Exclusive: RFU insist they will retain key role in spite of crunch votes

English rugby's governing body faces a defining moment on Friday: vote to abandon a century-old promotion and relegation system in favour of a closed shop designed to attract investors, or maintain sporting meritocracy whilst clubs continue to collapse. With three storied clubs already reduced to wreckage, the RFU Council will decide whether financial stability justifies fundamentally reshaping professional rugby in England.

The urgency is palpable. This isn't theoretical restructuring driven by ambition but a survival response driven by fear, with three major insolvencies serving as the forcing mechanism for the most significant structural change in the sport's professional era.

Commercial Imperatives Versus Sporting Merit

The RFU's messaging around Project Forge centres squarely on investor appetite. "I think we're all focused on the same thing, which is to make rugby from a commercial perspective attractive for investors," RFU chief commercial officer Claudio Borges told City AM. The priority could hardly be clearer: stability for capital trumps competitive uncertainty.

Under traditional promotion and relegation, investors face the nightmare scenario of Championship football. Pour millions into a club, watch it get relegated, see your investment value crater overnight. Ringfencing eliminates that risk, creating a protected environment where equity stakes maintain their value regardless of results.

From a pure capital allocation perspective, it makes perfect sense. But sporting merit becomes negotiable.

A points-based criteria system means clubs could theoretically remain in the top tier despite poor performances, provided they score sufficiently on stadium capacity, commercial revenue, or governance structures. The model has precedent: rugby league's Super League has operated this way since 2015, using a grading system that factors in finances, facilities, and performance. Critics have consistently argued it lacks transparency and allows wealthy clubs to maintain their status whilst sporting underdogs face structural barriers to advancement.

The Championship's Ealing Trailfinders have repeatedly won promotion on the pitch, only to be denied entry through infrastructure requirements. Under Project Forge, their path becomes even more complex: not simply winning matches, but accumulating points across multiple criteria. Whether that represents progress or protectionism depends entirely on which side of the ringfence you sit.

Power Dynamics and Rejected Proposals

Borges insists Project Forge will make the RFU "even more powerful" in governing the sport. The claim deserves scrutiny. Relinquishing control over promotion and relegation in favour of a criteria-based system actually reduces the governing body's direct sporting authority.

Instead of automatic sporting consequences, the RFU becomes an arbiter of points calculations and eligibility criteria, a shift from referee to administrator. Recent tensions suggest the collaborative tone may be somewhat aspirational.

City AM previously revealed that Premiership Rugby rejected stadium capacity requirements of 15,000 that had been recommended in the governance review led by Deloitte and backed by merchant bank Raine Group. When one party unilaterally rejects the other's proposals, 'collaboration' becomes a generous characterisation of the relationship.

The involvement of Raine Group is itself revealing. The merchant bank specialises in sports transactions and has advised on deals including Chelsea FC's £4.25bn sale. Their presence signals the commercialisation intent: this is about creating an asset class that can be packaged and sold to investors, not preserving sporting heritage.

Candidates and Corpses

The proposed expansion timeline envisions 12 teams by 2029, with Worcester Warriors and Ealing Trailfinders mentioned as early candidates. London Irish and Wasps could potentially resurrect in time for inclusion. The framing is optimistic to the point of fantasy.

Worcester and Wasps aren't merely struggling; they're dissolved entities. Referring to them as 'candidates' for expansion glosses over the reality that these clubs currently exist only as intellectual property and nostalgia.

Any resurrection would require substantial new capital, new ownership structures, and regulatory approval. The latter is hardly guaranteed given the circumstances of their collapse. Wasps entered administration in October 2022 owing £95m, including unpaid tax to HMRC. Worcester's debts exceeded £30m when it folded. These aren't clubs waiting in the wings; they're cautionary tales about precisely the financial fragility Project Forge aims to address.

Friday's vote arrives after an October meeting where the RFU Council endorsed the rationale for suspending relegation. With that political groundwork already laid, approval appears likely. The Men's Professional Game Partnership, which runs until 2032, ensures the RFU maintains formal influence over club rugby during the transition period.

The question facing English rugby isn't whether financial stability matters, it obviously does after three major collapses. Rather, it's whether creating an investor-friendly closed shop genuinely solves the underlying problems or simply redistributes them. If the sport becomes more attractive to capital but less compelling to supporters who value competitive integrity, has the trade-off succeeded or simply exchanged one crisis for another? The RFU is betting investors care more about predictability than fans care about promotion battles. By 2029, we'll know whether that calculation was correct.