It is widely accepted Sam Burgess will be leaving Souths at the end of 2014 despite the fact the rumours have not been confirmed by the player, Souths or his prospective rugby union club, Bath.
Furthermore, England rugby coach Stuart Lancaster has been less than enthusiastic regarding the prospect of Burgess adjusting and finding the form to warrant World Cup selection in such a short timeframe.
“It would be a challenge, big time,” he said. “The technical nature of union makes it very difficult and given the competition that already exists in this England squad, he would have to earn his right to be included by playing high-quality, top-level club rugby at a consistent standard.”
Bath also have not given any strong indication they are in any way advanced in their negotiations and Souths have officially denied having received any contact from the club.
The most recent development is there appears to be strong opposition from other English rugby clubs to the potential funding and support of Burgess signing by the English RFU.
While there is no doubt this deal has been in the works, there is the very real possibility Burgess’ potential switch has been compromised as a result of the news being revealed.
Now the deal has been leaked, there is the potential for the parties to retreat.
From Burgess’ perspective, he will now have to toss up the opportunity against the bad blood it will cause at Souths and rugby league in general, not to mention far greater pressure to make the transition and find form in rugby than he would have experienced had the deal been done discretely.
The pressure is also on for Bath and the RFU; what would have been a coup had they been able to announce it themselves, now is a big risk, with close scrutiny on Burgess’ price tag, question marks over his ability to make the switch and opposition to central funding of the deal.
They must be tossing up whether it’s all worth it.
For Souths, their fans expect them to stand their ground and while Burgess might have quietly negotiated a release they now will potentially be much stronger in their negotiations of a transfer fee.
They now clearly have the upper hand in this discussion and will rightly command a huge fee, which could be a further disincentive for Bath and the RFU.
While on the face of it it seems like a done deal, it may now in fact be much harder to complete.
The alternative scenario is Burgess remains at Souths, however this would raise even more questions.
Would the players, who it has been reported took exception to the Burgess sideshow, accept him back as one of their own?
Would Burgess resent Souths if transfer negotiations ultimately foil the deal?
If he stays would it cause even greater disruption to Souths’ premiership push?
And if he goes, will Souths fans look back on his last season in rugby league fondly after he plays a big role in delivering a long-awaited premiership to the burrow?
Paul N
Guest
I think Jonty might be the boofhead!!!
Black Chalk
Guest
Um...Maguire was just on Channel 10 News confirming Burgess and rugby union. The only loose ends are the transfer fee. Do you know what tangible means?
Black Chalk
Guest
In 2013 Sam was suspended 3 times in the NRL and once at the world cup. If he keeps on that thuggish path, he might end up suspended for all of 2014. He was lucky he didn't get 8 weeks for the Thaiday stiff arm in the world cup. Good riddance to bad rubbish!
Ice
Guest
I know for a fact he is going at the end of this season (2014)
eagleJack
Guest
Not sure if those figures are correct jonty. Unless you are talking revenue only, but the NZRU operating profit was only around $3m. That's a lot of expenses if that's the case!
jonty
Guest
Boofhead the games only broke in crap ass Australia most other countries are fine so get your facts right knob I heard NZ rugby earns about 65-80mil a year and England earn 90-120mil a year
Black Chalk
Guest
Sam has changed his twitter heading from "Loving life in Australia", and wanting to become an Aussie and play State of Origin, etc, to "Yorkshire Boy Living In Sydney For Now". Clearly, he wants out but Souths want more than Bath is prepared to pay to let him go. Incompetently handled saga. Clowns.
Muzz
Guest
So why hasn't he or his manager denied it???
Mike from tari
Guest
Another rumour spread by the Eastern Suburbs Sydney City Roosters to unsettle the Rabbitohs, they've tried a few already with their Journalist members to try to stop James Packer from investing in Souths.
SportsFanGC
Roar Guru
Dogs - would have to disagree with that! Izzy and Mundine are poles apart.
Australian Rules
Guest
Izzy the new Mundine..?? Well, now I've heard everything!
A View From the Top
Roar Pro
The Daily Telegraph - Controversy Creates Cash! They did this last year by announcing as fact that Jamie Lyon had signed with GC. Get a few days mileage off of this. Then they turn around with 'it was done but someone backed out' storyline and get a few more days mileage off of this 'new' story. Behind close doors someone at GC probably said 'Gee it'd be good to get Killer'
Mal
Guest
If I was a part of Aust. RU I wouldn't be too smug. The game is broke and has asked for a $200 handout from all junior teams - desperate times indeed. Maybe Izzy should take a paycut and take the pressure of the kids teams.
Dogs Of War
Roar Guru
Izzy is the new Mundine for any talk of Rugby hopers. Haven't got a story? Ring Izzy and get his opinion.
SportsFanGC
Roar Guru
Interesting to see Izzy's take on the situation considering he was apparently signing with the Eels just over 12 months ago and then became and Waratah and Wallaby in the one season: http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport/rugby/reaching-for-the-converted-israel-folau-wants-sam-burgess-to-jump-codes-to-join-world-game/story-fnii0ksb-1226825074201
Rod
Guest
I agree with you for the most part. Souths will miss him on a number of fronts. But I don't holding him to ransom wont be good for either party though. Hope to get a big year out of him ( As a fan if the bunnies)and if he goes all the best for his career in union, I don't begrudge him for that.
Blueberry
Guest
If he stays, I don't think England or Souths would be any worse off. England has been planning for the RWC for years and has lots of other players they've been monitoring and developing for a while. It's not like they've lost a player, they're just back to where they are. As for Souths, that can only go sour if people resent him even trying, which would be pretty petty in my books. This isn't about him leaving Souths because he doesn't like it there. If he stays well then Souths are also as they were. From where I'm standing this thing looks rather tame from all sides, so I can't see much politicking starting up, at least not to the extent it'll derail the club.
Blueberry
Guest
I'm with Steve on this one. Burgess doesn't have to start, just being in the mix would add to England's bag of tricks. After such a short amount of time in rugby he'd only likely be replacement material by RWC anyway, but that could be better. Imagine how dangerous they could be if they had Burgess to come on if Tuilagi gets tired or injured mid-game; they'd be like-for-like in terms of physicality. Or imagine Burgess replacing Twelvetrees after 60, so that in the final 20 it's Burgess and Tuilagi smashing their tired opponents.
Steve
Guest
True but what country or club in any sport doesn't want options. I'm sure if Man U were capable they would love to have Messi, Ronaldo, Ribery, Van Persie and Rooney on their books. England might have 4 good centers, why not have 10 if possible.
Squidward
Roar Rookie
Ahhh. The sparkly eyed man