New Club Structure

[harryp]

My first mistake was buying the SINDO for the first time in god knows how long. My second mistake was having lunch in the Waterloo............ anyway, this article really got me thinking about the new club structure that is being unveiled. I have a lot of issues with the structure of the grass roots game in this country and I don't believe this will do anything to rectify them........

Brave new dawn
Sunday September 3rd 2006
ADVERTISEMENT

A COUPLE of weeks ago, former Wallaby captains John Eales and Paul McLean sat down together in the stand at Ballymore to watch the Brisbane Grand Final in which their old club, Brothers, was involved. Pretty soon they got to talking about a topic that has commanded a lot of airplay in Australia over the last two months. In an effort to bridge the widening gap in standard between the professional teams and the clubs, the Australian Rugby Union plan to bring in a new national competition next year. It will comprise the pros - including the academy boys - who don't get a run with the Super 14 teams, with the best players from the club game.

The idea has generated a lot of heat, for there are real fears that a whole new tier will cast an even bigger shadow over the very ground that gave Eales and McLean their shot at stardom: the club. It was Brothers that provided the springboard for them to reach the Queensland team, the stepping stone to the Wallabies. "How will the new competition affect what we're watching here?" asked Eales.

This debate is being carried out in some shape or form all over the professional rugby world. For every bunch of Blues, Reds, Cats and Tigers, there is a sub-section of irregulars who rarely see action once the big boys are available. Where and how they should be occupied is at the heart of the debate. Its outcome affects not just how the professional game develops, but also what happens to the clubs beneath.

In this country last week, the issue took a dramatic twist. And in just over a month's time, we'll know if that change of direction will propel the game here into a new era.

It has been an unusually busy summer on the club front. The endeavour has been inspired by two problems: the AIB League format is delivering low quality rugby, which attracts neither punters nor media; and the likelihood of a further increase in the number of 'A' games at provincial level will relegate the league to an even darker street. Combined, it is a slow drip that will empty the reservoir which provides everything from our minnows to our big fish. There are no winners in this leak getting any worse.

Over the course of several meetings between the clubs, the umbrella body - the All Ireland Senior Rugby Clubs Association (AISRCA) - reached a monumental decision on August 24. They unanimously agreed that the First Division of the league should be cut from 16 to 10 clubs from 2007/08, and that the Second and Third Divisions should be of 19 clubs each.

AISRCA comprises six representatives from the top flight, and four each from the other two. The next step is for them to put the proposal before all 48 clubs, in early October. A simple majority is required for it to become policy for every senior club in the country. The IRFU is the ultimate executive of those clubs. It is unthinkable that the union would not carry out the wishes of its members.

"Maybe people will be shocked that we have come to this conclusion, but we've come to it after four separate meetings," says John Dickson, the chairman of AISRCA. "We've been very active and had lengthy debate over the summer. The more you work with it the more you're trying to provide a better structure for Irish club rugby, and I'm totally convinced that this is by far the best way forward."

Dickson spoke of shock, because the idea of clubs in lower divisions voting to reduce their window of opportunity was in the same bracket as IRFU men voting to cut the size of the committee. This is the second time in as many years that the clubs have confounded us. So disparate were their opinions in the recent past that the Tower of Babel was the standard analogy for describing how they went about their business.

The A games can be fast and noisy and, on the surface, very pleasing. But they aren't furious

In 2004 they were inspired to talk a common language. The catalyst was the union's half assed plan to revise the league, one that would have left the competition floating face down had it been allowed to launch. Uniquely, the clubs demanded as one to throw it out, and their reward was the compromise we have now: three divisions of 16 teams. It was acceptable as an alternative to what the union had on the table. The league is up for review this season, and before a ball has been kicked its shelf life has already been reached.

At the top end, the clubs are frustrated that they have no relevance to the professional game. At the bottom they are tired of being second class citizens. And at all points in between there is a fatigue with the words 'cost' and 'cutting.' This time, however, there is no official horror format from those creative geniuses down at Lansdowne Road. Rather, the glue that is binding the clubs together is what already they see happening, and what they fear will follow.

