Throughout the recent European dispute, the Irish media has stuck firmly to the IRFU narrative, one that manages to be self-righteous and hypocritical.
 |
| "You might as well read an ERC script": Brian Moore on the Irish media. |
Much of the media has portrayed the IRFU through the Disney-fied narrative of "good honourable little guys battling big greedy corporate business", with the IRFU in it to protect the wider interests of the game as a whole and the English and French opponents as self-interested, jealous, bullying and not caring about the wider game. There are numerous examples that can be cited of this from the most prominent media outlets and personalities, right down to fan forums.
 |
| L-R: Neil Francis & Donal Lenihan are two good examples of those who have followed the IRFU's self- righteous narrative. |
A lot of the focus though has been on the IRFU's opponents, LNR and PRL. "Smug Anglo-French brigands" (according to Neil Francis who’s been especially prevalent on this issue), who declared "a war on rugby" (according to Tony Ward).
Many more articles and instances could be pointed to, but you should be able to get the general picture of the narrative. A quick visit to a fan forum such as MunsterFans for example, or comments left on articles elsewhere makes it quite clear that the IRFU script has been well distributed to the hands of many supporters as well. The problem is though that the IRFU narrative happens to be hypocritical and lacking in self-awareness.
In the IRFU’s official 2013 report there was referenced a "grab for money and power" by PRL with no concern for the wider good of the game, and it's here where the hypocrisy and lack of self-awareness of the narrative becomes apparent.
Are their opponents self-interested? Were they after money and power? Well of course, problem is that is exactly what the IRFU are too and were battling for as well, and indeed everybody involved at the end of day was naturally in it for their own interests.
It just so happened though that the IRFU already had the favourable status quo of a Union dominated ERC setup, based in Dublin with an ex-Irish international as CEO in charge, which was well suited and beneficial to their interests for numerous reasons mostly revolving around money and power over the game.
And what of being in it to "protect the smaller nations", the "Pro12 fraternity" and the wider interests of the game?
Again the idea of a "Pro12 fraternity" was always erroneous; it was never about that and all about what maintaining ERC governance and what was preferable to the IRFU's interests. If the IRFU were so concerned about others interests then maybe they wouldn't have complained so hard when RRW and the SRU pursued them, and maybe they would be left with more than the WRU as their one remaining ally (and hardly an ideal ally at this point of time).
 |
| Despite the Irish blazers talking of their opponents harming the wider game and smaller nations, their defeat was welcome news for the ENC nations. The IRFU were left with the ERC dead, and the WRU their only remaining ally towards the end. |
The IRFU's policies widely go against the interests of the ENC nations, to the extent that France back giving them more of a say with the knowledge they would almost certainly sweep the votes. There was next to no support from the ENC nations towards ERC who were largely negligent towards them and their demise and reduction of Union control was largely welcomed.
So the IRFU were essentially telling those with slightly more clout in PRL and LNR to do what's best for their interests "for the wider good of the game", whilst also simultaneously backing harmful policies to those below in the ENC who they have more power than. That just smacks of hypocrisy and a lack of self-awareness.
Hopefully in the future we will see a more honest approach from the IRFU and Irish media who seem to be well off the pace on various other nation's affairs right now.
