ii. Non-RFU leagues and Merit Tables
7.16 With regard to the rugby played by other teams and clubs, the conduct of the Adult Competition Review has seen new importance given to the data assembled and held by the RFU on the rugby played within England. Through internal discussions, improvements have been made to the processes through which data is gathered, the format in which it is presented, and the networks within which it is shared. As a result, management information is now collected and summarised monthly to show on a league-by-league basis the number of fixtures completed against those scheduled / postponed / abandoned / walked over / not played / not recorded.
7.17 While this data still required filtering and validating at the time of writing this report, its potential for use between the RFU’s Competitions and Development teams, and the DOCs, for the early identification and redress of “problem” teams and leagues is significant. Indeed, within the 2013-14 season, positive use has already been made of a “walkover file”, communicated to and maintained by the RFU’s Area Managers, which allows the proactive deployment of Rugby Development Officers in support of those clubs and teams which persistently default on fixtures.
7.18 An important progression over time will be to gather data as to why walkovers happen, e.g., because of player shortages, pitch conditions, absence of officials or front-row forwards, etc. – which the sub-group believes to be achievable through the systems that the RFU has developed by means of a simple drop-down menu. It is acknowledged that this data will be dependent upon the quality of local input – but it will none the less be useful to identify underlying causes as accurately as possible so that these may be addressed by positive action on a local or national basis.
7.19 Meanwhile, and also at the time of writing this report, the RFU is working with IBM to establishing a single platform for hosting its information / communication technology (ICT) network, and with a view to improving its electronic customer relationship management (CRM) systems. While the detail of these developments is rightly addressed through separate processes, the sub-group hopes that the opportunity to create a national fixture management system will be fully and properly grasped.

7.20 Within the leagues and Merit Tables contested under the auspices of CBs, the sub-group believes that there is no need for a fundamental structural review – but instead a requirement to advise the management and development of these leagues in such a way as reduces the number of cancellations which occur over the course of a season, especially those which occur at short notice.
7.21 To this end, the sub-group has spent time investigating and isolating the measures that positively promote the playing of rugby within such leagues, including and especially the following:
The bringing together of teams to form leagues from within realistic geographical bounds, i.e., “postcode leagues”, working across CB (and DOC) boundaries where appropriate
Management systems and structures which are firm yet flexible
League structures which offer meaningful fixtures within appropriate schedules – this to include innovative competition formats where numbers of teams are small
Use of ICT to provide real-time communication for teams and players without a fixture, or whose match has been cancelled at short notice
Flexible regulations which emphasise and encourage the playing of matches under any circumstances
Deterrents which serve to discourage teams from cancelling matches without good reason
7.22 The dissemination of these measures so that they apply more widely within a greater number of leagues is seen as a key step towards maximising the number of fixtures played. With that in mind, the sub-group makes the following recommendations:

iii. Management and regulation
7.23 During the course of its work, the sub-group has become convinced of the importance of good management and organisation as a key success factor around and within regional and local leagues and Merit Tables. This principle is equally important at both the wider strategic and the operational levels: with regard to the former, the sub-group believes that each RFU Division should feature a strategic group or committee with responsibility for ensuring that rugby at 2nd and other lower XV level is well organised and administered within its territory. Liaison between these committees will also be important, to ensure that national coverage is in place, and that cross-border working is utilised as and where required.
7.24 The sub-group also believes that strategy is important at local level – and that those leagues which succeed have at their heart a strong awareness of the needs and preferences of the teams and players involved. Good two-way communication is therefore encouraged within all leagues, in order that league organisers and committees may remain well-informed of the evolving circumstances and requirements of the participants. The existence (or otherwise) of this should be assessed through the self-assessment framework described above.
7.25 Within individual leagues and Merit Tables, the sub-group is aware of the vulnerability occasioned by having just one league organiser – and the reliance in many instances on a single, often ageing volunteer. In order to address this risk, the sub-group believes that there is a need for succession planning on both a national and local level, through an RFU-driven workforce development initiative, and through local measures to identify and encourage a new generation of league organisers. Key to this will be systems to recognise and reward volunteers who step forward to become involved, through initiatives which include (but are not limited to) a national conference.

iv. Marketing and promotion
7.26 The staging of the Rugby World Cup in England in 2015 presents a huge opportunity for the game to capture the attention of the nation and encourage more players of all ages either to take up rugby for the first time, or to return to the game after a period of absence. Significant resource is being dedicated both by England Rugby 2015 Ltd and by the RFU to ensure that the legacy of the tournament is planned and delivered effectively, to the best benefit of the wider game.
7.27 It is not unreasonable to expect that any increase in participation which is realised through and after RWC 2015 will occur in two sectors:
The junior and youth game; and
The recreational game
7.28 The recreational game is principally defined as rugby for 2nd and other lower XVs – which will be the primary vehicle through which new or returning adult players will first access the game. In awareness of this, the sub-group believes that it is important not only to ensure that the structure of the game at these levels is fit-for-purpose to accommodate and cater for an anticipated increase in participation; but also that the “shop-window” is well dressed, attractive and enticing.
7.29 To this end, the sub-group believes that the RFU should increase its marketing and promotional support for 2nd and other lower XV rugby, to show the game at these levels in the best possible light. Suggestions as to how this might be achieved have included the establishment of a marketing package around 2nd XV rugby, for sale to or adoption by an RFU commercial partner; the institution of a scheme to recognise the “League / Team of the Week / Month / Year” at 2nd XV level; an annual awards ceremony for 2nd XV rugby.

8. Next steps, and implementation
8.1 The RFU Council are asked to approve the recommendations at its meeting on 11 April.
8.2 Following approval a summary of the changes will be issued to all Constituent Bodies and clubs along with a timeframe for implementation. At least one season’s notice will be provided prior to the implementation of changes to the leagues, which will be effective from the start of season 2015-16.
8.3 Responsibility for overseeing implementation of the changes will rest with the Community Game Board, who will need to work closely with the Governance Standing Committee and the Competitions Sub-Committee.
8.4 Changes will remain in place for a minimum five-year period, from season 2015-16 up to and including 2019-20. A time-limited review will be initiated after three years, using performance indicators to be determined by the Community Game Board.

9. Conclusion
Change is usually unwelcome and resisted. The recommendations made are based on the findings of extensive research and consultation and seek to future-proof participation in rugby against the attractions not only of new mass participation sports such as those described by Jack Buckner in the box paragraph at the end of Section 6, but also other team sports. It is worth noting that as many 16 to 25 year olds play basketball as play rugby. Compare that to gym and cycling, which respectively have twelve times and three times as many 16 to 25 year olds participating, and it can be seen that it is vitally important we provide the club environment and the competitive rugby that these age groups want to play. The future success and viability of all our clubs is dependent on many things but attracting, retaining and growing the playing population in the face of competitive sport and leisure offerings is at the heart of it. The Steering Group’s recommendations should be taken and considered in that context.