Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

The Clive Woodward verdict on Twickenham becoming Allianz Stadium

How Twickenham looked in March when England and Ireland ran out for their Guinness Six Nations men's championship match (Photo by Harry Murphy/Sportsfile via Getty Images)

Former England boss Clive Woodward has delivered his verdict on the naming rights deal that will see Twickenham rebranded as Allianz Stadium for at least the next 10 years. It was Monday evening when the RFU caught the rugby world unguarded by unveiling a sponsorship deal worth more than £10million a year that included the renaming of the home of English rugby from September 1.  

ADVERTISEMENT

The now 82,000-capacity stadium was opened in 1909, and its first-ever naming rights deal will now see funds injected into the game’s elite and grassroots levels.    

RFU chief executive Bill Sweeney defended the deal on Tuesday, explaining that rugby was facing significant financial challenges, but Woodward has now joined the chorus of criticism expressing dissatisfaction over the name change which has completely dropped Twickenham from the title.  

Video Spacer

Paul Gustard on potential “signing of the season” Owen Farrell

Coach Paul Gustard is full of praise for Racing 92 signing Owen Farrell

Video Spacer

Paul Gustard on potential “signing of the season” Owen Farrell

Coach Paul Gustard is full of praise for Racing 92 signing Owen Farrell

Sportsmail columnist Woodward, who led England to Rugby World Cup glory in Australia in 2003, has republished his rights deal column on LinkedIn, concluding that the RFU’s contract with Allianz was no silver bullet for its currently stretched finances and that the axing of Twickenham from the ground’s name was very sad.  

In a post that has been widely commented on, Woodward wrote: “In a wonderful summer of sport, the decision to rename Twickenham to Allianz Stadium is an almighty blow. The reason is obvious: money.  

Related

“The RFU badly needs cash to support the community game, fund elite player contracts, support the women’s game, and mobilise a rugby sevens programme for Olympic gold. It’s needed to drive England’s age group sides, generate coaches, and support players.  

“Steve Borthwick’s England showed great promise in the second half of this season, but English rugby and the RFU have fallen off the pace in world rugby and compared to other domestic and global sports. 

ADVERTISEMENT

“The RFU board sold its soul by renaming this historic stadium. Many, including myself, question why and how it has come to this. As an England player, you are a custodian of the jersey, responsible for filling it with pride and leaving it in a better place. This applies to the head coach and the RFU board. Will the board reflect if replacing Twickenham with Allianz Stadium is their legacy?

“I take no comfort that Ireland, Wales, and Scotland sold their stadium naming rights. England should not feel proud. All sports faced challenges post-covid. Australia already has an Allianz Stadium, so we’re not unique!  

“Some say a name means nothing, but Twickenham represents 100+ years of heritage. Those questioning this are called ‘traditionalists’ by the RFU which is a cheap shot and no different than calling people ‘old farts’ as Will Carling did years ago.

“Twickenham was a fortress during my tenure, we took on the world and showed fans rugby as they had never experienced it before. It meant everything to us. When I fly over west London, I eagerly look for Twickenham and still get goosebumps. Many feel this, whether they played for England or supported from the terraces.

ADVERTISEMENT

“It’s impressive how much money Wimbledon leaves on the table each year. They haven’t sold the naming rights to The Championships or Centre Court, they understand the brand value Wimbledon represents. Can you imagine Novak Djokovic and Carlos Alcaraz playing on Allianz Centre Court?  

“How would Scottie Scheffler feel arriving at Allianz Augusta? Do we want to see the first ball in the Ashes at Allianz Lord’s? Or see England at Allianz Wembley? This is not a dig at Allianz in any way, who support sport globally.  

“The RFU must now put their mouth where their new-found money is. How far will a reported £10m a year go? On the face of it, it doesn’t seem like much. Will this regenerate the atmosphere at Twickenham and get fans’ eyes back on the field instead of the next pint? 

“Also, what about the Olympics? Team GB failed to field a men’s sevens team in Paris and the women’s players were not on full-time contracts. Missed opportunities by the RFU board. Hopefully, some of the Allianz money will go to this.

“The RFU must restore England to the pinnacle of world rugby. Money is needed, but this naming rights deal is no silver bullet. The total removal of Twickenham from the venue represented a very sad and poignant day.” 

Related

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

1 Comment
Load More Comments

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 5 hours ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

I rated Lowe well enough to be an AB. Remember we were picking the likes of George Bridge above such players so theres no disputing a lot of bad decisions have been made by those last two coaches. Does a team like the ABs need a finicky winger who you have to adapt and change a lot of your style with to get benefit from? No, not really. But he still would have been a basic improvement on players like even Savea at the tail of his career, Bridge, and could even have converted into the answer of replacing Beauden at the back. Instead we persisted with NMS, Naholo, Havili, Reece, all players we would have cared even less about losing and all because Rieko had Lowe's number 11 jersey nailed down.


He was of course only 23 when he decided to leave, it was back in the beggining of the period they had started retaining players (from 2018 onwards I think, they came out saying theyre going to be more aggressive at some point). So he might, all of them, only just missed out.


The main point that Ed made is that situations like Lowe's, Aki's, JGP's, aren't going to happen in future. That's a bit of a "NZ" only problem, because those players need to reach such a high standard to be chosen by the All Blacks, were as a country like Ireland wants them a lot earlier like that. This is basically the 'ready in 3 years' concept Ireland relied on, versus the '5 years and they've left' concept' were that player is now ready to be chosen by the All Blacks (given a contract to play Super, ala SBW, and hopefully Manu).


The 'mercenary' thing that will take longer to expire, and which I was referring to, is the grandparents rule. The new kids coming through now aren't going to have as many gp born overseas, so the amount of players that can leave with a prospect of International rugby offer are going to drop dramatically at some point. All these kiwi fellas playing for a PI, is going to stop sadly.


The new era problem that will replace those old concerns is now French and Japanese clubs (doing the same as NRL teams have done for decades by) picking kids out of school. The problem here is not so much a national identity one, than it is a farm system where 9 in 10 players are left with nothing. A stunted education and no support in a foreign country (well they'll get kicked out of those countries were they don't in Australia).


It's the same sort of situation were NZ would be the big guy, but there weren't many downsides with it. The only one I can think was brought up but a poster on this site, I can't recall who it was, but he seemed to know a lot of kids coming from the Islands weren't really given the capability to fly back home during school xms holidays etc. That is probably something that should be fixed by the union. Otherwise getting someone like Fakatava over here for his last year of school definitely results in NZ being able to pick the cherries off the top but it also allows that player to develop and be able to represent Tonga and under age and possibly even later in his career. Where as a kid being taken from NZ is arguably going to be worse off in every respect other than perhaps money. Not going to develop as a person, not going to develop as a player as much, so I have a lotof sympathy for NZs case that I don't include them in that group but I certainly see where you're coming from and it encourages other countries to think they can do the same while not realising they're making a much worse experience/situation.

144 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Fissler Confidential: One England international in, one out for Bath Fissler Confidential: One England international in, one out for Bath
Search