Former professional referee Wayne Barnes has plunged the Rugby Football Union (RFU) into further crisis with a damning letter to referees, outlining the exact issues behind the SGM crisis.
His strong statement comes after the embarrassing Special General Meeting (SGM) incidents earlier this month, in which the RFU initially rejected the calls due to ‘inaccuracies’, but they later backtracked and approved the meeting.
Barnes also slammed the union which led the charge for an SGM, saying he felt that has tarnished the reputation of referees within the game.
Wayne Barnes: Union ‘damaging reputation of referees’
In an open letter to referees, which Planet Rugby has seen, Barnes called out the ‘inflammatory’ language of the Rugby Football Referees Union (RFRU) and highlighted the exact ‘inaccuracies’ in their request.
The full letter reads:
“To all fellow referees and referees’ societies,
I’m writing to you today because I believe that our reputation within the game is being damaged by the Rugby Football Referees Union (‘RFRU’), the Union that represent us.
Yours – and my – representatives have decided to take the lead in calling for a Special General Meeting, in collaboration with the Championship clubs, in which they intend to call for the Chief Executive of the RFU to be sacked. That is their right, of course. But when calling for the meeting, they have used inflammatory language and provided inaccurate information, which affects the credibility of every referee across England.
In 30 years of refereeing in both the community and professional game, I have never felt the need to send a letter like this, but as a proud member of my refereeing society and as an ambassador of our role, I believe it is important for me to correct the major inaccuracies that our representatives are feeding to the game.
It is absolutely the right of members to hold an organisation to account, but if someone is to mount a campaign within the game, I also believe that any statements they make need to be accurate. In this case, they are not.
Inflammatory Language
On Friday 3rd January, the secretary of the Rugby Football Referees Union (‘RFRU’), sent a resolution to clubs across the country and accused ‘Council Members [of] either being silent or trying to stifle good governance and democracy by actively briefing against it.’
Anthony Watson ‘proud and blessed’ as England star makes retirement decision
When our Union sends an email with language like this, it damages every referee, because if referees can openly criticise other members of the game, why can’t the game openly criticise referees? This is something we have all worked hard to campaign against. The Council members the RFRU accuse of trying to stifle good governance are volunteers of the game, just like you.
Inaccurate Information
The resolution includes the following inaccurate statements:
• ‘The RFU has made significant financial losses over the last two rugby World Cup cycles, (circa £130m+)’;
This is incorrect. I have spoken with the RFU finance team, and they don’t recognise, and cannot reconcile, the figure that the RFRU have quoted of £130m+. To the contrary, the finance team pointed out that the RFU has made significant financial progress over the last four years.
As per the independently audited report and accounts, across the last two men’s World Cup cycles, which included the unprecedented impacts of Covid, the RFU has generated:
o A net profit of £5.4m contributing to positive P&L reserves of £83.6m;
o Net positive cashflow of £3.3m, including full repayment of historically high levels of debt of £75m; and
o A closing cash balance of £59m and an additional £35m of undrawn
credit facilities.
This financial performance across the last two World Cup cycles, has allowed the RFU to invest more than £730m back into the game and more than £18m in driving long-term revenue growth from sponsorship, the stadium and the community game.
I have asked the RFRU to explain where they obtained the ‘£130m+’ figure. They said they would come back to me. They have not.
• ‘[The RFU] has spent millions on removing England coaching staff’
This is incorrect. Settlement agreements are confidential, however, the year in which Eddie Jones left the RFU, the Annual Report shows the restructuring costs – which included all staff restructuring costs across the organisation – were £900k.
• ‘We have also seen the demise of four clubs in the top two leagues and the damage done to the second tier of our game through unaccountable decision- making.’
It was devastating to see four clubs go into administration, but they were independent businesses, with directors responsible for running them. Their financial management does not rest with the RFU. Their owners were no longer willing to invest in clubs that were loss-making. It would have been wrong for the RFU to bail out these clubs. And where would the money have come from?
• ‘The failure in dealing with promotion and relegation in the pyramid.’ This has been dealt with. For the duration of the eight years of the Professional Game Partnership, the RFU Council agreed that promotion and relegation would continue through a play-off between the Premiership and Championship, provided that the Championship club met the relevant minimum standards.
There was extensive consultation with the Championship clubs, which led to greater flexibility for aspiring clubs to reach a capacity of 10,001 over a four-year period.
