Nigel Wray - Chairman and Owner of Saracens Rugby Club Extra Time

mounting that these days, it is cool to be cool. Now it's time for Extra

Time. Extra time has come to North London today to meet Nigel Wray, the

entrepreneurial chairman of Saracens. He took on Saracens just

after they turned professional in 1995. He has steered the club to the

very top of the English game. Also incidentally to a European cup

semi`final this coming weekend against the French side Clermont

Auvergne. Plenty to talk about, including European club rugby's new

competition, as well as the increased wealth coming into the

game via television contracts. Will Nigel Wray, welcome to this edition.

He said recently that no one in their right mind would eat in this

game to make a profit. So why, I have two ask you, why are you still

the owner of Saracens. If someone had explained what it had cost, I

would not have done it. I'm not that much of an idiot. But having done

it, I wouldn't have changed a thing. You are inviting me to ask you, how

much money have you put in in the time you have been here? Quite a

bit. Not prepared to go further than that? No, but I've also got a hell

of a lot out of this club. Not just in financial terms but in terms of

learning things about life. And actually, in a weird way, making me

and other people are better person. I may ask you for some examples.

What do you mean by that? If you look around you, this is not because

of me, but because other people have the vision. This is a fantastic

community Stadium. We have kids, we have charity groups coming in every

single day of the week. And that's not bad. You have brought us up to

speed in terms of the profile of Saracens. I will take you back once

again to the mid` 90s and ask you what attracted you to rugby in

general and Saracens in particular? It was my local team. Just down the

road. They came to ask me about sponsorship and I invested in the

club and came forward from there. I thought the amount I had invested

would be enough. It had gone within a year. So it involved a rethink.

And as I have said on many occasions, I would not have got

involved had I known what the cost was going to be. I doubt that anyone

else would either. At having done it, I'm delighted I did it. You

don't regret the decision. I regret the mistakes and stupidities, but

sadly you are not allowed to go back and cancel them out. What are some

of the wrong turns? We started off, in 1998 we won the Cup and almost

won the league and the double. We didn't understand why. The reason

why was the people we had. Not just good players, but very good quality

people. And actually, we didn't get the people thing right for another

ten years. Until about five or six years ago. We actually, not through

me, I hasten to add, but we began to understand that you got to have

outstanding people who worked together, who actually love each

other. That sounds silly, but if you're playing a game like that,

you've got to have good feelings for your comrades. I suppose that is a

principle you brought from business into the game. Absolutely not. I

think sport has much to teach business. The concentration on the

whole person, not just a bit of the person. The concentration on player

welfare, the whole family, mums, dads, wives, kids, looking after

people generally. And people work hard. And in return, and in return

we try and treat them very well. The effect that has on people, if you

could take that into... I won't mention any names, if you could take

that into major corporations where people don't know each other. I

think the effect could be dramatic. Let's move on to the negotiations

about a new European club competition. Those negotiations

affectively lasted to make years. They have only just been concluded

this month. The Heineken Cup has finished. Next season is the

European rugby champions cup. Why is this a battle deal for rugby? ``

better deal for rugby? The initial deal, fair enough. It may still be

called Heineken. Rugby union started it, it is their competition, fair

enough. As you would expect, it was not very club sensitive. And not

because we are marvellous, but just the English and French clubs have a

lot more eyeballs watching, because of the populations of their

countries. So England would be 20 times Wales. Just in the stadiums?

Just the population. Eyeballs to watch Sky. Not surprisingly, the

split of the money was completely wrong. When people say it is not

about the money, what they mean is it is about the money. So the money

did matter. And the arrangement we now have wearied is a third each way

is very fair. Obviously the English and French could have a lot more.

You could also argue it is not really fair on the four other Six

Nations clubs, beyond the English and the French. The Irish, Welsh,

Scottish and so forth are only getting a little bit between them.

It becomes meritocratic. You actually have to play in your way

in. And as I have said, just repeating, England and France are

much bigger countries. Therefore they are the market for television.

Their share of revenue should be far higher, if only because they have

much more of a population to spread the game over, if you want to put it

like that. But look, the deal is done. It is much more democratic.

Each league now has one vote. Previously the Celtic nations

outvoted England and France. And I've said all along, if I was them,

I would outvote them as well. We obviously didn't like that

situation. Are we getting to the stage in European rugby where the

clubs are getting more important and enjoying a higher profile than the

national teams, would you say? No. I think rugby clubs are getting more

important, but I think we all get that rugby is an international team

driven game, whereas arguably football is a club team driven game.

