The Pacific rugby funding dilemma

Opinion - Pacific islands rugby is not alone.

The lack of finance to support rugby in the islands is the same across most of the so-called rugby developing nations.

Unfortunately, the solutions are not as easy as A, B, C.

Last week's revelation about Lakapi Samoa's decision to withdraw from a planned Northern Hemisphere tour later this year is just another sign to show the real dilemma small rugby unions are faced with daily.

The union's board chair, former Prime Minister Tu'ilaepa Sa'ilele Malielegao, cited "the lack of sponsorships" as "the greatest challenge" to the union's efforts to grow and sustain the sport.

"We propose the exploration of targeted initiatives that can make a genuine and lasting difference for a country the size of Samoa. This could include enhanced financial assistance, and more robust support structures to help us navigate the complexities of international competition," he said in a letter to World Rugby chairman, Sir Bill Beaumont.

In an interview with RNZ Pacific, Tu'ilaepa said Lakapi Samoa, need funding to support themselves.

He claims the current government does not support them as much as his former government used to do.

"Lakapi Samoa has been facing a lot of financial problems ever since our government left," he said.

"We had talked again with other sponsors as well as other donations from the 100 years celebrations."

He said they are working on cleaning up their backyard and try to secure new financial support.

World Rugby responded and said the financial distress "are a direct consequence of decisions taken by the union".

On Thursday, they told me that they could not divulge specifically what Lakapi Samoa did that has resulted in decision to withdraw from the tour, saying the most important aspect is addressing the issues that cause the problems, rather than focus on short term fixes that might deepen the issues.

Now, that basically can mean two things:

• World Rugby is unhappy about the lack of financial management at Lakapi Samoa and they want the union to improve, like the ultimatum they had given to the Fiji Rugby Union (FRU) and the Tonga Rugby Union (TRU) in the past; or
• World Rugby is fed up with assisting Samoa and the other small unions because of their constant request for financial assistance.

The World Rugby spokesman said they already assist Samoa, as well as Fiji and Tonga, with funding as "World Rugby covers the costs for the Pacific Nations Cup, as it does the Under-20s and Rugby World Cups".

"World Rugby also funds the High Performance programmes, helps arrange fixtures and so on."

The share of gate receipts and sponsorships on tours are a matter for the respective unions and are covered by the tours' agreement agreed between both parties.

This confirms that island countries who tour the Northern Hemisphere, will have to fork out thousands of dollars to get their squad across the globe.

Overseas tours not cheap, ex-administrator says

Former FRU and Pacific Barbarians official Charlie Charters said overseas tours were not a cheap exercise.

"Because the main cost is airfares, payment to players and repaying the costs to players selected who have attended trials," he said.

Charters believes that financial returns on tours is an important issue touring union consider, especially based on what teams they will play on tour.

For instance, Manu Samoa were scheduled to play Spain and Portugal on tour. At least that was what the schedules showed.

Compare that to the Flying Fijians, who are scheduled to meet Tier 1 countries Ireland, Wales and Scotland.

It would therefore be a bigger challenge for Manu Samoa to spend at least $150,000 on a tour, which already indicates on paper that their share of the revenue would be less than what they would be spending.

Charters said that is a no-brainer and one that could have forced Lakapi Samoa to think twice about flying across the Pacific Ocean to play in Europe.

On the ground, it would be tough on Lakapi Samoa to be securing sponsors to back their national team if the returns for likely sponsors are not worth it.

Imagine going to a sponsor and asking them to buy sponsorship space on front of the jersey.

They would ask where are you playing? What TV stations?

With no disrespect to Spain and Portugal, but none of the big markets (because why would a TV station in NZ or Australia?) show such a 'small' match.

So, playing Spain and Portugal means you are fishing in a much smaller pond.

Charters said it matters very much to Lakapi Samoa because their sponsors sign on a month to month year to year basis.

These tours are set up by Word Rugby, in liaison with host unions.

So, they, World Rugby, must take responsibility for at least part of this.

Management issues

The onus is also on the respective unions to sort out their management of finances and resources.

It is a Pacific problem.

Both Tonga Rugby (between 2017-2022) and Fiji Rugby (2023 to now) have gone through reviews and system checks following issues with the management of funds.

Tonga was stripped off all funding they received from World Rugby and were put under strict monitoring for almost four years before they managed to get their books in order and a new system in place.

That involved the working together of the TRU, Tongan government and World Rugby.

The same has happened in Fiji, where an interim board has been working with government and World Rugby to achieve standards needed, including meeting legal requirements, that would ensure rugby can stand on its own footing again.

What needs to happen, though, is the unions then left to be independent of World Rugby.

The danger that seems to have been noticed now is the world body having too much wielding power, for instance with the FRU, where they are basically running the show, although they deny that.

While World Rugby must support all unions with finances and other resources, they must not be seen be dictatorial in their dealings.

Tongan Prime Minister Hu'akavameiliku Siaosi Sovaleni said in a social media post, in response to the Lakapi Samoa issue, that the issue is real and sad.

"This is the sad reality of the beloved rugby game in the Pacific," Hu'akavameiliku wrote.

"There needs to be better way of supporting rugby by World Rugby and sponsors.

"Hard to play well when you don't have the necessary resources. Hard to get the resources when you are not playing well...not a win-win situation."

A floating fund?

So, who must bear the cost of tours outside the official World Rugby commitments?

Charters said it must be worked out to mutually benefit those involved.

The costs of a Northern Hemisphere tour are the same, whether you play England and France, or Spain and Portugal.

But the revenue opportunity changes drastically.

He said rugby tours are supposed to work on a process of reciprocity: I tour your country and you tour my country. I earn when I host you. And you earn when I visit.

For such tours to happen successfully, World Rugby must put money into them.

And the host unions must also assist, paying for hotel, food, transport costs, while the touring team is in their country.

Or better still, World Rugby should divert more money into developing nations so they can then be able to have a floating fund that would assist them when they need to, if their own backing falls short.

Perhaps work out a way where smaller nations can get around 60 percent of their funding needs met by the governing body, because their ability to attract major funders are minimal compared to unions like New Zealand or France for that matter, who enjoy the luxury of sponsors ready to back them.

Has to be a better way

Whatever happens with Lakapi Samoa in the next 12 months, the fact remains developing unions just do not have the luxury Tier 1 unions enjoy.

Records show that in 2014 Tu'ilaepa raised his concerns with WR boss Bernard Lapasset in a meeting in Brussels.

Ten years ago, that was.

Back then, Manu Samoa was also given a bad deal.

World Rugby presided over a system where England's Rugby Football Union collected around NZ$4 million in the Test against the Samoans back then, while the visitors' appearance fee was just over NZ$100,000.

A repeat test on 25 September 2017 saw Manu Samoa played England Twickenham.

For that match, Manu Samoa helped draw more than 81,000 fans to the stand.

English players were claimed to have received $29,000 per player for the match, while Manu Samoa, a measly $860 per player.

It is therefore on World Rugby to ensure these unions are funded so they can get the opportunities to develop.

There must be a better way to pay teams off on tours, so that the tours are worth taking in every sense of the word.

Otherwise, all these talks of major investments across the globe to help grow the game is all just a load of hot air.