Rugby Union: Scots head down the same sorry road

Another week of bloodletting, another fine mess on the committee room carpet, another step closer to the edge. The impenetrable forest created by rugby's indecently swift espousal of professionalism is swallowing the game whole. Anarchy, which has been hovering just around the corner, finally arrived last week with the appointment of Gareth Davies, Cardiff's chief executive, as a director of English First Division Rugby (EFDR).

Two fingers to the unions of England and Wales and so far not so much as a whimper from either of them in response. Leadership in rugby's corridors of power? Don't know the meaning of the word, old boy.

Looking from the other side of Hadrian's Wall, of course, the Scots would happily settle for England's problems. At least there is a domestic structure in place, albeit it one that is heading for bankruptcy. Murrayfield, bleak and barren last Saturday, was a dismal place to be, a world and eight years away from the seething passion and clamour which had claimed the Scots' last Grand Slam. But what takes years to build up can be dismantled in a matter of months and there is no question that rugby in Scotland is in crisis.

A half-empty Murrayfield for the visit of the world champions was the last straw for Andy Irvine. His letter to Derek Brown, the president of the Scottish Rugby Union, was, as one would expect of a man of Irvine's intelligence and deep understanding of the game, carefully considered and well presented. He has since admitted that his decision to resign as chairman of the International Game Committee may have been a shade hasty in view of the fact that so many of his requests were met, and it cannot be long before he and John Jeffrey are asked to join the new government when it is formed.

Irvine's criticisms of the state of the game in Scotland are all valid and have the backing of the vast majority of the country's rugby community. There has been mismanagement on a large scale and far too many costly mistakes have been made, but what commentators have chosen to ignore, because it did not fit with their own views, was Irvine's praise for many of the changes wrought by Duncan Paterson. It was the methods by which he achieved them which so dismayed Irvine.

He also lent his support to the district and super team concept which, as anyone with half a brain must recognise, is the only way forward for a country with so few top- quality players and so little money to reward them. Despite the apparent evidence to the contrary, there has been advance in Scotland and the gulf between the super teams and the clubs is unbridgeable. To pit one against the other would be to create a mismatch on the scale of England's World Cup qualifier against Holland a fortnight ago. The problem for the SRU is to find credible and regular opposition for their professional teams, an issue very largely outside their control.

It was Paterson's fervent hope that the British League would be up and running quickly enough to save him but it was not to be and he duly announced his resignation last night. The English clubs were too busy pursuing their own agenda and despite the positive noises coming from Glanmor Griffiths' working party the establishment of a British league is by no means a certainty. There is the expectation in the wake of Donald Kerr's departure that the new EFDR board will show a more moderate and flexible face. I doubt that very much.

Until the clubs get everything they want we can expect more of the same - demands, threats, boycotts, and even betrayal. It cannot be long before the elite few cut the umbilical cord and cast at least four of their First Division colleagues adrift into the oblivion of the lower leagues. If Cardiff and Swansea become permanent and official fixtures in the English Premiership then that number could rise to as many as six.

The election of the Welshman Davies to the board can hardly be interpreted as a peace offering to the RFU. Indeed it is hard to imagine a more provocative act although from the total absence of any response, we must assume that the RFU are in full agreement with it.

No amount of talking will change the fundamental truth that full-time professionalism, burdened by its crippling wage bill and rising debt and, outside the international arena, its limited appeal, does not work. Francis Baron, the RFU's new chief executive, is clearly an able businessman and has identified a number of areas within Twickenham where excess fat can be trimmed. But this will be a largely cosmetic exercise. He must know that if the clubs ultimately get what they want there won't be much of Twickenham left to sell off or, for that matter, to pay off.

His power and, more important, the authority he needs to wield it will have to extend into areas which have hitherto been the well- protected domain of committee men, a number of whom would die rather than relinquish their position, if he is to have any significant influence on the future direction of English rugby. The signs are not promising. The Celtic countries are demanding with menaces the monies due to them from the Sky TV contract. There were two battles royal on the issue last week.

In addition, the International Rugby Board are increasingly agitated that the RFU's response to the European Commission over the clubs' challenge to their regulations is not the vigorous defence promised to them six months ago. So far the IRB have failed to get a sight of England's response and on the all-important issue of Regulation 8, which deals with the primacy of the international game and the unconditional release of players for international matches, the suspicion is growing that the RFU's sympathies lie with their clubs. When and where will it all end?