Currently moving towards the football model? A little bit, but

not much. The fact is, as I found with Saracens, changing people 's

culture, getting the crowd, takes decades. I didn't think it would,

but it does. As you have pointed out, football cities are not...

Rugby is a provincial game, as in France. I think the national side

for me is absolutely huge. And firstly, if only because you must

have an academy. But then you've got a produce your own players. You need

people being brought up with the club who have the core values of the

club, and the heart. And frankly, if those players don't want to play the

their country, you probably don't want them. They have to have that

sort of ambition. Who doesn't want to play fur his country? Like you,

what a thrill that would have been. What we do seem to be moving

towards, and I will take a quote from you, from the Guardian

newspaper in January, we just are at the end of the era when the unions

would tell the clubs what to do. The last Eddings of the landlord, serf

relationship. `` ebbings. I don't think it is seismic. We all want a

strong England. It is merely a matter of sitting down and talking,

if you like, as equals. Like you would in any other business

relationship. And coming to a deal which is good for everybody. That is

what has happened in the European cup. It will continue to happen in

the international game. Is it possible to have a deal which is

equally good for the unions and the clubs? You think so? They have

always been at loggerheads, over the last 20 years. There will always be

an argument, because they both want to drive same car on the same

afternoon. So that will go on and on. Will win over certain is there

will be much more money in it in future. The salary cap was recently

raised to 5 million pounds per club. What is your view? Mixed. I think it

is very helpful, because as we all know, rugby union, at the club level

is a massively loss`making game across the board. That said, that

primary tournament, the Heineken, we are all playing with different

rules. The French cap is much more. The Irish clubs don't have one. And

we have a cap. We can't play by different rules. It explains why

French and Irish clubs have been so successful in the Heineken Cup. I

don't think an English club has one in years. You have this ambivalence.

How you resolve a? At the end of the day it will be market forces. You

stand in the ocean and try and stop waves coming in, but they will come

in. It is a commercial game. As you know, French television revenue has

just soared. So they will be even more capable of paying larger

salaries, larger fees. To help the viewers, we should tell them it is

?300 million over five years, that television deal. Is broadly three

times ours. It means we can renegotiate in a couple of years

time, and we should get a big increase over here. You have to

remember that the French will always be ahead, because they are not a

soccer country. That is not great news. A lot of English players will

want to play in France. There could be a haemorrhaging of the top talent

if they find salaries so extravagant. That is why the policy

of selecting people from here is sensible and helpful. It is not

quite such good news for you. What could happen is a lot of English

players will follow people like Toby Flood and go and play their rugby in

France where they can command higher salaries. That is where we have to

compete. It is quite wrong that you stop people getting what they are

worth. One of our problems here is that the more that we are successful

and create England players, the more we move the bar against ourselves.

That's another thing we have to resolve with the rugby union. It is

money, I'm afraid. There is one issue with the salary cap. It is an

injury ravaged sport. They need big squads to compete in various

competitions that they take part. I will read you something from Austin

Healey, the leading players will see the rising salary cap as a chance to

fill their pockets. You can bet your last pound Manny Lawson that agents

in the summer to negotiate another 10% on top of what they already own

the idea that you will have a bigger squad won't actually happen. `` that

many players will tell their agents. We already have a bomb. You don't

have to be a genius to work out that if your ambition is to stay in the

premiership, you need one team. If you are like a Leicester or a

Saracens, you are trying to win the premiership and win the Heineken,

fighting on two fronts. By definition, you need a bigger squad.

There are a number of questions in need of answering. It is about

money. If you have great players, it actually wrong. You have got to pay

them what they are worth in a short`term career. It is one problem

that needs to be resolved. Rugby union has to be involved. There will

need to be more money available. If we talk about the southern

hemisphere, we know that they are concerned are they, about the money

available in French rugby. If you look at the quotes from the CEO of

the New Zealand rugby players Association, he says the TV deal is

made a threat. The Australian bass set it is scary and he can't ignore

it. There are broadcast rights in the northern hemisphere. `` the

Australian bass. `` says it is scary. You have to worry about the

balance of power among the unions around the world. The all Blacks

have a fantastic brand name. They can exploit it `` At Blacks.

