On the organization of American rugby

It's no wonder the rugby community's opinions are strong. The question is what to do about them?

For nearly all of us, pursuing our chosen sport is a voluntary activity. Experience and achievement therefore must coexist with passion, or else adherents quit in favor of competing interests.

Americans have a genius for voluntary associations, as Alexis de Tocqueville first noted in his classic Democracy in America. Equally important, we regard such organizations very differently than the English or the French:

Wherever at the head of some new undertaking you see the government in France, or a man of rank in England, in the United States you will be sure to find an association.
I met with several kinds of associations in America of which I confess I had no previous notion; and I have often admired the extreme skill with which the inhabitants of the United States succeed in proposing a common object for the exertions of a great many men and in inducing them voluntarily to pursue it.
I have since traveled over England, from which the Americans have taken some of their laws and many of their customs; and it seemed to me that the principle of association was by no means so constantly or adroitly used in that country...
The most democratic country on the face of the earth is that in which men have, in our time, carried to the highest perfection the art of pursuing in common the object of their common desires and have applied this new science to the greatest number of purposes.

Like civic government, associations require three elements to succeed: functional leadership, rule of law (i.e., the same standards for everyone), and accountability. When properly balanced, these reflect and enhance the various interests of the association's members.

'But what people regard as self-interest, and how they are willing to collaborate with others, depends critically on ideas that legitimate certain forms of political order. Self-interest and legitimacy thus form the cornerstones of political order', the Stanford scholar Frank Fukuyama observes in The Origins of Political Order.

When founded in 1975, USARFU provided for its members' interests via simple geographic representation, which easily channeled the national championships that soon followed. Later, in the 1990s, the national body followed regional unions in adding delegates from various constitutencies, such as schools, women, or military. Under this system, it was possible for competent volunteers to quickly become national contributors.

The increase of USARFU's annual turnover and full-time staff, as well as the rise of Olympic rugby, necessitated refinement. Since the current system began in 2006, however, USARFU's seven non-athlete directors have been selected by an unelected committee of three. The present congress includes representatives of defunct territories while excluding any schools representatives -- the constituents that now comprise the majority of American players. Additionally, the national championships have been divorced from the organizational structure.

The current system thus violates American democracy, tradition, and common sense. It more efficiently collects taxes. But no individual or group can plausibly claim to represent a vision or program uniting different regions and segments, because there is no give-and-take discussion of such ideas, no system of representation, and no voting.

Politics is the name given to the processes of dialogue and transparent decision making to resolve difficult issues and allocate scarce resources. In voluntary association as in government, we hold it is more effective than any other approach.

American rugby needs more, not less, politics.

Comments

[Bruce McLane]

Quoting the great book Democracy in America
I love it
But Kurt, I was told when I questioned some things at a union AGM
"it's a top down approach at USA Rugby, get used to it!"
Good luck
When the volunteers dry up, and they are, they'll be in deep crap

[Rugby Sage]

USA Rugby serves two purposes.

1 - Monetize the rugby community within the borders of the USA (i.e. CIPP, tournament revenue, sponsorships, merchandise sales, etc).

2 - Meet the demands of the IRB in exchange for grants (i.e. assemble and manage national teams at requested age grades and genders in both 7s & 15s, participate in IRB events for the aforementioned competitive groups, host or bid to host IRB rugby events, play nice within the constructs of the IRB old boy club that runs world rugby).

Other than these 2 things USA Rugby is a failure because they don't care. I'm not saying that the individual responsible doesn't care, but they can't succeed because there is no support within the organization for them to accomplish anything.

USA Rugby is like a third world government where the people are simply serfs.

[Sober Up]

If clubs had members who wanted to do more than get wasted at a function, imagine what could get done.

[Deal with it]

USA Rugby is a closed system not beholden to the interests if its members or any politics. There is nothing anyone can do to change USA Rugby, the organization. Tough deal on CIPP but until somebody else come up with an altenative insurance plan, CIPP is here to stay. There is plenty of work to be done on Rugby in the US by the clubs, conferences and entrepreneurs across the country if they can learn to work together without looking to Boulder for leadership or support.

[Peter Evans]

What a load of rubbish. Get a group of adults into a room and all you get is an almighty cock up. You Americans love your politicking. You all end up talking a good game but get nothing done.
Weak leadership has allowed this situation to continue.
Just my opinion after 25 yrs watching the system from most angles. American 'exceptionalism'. Don't make me laugh.

[ray cornbill]

In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is King.

Related issue is the constant revisionist history to support whatever notion is being promoted.

[Sober Up]

Too bad Kurt didn't mention one important aspect involved in making a democracy effective, which is having an engaged and educated citizenry.

[emperor has no clothes]

Kurt, very thoughtful piece.

There is an important question which can't escape this conversation and one very identifiable wrong.

First the question. If USAR retained the exact same governance but changed the people sitting in the seats, would we be having this conversation? The answer might be no. Kevin Roberts has been a disaster as Chairman. He has handpicked yes-men as his fellow Board members. Congress is a collection of weak individuals who won't stand up and speak their mind. Most are just happy to have a title and a small story to tell in their local rugby community. Change the Chairman, the Board and a few strong willed Congress members and the current governance might work just fine, even be good. Certainly in this scenario, Nigel Melville would not be the USAR CEO, nor would many of the current USAR employees still be employed. We need to accept that KR and NM have surrounded themselves with individuals which won't make them look bad by setting a higher bar. Change two positions and everything changes.

The wrong though has to change. If you are a CIPP member you need to be able to vote for the leadership of the organization. Currently, there is no bona-fide voting structure which elects the USAR leadership. Even if each club (not person) got a vote on the Board positions it would be better than the current cozy voting structure.

USAR has again recently replaced Board members and still not offered insight or announcement. The "unelected committee of three" selects a candidate and bingo they are a Board member. Their first order of business is not to get on the bad side of KR, followed by finding a way to package the Board's work as good, when its actually very poor.

A new Chairman would fix much that is wrong with the governance structure and staff productivity , but in order to that we need to be able to vote. Roberts would lose a vote on being the Chairman, by 70-30%.

[IRB shares in the blame]

Closing in on 40 years of USAR (the organization) and there is much to be proud. In reality there was one bad stretch led by Doug Arnot as CEO, which created the mess we are experiencing. Arnot BK'ed USAR and forced the organization to go to the IRB hat in hand.

What we got was very limited IRB funding and the current administrative structure. This would be a good place to say, we don't mind being owned, but its being owned for chump change which is the galling part.

This all happened during 2006 reboot Kurt referenced. USAR has very steadily got downhill since. This is the beginning of Roberts and Melville. Out went USAR chairman Brendel and CEO Arnot. Interim Chairman Latham moved to the Vice Chair, KR lackey role.

Wish we could be hopeful of positive change, but just don't see it. The US rugby members are captives in this play.

[Deal with it]

Clubs need to commit to quit playing crap rugby too. Plenty of resources out there for free. How many clubs run fitness tests or even know what rugby fitness standard are?

[The Hard Truth]

A new organization is needed. The Varsity is showing you guys what needs to be done. Do it !!!!