The 'A' games are the union's answer to the missing link. There is an idea in rugby's high performance units that you have to be on the elite bandwagon by the time you clear your teens, or you'll get left behind. It is rubbish. In this country the idea is that you progress through the elite schools system, where the physical conditioning of players is already a focus of the IRFU, and then move straight into a provincial academy set-up. Between your schedule with age grade representative rugby, and the increase in the number of A games at provincial level, it should be possible to get to the end of the production line without being contaminated by any club. It would be a structured journey in sterile conditions where everything but the mood music was chosen for you.

Eddie Wigglesworth, the union's rugby director, worries that the club game isn't providing the young pros of today and tomorrow with a suitable environment for moving forward. He's right. But rather than advocate for change in the club game, he wants to get his white coat on and change the locks on the door of the lab.

It was interesting that the recent launch of the Magners League should feature a plug for the A games from Brian O'Driscoll. "I think a lot of the guys that have played A before find it a good stepping stone," he said. He wasn't primed to add that a reduced First Division which featured the irregulars - the pros numbered 22-35 on the provincial squads - would be just as good. In fact a lot better. That's the door the clubs want opened. The A games can be fast and noisy and, on the surface, very pleasing. But they aren't furious. No one gets relegated. There is no sense of doom if defeat is your lot.

Of course that may change, were the Magners League to develop an A wing, but why would you want to go to the extra expense of all that when already you have a structure on hand just waiting to be redecorated? Moreover, there is evidence from England, where an A league operates among the Premiership clubs, that there is a trend towards pitching these players into First Division games where the action isn't as flash, but the stakes are a lot higher.

The other motivation for the clubs of Ireland to stick together is the frightening prospect of the IRFU doing the league review all on their own. Such a review might see some reduction in the First Division in any case, but for sure it would come with cuts lower down. Suddenly you could be left with just two national divisions fed by provincial leagues. That vista has diluted the fear among smaller clubs that the high fliers are trying to take off on them. And in any case, with promotion and relegation built into the AISRCA proposal, there is scope for everyone from those who want mainly to participate, to those who want to compete.

For the union, there is the chance to make itself relevant to the constituency it is supposed to serve. They could recognise the input of the clubs to their own game by giving them space on the domestic game committee. To do so would involve tacit acknowledgment that their own federal system is less of an express, and more of a slow death by branch committee. Perhaps they fear a takeover.

If that's how they live their committee lives, then their blazers haven't been worth all the effort. There is now a glorious opportunity for the clubs to overwhelmingly vote in favour of their own futures, and that of the professional game, and for the IRFU to act on both. If our committee men need a signpost, they need only look to their pals in Scotland.

Two years ago, the SRU dropped £127,000 into the bank account of a consultancy firm to recommend a way forward for their game. Unusually, the consultants told them what they may not have wanted to hear: build a bridge to the professional level by cropping your First Division to eight clubs, part-fund full time coaches in each club; and set out criteria on structures and facilities for each team in the top flight.

The SRU followed the tried and trusted method of the IRFU, and gave a vote to anyone with a chance of not being in the First Division. Not surprisingly, the clubs from the wee bit hill and glen voted the report onto a shelf.

All it needs is for the rest of the clubs to endorse what their own representatives have agreed

Since then Ian McGeechan left for Wasps, and Frank Hadden has put even more distance between the clubs and the pro game by following the laboratory method favoured by Eddie Wigglesworth. Currently Scottish rugby is awful at three levels: country, district and club. And they haven't the price of another consultants' report to offer any alternatives.

It's not that long ago that we used to think the Scots, who used to beat us for fun, had the system down pat. From their game plans to their body positions, regularly the task would be to marvel at how they could be so good. Thankfully, the useful things the IRFU have done since then have allowed us to leave them behind. But we should still look at them and learn. They had the opportunity to do something about their predicament and blew it.

Back in Australia,meantime, it will be a while before John Eales gets a definitive answer to his question. Their model is something that has enthused Eddie Wigglesworth in his quest. Creating eight new teams across five states in a country the size of Australia, however, involves a raft of detail. Chances are the Is and Ts won't be crossed on schedule. And by the time they are, Ireland could be up and running with a model that suits our needs. We don't have to cross time zones to include all the elements in the mix. It's already there and waiting. All it needs is for the rest of the clubs to endorse what their own representatives have agreed. And for the union to play ball.

[dingbat]

I dunno - at first glance it made a lot of sense to me.

