Rugby Union: Board batters England with another crisis

ANOTHER THREAT, another crisis, another opportunity for the kind of Fawlty-esque cock-up that has established big-time rugby as the sporting equivalent of the Bill and Monica show: all mouth, no trousers, oceans of scandal. Having been briefly kicked out of the Five Nations' Championship for ignoring one of the ultimatums recently issued from the Dublin headquarters of the world game, poor old England have until tea-time today to meet a second, potentially more serious deadline.

The International Board, that merry band of muddle-headed bunglers who let the demons of professionalism out of the box in 1995 and have spent the past three and a half years trying to force them back in, are awaiting the Rugby Football Union's response to the guilty verdict passed upon them earlier this month. Twickenham was convicted, for want of a better word, of reneging on its pledge to show unconditional support for the IB's fight against England's Premiership clubs, who are seeking to establish a raft of commercial rights under European competition law.

Under the IB's peculiarly convoluted approach to jurisprudence, the RFU has been asked to suggest its own punishment. The board's disciplinary committee will consider any Twickenham response before deciding on a sanction, which is certain to be financial because it would be tantamount to suicide to expel the English national team, the biggest money-spinner in the game, from Test competition within nine months of a World Cup. What happens then is anyone's guess; the RFU, fed up to the back teeth of being kicked around by everyone else, may well refuse to pay up and head for the courts instead.

Talking of which, Bristol have threatened to take civil action against the RFU - yes, them again - if any attempt is made to obstruct the West Country club's takeover of London Scottish. "The union could say no to the proposal, but then they could be landing themselves in a legal wrangle," warned Malcolm Pearce, Bristol's millionaire financier, who hatched the buy-out idea as a means of circumventing any move by the Premiership One clubs to leave his side in the wilderness next season. "If the RFU agree with any wacky scheme that excludes us, they will have a thundering great legal battle on their hands. They are not too good at those at the moment, so I may even enjoy it."

Solicitors representing both clubs met yesterday to finalise the London Scottish asking price and iron out the small print. Meanwhile, Twickenham officials were still waiting for details of the takeover. "We can't come to a view about this until we have received the proper documentation," said a spokesman. "As yet, we've received nothing at all. The clubs have until Friday to come up with the information we need, after which the issue will be properly considered."

One deal that appears to have no future at all is a ground-share arrangement between Bristol and Bath, which was floated by Nick de Scossa, the Bristol chief executive, earlier this week. "There has been no serious discussion about sharing and we are not party to conjecture and speculation," said Bob Calleja, Bath's general manager, last night. Even so, Bath's long- term future at the Recreation Ground, their city centre site for more than a century, is anything but secure. Club officials meet local councillors tomorrow in a renewed effort to win civic support for a radical overhaul of facilities at the Rec and another breakdown in talks will leave them searching for alternative accommodation.

South Africa, the reigning world champions, yesterday suffered a personnel setback when Andrew Aitken, one of the most intelligent footballers of his generation, decided to retire at 30 to concentrate on a career in commerce.