Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

Sam Cross: 'I feel it's important the fans and public know the truth'

Sam Cross of Ospreys during the Guinness PRO14 Round 17 match between Connacht and Ospreys at The Sportsground in Galway. (Photo By Ramsey Cardy/Sportsfile via Getty Images)

Ospreys flanker Sam Cross has claimed that the Welsh Rugby Union held out on the funding of player wages in favour of boosting the corporate hospitality facilities at the Principality Stadium.

ADVERTISEMENT

Wales players had threatened to go on strike prior this weekend’s Guinness Six Nations game with England in Cardiff, which was called off late on Wednesday. Professional players in Wales had been left without any clarity over contracts, with as many as 70 players set to go off contract at the end of the current season.

After much discussion, Welsh rugby officials and players eventually reached compromises on controversial matters such as the 60-cap selection policy for players who play outside of Wales, as well as fixed-variable contracts across the regional game.

Video Spacer

Video Spacer

Cross took to Twitter on Friday afternoon, claiming the regions will only be allowed to contract 44 players, while the WRU are favouring keeping £4.8 million for the improvement of their corporate hospitality.

“Meeting on weds [Wednesday] we were told by the WRU that the budget allows squad sizes to be 44 players. After asking regional reps at the meeting in front of the Union the regions on the new budget can only afford 34-36 players due to issues like being tied to current deals and the drop off in money being to[sic] steep to [sic] quickly,” wrote the former Great Britain Sevens silver medalist.

“Take into consideration on average 10 players injured at any one time and Ospreys currently having 14 boys with Wales and 4/5 boys with Wales 20s you’re struggling to even field a senior 15. The regions need more funding this is a huge player safety issue and squads need depth and the ability to retain their current talent.

“The union is sitting on a pot of 4.8 million that they’re reluctant to put into the game that could save welsh rugby. But players were told that 4.8 million is being used to improve things like corporate hospitality at the stadium.

ADVERTISEMENT

“You can imagine the players’ frustration, there will be no need for corporate hospitality if things continue in the pro game the game needs proper investment not money taken out.”

Cross was part of the GB sevens team at 2016 Olympics that claimed silver, losing to Fiji in the final after sweeping aside Japan, New Zealand and Kenya in the pool stage before defeating Argentina and South Africa in the knockouts.

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 4 hours ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

Yep, that's exactly what I want.

Glasgow won the URC and Edinburgh finished 16th, but Scotland won the six nations, Edinburgh would qualify for the Champions Cup under your system.

It's 'or'. If Glasgow won the URC or Scotland won the six nations. If one of those happens I believe it will (or should) be because the league is in a strong place, and that if a Scotland side can do that, there next best club team should be allowed to reach for the same and that would better serve the advancement of the game.


Now, of course picking a two team league like Scotland is the extreme case of your argument, but I'm happy for you to make it. First, Edinbourgh are a good mid table team, so they are deserving, as my concept would have predicted, of the opportunity to show can step up. Second, you can't be making a serious case that Gloucester are better based on beating them, surely. You need to read Nicks latest article on SA for a current perspective on road teams in the EPCR. Christ, you can even follow Gloucester and look at the team they put out the following week to know that those games are meaningless.


More importantly, third. Glasgow are in a league/pool with Italy, So the next team to be given a spot in my technically imperfect concept would be Benneton. To be fair to my idea that's still in it's infancy, I haven't given any thought to those 'two team' leagues/countries yet, and I'm not about to 😋

They would be arguably worse if they didn't win the Challenge Cup.

Incorrect. You aren't obviously familiar with knockout football Finn, it's a 'one off' game. But in any case, that's not your argument. You're trying to suggest they're not better than the fourth ranked team in the Challenge Cup that hasn't already qualified in their own league, so that could be including quarter finalists. I have already given you an example of a team that is the first to get knocked out by the champions not getting a fair ranking to a team that loses to one of the worst of the semi final teams (for example).

Sharks are better

There is just so much wrong with your view here. First, the team that you are knocking out for this, are the Stormers, who weren't even in the Challenge Cup. They were the 7th ranked team in the Champions Cup. I've also already said there is good precedent to allow someone outside the league table who was heavily impacted early in the season by injury to get through by winning Challenge Cup. You've also lost the argument that Sharks qualify as the third (their two best are in my league qualification system) South African team (because a SAn team won the CC, it just happened to be them) in my system. I'm doubt that's the last of reasons to be found either.


Your system doesn't account for performance or changes in their domestic leagues models, and rely's heavily on an imperfect and less effective 'winner takes all' model.

Giving more incentives to do well in the Challenge Cup will make people take it more seriously. My system does that and yours doesn't.

No your systems doesn't. Not all the time/circumstances. You literally just quoted me describing how they aren't going to care about Challenge Cup if they are already qualifying through league performance. They are also not going to hinder their chance at high seed in the league and knockout matches, for the pointless prestige of the Challenge Cup.


My idea fixes this by the suggesting that say a South African or Irish side would actually still have some desire to win one of their own sides a qualification spot if they win the Challenge Cup though. I'll admit, its not the strongest incentive, but it is better than your nothing. I repeat though, if your not balance entries, or just my assignment, then obviously winning the Challenge Cup should get you through, but your idea of 4th place getting in a 20 team EPCR? Cant you see the difference lol


Not even going to bother finishing that last paragraph. 8 of 10 is not an equal share.

126 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Return of 30-something brigade provides welcome tonic for Wales Return of 30-something brigade provides welcome tonic for Wales
Search