Normally the Scottish Rugby Union AGM is held in person on Saturday mornings with those unable to attend participating remotely. Not this year.

It will be held entirely online this week (Wednesday, November 27) at 6pm which is a cause for concern.

Why does that matter?

Because more than any other AGM, this is the one that club representatives should have been there in person to ask as many questions as possible about a variety of worrying matters.

There is the spiralling overall losses that stand at £11.3m up to June 30,2024. The massive salary and pay off totalling £887,000 given to departed SRU chief Mark Dodson and the £262,00 severance package given to finance director Hilary Spence when she left.

Where was the money spent to create such a big loss? Who sanctioned the massive pay off to Dodson? Is the money there to start the upgrading of Murrayfield that celebrates its 100th anniversary next year? Will there be enough money to spend on improving the pathway system for young players or giving grants to amateur clubs to keep them going?

The SRU has launched an independent review of themselves to try and find out why the losses are so high but that alone isn’t good enough. They insist they won’t be marking their own homework but club representatives need the chance to ask the officials in person and at length what is going on?

The media will get that chance afterwards. They, and I include myself in that group, will watch the AGM online in a different room at Murrayfield then be taken into the main room for a face to face press conference with the SRU hierarchy. That is only right and proper but surely the club representatives- if any of them wanted to come personally- should have been given the same rights as the press?

Not a single club representative will be inside Scottish Gas Murrayfield.

The SRU hierarchy will hold their annual gathering in an otherwise empty room with club representatives sitting at home watching proceedings on their computers.

Read more:

Seems to me the SRU chiefs could be accused of hiding behind technology. They will of course vehemently deny that but it matters that club representatives won’t be able to see the whites of the eyes of those who control the purse-strings at Murrayfield.

Many at the top table at the AGM should have a fair idea of what went wrong financially as they were in the room when the big decisions were made. They need to be held to account. Where better to put them under scrutiny than at an AGM with 100s of Scottish club representatives asking the questions in person? There is also voting to be done at the AGM on who will be the next SRU vice-President.

I spoke to the SRU and they claim club representatives are happy with the meeting being held remotely on a Wednesday evening in November. Saves them travelling to Murrayfield in possible bad weather and means they can get to their local club game on a Saturday afternoon.

That could very well be the case but some I have spoken to aren’t happy at all with the change as they want to ensure they aren’t cut off remotely by the host when they request to ask what is perceived as a difficult question to the SRU hierarchy. It is easier to get rid of awkward ones when the meeting is being held online than it is when that person is in the room and won’t back down.

How many times have you been left frustrated in the online waiting room with your virtual hand up waiting for permission to ask your question, especially during any other business, but the moderator never comes to you? Having nobody to answer to in the flesh makes it an easier ride for the SRU officials.

It could also be a case of divide and conquer for the SRU hierarchy as every year representatives make great efforts to get to the AGM in person to make sure their club is represented at the gathering. It allows them to catch up with old friends and representatives of clubs in other leagues over the early morning bacon rolls. It also allows them to exchange stories about how they are coping with a drop off in playing numbers and a lack of volunteers.

The main reason for going is that it gives them access -most likely the only chance they get- to quiz those that run Scottish rugby in person. They may even be able to speak to them privately over a coffee and a strawberry tart after the AGM. It is all part of the openness required to ensure the SRU top brass are held to account.

In previous years Dodson as chief executive would give a state of the nation address but obviously he won’t be there this year. His replacement as chief executive Alex Williamson, who is preparing a ten year plan for the future, doesn’t start till the third week in January so there is nobody in that role to be quizzed by club representatives.

Read more:

Professor Lorne Crerar, chairman of the Scottish Rugby Union’s board of custodians and John McGuigan, chairman of Scottish Rugby Limited, will fill the gap at the AGM. Crerar’s board represents the amateur clubs that make up the SRU and are there to monitor the professional side run on a day to day basis by McGuigan’s team.

Both men fell out over whether to back John Jeffrey’s candidacy to become chairman of World Rugby. Crerar was against it with McGuigan for it. Crerar’s group even brought in their own external PR man -at no expense to be fair- to state their case against McGuigan’s group who used the in-house SRU PR team. Two rival factions within the same organisation using different PR men. Not a good look.

Jeffrey withdrew his candidacy to become the most powerful man in World Rugby once he found out that the SRU faction that included Crerar had won the day and would refuse to back his candidacy. There is an uneasy truce between Crerar and McGuigan who will sit together at Murrayfield for the AGM.

The SRU will argue club representatives can ask both of them tough questions online which is true to an extent but as I mentioned earlier it is much easier to shut down debate remotely than it is in person.

Crerar has to be asked about why an independent review into the dealings of the SRU had to be set up in the first place.

His lengthy statement in the SRU annual report that will be presented at the AGM does set alarm bells ringing over what has gone on. Crerar said in the report :”In March, 2024, the SRU board instructed an independent review into how and why the higher than expected losses of financial year 2022/23 had been incurred and which had dictated the direction of travel for the financial performance of financial year 2023/24.

“The review will also consider how and why the governance arrangements did not provide the necessary insight into the operations of Scottish Rugby for financial year 2022/23. Since the decision to instruct this Review, much has been done. A Panel of four, with appropriate experience, under the chairmanship of recently retired Sheriff David Mackie has been appointed with all necessary procedures and processes of the review agreed.

‘’The Review underpins SRU’s commitment to accountability across the organisation and will also seek to ensure the future resilience of Scottish Rugby’s governance structure. Well-performing governance structures are recognised as an important building block of good business performance which will as a consequence enable and resource the opportunities for our game.”

Apparently the review process is “well underway” and the overall cost of the review is expected to be very small but clearly all has not been well within the corridors on power at Murrayfield yet those at the heart of the matter chose to hold the AGM remotely. It is not the way to go about things so let’s hope every question -regardless how tough- is accepted in the first place and answered in full and no club representative is cut off.

It sadly looks like the genie is out of the bottle and the SRU will push for totally online AGM meetings from now on if this one in successful. The club representatives need to ensure they are in the room going forward to put the SRU officials under scrutiny. If they don’t the divide between those involved in grassroots rugby and those at the top will grow even wider.