chief lays out 'catastrophic' consequences if Nations Championship format gets go-ahead

England players dejected after All Blacks defeat in November 2018.(Photo by Laurence Griffiths/Getty Images)

World Rugby’s proposed Nations Championship has hit a major road block after the Rugby Football Union declared that England’s relegation from the Guinness Six Nations would be “catastrophic” for the game on these shores.

ADVERTISEMENT

Acting chief executive Nigel Melville is determined to avoid the doomsday scenario – however unlikely – of a two-year spell outside of the sport’s most successful annual tournament.

It has been speculated that were England to drop into a tier two competition, then Twickenham might have to be sold to cover for the inevitable collapse in revenue.

In a comment that appears to end the prospect of the Nations Championship being approved in its current format, Melville insists the RFU will not allow ownership of its 82,000-capacity ground to ever be threatened.

Reflecting on that possibility, Melville said: “I think we make sure it doesn’t arise. That solves that problem. You just don’t want to get into a situation where you’re making decisions like that.

“For us it could be catastrophic being relegated, commercially. To be relegated, the catastrophe isn’t just the team being relegated, it’s our ability to fund the game as a governing body in England.

“Can we fund the community game in England to the level we do now if we don’t have the revenues we have?

ADVERTISEMENT

“And on the point of promotion and relegation, there’s no promotion and relegation in a Lions year and there’s no tournament in a World Cup year.

“So when you’re relegated, you’re relegated for two years, not one. It’s not quite up and down, one season on the naughty step and go back up, it’s actually two years and that could be a disaster for people.”

Watch: The Rugby Pod aren’t too keen on the World league proposals

Video Spacer

The Nations Championship is World Rugby’s vision for the global game after Japan 2019 and takes the format of a new cross-hemisphere league that would see the top teams from the Six Nations and Rugby Championship collide at the end of the year.

ADVERTISEMENT

Relegation and promotion based on overall league performance is a foundation of the plan in the hope it will create depth by offering tier two teams a place among the elite, but some European unions including Ireland and Scotland are vehemently opposed to it.

World Rugby insists it has investment of £5billion over 12 years to inject into the Nations Championship, while the Six Nations have their own cash source in the shape of a large offer from private equity firm CVC Partners.

The RFU board will continue its discussions before another meeting of the Six Nations unions is held.

A decision must be made in two weeks and for the Nations Championship to proceed, there has to be unanimous support from all teams involved.

And as if all those hurdles were not enough to overcome, Melville outlined other concerns held at Twickenham.

These are the integrity of the competition in Lions and World Cup years, the issue of the global final falling outside of the international window thereby requiring clubs to release their players for additional Tests, player welfare issues and the current lack of a credible tier two tournament to drop into.

“We talk about a global window and it makes sense to look at those windows to see if they can be combined,” Melville said.

“The narrative makes sense, but there are obvious concerns coming out of the proposal.”

PA

In other news: France chasing high-profile Kiwis for 2023 World Cup cycle

Video Spacer

ADVERTISEMENT

Join free

Aotearoa Rugby Podcast | Episode 11

Chasing The Sun | Series 1 Episode 1

Abbie Ward: A Bump in the Road

Pacific Four Series 2024 | Canada vs USA

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

Fresh Starts | Episode 2 | Sam Whitelock

Royal Navy Men v Royal Air Force Men | Full Match Replay

Royal Navy Women v Royal Air Force Women | 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 8 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.

23 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Dan Carter weighs in on who should be Scott Robertson's All Black 10 Dan Carter on who should be Razor's All Black 10
Search