The financial challenges faced by rugby unions in the Pacific Islands are reflective of broader issues impacting many developing rugby nations. The decision by Lakapi Samoa to cancel its Northern Hemisphere tour highlights the ongoing struggles small rugby unions encounter.
Tu’ilaepa Sa’ilele Malielegao, the chair of Lakapi Samoa and former Prime Minister, pointed to “the lack of sponsorships” as a significant obstacle to the union’s efforts to grow and sustain rugby in Samoa. In a letter to World Rugby chairman, Sir Bill Beaumont, he recommended exploring targeted initiatives that could provide meaningful support to a small nation like Samoa, emphasizing the need for increased financial assistance and better support structures for international competition.
In an interview, Tu’ilaepa stated that the current government does not offer the same level of support that his administration did, claiming that financial difficulties have increased since their departure. He mentioned seeking donations and sponsorships linked to centenary celebrations to stabilize the finances of Lakapi Samoa.
World Rugby responded to these claims, indicating that the union’s financial distress is largely a result of its own decisions. They emphasized the importance of addressing the root causes of these challenges rather than seeking short-term solutions.
The implications of this situation are twofold: World Rugby may be dissatisfied with Lakapi Samoa’s financial management, similar to past actions against the Fiji Rugby Union and Tonga Rugby Union, or they may be weary of the constant requests for financial aid from smaller unions.
A World Rugby spokesperson noted that the organization already provides funding for major events such as the Pacific Nations Cup and the Rugby World Cups, which includes financial support for high-performance programs and arranging fixtures. The burden of costs related to tours primarily falls on the unions, meaning Pacific Island countries face the significant expense of international travel for their squads.
Former Rugby administrator Charlie Charters highlighted that overseas tours incur high costs, primarily due to airfares and player payments. He underscored the necessity for unions to assess the financial returns of tours thoroughly, noting that matches against Tier 1 nations tend to yield better revenue than those against smaller teams.
Charters pointed out the difficulties Lakapi Samoa faces in securing sponsorships, especially given the perceived lower market value of games against teams like Spain and Portugal, as opposed to higher-profile opponents.
As financial management issues plague several rugby unions in the Pacific, including Tonga Rugby and Fiji Rugby, there is a pressing need for these unions to improve their financial practices. Tonga was subject to strict monitoring until its financial systems were reviewed and corrected, a process mirrored in Fiji where an interim board is working towards meeting necessary legal and operational standards.
To remedy these ongoing financial discrepancies in the Pacific rugby landscape, Charters suggested that World Rugby could increase support for developing nations, potentially establishing a fund that addresses funding shortfalls when local support is inadequate. It might be necessary for the governing body to assume a greater share of responsibility in ensuring the viability of rugby in smaller nations.
The reality for developing rugby unions remains stark; they continuously strive to operate without the financial resources enjoyed by Tier 1 unions. Past experiences exemplify this disparity, notably when Ku’ilaepa raised concerns surrounding the unequal distribution of funds. Ten years ago, Samoan players received a fraction compared to their English counterparts during international matches, reflecting systemic issues that need to be corrected to foster rugby development in the Pacific.
In conclusion, the financial sustainability of rugby unions like Lakapi Samoa is tied to broader systemic changes within World Rugby. Fostering a fairer environment for international competition is essential. Without improved financial arrangements and structures, the likelihood of these unions thriving remains bleak.