Rags and riches

Distribution of World Cup wealth

Click here for more on this story

Posted: Wednesday October 13, 1999 04:51 PM

Gareth Rees: "Most of our players aren't paid and it is increasingly difficult to compete at the highest level." David Rogers/Allsport

PARIS (AP) -- When Fiji's substitutes were ordered to stop warming up during a World Cup match because they were obscuring advertising hoardings, some began to wonder if the sport's march to commercialism had gone too far.

Especially those who don't know if rugby's new riches will ever trickle down beyond the game's traditional superpowers.

"The big nations will end up with the cash and the small ones will be crippled," Fiji coach Brad Johnstone told the Associated Press.

"I would have thought that the health and welfare of our substitutes is more important than advertising hoardings not being seen. But the game is now run for commercial benefit."

On the field, the gap between rich and poor is as great as ever.

What's become more extreme at the first World Cup of the professional era is the financial gap between competing nations.

"Most of our players aren't paid and it is increasingly difficult to compete at the highest level," said Canadian captain Gareth Rees. "We are not bitching or asking for more money. But it is important for the World Cup for countries like Canada and Namibia are able to compete."

The International Rugby Board, the sport's governing body and organizer of the World Cup, declined to comment specifically.

But in a statement it said that countries "enter the World Cup for the honor and enjoyment of taking part, rather than financial succor from their triumph."

The World Cup is already proving a financial bonanza for organizers, who will rake in profits from ticket sales of 30 million pounds (US$50 million), up from 4.5 million pounds (US$7.5 million) in 1995.

That money will be divided equally between England, France, Ireland, Scotland and Wales, the five countries hosting matches.

Separately, profits from broadcasting, sponsorship and other commercial sources should run to 45 million pounds (US$74 million), up from 17.6 million pounds (US$29 million) in 1995, and just one million pounds (US$1.6 million) at the inaugural World Cup of 1987.

That money goes into a pool, from which grants are available for both big and small countries.

The IRB expects to give grants of 3.4 million pounds (US$5.6 million) in 1999, and a further 17 million pounds (US$28 million) between 1999 and 2003 to unions - both rich and poor - around the world.

For the World Cup, it gives 30,000 pounds (US$50,000) to eight of the smaller qualifiers.

But that doesn't go anywhere near to covering the expenses for a more than month-long trip for 30 players, coaches and other staff.

Fiji's struggle is a case in point.

The South Pacific nation has won both its matches, but Johnstone is pessimistic about its financial outlook.

"Normally we borrow, go broke and have to go to the government to help us out," Johnstone said.

Weeks before the World Cup, the Fijian government paid off its rugby union's debt of F$800,000 (US$408,000). The team then had to raise F$500,000 (US$255,000) to cover the World Cup, half of which came from the state and half from a public appeal.

Fiji's only other source of revenue is the F$75,000 (US$38,000) from sponsor Vodafone.

"The rich countries run the game to suit themselves," New Zealand-born Johnstone said. "It is ludicrous that we nearly had to bankrupt our union just to get here when the organizers are talking of making a profits of 45 million pounds."

The fear is that lack of funding will stifle the development of the game outside its traditional hotbeds.

 

Related information
Stories
World Cup witticisms Notebook: Wallabies wall; Bravo Max
Multimedia
Visit Multimedia Central for the latest audio and video
Search our site	Watch CNN/SI 24 hours a day
	Sports Illustrated and CNN have combined to form a 24 hour sports news and information channel. To receive CNN/SI at your home call your cable operator or DirecTV.