Pacific rugby’s funding woes

Viewpoint – Pacific Islands rugby is not alone.

The lack of funding for rugby on the island is similar to that in most so-called developing rugby countries.

Unfortunately, the solution is not as simple as A, B, C.

Last week’s Disclosure regarding the Rakapi Samoa decision Pulling out of a planned northern hemisphere tour later this year is just another sign of the real struggles facing minor rugby league on a daily basis.

The federation’s board chairperson, former prime minister Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaard, said “lack of sponsorship” was the federation’s “biggest challenge” in growing and sustaining the sport.

“We recommend exploring targeted initiatives to bring about real and lasting change for a country the size of Samoa. This could include increased financial assistance and stronger support structures to help us navigate the complexities of international competition,” he said in a letter to World Rugby chairman Sir Bill Beaumont.

Tuilaepa told Radio New Zealand that Samoa Rakapi needed the funds to support himself.

He claimed The current government does not support them as strongly as the previous one.

“Rakapi Samoa has been facing many financial problems since our government left,” he said.

“We are talking again to other sponsors and other donors to the Centennial.”

He said they are working to clean up their backyard and try to get new financial support.

World Rugby responds to financial woes “It’s a direct consequence of the union’s decision”.

On Thursday, they told me they could not reveal what specifically Rakapi Samoa had done that led to their decision to withdraw from the tour, saying it was most important to address the causes that had led to the problem, rather than focusing on short-term solutions that could deepen it.

Now, this basically means two things:

• World Rugby is unhappy with the lack of financial management at Rakapi Samoa and they want the federation to improve, just as they have given ultimatums in the past to the Fiji Rugby Union (FRU) and Tonga Rugby Union (TRU); or
• World Rugby has grown tired of assisting Samoa and other smaller rugby unions amid their constant requests for financial assistance.

A World Rugby spokesman said they had provided financial assistance to Samoa, Fiji and Tonga because “World Rugby covers the costs of the Pacific Nations Cup, the Under-20 Championship and the Rugby World Cup”.

“World Rugby also funds high performance programmes, helps arrange matches and so on.”

The tour’s ticket revenue and sponsorship shares are determined by the respective unions and are governed by the mutually agreed tour agreements.

This confirms that island nations touring the northern hemisphere must spend thousands of dollars to get their teams around the globe.

Former administrator says overseas travel is not cheap

Former FRU and Pacific Barbarians official Charlie Charters said overseas tours were not cheap.

“Because the major costs are the airfare, fees paid to the players and reimbursement of the selected players who attend the tryouts,” he said.

Charters believes the financial return of the tour is an important issue for the tour alliance to consider, especially considering which teams they will play in the tour.

For example, Manu Samoa is scheduled to play Spain and Portugal during the tour. At least that’s what the schedule says.

In contrast, the Flying Fiji team is scheduled to play against Tier 1 nations Ireland, Wales and Scotland.

It will therefore be a greater challenge for Manu Samoa to spend at least $150,000 to participate in the tour, which on paper already indicates that their share of revenue will be less than the amount they spend.

Chatters said it was an obvious decision that might force Rakapi Samoa to think twice about flying across the Pacific to compete in Europe.

As a practical matter, if the returns from potential sponsors are not worthwhile, then Rakapi Samoa will have a hard time finding sponsors to support its national team.

Imagine going to a sponsor and asking them to buy sponsorship space on the front of their jersey.

They’ll ask where you’re performing? Which TV station?

No disrespect to Spain and Portugal, but there isn’t a big market (because why would a TV station in New Zealand or Australia show such a “small” game).

Therefore, playing against Spain and Portugal means you are fishing in a smaller pond.

Chatters said this is very important for Rakapi Samoa because their sponsors are signed on a monthly and annual basis.

The tours are organised by Word Rugby in coordination with the host unions.

So World Rugby must take at least some of the blame.

Management issues

Unions also have a responsibility to sort out the management of finances and resources.

This is a Pacific problem.

Tonga Rugby (2017 to 2022) and Fiji Rugby (2023 to present) have both been subject to scrutiny and system inspections over money management issues.

Tonga was stripped of all World Rugby funding and placed under strict surveillance for nearly four years until they managed to sort out their accounts and New system in place.

This involves a collaboration between the Tonga Rugby Union, the Tonga Government and World Rugby.

The same thing is happening in Fiji, where the interim committee has been working with the government and World Rugby. Meet the required standardsincluding meeting legal requirements to ensure rugby can once again find its footing.

What needs to happen, however, is for the union to be independent from World Rugby.

One danger that seems to have been noticed now is that this world body has too much power, such as the FRU, and they basically pull the strings, even though they deny it.

While World Rugby must provide financial and other resource support to all unions, they must not appear dictatorial in the conduct of their affairs.

Tonga’s Prime Minister Huakawameliku Shosi-Sovaleni responded to the Rakapi Samoa issue in a post on social media, saying the issue is real and sad.

“This is the sad reality of the Pacific’s beloved sport of rugby,” Huakawameliku wrote.

“World Rugby and sponsors need a better way to support rugby.

“If you don’t have the necessary resources, it’s hard to play well. If you don’t play well, it’s hard to get resources… It’s not a win-win situation.”

Floating fund?

So who has to bear the costs of tours outside of World Rugby’s official commitments?

Charters said an agreement must be reached that benefits all parties involved.

The cost of a trip to the Northern Hemisphere is the same whether visiting the UK and France or Spain and Portugal.

But income opportunities have changed dramatically.

He said that rugby tournaments should follow the principle of mutual benefit: I travel to your country, you travel to my country. When I host you, I make money. When I visit, you also make money.

To ensure such a tour can be held successfully, World Rugby must invest a lot of money.

The host union must also help out by covering hotel, meal and transportation costs while the touring group is in their country.

Or better yet, World Rugby should transfer more money to developing countries so that when their own funds run low, they have a floating fund to help them when needed.

Perhaps a way could be devised whereby smaller nations receive around 60% of their funding needs from the governing body, as their ability to attract major funders is minimal compared to federations such as New Zealand or France, which have the luxury of having sponsors ready to support them.

There has to be a better way

Whatever happens to the Rakapi Samoa trade unions over the next 12 months, the fact remains that developing trade unions do not enjoy the luxuries enjoyed by first-class trade unions.

Records show that in 2014, Tu’ilaepa expressed his concerns to WR owner Bernard Lapasset At a meeting in Brussels.

That was ten years ago.

Back then, Manu Samoa also suffered unfair treatment.

World Rugby used a system where the England Rugby Union earned about NZ$4 million for a Test match against Samoa, while the away team received just over NZ$100,000 in appearance fees.

In the rematch on September 25, 2017, Manu Samoa faced England at Twickenham.

In that match, Manu Samoa attracted more than 81,000 fans to the stadium.

It is claimed that the England players will receive $29,000 each for the match, while Manu Samoa will receive only $860 each.

Therefore, World Rugby must ensure that these leagues receive funding so that they are given the opportunity to develop.

There has to be a better way to pay for the team’s tour so that the tour is worth attending in every way.

Otherwise, all the talk of making major investments to grow the sport worldwide will be just empty talk.