[harryp]

I was the same, but....... then after thinking about it, it makes the game even more elitist from an even younger age again. It means you have to be in the provincial set ups from a very early age, otherwise the potential of playing at the higher levels is severly diminshed.

Given the current unbalanced "strructure" of Schools and Youths, never mind that certain schools and clubs have weighting and pull at Provincial Levels, it effectively means that a player at the wrong school or club, can be effectively destined to a career at AIL level at best irrespective of ability.

Given, the existing lack of structure in the country after Schools / U18's level, where all too many promising players simply cease playing more out of frustration than anything else, I think these changes will only go to further enhance that drain of youth on the system.

So, how is this correct, surely we need to allow and encourage as many players as possible to play at the same level for as long as possible before being specifically elitist.

Case and Point...... where was BOD at 18? Would he have made it through the revised system given the changes? I'd like to think so, but can you be sure? The same goes for John Hayes, Malcolm O'Kelly, Trevor Brennan etc etc???

I mean A's is all well and good, but the competition and passion won't be there and I think the Provincial Structure will simply become littered with career journey men.

[CRAZYDAVE]

The big problem for clubs is that they will now have to carry an extended squad to cater for the additional matches and provincial call ups. One of the difficulties last year was where fringe players were called up or on call for provincial matches on the Sunday. The clubs had no chance of playing them. If the team they were playing had its fringe players called up for a Friday match, they were usually in the squad. The AIL 1 final is a case in point. There were 7 Munster squad members on the Shannon squad that day. Clontarf were missing Jackman & Gissing due to Leinster's match against Cardiff the following day. The CL created an imbalance. If this continues, it will make a mockery of the league.

Also why have certain clubs been allowed to alter their fixtures to Sundays, in this years AIL. If their ground is being used for another match on Saturday, surely they should be drawn to play away on that date and not be given the added bonus of having their fringe players back for a Sunday match. Every other clubs in the AIL does not have this option, regardless of when their province is playing.

Another issue is the number of provncially contracted players allocated to individual clubs. There are two clubs in Leinster (AIL1 Clubs) who have the majority of players on the Leinster panel allocated to them. It also appears that players who start to arrive on the provincial scene suddenly decide to drop their former club in favour of one of these two clubs. I'm sure that the same is happening in Munster, where I've notice more players from one city joining a club from the other

If they are going to have a 10 team top flight, they would be better off making it a composite structure. 2/3 teams from Limerick, 1/2 from Cork, 1 from Galway, 2 from D4 , 1 from D3 , 2 from the north. Individual clubs could feed into this structure and it could ensure quality opposition and a greater pool of resources from which the composite "clubs" could draw.

Enough of the rant... but I think the new "idea" for club rugby is a load of pants

[tones]

The big problem for clubs is that they will now have to carry an extended squad to cater for the additional matches and provincial call ups. One of the difficulties last year was where fringe players were called up or on call for provincial matches on the Sunday. The clubs had no chance of playing them. If the team they were playing had its fringe players called up for a Friday match, they were usually in the squad. The AIL 1 final is a case in point. There were 7 Munster squad members on the Shannon squad that day. Clontarf were missing Jackman & Gissing due to Leinster's match against Cardiff the following day. The CL created an imbalance. If this continues, it will make a mockery of the league.

Also why have certain clubs been allowed to alter their fixtures to Sundays, in this years AIL. If their ground is being used for another match on Saturday, surely they should be drawn to play away on that date and not be given the added bonus of having their fringe players back for a Sunday match. Every other clubs in the AIL does not have this option, regardless of when their province is playing.

Another issue is the number of provncially contracted players allocated to individual clubs. There are two clubs in Leinster (AIL1 Clubs) who have the majority of players on the Leinster panel allocated to them. It also appears that players who start to arrive on the provincial scene suddenly decide to drop their former club in favour of one of these two clubs. I'm sure that the same is happening in Munster, where I've notice more players from one city joining a club from the other

If they are going to have a 10 team top flight, they would be better off making it a composite structure. 2/3 teams from Limerick, 1/2 from Cork, 1 from Galway, 2 from D4 , 1 from D3 , 2 from the north. Individual clubs could feed into this structure and it could ensure quality opposition and a greater pool of resources from which the composite "clubs" could draw.

