Bill Sweeney has vowed to fight on as the Rugby Football Union chief executive despite facing calls for his dismissal over a pay and bonuses scandal. Sweeney has also revealed that he wanted to defer the controversial bonus payment that has led to calls for his removal.
The RFU has agreed to hold a special general meeting, at which Sweeney will face moves to end his tenure, after the Six Nations. A total of 141 signatories are included on a letter that was sent to the RFU on 9 January, easily exceeding the 100 member clubs needed to trigger an SGM under the governing body’s rules.
Annual accounts published in November revealed Sweeney received pay of £1.1m for the 2023-24 financial year, comprising an increased salary of £742,000 and a bonus of £358,000. Further bonuses totalling almost £1m were paid to five other executives even though the RFU reported a record operating loss of £37.9m and made 42 staff redundant.
Speaking to The Good, The Bad and The Rugby podcast, Sweeney said: “I have definitely got the energy [to carry on]. I mean, the easiest thing to do now would be [to] walk away. The easiest thing to do now would be to say: ‘Right, I’ve had enough of this stuff. I’ve had enough of this political crap that goes on. It’s worse than Succession. I’ve had enough of all that stuff. Why bother?’
“I can’t do that. I wouldn’t do that. It’s just unbearable to think I would just take that easy option out. We have got some great stuff that we’ve developed and we’re just starting to land into the game. I know what’s going on behind the scenes. I know who is involved in it.
“So I am not just going to walk away from those characters either. So I’m going to stick it out. If the board tells me to go, that’s fine. If they don’t tell me to go and they believe I’m doing a good job – and I do believe I’m doing a good job – then I’ll stay. And if that means taking a load more stick and flak, then OK, I’ll stay.”
Sweeney, meanwhile, said he had been unable to push back his long-term incentive payment. “I knew it was going be a major problem, quite a way before it was done,” he added. “I wanted to defer it, so I said: ‘Why are we paying this in 23-24? Why don’t we defer to 25 or 27?’
”The problem is, once you’ve declared an incentive programme like this, it’s stated in your annual reports, and it was done previously, you accrue for it year after year. Even if it has been paid later, it still has to be announced and it still has to be taken in that year, so that wouldn’t have changed.”
Sweeney swept aside any suggestion that he should have rejected the bonus or offered it to charity. “It’s a contracted commitment. You don’t have to take it … it’s contractually available,” he said. “We didn’t request an LTIP [Long-Term Incentive Plan], we had no say in the quantum of it, no say in what the amount should be. Giving it all to charity as a justification for why you’ve accepted the LTIP … I’m not sure that’s the right message.”
The latest rugby union news and analysis, plus all the week’s action reviewed
Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
after newsletter promotion
Sweeney did not hide away from the gravity of the scrutiny on his organisation, but suggested the problems may run even deeper. Asked if he felt the RFU was fit for purpose, he said: “I do think it is, but I do think there are changes necessary. I don’t think applying the same structures we’ve in the RFU now that existed when the game went professional in 95 and prior to that [works].
“I suppose the question would be is the RFU fit for purpose or is rugby fit for purpose? If you look at the various stakeholders are they all working together in the right way? That’s another bigger question.”
