Rugby will never become a global sport.

Rugby will never become a global sport.  

New Zealand and its old-boy mates have seen to this. 

New Zealand and the old-school-tie buddies actually like it this way.  

Turkey’s don’t vote for Christmas.   

From many New Zealanders the IRB and some sort of ‘pink-gin drinking’ toffs in Ireland.  

The reality is the New Zealand Rugby Union is just as complicate in the travesty of the voting system that ostracises the majority of countries involved in the sport. 

Take the U.S for example. 

They can boast 90,000 players versus Scotland’s 40,000.        

Scotland gets two votes, from a total of 28, yet the U.S merely gets a share of the North American bloc’s single vote.   

It’s a similar situation to Samoa, ranked 7^th in the world, yet only gets a small say in the sports administration via Oceania, along with Fiji, Tonga etc. 

Neither the U.S nor Samoa get a direct say in the way the sport is run.  

Japan (ranked 15) and Canada (ranked 14) can bring their vote to the table. 

Samoa, Tonga and Fiji, all ranked above them – bring one vote between them.  

This single Oceania vote also includes Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, Tahiti, Vanuatu, and American Samoa etc.     

The eight foundation (read: old school tie) members of the IRB get 16 of the 28 votes.  

But it gets worse, less equitable.  

The president and vice president of the IRB get a vote as well!   

These two administrators are always patsies for the 8 foundation members so in effect eight countries get 18 votes and the rest 10.  

8 countries from 100 have the sport by the balls, act on their best interests and not the sports.  

Changes to the Laws of the Game, the hosting rights for the Rugby World Cup and the international tours schedule are all controlled by 8 countries that do what’s best for them and not the emerging countries.

Fiji Rugby is having its century this years and N.Z Rugby is condescending sending an invitation team up there.

Don’t think this situation is going to change anytime shortly.   

To quote the IRB Chief Executive Brett Gosper “You can't, for instance, have Lithuania having the same clout at New Zealand or England - that's just not going to happen." 

People may lambast FIFA, corruption in football etc but unquestionably football is growing globally. FIFA goes out of its way to pour money into developing countries including New Zealand.  

Bahrain, Ivory Coast, Burundi, Jordan, Cayman Islands and Northern Ireland are hardly global footballing powers but all have spots on FIFA’s executive Committee.  

Contrast this to the IRB which has failed to grow the sport, looks like a colonial throw-back.  

In-fact you could argue rugby is getting weaker as Australia slips down the perch. In Australia, one of the sports traditional powerbases, rugby is now only the 4^th most watched (crowd/television) football code. The code languishes as Australians 13^th most popular organised sport participant wise.     

After seven tournaments just five countries have made the World Cup finals.  

Name one country that will seriously challenge N.Z, Aust, England, S.A and France’s dominance at the next RWC?  

Name one up & coming country that will become a force in the sport in your lifetime when nine of the top twenty nations countries; Argentina, Samoa, Fiji, Canada, Tonga, Georgia, USA, Romania and Russia still run largely amateur domestic competitions?       

Rugby in Japan and Italy is stagnating and falling further behind football.   

But why would the IRB care, when they are the self-serving mouth-pieces of the elite?  

What’s in it for England or Wales if the U.S became a force in the game?  

What does New Zealand have to gain if Samoa received the necessary finances to become serious opposition?  

Here-in lies the problem and why rugby will never be a global sport.