If I could state right at the beginning I am anti formal leagues, and that gets that out of the way.
Rugby managed for many years without a formal league structure, and whilst it seemed like a great idea at the time when leagues were created, it has now ceased to be a league, and much more a competition for the knock out phase, or for a European competition. Leagues should have a winner with the most points not act as qualifying competition for a cup
We have European competitions, and that in itself imitates the soccer equivalent, but please save us from a World Club competition!
I would however like to discuss the current league structure in terms of the ridiculous position where the winner of the league is not the automatic champion, but has to go through two more extremely exhausting games to actually be the knock out winner.
In my opinion this farcical position needs to be abandoned, as it makes the season ridiculously long for the players involved, many of whom are also international squad players.
The true rugby season runs from September to April, not May or even June as we have just witnessed, and how South African teams can be involved in European competition defeats me. The cynic in me feels it might be something to do with money, and tragically a means to allow the Springboks to be part of what would become the 7 Nations.
There is no doubt at all that the standard of rugby played in almost all of the top level competitions has been superb. There is however an element of throwing matches beginning to creep in, and I believe this must not be allowed to happen.
I immediately think of the Gloucester Northampton match, won 90-0 by Northampton because Gloucester were saving themselves for what they considered to be a more important game in Europe, as they were out of contention in the league and no relegation to fear. Equally the Bulls were hammered by Northampton in a European competition because they left all of their internationals at home.
This is unfair not only on the paying public who will have paid good money for little entertainment, and it is unfair on the players.
This kind of thing needs to be nipped in the bud, the question is how can that be done?
It seems to me the whole problem lies in the organisation of the rugby season for the top players. The RFU and of course World Rugby have spent many hours trying to sort this one out, but here are a few thoughts.
There are obviously competitions that clash, and that makes priorities for clubs and especially coaches very difficult.
A few thoughts about the rugby season as a whole. To me there is no doubt the Premiership needs total reorganisation.
The points breakdown is inherently wrong in my opinion. Bonus points for tries scored and the losing points as well, should be done away with, and instead replaced by the points difference. In other words three points for a win, two for an unlikely draw, and no points for a defeat. A win by let us say 25-12 gives the winners 13 points for the points difference, and three points for the win. Equally no points for the losers and minus thirteen for the points difference. Under this rule, Gloucester may have thought twice about the match against Northampton.
In addition the knock out phase at the end should be done away with, and the new method of points scoring would keep the interest up because a high scoring victory at the end of the season could transform a team’s position.
Under this proposal in season 23/24 the winners would have Bristol Bears with 177 points with Saracens second with 168 points. In addition Newcastle would still have been last and facing automatic relegation.
Below is the league positions as at the end of the season just past. Below you will find the league as it could be.
If however we did away with bonus points and simply used points difference added to the good old fashioned three points for a win, two for a draw, and obviously no points for a loss, then we end up with this instead.
Now the press, social media and the television channels spent a huge part of the season building up the ‘run in’ to the knock out stage, and how exciting that was going to be. Another experience for the spectators whose main reason for attending is to tell their friends that ‘they were there’.
I think if you looked at the last two or three weeks of the regular season and broke down the points and the matches being played then spectators, the press, the TV commentators would all know exactly what was needed for teams challenging for the top spot. How exciting would that be, and for the teams at the bottom, with relegation looming, would Gloucester in the situation of knowing that the bottom two teams face relegation, is there any chance of a 90-0 defeat?
The table also shows how ineffective Harlequins were yet they would appear to be consistently being praised to the skies. Now I have nothing against harlequins, in fact they remain one of my favourite clubs going back to my playing days. Appearances in the current league programme can be deceptive because of their ability to score spectacular tries.
Having written all of this, there is still the problem of the length of the season, with regular matches into May and the knock out phase into June. Why not two leagues of five teams, then a semi final and final would be appropriate. as a major point the present league is taking up 18 weeks, plus two more for semi final and final. A league of five takes up eight weeks plus two for the semi and the final.
This makes more sense, but then we face the challenge of the money men, who want their pound of flesh.
Well you can’t please everyone!!