Rugby: Players want bigger slice of World Cup cash

Photo / Richard Robinson

The IRB has been put on notice by the International Rugby Players' Association and warned the World Cup needs a massive financial revamp.

The increasingly powerful body that represents the world's leading players is demanding a meaningful role in devising a new commercial model for the 2015 tournament.

Tension between the players and the governing body has increased since 2007, with the former disillusioned by the lack of progress on various major issues and their lack of representation in the consultative process.

The World Cup is at the core of their dissatisfaction as the players feel the current model (in terms of the distribution of revenue and the participation agreement) is flawed. The IRB has held a draconian view on how to run the tournament and controls all income and dictates how it is then distributed.

IRPA would like to see an increased and equal participation fee for all 20 teams in future tournaments and for players to be able to benefit directly from their image rights. For the winning team in particular, their images are often used extensively for four years without any payment ever being made.

IRPA chief executive Rob Nichol says: "We need a model that better reflects all the contributors to Rugby World Cup. The countries that take part, and the players, need some kind of financial benefit."

The so-called Big 10 - Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Argentina, England, Ireland, Wales, France, Scotland and Italy - have also pushed for changes to be made as they argue it is nonsensical for them to be penalised financially for taking part in the Rugby World Cup.

Because the Tri Nations has to be truncated and the June tests cancelled, the New Zealand Rugby Union estimates it loses between $10m-$15m in World Cup years.

The Big 10 negotiated a bigger pay-out from the IRB as compensation - they will each receive close to $2m this year to offset their pain - but they are still keen for more changes.

Of equal importance to IRPA is that they are directly involved in determining the future landscape. Despite the IRB being made aware that individuals from all leading countries have signed a mandate to let IRPA represent them, some national unions stand accused of trying to undermine the players.

At a recent IRB forum it was agreed there would be six priorities for 2012 and beyond. One is to review the 2011 World Cup and its financial distribution, format and duration.

IRPA says that, while it is encouraged by that decision, it remains sceptical as to whether it will actually lead to anything tangible. The players have lost faith in the IRB after they promised to fix many of the game's most pressing issues following the last World Cup.

There was a marathon lock-in meeting in November 2007 that involved all the key stakeholders such as medics, sponsors, broadcasters, players and administrators. By the end of the conference, agreement had been reached that changes had to be implemented around the global window, player welfare, the June and November test windows and bringing Argentina into a meaningful competition.

Only one of those objectives has been achieved - Argentina will join the Tri Nations next year - while other issues such as eligibility have surfaced in the last two years without reaching a satisfactory conclusion. The IRB has dismissed the idea of creating a global season saying it is too hard.

The June window remains a huge concern and the players don't believe the 'big idea' of creating three-test series against one opponent in that window will engage fans. The wider issue of sharing test match gate revenue on a pooled and equitable basis is something the IRB refuses to be drawn on.

The implementation and then rejection of the ELVs was a shambles and there have been various failed attempts to amend and improve the regulations regarding foul play.

The pressure is now squarely on the IRB to involve IRPA in the process of remodelling the World Cup and to come up with a satisfactory outcome.