Jeff Probyn: Why Bruce Craig’s vision for global season will fail to see the light

Last week’s interview encapsulating Bath chairman Bruce Craig’s vision of the future of global rugby showed some interesting, if slightly naive ideas. By breaking the season into two blocks each for international and club rugby appears to be a good idea. However, it was the clubs that insisted that the club game should continue throughout the international windows set aside for the Six Nations and Autumn Internationals.
When seeking to structure the season at the start of the professional game, the RFU offered the chance of a ‘split season’ to the clubs, suggesting that the league should take a break during the international windows.
The Premiership, however, refused, stating that any break would be detrimental to the business of club rugby as it would create a break in the continuity of the club game, which would then make it harder for them to attract and keep fans.
Even the protracted Six Nations played over seven weeks (it could be played over just five) came from a suggestion from the clubs, seeking to exploit the enthusiasm generated by the international competition over the seven-week period, by playing competitive games during the ‘rest’ weeks between international games.
Moving the November and June windows to August and September so that outgoing and incoming tours would be played virtually back to back would make it logistically impossible for international teams to play a proper tour schedule, with games against provinces as build up to Test matches, which is something that all agree makes playing and financial sense.
It would also mean that all cross hemisphere internationals would be played when the Southern Hemisphere teams were match fit and the northern hemisphere teams were not.
Our teams in Europe would be just returning from our summer break while the southern boys would (under Craig’s scheme) have just finished the Super rugby season. They could then use the tour window in August and September as preparation for the Rugby Championship thereby helping to raise the standard of that competition.
Meanwhile, in Europe all it would do is make the international matches act as a pre-season build up to the first tranche of club rugby, possibly adding value to the club game while taking it from the international game.
Craig has allowed a window for around six weeks in August and September for tours, which given England’s tours are around three weeks this year to New Zealand (June 1 – 21), would almost see the All Blacks sharing the plane back to Europe to play the return leg.
His argument that June tours are tough for players after a long season doesn’t take into consideration the fact that the clubs are paid to rest players in the EPS specifically to help reduce the strains and stresses of the professional game.
The RFU have had a player management system in place for a number of years monitoring elite players in conjunction with the clubs and agreeing when they should be rested and the absolute number of games they can play throughout the season.
The tour windows for international rugby are based on when each hemisphere finish their season so as to provide each union with a chance to begin and end their season with the bonus of international rugby to fund the game.
Moving all tours to the same time of year would also put a strain on the finances of fans who would have to first pay for games at home and then travel to the other side of the world to watch their team, all within that six week window.
All in all, Craig seems keen on change for change sake having not really looked at why we have the system we have and the possible ramifications of change for the sport overall, or what is already in place in terms of player management and welfare.