Comparing both Unions, they have similar numbers in terms of registered professional players and both countries have 4 professional outfits. So what are the two adopted strategies?
Let's start with the Welsh. With full support from the WRU, the Ospreys, Scarlets, Dragons and Blues have united to agree the terms of introducing a £3.5 million salary cap on each region, covering European squads only and excluding development players and academy costs, effective from the 2012/13 season.
The WRU announced on their website that "...In removing the potential for dramatically increasing salary costs during a time of austerity for both businesses and individuals, the effect of a simple and focused salary cap will be to ensure balanced and sustainable costs...encourag[ing] further emphasis on the evolution of the development pathways".
Encouraging indeed. There is a clear risk however to the strategy of having a salary cap; that the most valuable Welsh players playing in Wales will be lured elsewhere by higher salaries. We have already seen the likes of Mike Phillips, James Hook and Lee Byrne moving to the continent to play for French teams in the Top 14 with the enticement of higher incomes.
The WRU intend to review the system on an annual basis to monitor it's effectiveness which strikes me as entirely sensible. The balance will be tricky to get right to avoid an exodus of top players.
Phillips, Byrne & Hook have all exiled to France
Meanwhile in Ireland, the IRFU have announced a series of adjustments of its player contract policy to further the development of Irish players and control the use of foreign players. The plans, due to be introduced for the 2013/14 season, are geared towards increasing homegrown talent with the ultimate aim of improving the national team.
The clear difference between the two plans is that the Welsh agreement is one that has been generated by the clubs with the national Union in support whilst the Irish Union is the party taking control and imposing changes with apparently little or no consultation with Leinster, Munster, Ulster or Connacht. This has rubbed certain people the wrong way, not least Leinster's foreign head coach Joe Schmidt.
Schmidt has made no bones about his opposition to the IRFU revisions insisting that it is a knee-jerk reaction to Ireland's performance in the RWC in New Zealand, where they were knocked out by the Welsh. He claims that the current setup is clearly sufficient and successful at bringing through young Irish talent in adequate numbers.
It begs the question of whether the roles would be reversed and the WRU would be the ones taking the lead and imposing sanctions on its regions had they had a poor World Cup. I suspect not, but it is worth considering.
Regardless, it strikes me that the Welsh system is the more sustainable longterm. It is a considered and pragmatic solution to the times we live in, with the flexibility to be altered on an annual basis. However, the attraction of the big money clubs outside of Wales and Ireland looks set to remain for the foreseeable future.
Maybe there is a third option - one that has been adopted by New Zealand in recent years and is encouraged in Scotland: If you want to play for your national team, then you need to play for a club that belongs to that country. Surely that is the ultimate incentive for any player?
No comments:
Post a Comment