Clubs set for Heineken Cup row settlement

The participation of England’s top clubs in next season’s Heineken Cup will be decided by May 18 as top-level talks are set to resume tomorrow.

The discussions between the Rugby Football Union and Premier Rugby Ltd at Twickenham are aimed at resolving the bitter dispute which has led to Guinness Premiership clubs threatening to boycott the tournament next season.

A deadline of May 18 has been set to resolve the issues which led to Premier Rugby Ltd – the clubs’ organisation – threatening to boycott both the Heineken Cup and the second tier European Challenge Cup.

European Rugby Cup want the matter settled before the all-English Heineken Cup final between Leicester and Wasps on Sunday, May 20 and RFU top brass are hopeful that a deal can be agreed in that time.

The issues which the RFU and PRL have been disputing for a year will need to be settled within 10 days but Francis Baron, the RFU chief executive, said: “Hopefully we can come to an agreement with all stakeholders.”

European Rugby Cup voting rights and shareholding and differences between club and country over the control of England players have been the major stumbling blocks which caused talks to break down in February.

Rob Andrew, the RFU’s director of elite rugby, believes he has virtually achieved agreement with the clubs over England’s management of their players.

But Baron warned: “The biggest issue is going to be money – what it’s going to cost the Union and can the Union afford it.”

He put the cost of compensating the clubs for sacrificing their England players for longer periods at “anywhere from £12m (€18m) to a possible high of £17m (€25m)”.

Baron added: “These are very big numbers and we don’t have the resources to meet the demands. That will be the crux of the discussions.

“The issue is going to be how we can structure a deal which gives the clubs financial funding to compensate them for what they are delivering.

“If we have to lose funding from the community game to the elite game all we would have is a new set of problems.”

Baron, anxious to avoid a situation where any negotiated deal was voted down by the grassroots representatives of the game, said: “We are trying to plan a number of things here to get a package.”

The slump in form of the 2003 Rugby World Cup winners cost the RFU £4.5m (€6.63m) last year and Baron believes that a rejuvenated England, with the right support structure, could help the RFU make up the loss.

“If we could get that then our revenue could turn around fairly quickly and we can deliver that money to the clubs,” said Baron.

“We have made it clear there is a limit to how much the Union can afford. At the end of the day that will be the most difficult area to resolve.”

Chairman Martyn Thomas said: “I think we shouldn’t underestimate the enormity of the task because what they (ERC) are looking at is that we reach agreement on outstanding issues.”

But, after talks with Tom Walkinshaw, the Gloucester owner who is heading discussions for the PRL, he said: “I do believe the will exists within Premier Rugby for that to be achieved.

“Tom Walkinshaw expressed the view that it would be achievable by May 18.

“We are up for it and Tom Walkinshaw assures us that PRL are up for it. We had a hiatus from about February 26 until about 10 days ago so we have lost some time there but if the mood is there to do it then we have got to give it a go.”

But Thomas warned: “We cannot compromise on what we need to deliver for the England team.

“If we cannot get a deal Rob feels he needs to deliver for England then there will not be a deal.”

With or without agreement, England’s major clubs could still be playing in Europe.

Baron pointed out that, despite issuing press statements, PRL have never informed the Union that they are withdrawing.

He revealed that even if the issue is not resolved, the RFU could still enter England’s top seven clubs into the Heineken Cup by the June deadline and then throw the ball into the court of the clubs, who stand to lose £15m (€22m) if they fail to participate.