Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

RPA fears Premiership players getting flogged

(Photo by Jordan Mansfield/Getty Images)

Players union chief Damian Hopley has grave fears about the Gallagher Premiership’s grand ambition to finish out the remainder of this season and still start the 2020/21 campaign as scheduled on September 12.

ADVERTISEMENT

The English season’s showpiece final is still scheduled to take place at Twickenham on June 20. However, with nine regular-season rounds off matches still to be played along with the semi-finals, there are fears that midweek matches will be played despite regulations guaranteeing a minimum five-day turnaround between games. 

If there are no midweek matches, the likelihood is that the 2019/20 season will carry on much later into the summer and reduce the agreed twelve-week break that is supposed to exist between seasons.

Either way, it is set to generate anxiety about player welfare and Rugby Players’ Association boss Hopley is concerned about the potential damage this might do. 

In an interview with the Daily Telegraph, Hopley said: “While we understand we are in some pretty catastrophic circumstances, we fully expect to be consulted and involved in what a hybrid season structure may look like.

“It needs to be a joined-up collaboration so we are doing the right thing. If you put player welfare first then the commercial will flow from that, not the other way around. We have battled very hard in the new season structure to secure a twelve-week period for absolute rest, active rest and then preparation for the season.

“This has to be about working in collaboration because the world is changing so quickly. But that is not the same as giving up on the principles around player welfare that we have worked so hard to establish. 

ADVERTISEMENT

“This is not about the players rolling over, this is about the players taking a really responsible approach not only to the clubs’ futures but to their own futures.

“Every player we have spoken to recognises there is a bigger picture at play here. We all understand and accept the principle of what they are asking, we are just trying to get a lot more certainty about what the practice looks like. 

“We want 13 Premiership clubs (including Newcastle) which are vibrant and financially sustainable rather than eight. There is a necessity of all employees accepting some responsibility.

“Our take is that there is enough common sense around the game to ensure that no unnecessary demands will be made of players, particularly when we have worked so hard to create a strong welfare culture. 

ADVERTISEMENT

“If there is any hint that player welfare is being reduced to a token gesture then everyone will be reminded of the edicts that player welfare is the real No1 priority.”

WATCH: Billy Vunipola chats to Jim Hamilton in the latest episode of The Lockdown, the new RugbyPass series

Video Spacer
ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 15 minutes ago
'Passionate reunion of France and New Zealand shows Fabien Galthie is wrong to rest his stars'

Where? I remember saying "unders"? The LNR was formed by the FFR, if I said that in a way that meant the 'pro' side of the game didn't have an equal representation/say as the 'amateur' side (FFR remit) that was not my intent.


But also, as it is the governing body, it also has more responsibility. As long as WR looks at FFR as the running body for rugby in France, that 'power' will remain. If the LNR refuses to govern their clubs use of players to enable a request by FFR (from WR) to ensure it's players are able to compete in International rugby takes place they will simply remove their participation. If the players complain to the France's body, either of their health and safety concerns (through playing too many 'minutes' etc) or that they are not allowed to be part in matches of national interest, my understanding is action can be taken against the LNR like it could be any other body/business. I see where you're coming from now re EPCR and the shake up they gave it, yes, that wasn't meant to be a separate statement to say that FFR can threaten them with EPCR expulsion by itself, simply that it would be a strong repercussion for those teams to be removed (no one would want them after the above).


You keep bringing up these other things I cannot understand why. Again, do you think if the LNR were not acting responsibly they would be able to get away with whatever they want (the attitude of these posters saying "they pay the players")? You may deem what theyre doing currently as being irresponsible but most do not. Countries like New Zealand have not even complained about it because they've never had it different, never got things like windfall TV contracts from France, so they can't complain because theyre not missing out on anything. Sure, if the French kept doing things like withholding million dollar game payments, or causing millions of dollars of devaluation in rights, they these things I'm outlining would be taking place. That's not the case currently however, no one here really cares what the French do. It's upto them to sort themselves out if they're not happy. Now, that said, if they did make it obvious to World Rugby that they were never going to send the French side away (like they possibly did stating their intent to exclude 20 targeted players) in July, well then they would simply be given XV fixtures against tier 2 sides during that window and the FFR would need to do things like the 50/50 revenue split to get big teams visiting in Nov.

303 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Why England's defence of the realm has crumbled without Felix Jones Why England's defence of the realm has crumbled without Felix Jones
Search