THE postponement of this weekend’s Six Nations clash against France in Paris was a major frustration for the Scotland team and their fans, but that is nothing compared to the headache it has given the people responsible for guiding Scottish Rugby – the business – through these turbulent financial times.
The loss of crowds at all matches during the last year – and particularly during the Autumn internationals and this year’s Six Nations – has been a massive blow to Murrayfield’s coffers.
And while Chief Executive Mark Dodson and his team have managed to weather the storm through a combination of government support, bank refinancing and a deal last May to sell a 28 percent slice of the PRO14 to CVC Partners private equity house for more than £20 million, the situation remains precarious.
Now Scottish Rugby will not receive vital participation payments and broadcast revenue from the Six Nations until they have completed their schedule at a date yet to be confirmed, and while March 27 appears to be the favoured option, nothing has been agreed yet.
The good news as far as Dodson is concerned is that he believes a “transformational’” injection of cash – understood to be worth £40m to Scottish Rugby – is now close, with CVC Partners in the final stages of agreeing terms to buy a chunk of the Six Nations.
READ MORE: French sports minister threatens to pull plug on Six Nations after Covid outbreak
“The deal we did with the PRO14, and if the deal with the Six Nations comes through, they will be absolutely transformational for the Union,” said Dodson last week. “That’s why we have to be very careful about how the money is spent. It has to be spent on things that will future-proof the game.
“It will be across the whole business. The community game, the facilities of the community game, BT Murrayfield itself – it’s a massive stadium, costs a lot of money and always needs to be renewed and improved. If you look at the comparator set, Twickenham, the Principality Stadium, the Aviva, the Stade de France, these are terrific stadiums, and some of the football stadiums that have been built as well, so we’ve got some catching up to do.
“There’s also a look at what we need to do to re-start [grassroots] rugby, how we make sure the pro teams stay competitive … there will be a lot of mouths to feed, but it will be a nice problem to have. It will be great for our Council, our Board and our stakeholders. How we spend it will be something we speak to a large range of people about.”
While more money in these straitened times must be welcomed, there is risk involved. All the other Six Nations teams are going to receive a windfall as well, so if it is not spent wisely then Scotland – who are already the poor relations of this group – run the risk of falling even further behind.
“If you spend it badly, it’s frittered away, or there are no outcomes to the expenditure, then more fool us,” agreed Dodson. “We’ve got to make sure we spend it in the most appropriate way and in a way that takes Scottish rugby forward as a whole, not just one part.”
Fans have expressed concern that the deal will lead to the Six Nations going behind a television paywall as CVC look to recoup their investment, but Dodson stressed that this is not a foregone conclusion.
“If you look at the tender that will go out, we’ve got interest from everybody: terrestrial, traditional pay TV, and a wider new group of broadcasters,” he said. “I don’t necessarily think that going behind a paywall is the likely favoured option. Terrestrial TV gives us an incredible reach that is hard to achieve elsewhere – but, equally, we’ve now got people who are prepared to pay material amounts of money for what is the best rugby tournament in the world.”
Dodson added that he would support a move to summer rugby this year as the amateur game looks to return from lockdown. “The clubs decide when they want to play, but for me, summer rugby in a country like Scotland has to have some merit,” he said. “If you think about what we face in December, January and February, it’s not the easiest game to continue through.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here