Enough of the rant... but I think the new "idea" for club rugby is a load of pants

I think the idea of a ten team top division is a good idea, but they then go and spoil it with the Cup and Plate competition! This leads to too many fixtures. Surely an 18 match, home and away basis for AIL1 would be ideral with AIL2 and AIL3 having 18 matches, with 9 home and 9 away. Are the provinical Cup competitions being scrapped as well?

[LeinsterLion]

This leads to too many fixtures. Surely an 18 match, home and away basis for AIL1 would be ideral with AIL2 and AIL3 having 18 matches, with 9 home and 9 away.

Isnt that the plan?



I dont really get the whole noise being made over this new plan. The indo over the last few days has lauded it as the best thing since sliced bread. Can anyone explain how it will make things so much better?

Is it just because the top diviosn is split between fewer clubs, meaning that the provincial fringe players are playing for fewer clubs, and thus the quality will be better (because the best club playera are all condensed into one smaller package, of 10 clubs)? If so, while a good idea, it's hardly earth shattering. It would raise the quality in AIL1, but presumably lower the qualty as a result in 2 & 3? Perhaps the fringe provincial players would play more club rugby, and club players may get more notice, but would the difference be all that much? As it is Leinster and Munster seem to be heeding club form more and more when picking A squads and handing out development contracts already, and the increase in A games will surely hinder the number of games the players are available for.

I dont think it's a bad idea, I just dont think its think its the kind of revolutionary thinking that it's purported to be.

[tones]

This leads to too many fixtures. Surely an 18 match, home and away basis for AIL1 would be ideral with AIL2 and AIL3 having 18 matches, with 9 home and 9 away.

Isnt that the plan?



I dont really get the whole noise being made over this new plan. The indo over the last few days has lauded it as the best thing since sliced bread. Can anyone explain how it will make things so much better?

Is it just because the top diviosn is split between fewer clubs, meaning that the provincial fringe players are playing for fewer clubs, and thus the quality will be better (because the best club playera are all condensed into one smaller package, of 10 clubs)? If so, while a good idea, it's hardly earth shattering. It would raise the quality in AIL1, but presumably lower the qualty as a result in 2 & 3? Perhaps the fringe provincial players would play more club rugby, and club players may get more notice, but would the difference be all that much? As it is Leinster and Munster seem to be heeding club form more and more when picking A squads and handing out development contracts already, and the increase in A games will surely hinder the number of games the players are available for.

I dont think it's a bad idea, I just dont think its think its the kind of revolutionary thinking that it's purported to be.

Yes that's the plan, but on top of that you have the Cup and Plate competitions. These competitions, I feel, add too many games, obviously depending on progress.

[harryp]

It means if you have a provincial contract you effectively no longer play for a Club and vice versa.

Clubs get more consistency and the potential for a more competitive league, but lose out on their big players and as a result gate receipts.
As a player, you either make it by SCT/U18's latest, or your destined to be no more than a club player? On the plus side those who do get in, will be playing & training with better players and in a better structure than before.

Side point, did anyone think of what will happen to Connaught, Buccs & Galwegans? You have to have the 2 sides in AIL1 and Connaught to have a senior squad, an A squad and an U20 squad? I just don't think there are that many players "out west"

[LeinsterLion]

It means if you have a provincial contract you effectively no longer play for a Club and vice versa.

That's not the idea being floated in the press and from the clubs - they are suggesting the exact opposite, that if the AIL1 is condensed then the standard is improved, and thus fringe players are released more often and more readily for meaningful gametime. Also, because the standard is raised, more players can make the jump from AIL to province, rather than having to make it at 18 by gaining an Academy place, or being ignored from there on in. Means the likes of Wickham and Leyden become more common.

Thats the thinking. Again, as I said, I'm not so sure it's the reformation they'd like us to think it is, but I've heard nothing yet to clarify that either way.

[CRAZYDAVE]

It means if you have a provincial contract you effectively no longer play for a Club and vice versa.

That's not the idea being floated in the press and from the clubs - they are suggesting the exact opposite, that if the AIL1 is condensed then the standard is improved, and thus fringe players are released more often and more readily for meaningful gametime. Also, because the standard is raised, more players can make the jump from AIL to province, rather than having to make it at 18 by gaining an Academy place, or being ignored from there on in. Means the likes of Wickham and Leyden become more common.

Thats the thinking. Again, as I said, I'm not so sure it's the reformation they'd like us to think it is, but I've heard nothing yet to clarify that either way.

