1
'There's no financial crisis here... it's not in as bad a situation as I expected it to be'
By Online Editors
Chief executive Bill Sweeney has insisted there isn’t a financial crisis affecting at the RFU. Former chief executive Steve Brown lost his job over hefty cuts that led to scores of job losses.
However, the former British Olympic Association (BOA) chief, who joined the RFU in February in a bid to reverse serious financial troubles suffered by the English game's governing body, is adamant there isn’t a crisis that will damage the union’s long-term health.
“There's no financial crisis here,” he insisted. “The similarities with the BOA are there, it's a cyclical business. You’d expect to have a loss-making year in the year coming up. It's not a financial crisis.
“The business model at the RFU is inherently very healthy, we generate a lot of cash, a lot of revenue and if you keep your costs in control there's no reason why that should be a fragile business plan. So it's inherently strong. Stabilising the financial situation is a key priority.
“It's not in as bad a situation as perhaps I would have expected it to be quite frankly, having read a number of things coming in. The team here has done a really good job over the last 18 months already, taking quite a bit of cost out of the operation.”
Brown, who exited last November, had only been in the role for 15 months. The RFU posted losses of £30.9m for the last financial year, as well as having made numerous redundancies in a cost-cutting exercise.
By March it was feared that the England sevens programme could be disbanded as a cost-cutting measure as Twickenham began looking at ways to save £20million in the areas of the professional and community games and overheads across the next four years. Of that sum, cuts of at least £5 million need to be made for the 2019-20 financial year.
An RFU spokeswoman said at the time: “We have been very clear for some time that we need to cut costs in 2019-2020 as our revenues have not risen in line with our original forecasts.
“We have kept the game informed - and this is also outlined in our annual report. We are currently consulting with the game on how best to adjust costs. There are a broad range of options under discussion across the professional game, the community game, and our general overheads.
“Any budget cuts in 2019/2020 come after years of record investment in the professional and community game.”
WATCH: How RugbyPass reported Bill Sweeney's appointment by the RFU
Trending on RugbyPass
2
All Blacks XV player ratings vs Munster
3
Suaalii strikes awe as Wallabies lose midfielder
4
Scott Robertson responds about handling errors
5
Latest Comments
Borthwick is supposed to be the archetypical conservative coach, the guy that might not deliver a sparkling, high-risk attacking style, but whose teams execute the basics flawlessly. And that's OK, because it can be really hard to beat teams that are rock solid and consistent in the rugby equivalent of "blocking and tackling".
But this is why the performance against NZ is hard to defend. You can forgive a conservative, back-to-basics team for failing to score tons of tries, because teams like that make up for it with reliability in the simple things. They can defend well, apply territorial pressure, win the set piece battles, and take their scoring chances with metronomic goal kicking, maul tries and pick-and-go goal line attacks.
The reason why the English rugby administrators should be on high alert is not that the English team looked unable to score tries, but that they were repeatedly unable to close out a game by executing basic, coachable skills. Regardless of how they got to the point of being in control of their destiny, they did get to that point. All that was needed was to be world class at things that require more training than talent. But that training was apparently missing, and the finger has to point at the coach.
Borthwick has been in the job for nearly two years, a period that includes two 6N programs and an RWC campaign. So where are the solid foundations that he has been building?
Go to commentsI think they just need to judge better when it's on and when it's not. If there is a disjointed chase and WJ has a forward in front of him and some space to work with then he should have a crack every time.
If the chase is perfect and the defence is numbered up then it needs to get sent back. From memory they have not really developed a plan for what to do if they take the ball on/in the 22 with a good chase and no counter attacking opportunity.
Go to comments