A grassroots rebellion has accused the Rugby Football Union of “postponing the inevitable” after the governing body rejected an attempt to force the removal of the chief executive, Bill Sweeney, amid the pay and bonuses scandal.
On another remarkable day at the RFU, a group of 141 members from across the country called for a special general meeting and a vote of no confidence in Sweeney, only for the union to declare the motion invalid on bureaucratic grounds.
In a further twist, the rebels then claimed the RFU’s basis for rejecting the motion was incorrect and they expect the union to comply with the call for an SGM in the coming days. The rebels – who later said their support had grown to 152 members – have demanded an SGM no later than 28 February and have said they are calling on the board of directors to “terminate [Sweeney’s] employment … as soon as practicably possible”.
The threshold to call for an SGM is 100 clubs, so the rebels were confident they would succeed in forcing a vote. But the coup appeared to have failed, at least temporarily, on the grounds that “it does not comply with the relevant requirements”. The procedure to call for an SGM is notoriously bureaucratic and a similar putsch failed during the tackle-height debacle in January 2023.
A spokesman for the group calling for an SGM said: “The RFU can play for time all it likes, but this is a mass movement by a stronger, united team. Splitting hairs about the rules of what is or isn’t a valid complaint-form is merely postponing the inevitable.
“It would surely be better for the RFU to respect the wishes of more than 150 members – so far – who seek to invoke their right under Twickenham’s own regulations to hold the administrators of the game to account at a special general meeting.” The rebels – a mix of clubs and constituent bodies – are led by the Rugby Football Referees’ Union and the Championship clubs and have said they have “scores” more members, believed to be around 70, ready to commit to their cause.
It is understood there is no specific voting threshold required to force the board to sack Sweeney at an SGM but the rebels believe a simple majority would suffice. An RFU source said consideration would be given to what percentage of the 1,849-strong membership is behind the vote.
The timing of the rebels submitting their letter is significant, with Bill Beaumont set to be ratified as interim chairman of the RFU at Friday’s council meeting. In light of the RFU’s rejection of the motion, Friday’s meeting is expected to be uproarious with Sweeney facing the music having been absent from the emergency council meeting on 18 December.
Equally, some clubs and council members are unhappy at what they perceive to be an attempt to railroad Sweeney out of his job. The RFU’s nine professional referees have also spoken out against the motion. “We wish to clarify that, as a group, we have not been consulted by the RFRU regarding these initiatives and have not endorsed any statements or meetings proposed by them.”
Two days after last month’s council meeting, Tom Ilube stood down as chairman, citing how “recent events have become a distraction from the game”, amid widespread fury after it emerged in late November that Sweeney was paid £1.1m, including a £358,000 long-term incentive plan bonus, while five other executive directors shared close to £1m amid 42 redundancies and the RFU’s record loss to reserves of £42m.
after newsletter promotion
Yet the departure of Ilube has done little to quell the rebels’ appetite for major overhaul and their letter calling for an SGM is scathing. They cite the “negative reaction across stakeholders throughout the game” to the pay scandal, “significant concerns around good governance and effective checks and balances”, the attempts of the RFU president Rob Udwin to brush off negative coverage as “media spinning” and “clickbait” and losses of around £130m over the past two World Cup cycles. They also reference the “tackle height debacle”, the demises of Worcester, Wasps, London Irish and Jersey Reds, a failure to deal with promotion and relegation and the “wasted money spent on sacking England coaching staff”.The rebels’ submission was deemed invalid by the RFU, however, on the grounds that it lists clubs in support rather than providing two signatures from each club, and on the basis that it calls for the removal of Ilube as chairman even though he left last month.
An RFU statement read: “The letter contains a number of inaccuracies. It does not comply with the relevant requirements and is therefore invalid as a requisition for an SGM.”
In response, the rebels have said that they have provided the necessary signatures, in different, subsequent emails, and that leaving in reference to Ilube – the motion was written before his departure – would help meet the stringent criteria.
“Rather than wait for the signatures to arrive, [the RFU] just gleefully announced that there weren’t any on the first email. I’m not sure how they step back from this in a few days’ time when they have to announce they are complying and calling an SGM,” a person involved in the process said on Thursday night.The rebels’ initial statement reads: “To provide a coherent vision for the future, further resolutions will be submitted that will recommend an action plan and changes that will stabilise matters and subsequently restore democratic rights to member clubs.
“Clubs and members from County Durham to Cornwall, Cumbria to Kent, have signed in a final effort to have their voices heard. Scores more clubs have indicated their support for the calling of an SGM and will add their names to it in days and weeks to come. The number of signatories reflect the breadth and depth of dissatisfaction with the current administration’s failure to find a whole-game solution to the whole-game problems English rugby faces.”