Nothing personal. But their opinion is based on seriously flawed logic. The ML and HC will take precedent and you will soon find that fringe players are more often than not omitted from their club sides because of the demands of the provincial structure, weakening the club sides and not raising the club game to the desired standard as a result.

[harryp]

Have to agree with Dave on this one.

[the general]

The issue that is at stake here is the role that clubs are going to have in the future of Irish rugby. At the moment there are a lot of well paid administrators whose financial well being is dependent on provinicial and international success. Their perception is that the only way to safeguard these successes is to have total control over the development of future professional players.

Accordingly, they would like to see a scenario where potential professional players are identified early (as young as 15 in some cases) and are given the support to allow them to develop through the academy structures and into professional contracts.

For some players this is will work extremely well and only the old buffers brigade are arguing that there is no merit in this setup.

However, this setup is not perfect and the clubs are currently asking if it can be tweaked to benefit rugby as a whole in Ireland.

Specifically, if the clubs are bypassed completely:
- what happens to late developers (not all Irish internationals have come through the schools and youth setups)
- where are future coaches going to come from
- where are referees and administrators going to come from

The clubs have said that they want a role in developing players. This will require investment in physical and playing infrastructure (professional coaches, gyms etc).

Accordingly, certain clubs will become almost semi-professional. The clubs as a whole recognise that the playing base is insufficient to provide meaningful competition between these elite clubs and are happy to limit this layer to ten clubs as long as there is promotion and relegation.

The clubs want a situation where there are four professional squads of say 30 (giving a total of 120 professional players) backed up by 10 squads of 25-30 (giving a pool of 250 to 300). The latter would consist of development players aspiring to professional contracts as well as individuals with no professional aspirations but who are good enough to play at a level just below professional levels while developing their own careers.

[harryp]

I know I'm going to regret saying this, but did anyone read Franno in the Tribune today?

When you cut through the overdramatisation, bad journalism, and mindless cr@p, he is actually on the ball. He seems to be of the opinion that the new tier will ultimately lead to collapse of the senior clubs in the near future, with a knock on effect on Junior Clubs and Underage Rugby.

Might be a bit "extreme" per se, but I am honestly of the opinion that given our already limited player base that the clubs / schools / provinces all need to be unified under 1 logical and progressive structure rather than now effectively becoming 3 or even 4 isolated threads.

[Leinsterman]

I know I'm going to regret saying this, but did anyone read Franno in the Tribune today?

When you cut through the overdramatisation, bad journalism, and mindless cr@p, he is actually on the ball. He seems to be of the opinion that the new tier will ultimately lead to collapse of the senior clubs in the near future, with a knock on effect on Junior Clubs and Underage Rugby.

Might be a bit "extreme" per se, but I am honestly of the opinion that given our already limited player base that the clubs / schools / provinces all need to be unified under 1 logical and progressive structure rather than now effectively becoming 3 or even 4 isolated threads.

I read it and he's completely on the ball with his comments. Junior Rugby is dying rapidly with the smaller clubs keeping it afloat - these are the clubs the IRFU would love to see go under as well..... perverse psychology from the suits.

[Oscar]

The size of AIL1 has been up and down so many times now it's ridiculous. I really don't see how this 10-team division is going to be the saviour of the club game any more than the old 12 team division was, or the 16 team division, or 14 or whatever other sizes they've had in the past, and whether they've played each team once or twice, not to mention the fluctuations in size of the lower divisions and what, exactly, their relative purposes are.

I don't think we're ever going to get back to the days of Shannon v Garryowen filling Thomond, or Rock or Mary's having to negotiate with residents' associations over parking difficulties. This is further reshuffling of deckchairs; I'm just wondering how they arrived at the figure of 10 teams?

[groundhog]

With the provinces plucking players from schools andwith the IRFU not wanting to deal with them, the low sectors of rugby are doomed
THIS one is about money. A number of you will never have heard of LeBron James. A poor black kid from Detroit, he didn't have too much going for him. But he could play ball . . . basketball, that is.

At 18 years of age and in his final year in high school, the Cleveland Cavaliers (an NBA franchise) gave him a contract worth an unimaginable amount of money for a kid.

Nike gave him a contract worth $95 million before he had set foot on an NBA court.

