The Welsh Rugby Union: Time to follow a different part of the Irish model

Evan Wall

The Welsh Rugby Union (WRU) made a great mistake in emulating Irish rugby’s regional system when Welsh clubs were struggling in the early 2000s.

The regional system always had a greater chance of success in Ireland than in Wales.

Ireland has long-standing rivalries between its provinces, so the regional system mirrors existing identities and is easier for supporters to buy into. In Wales, by contrast, rugby culture has traditionally been rooted in local — not regional — rivalries, making supporter buy-in far more difficult.

As a testament to the regional system’s inefficiency in Wales, alongside the WRU’s unwillingness to accept that the system itself is the problem, professional rugby is being taken away from the Swansea area.

Copying the Irish regional model has proved a mistake because it is now marginalising an area of Wales that produces genuinely world-class rugby players. But copying a different aspect of it may yet offer a way forward.

The proposed axing of the Ospreys is, by the WRU’s own admission, a financial decision.

Following the Italy match, Dave Reddin, WRU director of rugby and elite performance, described it as a matter of “simple economics.”

Reddin’s comment reveals the extent to which those making decisions about the future of Welsh rugby are focused more on balancing spreadsheets in the short term than on enacting the structural change needed for the game to flourish again.

Listening to Reddin raises a broader question: what if the real problem is that the WRU itself is too large, too costly, and too bureaucratic? A comparison with the Irish Rugby Football Union (IRFU) would suggest so.

A striking difference between the two systems is that the WRU’s turnover is just over £100m, yet only around 60% of its revenue goes towards rugby costs.

Meanwhile, the IRFU’s turnover is between £70–80m, with 65–75% of its revenue going towards rugby.

Significantly, Ireland invests just under £38m in its professional teams, whereas in Wales only around £25m goes towards the professional game. Despite having greater overall revenue, the WRU commits significantly less to the pro game. That raises a fundamental question: why, with greater financial resources, is Wales unable to sustain four professional regions when Ireland can?

The cost of bureaucracy

Part of the answer lies in how each union spends its money. The IRFU spent approximately £9.9 million on administration, marketing and support in 2022 — roughly 10% of its expenditure. By contrast, the WRU directs around 25% of its spending towards governance, administration and bureaucracy.

According to its financial report, across business and administration, direct costs and hospitality, the WRU spent approximately £24.6 million. In simple terms, one pound in every four earned by the WRU is spent on running the organisation itself, rather than on rugby.

Staffing reflects this imbalance. The IRFU operates with around 250 central staff, some embedded within the provinces. The WRU employs more than 300 centrally, pointing to an organisation heavier at its core, with more layers of administration.

These costs are not driven by frontline roles, but by a heavy emphasis on strategy and governance — both of which come at a significant price.

The available information suggests a number of high-paying roles and departments within the WRU that are strategic and largely removed from the day-to-day running of rugby in Wales. While exact figures are not publicly available, these roles together are likely to cost well over £1 million annually.

The WRU now includes a wide range of senior, strategy-focused roles, including a Chief Growth Officer, Chief People Officer, Director of Sales, Director of Corporate Affairs, and Director of Women’s Rugby. Individually, many of these roles have value. But taken together, they point to an organisation that has become too large and too expensive.

These strategic departments cost the WRU millions annually — and they should be the first place to look in any cost-cutting process. Professional rugby in Swansea should be the very last option.

Consultants and cost leakage

This concern is reinforced by the WRU’s use of external consultants.

The WRU’s senior leadership commands substantial salaries, likely amounting to over £1 million annually, excluding expenses and supporting staff. Yet despite this, the organisation has continued to spend heavily on outsourced work.

There is little transparency around how much has been paid to consultancies, meaning the full extent of this spending is unclear. However, the available evidence suggests it is significant. The WRU accounts show £1.9 million spent on restructuring costs in a single year (2022–23).

At least part of the 2025 “future of elite rugby” consultation was outsourced to external firms. Conservative estimates suggest this process may have cost between £750,000 and £1.5 million.

The sums of money being wasted by the WRU are the very sums that could sustain professional rugby in Swansea.

Domestic structure: Ireland vs Wales

The Irish and Welsh rugby pyramids are organised differently — and in terms of efficiency, the Irish model is clearly more effective.

In Ireland, the system is relatively simple and vertically integrated. At the top are four fully professional provinces aligned with the union. Beneath them sits the All-Ireland League, an amateur competition that runs alongside the professional game rather than feeding into it.

The system is not meritocratic — the provinces are ring-fenced — but there is a clear divide between the professional and amateur levels, allowing investment to be focused and effective.

The WRU operates a more layered and complex structure. Beneath the four regions sits Super Rygbi Cymru, a semi-professional league, followed by the amateur game.

Like Ireland, the Welsh system is not meritocratic. But unlike Ireland, the additional tier adds complexity and dilutes resources. The WRU is effectively funding two unprofitable systems at once, whereas Ireland concentrates its investment at the top.

Structurally, the IRFU is leaner, more focused, and more efficient. A greater proportion of its resources reaches the professional game, with less absorbed by administration. That is the aspect of the Irish model Wales should be looking to emulate.

Misplaced

Before removing professional rugby from Swansea, the WRU should look inward. The financial pressures are real, but the response is misplaced.

There are clear alternatives. Reducing administrative overhead, streamlining roles, and limiting reliance on consultants would free up significant resources without weakening the professional game.

The WRU, as an organisation, carries too much bureaucratic weight. Rather than cutting away that deadwood, it is instead removing one of the ship’s engine rooms — the Ospreys — to temporarily lighten the load.

It cannot be allowed to happen.