Should the RFU and FFR think about running a couple of clubs?

I was wondering, with the recent talk about the clubs in England and France becoming more powerful than the union would it make sense for the Unions to purchase and run a couple of clubs in the top tier?

The benefit would be the union would gain 2 votes on any league issues, and be invited to any of the club general meeting or plans.

They could also look to recuite most of the English/French team to these teams and decrease the payments made to clubs for their release.

Clubs would work like having a rich benefactor, however will lose lots of player in international windows and before, would have NE/FQ limits.

It has many pros and cons, what would your thoughts about it be, is it worth them considering?

I dont think that is a possible solution to the obvious problems.

Not really sure what is other than the Unions in France and England taking a firmer control over the clubs that play the game in their country.

An interesting idea, however, the RFU would only be able to afford a club that is in financial trouble and would then end up putting considerable resources into that club to turn it round. Those resources might be much better used in the continuation of the incentive schemes put in place for clubs that feature a certain number of English qualified players in their match day 23 and utilise English qualified players aged 24 and under. The number of English players coming from the under 20s and into the AP teams is pretty good so more of the same plus the new regional academies should offer a good set of options for the English management (If Wales and Scotland stop stealing our wingers!).

One other point, there's no such thing as an eRFU it's just the RFU, the original.

the eRFU came about from the 'e' in the being moved 'th eRFU' instead of 'the RFU' I'll amend it.

Maybe even buying a smaller club Bristol/Pirates/Jersey and bringing them up. or starting a brand new team London English, and bringing them up.

Maybe even buying a smaller club Bristol/Pirates/Jersey and bringing them up. or starting a brand new team London English, and bringing them up.

It would still be a financially intensive operation. Bristol would be an expensive takeover as they hold the freehold of their own ground and Pirates are in a similar position. A London English side starting from the bottom and working its way up would be dogged with accusations of favouritism.

In theory it's a good idea but in terms of actual application it would be very difficult to work. The chance they'd have is to buy out Wasps and relocate them back to London. Utilise the academy and pick up English players to replace the foreign aspects of the team where possible. That would still be an intensive operation though.

Kyran Bracken has suggested such a purchase of Wasps today on the Beeb.
It's on the Sports live malarkey so i can't be arrised to link to it.

it may be a worth while investment just to get a voice inside the PLA (or whatever the clubs union thing is called.

expensive yes but does cost outweight gain?

what would Wasps fans think

I think it would be weird as would collude with their main role which is to run the amateur game and look after the international team (and develop women rugby and 7s). FFR supervises all competitions excluding pro ones.
I dont see what the FFR would gain in having control of a few pro clubs, they dont care in what's going on in the HC to be honest. They only negociate every year with the LNR (pro clubs league)on when they require player for international duties and its not a big deal in France anyway.

It would make sense to buy up a club that may go bust in an area that would be left without any pro team. Englands great advantage in rugby is that their union has the most money and their country the most players so can they not spare some cash to run a club?

It cost millions to run a club. Most of the failing clubs that the RFU are massively in debt, have no support, no ground and would be a massive liability. Add in the issues with accusations of bias and the need to work with the PRL, I just can't see it as workable.

it may be a worth while investment just to get a voice inside the PLA (or whatever the clubs union thing is called.

PRL (Premier Rugby Limited) and no I don't think the PRL would allow them to take up the place on the board. The representitive body was set up as a means to manage the financial arrangements for the Premiership and to deal with the RFU when negociations arose. It would make no sense for them then to let in an RFU memeber onto the board, Wasps would just have no voice on matters regarding the RFU as it would be a clash of interests.

Givebn th RFU cant suvccesfuly run itself or the england team what on earth makes you think they should get embroiled in the massive conflict of interests that would be investing money in competing against the people that keep rugby afloat ?

Would this be to the benefit of the clubs or the national team?

If it's the national team, I don't think we need it. I think what the RFU have been doing over the last few years is starting to bear fruit. Our U20s have won x U20 Six Nations Championships in a row and we're normally there or thereabouts in the JWC. As these players start to transition into the senior team we should get stronger. I think all the AP clubs got a bonus payment for averaging 15 (?) EQ players in their matchday 23s each week, so this English talent is getting game time, it just needs a bit more time to develop.

If it's meant to be to the benefit of the clubs, then I'm not sure how it would benefit them to be honest. Even if they got 2 spots on the board, that's not enough to reject let alone pass through any motions they feel are necessary to improve the club game.

The non-RFU clubs (with their superior voting rights in the PRL) could also in theory still block the player release outside of international windows, forcing the RFU to pay the clubs for release. The non-RFU clubs (again, with their superior voting rights in the pRL) could then smooth any RFU attempts to pro-rate the payments (effectively giving the money to themselves) and divide the money up equally. Basically the RFU would pay to run the clubs (to give them access to their players), then have to pay 10 other clubs for access to their players.