He is known as 'The Chosen One' and Nike and James's legion of sponsors will brand him and everyone will roll in green on the dream. Michael Jordan has been replaced. At one of his final games at high school all 24 NBA franchises had a scout/coach at the match.

Money talks and it has set a precedent. Money doesn't wait until college players graduate and are drafted by the pros, managers simply go to the high schools and buy them. Why wait four years and let somebody else use an asset that could be used by you?

Irish rugby has already gone that road this summer.

The principal isn't the same but the principle is.

The current conjecture about the third tier might take a little bit longer to dissipate as the serious rugby rolls in. The rugby takes everyone's mind off the squabbling. Nothing keeps the peasants in a perpetual state of revolt more than disenfranchisement.

The senior clubs on this current path will be extinct within 10 years. The junior sections of these clubs are like the remnants of those Klondike gold rush towns with tumbleweed rolling across the streets for dramatic effect. No coaches, no managers, no players, no referees, no pitches. No interest.

The volunteer movement is dead. They have become alickadon'ts. Every year it will erode and get eaten away.

Some clubs can't even now consistently field a second's side. The Sahara increases its circumference by 10 miles a year . . . you can't stop it.

The barons have lit the touch-paper for the dissipation of the senior club teams.

The tackle bag holders will now not even get to play for their clubs. The revitalised (not a good word to use) 'A' series will be implemented from this season on. It was discontinued a few seasons ago for monetary reasons . . .

they were also shite meaningless affairs with no sense of purpose to them, merely an exercise in keeping the rest of the squad fit and playing to the patterns that the provincial management wanted, should they be needed.

Over the summer quite a number of Fidels and Ches from the First Division clubs decided that enough was enough (I won't name them), but their proposal was to break away from the IRFU, to form their own amateur union and conduct and govern themselves as they saw fit . . . including keeping their players for themselves. A bit dramatic I thought.

At this stage you have to ask yourself a question: What is the club game all about? Is it an organisation of likeminded individuals who come together to play rugby union aesthetically for enjoyment and camaraderie, to play essentially an amateur version of the code and to be selfserving and autonomous to provide facilities for that purpose only? Or are they merely there to give players a kick start on their way to a pro career?

At this current state of evolution, the answer is obvious but it falls somewhere between the two.

The clubs still do provide a number of players to the provincial squads, but it's down to a trickle now and soon the taps will be shut off.

The clubs beef over the course of the years is that they have borne the cost of developing a player . . . put hands in pockets, underwritten overdrafts, effectively funded the quality players.

The province swoops, signs them and the clubs never see them again. No compensation. Not even a thank you note. Occasionally they might get dispensation to play in an AIL game.

That was then, this is now.

At higher levels it has been decided that clubs are to be bypassed when it comes to fostering talent . . . they won't even have the gripe of saying that they developed players and received no recognition, thanks or financial compensation.

The way forward is through the schools. Difficult to make comparison between LeBron James, and, say, Luke Fitzgerald, but the Blackrock school's player came straight from school to the Leinster senior squad. The Leinster management were fast-tracking him to the top (funny how they missed the bid from Munster).

This is the way it will be from now on . . . schools, academy, 20s, 21s, As, Senior. Club won't even come into it. There are many reasons. The prime one being that when these kids leave schools, they are professional rugby players.

They are extremely fit, they have serious weight, fitness, diet and skills regimes. Put them into a club environment and the fear is that everything will be diluted . . . the systems at club level are not anywhere near as good. It is a factor in quite a number of prospects slipping through the net. Keep them in the academy, nurture them and prepare according to dictats from above. Another factor would be to protect them from the hands of insufferable gobshites that populate clubs and inflict themselves upon talented players.

None of the established players ever play for their clubs. It seems that even the bag-holders are reticent about turning out for their clubs now. If that is the case, then it's all over. I have always felt that it is dangerous for the pros to be let loose on club competitions. They run and tackle harder. They are far stronger than the club player.

It's only a matter of time before someone gets injured.

Club sides will have no one worth watching soon.

I find it incredible that the clubs effectively form the provincial executives from elected members, yet they have been disenfranchised to such a degree that their very existence is in doubt.

It is a high-risk strategy employed by the IRFU . . . the schools, elite or not, are educational establishments primed and mandated to give our sons an education. The IRFU have no call or mandate for these young men.

