So no one told you life was gonna be this way
Your job's a joke, you're broke, your love life's DOA
It's like you're always stuck in second gear
When it hasn't been your day, your week, your month, or even your year, but
I'll be there for you (When the rain starts to pour) I'll be there for you (Like I've been there before) I'll be there for you ('Cause you're there for me too)
I'll Be There For You - The Rembrandts
Coventry Rugby's recent trip to Jersey in support of the amateur game on the island after the collapse of Jersey Reds a month earlier continues to make the news.
Last weekend's The Rugby Paper includes pretty much a full page spread under the banner headline 'Coventry show how it should be done' in which the writer, our own Paul Smith, counterpoints Coventry's selfless act of support for the plight of the game in Jersey (and in appreciation of the many Cov supporters who chose to fly over despite the cancellation of the club's Championship fixture) against the sometimes rather mixed adherence to the RFU's own values by those in the highest echelons of the sport.
At a cost of over £20,000, according to PS, Coventry's weekend stay in Jersey represents a healthy chunk (or should that be unhealthy?) out of the RFU's derisory annual funding of just £150,000. It's money that the club can ill afford to lose but 'some things are more important than money' and Cov clearly decided that providing coaching opportunities for Jersey's youngsters, whilst at the same time raising some much needed cash for the island's junior club Jersey RFC, was more important than whatever losses might be incurred as a result of its recent visit.
As gestures go, it was massive.
Unlike the RFU, Coventry have highlighted just what values like teamwork, respect and enjoyment mean in practice, rather than following the RFU's seemingly theoretical approach, one that is buried deep within its own governance under 'rules and regulations', referring to them only when it best suits their needs.
Which is hardly ever, if at all.
Philanthropy doesn't always have to involve the giving of money, something that Cov just isn't in a position to be able to do anyway. By offering the island access to its richest assets, namely its players and coaches, the club has shown just how closely knit the rugby community is outside of the Premiership.
And as an aside, it's good to see journalist Paul Smith back at Cov after his stint away from the club as Wasps' Media Manager. Paul is a Coventry lad who knows the local rugby scene better than most and I've always felt that he has a real respect for the club, recognising its glorious past as well as its previous failings, whilst at the same time understanding how the club is trying to rebuild itself under its current leadership. Paul, along with Dan Lewis make for a formidable duo and it's no surprise that the club's media output is far better as a result these days (with John Coles supplying the photos, obviously!).
The club is very lucky to have someone of Paul's experience covering such an important period in the club's history and having work extensively with Wasps, I imagine he's rather better placed to attract the interests of the national media than those previously in his post in recent seasons and that's not meant as any criticism of them, just an acknowledgement of Paul Smith's contribution.
To have PS reporting on the continued rise of the club at both a local and national level won't do Cov any harm at all. Certainly, I've been aware of a far greater coverage of all things Coventry Rugby in recent months and whilst that might not all be down to Paul alone, I'm sure his presence has helped raise the Club's profile.
In another article in last week's The Rugby Paper, there's a suggestion that whilst Coventry Rugby was in the process of planning its weekend's trip to the island in support of amateur club Jersey RFC, those attempting to secure the future of doomed Jersey Reds, its professional big brother, were inadvertently incurring the wrath of the Coventry Board by over-inflating the wage bill of the top Championship clubs and in so doing potentially damaging the Coventry brand.
It appears Coventry were, probably still are, less than happy.
Furious in fact.
As I understand it, and I think this is correct, a few days after the announcement that Jersey Reds was to go into administration, attempts were still being made to secure the long term future of the club. One such endeavour was undertaken by a Lyndon Farnham, a Jersey councillor, who lodged a proposition to Jersey's States to provide funding for the Reds in early October in the form of a Business Model Review, backed by Santander.
According to RugbyPass.com the document states on page 10 that Coventry Rugby in 2022/23 'has an annual player salary spend in excess of £2.5million plus'. There is also mention of other Championship clubs with similar figures and it's the Cornish Pirates Head Coach, Gavin Cattle, who spearheads the rebuttal in The Rugby Paper article previously referred to.
Pirates have also obviously taken exception to the claims.
Were this to have been true, then it would have been something of a bombshell given the RFU 's input of just £150K and it would rightly lead to some serious questions as to how the club was raising this sort of money and how it could be sustained over a longer period.
Small wonder then that Coventry Rugby's reaction was so combative:
'This is entirely untrue and overstates our actual player salary budget by more than 200 per cent. We subsequently requested that a further statement is made correcting this misrepresentation but have received no response.
We are a club that operates within its means on a prudent basis. We do this by building a team of predominantly young Midlands-based, English-qualified players who we develop through our outstanding rugby programme.
The potential damage done to our brand and business by this irresponsible and untruthful statement is considerable.
We confirm to our supporters, financial partners, staff and players that the statement is entirely without factual merit and should be treated as such.
We reserve the right to pursue action against those responsible if this error is not speedily redressed.'
Such was the potential damage that could have been done by a fallacious and erroneous claim of this nature that the club felt it necessary to release a statement of its own soon after learning of the document in order to waylay any potential fears its stakeholders might have.
Whose to say that a current or potential future sponsor wouldn't pull out of working with the club if it felt that the Board was being anything less than prudent in terms of its payments to players? The loss of just one sponsor could well have a disastrous effect on the club's finances.
It was irresponsible of the those behind the document to put such out document out into the public domain without having checked the figures first - and it's still out there and isn't difficult to find even now. There doesn't appear to have been any public response from either Mr Farnham's or anyone else connected with the proposal despite Coventry Rugby's vehement denial and, again according to RugbyPass, Cov has made it clear that it will take legal action if the figure relating to the club's expenditure on players isn't corrected.
I'm prepared to give Mr Farnham the benefit of the doubt here and suggest it was an honest mistake, but there could be those, rather less generous than myself, who might interpret that as an attempt to mislead others at the expense of the likes of Coventry and Cornish Pirates.
I've not seen or heard of any denial emanating from Ealing as to the claim of a £4 million pound expenditure on its part.
Coventry's rebuttal is interesting for another reason, too. The claim that Jersey's figure of £2.5m plus overstates the correct figure 'by more than 200 percent' is intriguing, if only in its ambiguity.
One of the things supporters are always interested in is the amount a club spends on the salaries of its players and wittingly, or otherwise, Coventry has provided us with a big clue here, although I've managed to tie myself up in knots trying to work out what 'by more than 200 percent' really means.
Does 200% equate to a figure of £1.25m (that's £1.25m plus 100%) or does it mean that if 100% is double, then 200% would be that again - ie (2.5m/300)*100 - to give a total of around £834K?
Either figure is significantly less than the 'in excess of £2.5 million', but for it to be the lower figure of £834K then the average salary would be just £26K, based on a squad of 32 (there are only 30 players' photos on the official website so I've added a couple on for good measure).
£1.25m, though, would give you an average salary of just over £39K which, given the likes of Kvesic and Chumley won't come cheap, might be nearer the mark.
Anyway, I guess 'it don't make no never mind' as my grandad used to say. The main point is that Coventry Rugby were rightly aggrieved at the vastly inflated figure presented in Santander's Business Model Review - an egregious error that needs to be corrected with immediate effect. Hopefully, by releasing such a strongly worded statement, even without a rebuttal from those responsible, minds will be put at ease without the necessity of any court action.
Well, it certainly hasn't been Jersey Reds' day, week, or month even for that matter, but Coventry is there for you and in the week that has seen the tragic death of the great Matthew Perry, there can only be one choice of song to accompany this post...
Comments