Picture the scene. It’s November 2022 and Fiji are facing Scotland.
The last time these two teams played each other, in 2018, Scotland cantered to a 54-17 win. The perennial strugglers of the Northern Hemisphere normally expect to comfortably beat Fiji, regardless of ranking or the known strength of Fijian rugby.
But this year something is different. This year the game is a part of the Nation’s Championship and Fiji are a contender.
They win this game and they are through to the Nations Championship Finals. Scotland are playing at home, but they are in the doldrums.
Safe from relegation with a superior record to Italy, they can’t crack the top two of the European teams.
The bookies have Fiji as narrow favorites. How is this scene possible you ask? How can things have changed so dramatically since the last time these two sides met?
The Fijians are being paid.
That one sentence changes the entire complexion of international rugby, of the success of Pacific Islander teams, and of the ability of tier-two nations to grow and maintain talent. But how?
Casting our minds back to that game in 2018, there was a reason Scotland could be confident of the win. The Fijian players were barely paid. The game took place during the Northern Hemisphere club seasons.
Many Fijian players playing for French clubs are ordered to feign injuries or ‘retire’ from international rugby so as to not be available for international matches. Threats of pay cuts and contracts being torn up are made.
In the end, like they often do, Fiji field a weakened team with almost no preparation leaving Scotland the heavy favourites. This is considered normal.
Looking forward to 2022 however, there is a potential for a radical change.
Fiji performa the haka before their clash against Scotland in 2018. (Andy Buchanan/AFP/Getty Images)
The Nations Championship has enabled the payment of match fees paid directly by World Rugby to players.
Please note: none of the following represents what will actually happen with player payments in the Nations Championship. At this point there is no public information available regarding the sharing of revenue from the proposed new competition.
But why is this such a massive change? Because it shrinks, or even eliminates, the earning gap between club and international rugby for players from poorer unions.
As it stands clubs can put pay pressure on their overseas stars to not compete in international matches.
While this is a contravention of World Rugby regulations, it’s is widely believed to be the case, especially in France.
The Nations Championship provides World Rugby with a revenue stream which it then distributes to the competing unions. Part of that distribution could be directly to players as match payments.
Those payments would offset any financial disincentive from a players club to not play international rugby. I would suggest this should be on a reporting basis so wealthy nations’ players don’t get a top up from World Rugby, say a cap of $10,000 per game, for argument’s sake.
Without the threat of financial pain, clubs will likely resort to reducing their average salary bill. This will allow for larger squads so they can balance losing players to international matches.
At this point the sheer impact of the opportunity becomes clear. A normalization of wages will reduce movement between countries.
Match payments will make playing for their home country, rather than waiting out a residency period in a different country, more attractive to Pacific Islander players and players from other tier-two nations.
Larger club squads in Europe could open up room for more players to get opportunities, including potentially players without strong domestic competitions.
A Nations Championship which provides World Rugby to directly remunerate international players would be a massive step change for rugby, and would go a long way towards balancing the playing field at the international level.
If the Nation’s Championship does go ahead I hope it’s something seriously considered by World Rugby!
Ben
Guest
Management or mismanagement...arent the richest union in the world, England, in the red? Theyre talking about disbanding their 7s team to save a few $million. Wheres all their money gone?
Muzzo
Roar Rookie
Good read Papanui, & very interesting. As you mentioned.about the "Frogs",well they have been abusing that ruling, virtually since the game became professional, possibly even a little before that. It really shows how pathetic World Rugby, or formerly the IRB, actually are, by not pursuing, that ruling. It dose, as we know, apply to all nations under their jurisdiction. Didn't they once, suspend South Africa, over racial issues, who are a nation under the WR flag? On the PI's, well, in the past, their major problems, have been in the mismanagement of finance. I myself, would like to see, a truely, fully, representative teams from these Islands, as Polynesian & Melanesian rugby, do have so much to offer. We only have to look at the many nations that have these players, which in their case, are first generation players. Yep, Papanui, there are some interesting times ahead.
Working Class Rugger
Roar Guru
The right model will definitely help T2 and even T3 nations. And the model released by WR is pretty close to that model in my opinion. I still think it needs some tweaking. But it's close. What is does ensure is that the Top 24 natons will get 11 competitive games each and every year. Which can only help them grow and develop.
Wee Wally
Guest
Pure fantasy. How can this be a realistic outcome? France, Australia, England, and its Celtic colonies, are all stealing Fijian players. Even the Knuckledraggers have a huge number of Islander players, although most were born in the Shaky Isles. QueeNZland needs to be re-named for the SOO as most of its players are foreigners. Even Thurston has a Kiwi father and cannot join our Parliament.
Jacko
Guest
Peter I dont see who pays the players as a problem. I hope that the WR sets a minimum wage per test for the top 12 and $10,000 per player would seem a good figure......starting players maybe a bit more....Make that compulsory....If the richer nations decide to pay their players extra then so be it but I cant see why any nation would be against the payers being given this minimum 10k from WR....Top-ups from the nation out of their own earnings and the amount of those top ups would vary for each player..EG starting players get more than the bench and a superstar would get more than a newbie. The top 12 nations will be getting 11-12 mil per year so thats roughly 1 mil per test so half for the players and half for the national Union would seem a fair split...after costs...so perhaps 400k to players and 400k to unions after 200k costs taken out...just rough figures of course as different venues would require different expenses with tours dearer than hosting
PeterK
Roar Guru
For the improvement you make allude to happening, AND the power moving away from the home nations is why World rugby will NOT vote for payments to be made directly to players. All 6N's would be against it and probably most RC countries as well.
PeterK
Roar Guru
For exactly the benefits you see I cannot see World Rugby voting that way for the dispersal of money, every 6N country would vote against it and perhaps some RC's one as well. I would like to see players paid directly by world rugby especially as some PI countries national unions have been corrupt and the money has disappeared.
Chris
Guest
I expect the biggest benefit for the likes of Fiji will be playing 11 high quality test matches in a season. That means time together and exposure to high intensity test rugby. Something they have never had outside of a World Cup. Even the second tier comp will benefit from this.
Harry Jones
Expert
Excellent article.
Istanbul Wingman
Roar Guru
Good article.