Even now, the good schools players are taken out of their schools environment and away from their classmates on their respective SCTs and brought to provincial schools training on a regular and regimented basis.

These days you can dispense with your girlfriend by text without any recourse, communication or further explanation. Given the IRFU's ambivalence towards dealing with the clubs, maybe like a girlfriend scorned, they have turned up on the boyfriend's doorstep looking for an answer.

From experience, the IRFU are a reactive organisation.

It's obvious they haven't given clear thought on how to deal with disentangling amateur from professional. The clubs have been clever enough not to look for guidance and have taken things into their own hands. Whether a 10-team division one structure will change things is debatable.

The Australian 8-team semipro league has three years to work properly. The IRFU, late in the day, has written to every club secretary to ask for their belated opinion. "Whom should you have me release, Jesus of Nazareth or Barabas?" Pilate showed more interest in the whole thing.

Meanwhile, evolution is taking its course. Every club in Leinster seems to have lost about 150k for the season . . .

except one. The rumour mill is on fire. Club trustees are unwilling to underwrite overdrafts to sustain continuous losses. The provincial unions are also in a perilous financial state, so the inevitable has at last begun to come about.

Lansdowne and Monkstown have been in talks . . . Lansdowne need a ground, Monkstown senior status.

Blackrock are currently considering proposals to sell three acres to a developer and demolish their clubhouse in a radical restructure. Wanderers allegedly have been talking to one of the biggest developers in the country. It's happening . . . amalgamations and asset sales. Whether it saves or sustains is another matter, but they have no choice.

One thing though that is worth a thought is the accumulated land bank of say, Monkstown, Wanderers, Old Belvedere, Railway Union, Blackrock, St Mary's, Terenure and Greystones (subject to leases) would be worth in excess of 1bn at today's prices. If they all got together they could sell all the land and take over the union, or better still, form their own. Not an option really. Great for the IRFU though.

No more club problems to deal with. No more fan base, no more mini-rugby, no more ticket allocations. . . no more rugby . . . the game they are charged with propagating.

In the meantime, I will be applying to join every club in Leinster this season and wait for the end to come, and the dough. If the IRFU have decreed it then it will happen. Money talks.

[groundhog]

Junior Rugby is dying rapidly with the smaller clubs keeping it afloat - these are the clubs the IRFU would love to see go under as well..... perverse psychology from the suits.

Agree, Junior rugby has died in the traditional senior clubs but rugby in the province is going from strength to strength. The way forward for clubs to survive is to start building on the community, Munster clubs have done this for years and Clontarf and Carlow would be the flag bearers in Leinster but clubs like Lansdowne, Wanderers, Bective etc don't and I for one won't shed a tear if any of these clubs cease to exist.

As an aside the Naas v Cill Dara Leinster League 1 game would draw a bigger crowd than any AIL Division 3 game and most AIL Division 2 games.

The only advantage the AIL lower leagues have to offer are the extra tickets in your allocation for Internationals.

[the general]

Junior Rugby is struggling in many of the so called "senior" clubs. The main reason for this is simple demographics. Those in their 20s and 30s cannot afford family homes towards the centre of Dublin and want to play their rugby closer to where they live.

That said, there are senior clubs in Dublin with thriving underage and junior sections.

This idea that Munster clubs are somehow better tuned into their communities doesn't wash. The senior clubs in Limerick rely on a feeder system from junior clubs.

The issue is whether senior clubs are the best way to develop promising talent. Given their sizes and resources they should be better equipped to provide players with proper nutrition, fitness and coaching.

We need to get past the vested interests of the IRFU/Provincial executives and the club blazers and come up with a viable structure that maximises the talent available.

I have never seen Frano at an AIL game so am reluctant to give any credence to his views in yesterdays paper. Frano continues to live in the past and fortunately the structures are much better now than then.

[Leinsterman]

Guys - even talking to committee members of other Junior Metro clubs last year in the "non traditional" areas, the areas that are supposed to be flourishing - playing numbers are gradually decreasing with a lot of these clubs. Maybe it's a "bump" in the sense that people in their 30s are now raising young kids and don't have time to play anymore but at the same time their children are now playing rugby with these community clubs. So perhaps in 10-15 years time we'll see these community clubs become the new powerhouses of rugby in Leinster.
Mark my words though - playing numbers are DEFINITELY decreasing at senior level across the province.