Setting the structure of promotion and relegation continues to be the responsibility of the Council and remains throughout the pyramid.
• ‘The debacle of the tackle height implementation, added to a centralised staffing structure, which does little to serve the game at local levels, means the thousands of volunteers who keep the game alive, and running have now lost confidence and trust in the leadership of our game.’
Council voted to lower the height of the tackle in the community game, two years ago today, in order to make it safer. The word “waist” was initially used to define the line rather than the “sternum”, contrary to the advice of the Executive. The RFRU council representative was part of that decision.
Though it was the Council’s role to decide these changes, the RFU, as whole, acknowledged engagement with the game could have been better during the build-up to the decision being made.
The law change followed significant research that evidenced this would result in a reduction in concussion and head-on-head contact.
• The resolution also suggested that Council were not aware of the Executive’s Long-Term Incentive Payments. Council was aware. Executive pay is set by the Remuneration Committee under the supervision of the Board. Council has a representative on that committee. The RFU Board had six council members on it when it was agreed. In total, at least 18 Council Members were involved in the in Long-Term Incentive Payments discussions over the last four years. It was also publicly disclosed in the annual reports of 21/22 and 22/23.
• The email sent to clubs states that clubs up and down the country have seen the support they receive ‘disappear’
This is incorrect. Investment in Community Rugby has been a priority, and the Community Game Future Project has been agreed and will see £30m a year invested with more coaches, more resources for clubs, and accessible forms of T1 non-contact rugby being taken into thousands of schools.
Discussions with the RFRU
In seeking to understand why the RFRU decided to send misleading and inaccurate information with such inflammatory language to clubs, and to understand where the misinformation has come from, I spoke to Adam White, the Secretary of the RFRU. He told me that most of the misleading wording was provided by Championship club representatives. The wording wasn’t checked or challenged by the RFRU, and I have written to them to ask whether they intend to correct the inaccuracies with everyone who they have been lobbying to sign the motion. They have not replied.
The SGM resolution has gone out in the name of the RFRU and therefore in the name of its members, and so I believe it is the responsibility of the RFRU to correct the inaccuracies and false assertions.
Adam White also confirmed that the RFRU believed they should lead the campaign for change in the leadership of the RFU and confirmed that the RFRU have the right to provide a public opinion about the promotion and relegation in the professional men’s game.
The members of the RFRU were never asked if they agreed with taking such a public view on this, and as a member, I totally disagree with it.
It’s also worth noting that the resolution called for the Chair of the Board to resign. The
Chair of the Board, Tom Ilube, resigned on 20 December 2024, stating that ‘recent events have become a distraction from the game’. The resolution called for a Special General Meeting no later than 28th February.
This is the middle of the men’s Six Nations; a time when we should surely be celebrating our game. This is also a Rugby World Cup year. A year when we should be celebrating our Red Roses.
Summary
The RFRU has thrust referees into headlines. This is not a place where referees should be. People may disagree with me on that, which has happened a lot in my career. But if any referee, any society, any club – community-based or professional – want to discuss this further, I am always available. And I will always be honest, dealing only in facts.
I would encourage other referees to ask their representatives why they have made accusations against Council members using highly charged language, and provided false information in your name. Refereeing deserves better. For anyone who might find it useful, I have attached a summary of the RFU and Council structure and a more in-depth overview of how the RFRU lead the call for an SGM.
I’m very proud to represent referees on the RFU Board and I will continue to do so with the same passion and integrity as I have done throughout my refereeing career. I believe referees should have a strong voice in the game, but this is not the right way to do it and the changes they call for will not improve our game.
Thank you for your time.
Wayne”
RFU to hold SGM following pay scandal
The letter is the latest chapter in a messy month for the RFU, in which they have announced an SGM will be held over the pay scandal.
“The RFU is in the process of validating the additional information that has now been provided to request a Special General Meeting (SGM),” an official statement read.
“The notice to request an SGM contained a significant number of inaccuracies, however, the RFU respects the right of its members to call for an SGM and for their views to be heard.
“A date for the SGM will be announced in the next two weeks and it will take place after the Guinness Men’s Six Nations has concluded.”
In a fresh twist in the saga, the Times now report the RFU will also be hiring ‘crisis experts’ to repair the reputation of the body.
Src: Planetrugby.com - https://www.planetrugby.com/news/wayne-barnes-plunges-rfu-into-further-crisis-with-damning-open-letter-to-referees
