The Flying Fijians’ 33-member squad received approximately $3.5 million in payments related to their participation in last year’s World Cup held in France, as reported by the Fiji Rugby Union (FRU) in response to allegations made by former captain Waisea Nayacalevu.
Nayacalevu expressed to the Daily Mail that the players considered boycotting their quarter-final match against England due to unpaid bonuses and corruption issues within the Fijian Rugby Union. He stated, “We weren’t going to play. We need to cut off this virus that has always been there,” and emphasized that the team had been promised bonuses that were not delivered.
He detailed that while in Marseille, he organized a Zoom meeting to address promised payments, warning that without payment by a certain date, the players would refuse to participate in the quarter-final. Nayacalevu, who has been part of the national team for over a decade, mentioned a pattern of deferred payments and empty promises by the FRU, adding that payments were delayed until just before the match, impacting their focus.
Nayacalevu expressed hope that future Flying Fijians would continue to challenge corruption, urging teammates to be bold in addressing issues as they arise.
In a statement, the FRU clarified that each player received a sign-on fee and daily allowance throughout the tournament, along with potential performance bonuses from the government based on match outcomes. They acknowledged some delays in payments to a few overseas players due to bank detail confirmations but confirmed that all necessary expenses were covered.
The FRU explained that the players’ demands for bonus payments prior to the quarter-final led to a serious negotiation with the Prime Minister, resulting in an assurance that bonuses would be paid immediately after the quarter-final. They stressed that risking a player boycott at such a crucial event was not an option, as it could jeopardize future participation in World Rugby matches.
The union also expressed disappointment over Nayacalevu’s allegations, urging him to specify any particular instances of corruption he was referencing, asking for evidence to be presented for examination.