CF10 Rugby Trust

Since Helford Capital’s abject failure to fulfil its financial commitments as owners, and Cardiff Rugby’s subsequent slip into administration and temporary WRU ownership, as a Supporters’ Trust we have chosen to mostly maintain a dignified silence.

Earlier this year we considered making our feelings known about the URC’s continued policy of ignoring our club’s chosen kick off times. The Saturday evening kickoffs – unpopular with many fans and inconvenient for families – are far from being the club’s preference. We have grown all too accustomed to similar complaints falling on deaf ears at the URC. 

So, whilst we did write to the URC, we held back from publicising our letter at the time out of respect to our friends at clubs facing much greater challenges.

And, as is usually the case in Welsh rugby, those challenges have been imposed upon them by our own governing body, the Welsh Rugby Union – the organisation which leads the Welsh game, but which is also the leading cause of many of the Welsh game’s problems. 

This is not intended as an inflammatory statement or something designed to provoke a reaction. It is simply a statement of fact. 

There can be no doubt that decisions made by the governing body over the past fifteen years have had an overwhelmingly negative impact on the professional game in this country. The WRU’s moves to create a lasting solution for pro rugby in Wales are a response to a mess that the WRU has itself created. It is important that this is recognised.

We are all too aware that our status as the capital city club gives us a proximity to the WRU that other clubs have always treated with a certain amount of suspicion. It is of course well documented that there have been frequent disagreements between Cardiff and the WRU both before and since the sport went professional (as ‘Glanmor’s gap’ bears witness). Nevertheless we understand the suspicion with which our club is treated by supporters of other Welsh clubs at the present time.

We are hugely grateful to the WRU for the action they took to preserve the club and protect the club’s employees. We have also been respectful of the consultation process and are grateful for the time Dave Reddin gave us earlier this year.

However, as events have developed over the past few months, we feel it is no longer possible to stay silent, especially seeing as our members have made it very clear to us that they wish to return to private ownership as soon as possible.

Strong rumours continue to circulate that the Ospreys ownership are amongst the six parties expressing an interest in buying our club. Statements from WRU Chairman Richard Collier-Keywood seem to back up this possibility.

This “solution” cannot be seriously considered.  It has already been made clear by our Trust and by the other supporters groups that no mergers are desired and that the bulk of our members would not support such a team. We have no desire to be seen as a club that only survived at the expense of another club. The anger and contempt that would be directed at such a group would also be directed our club. Quite understandably. We do not wish to see our club dragged through the mud in this way

Furthermore, we would wish to be able to deal with any new owners in a spirit of mutual respect and cooperation. It would be impossible to trust any ownership group who have already trampled on one of our rivals in order to get to us. It is hard to see anyone in the sport liking, respecting or trusting such an ownership group. 

It is not a solution that anyone can support. If it is genuinely being considered then it must be abandoned. 

It is clear that it would offer a short-term solution to the WRU by providing an easy route to three teams. But – as they have themselves stated – Welsh rugby needs long-term solutions. Not convenient deals that solve the short-term headaches of WRU management.

We are also deeply troubled by the terms apparently being insisted upon by the WRU.

Asking individuals to invest money whilst having no control over the teams themselves is unreasonable. It is no surprise that this proposal has sparked such a backlash. Add in the fact that the WRU’s Covid loan has apparently been put back on the shoulders of the clubs, that the Union is seemingly demanding a 50% share of commercial profits, and that it wants all players centrally contracted, then the offer becomes one that is almost impossible to accept. Perhaps this is indeed the intention and the de facto route to getting to the “optimal solution” of two teams.

Supporters wish to get behind clubs with a clear identity and clear autonomy. Teams cannot simply be seen as toys of the governing body.

The balance between union and private ownership in New Zealand has been cited as a positive precedent for this arrangement. But the reality is that New Zealand rugby itself faces profound challenges off the field. Not least, the erosion of interest in their Super Rugby and NPC sides. More and more, it is rugby league which is capturing the attention of fans from week to week in New Zealand. Something that was previously unthinkable. 

Is this really a successful precedent which we should seek to follow?

We fully support the Dragons’ ownership group in the stance they have taken regarding the  ten-year licence system suggested by the WRU. We are heartened by their widely publicised response. We wish representatives of our own club were in a position to do the same but appreciate that in their case, this is made impossible by the WRU’s temporary ownership.

As previously stated, our members have made it clear that they hope for a quick sale of the club to suitable buyers. We are pleased to learn that there has been significant interest. One interested consortium visited the club for the recent Connacht game and made their strong interest in the club clear via the media and to members of our Trust.

Our deep concern is that the terms apparently being demanded by the WRU will simply put off those and other potential buyers. Worse, they may even encourage completely the wrong type of buyer. The WRU’s terms seem calculated to attract buyers purely interested in the profits that can be generated. The WRU is once again driving investment out of the game. But the good news – apparently – is that investors might be replaced by people who wish to extract money from the game.

This does not feel like a step forward.

This creates doubt about the future sale of our club and about the future of every Welsh professional club.

The term “licence” itself implies impermanence. Something that can simply be taken away at the whim of the WRU. 

Supporters want teams with clear identities. Teams that time, money and – crucially – emotion can be invested in. This “10 year licence” system seems to be the antithesis of that. It risks further devaluing the prestige of pro rugby in Wales.

The WRU will by now be well accustomed to the anger generated on social media by their decisions. But there is also another emotion amongst supporters of what hopefully we can still call our national game: sadness. 

Sadness is less likely to be expressed on social media. But it is there nonetheless. Sadness about the state of the sport and sadness about the threat of a team being taken away. 

Supporters have a deep, emotional investment in their clubs. For some, the family they find at rugby will be the only support network they have. Some will have been following their club for decades. The removal of their club will leave a gaping hole in their lives. The threat of genuine mental health issues resulting from this process is very real. Likewise, the psychological impact on the players and staff at all our clubs during the current uncertainty cannot be understated. The WRU would do well to keep this in mind. It is certainly not appropriate for its current chair to state that, throughout this process, he has been having fun at work everyday.

A few months ago, on the Scrum V podcast, Gareth Davies, former WRU chair and of course a former Cardiff outside half and shrewd tactician, made the point that a consultation process was the correct course for the WRU to take, but with fans, players and clubs all expressing disagreement then the only option must be to change course. 

It was with deep disappointment that we saw Gareth Davies leave the WRU five years ago. It is likely that under his leadership, some of the profound errors made by the WRU might not have occurred. The current leadership of the WRU would do well to heed his advice.

In the interest of the spirit of cooperation and goodwill with which they entered this process, it is surely now time for the WRU to think again.