Australia has a bigger problem because it is the fifth sport behind

cricket, Aussie rules, rugby league and maybe even football nowadays. I

think their biggest problem is South Africa. South Africa is in the same

time zone as we are over here. It makes sense. You play at the proper

time as opposed to South Africa, who generate 60 ` 70% of what was the

Tri`Nations money rights having to go off somewhere and get terrible

jet lag and play at the wrong time of day. Their people are watching at

breakfast time, which, as we all know, the best rates are at peak

times. If South Africa played England, France, Wales, Ireland,

their revenue would go up massively and that will happen. I don't know

when. You can't stop progress. Let's talk about the World Cup which can

you tell us about your stance is Mac as I understand it, there is a

threat that you might withhold players. To be perfectly honest, we

should not be put in that position to discuss that. It is wrong. Rugby

union should not even get near a discussion like that. We should have

a proper discussion. If anyone is working in a company or factory and

they are closed down for two months, who will pay the wages? Who

will pay the bill? If you have a World Cup in your country, you are

not allowed to play any other rugby. We have to close down for two

months. How will it be resolved? Hopefully both parties will be

responsible. The fact that the factories, if you can call them

that, " two months, to enable a bigger factory to take place, just

work it out. It's not difficult. I have quoted, if you have a gun and

you are not prepared to fire it, you have not got a gun. That's right. I

think that was more about leaving the room in the case of the European

negotiations. White it is still about taking a position and carrying

out that. In this case, I hope the rugby union, I am sure they do have,

the sense to not push like that. Frankly, we want a fantastically

successful World Cup. Of course. Are you prepared to withdraw your threat

was yellow I have never made a threat. I have said, if you have a

gun and you are not prepared to fire it, that you haven't got a gun. That

is a general observation. I wouldn't ever make that threat. It would be

an empty threat, wouldn't it? You would be depriving players of

international honours and your relationship would break down with I

think it is an interesting discussion. We are trying to create

layers to play for England. We need players who want to play for their

country `` players. To take the opposite view... What we do need is

for the other side, rugby union, to not take advantage of that fact.

That would be unfair. They I think they will. You have an exciting

fixture coming up against the French, Clermont over them. I think

I am right in saying that you have been into Heineken Cup semifinals

before. This is the big one, isn't it? It is. Hopefully it is going to

be one of a succession of big ones. That is the whole object. To play

big games. I am always amazed that that is exactly what the players

want, they want to play at the highest possible level. You find

that amazing? I do. I look at myself and think, I would be frightened out

of my wits to play at that sort of level in that sort of tension. I

admire them for it. I find it amazing... This is

across`the`board. Are you a man in the dressing room? Never. I go to

the dressing room always after a game to shake people 's hand and

said, win or lose, well done. I think they like that and that is

what I do. There you are in the semi`final against Clermont, for

players this is about Glory and earning a winning bonus, but for you

it is a personal milestone in your development as a club. Yes it is. I

don't think it is about bonuses for the players. Not while they are on

the pitch. They just want to give their for the club, it is a huge

step forward. Given we fell at the semi`final fence twice last year. We

are a work in progress. It doesn't end there. I think life and sporting

life certainly is a mountain without a top, you are constantly climbing

and that is that. We shouldn't get ahead of ourselves. But if this is

and is widely Heineken Cup, it is tempting to ask you whether there

would be anything else for you to achieve here. You talk about the

mountain without a top. But, he would be at the top of a

particularly personal mountain, wouldn't you? Maybe it will be time

for you to say you have done all you can and move on. I think the moment

you fly too close to the sun, you get your wings burned and you come

crashing down. That is it will be time for you to say you have done

all you can and move on. I think the moment you fly too close to the sun,

you get your wings burned and you come crashing down. That is Icarus.

Yes. At the moment, you think you are marvellous because you have won

something. But you are finished. What would be the motivation to

continue? To create a Saracens club that we will all be incredibly proud

of because of what it has achieved and what it continues to achieve.

Otherwise, it would be like saying of a company, we have created a

wonderful company, next year it goes bust, no, you have to create things

that endure and go on. That is what it is all about. One final question.

If it came to a choice between Saracens winning the Heineken Cup

this season and England winning the World Cup next season, where would

your preference like? Heineken. It is one of those things. When

something is that immediate and close to your heart, that is where

you go. I know the families, I know the people, owner the spectators. I

know it sounds Hackney, but we are one big family and in England

obviously, it is hugely important. It is not your little family,

however. Nigel Wray, thank you very much for the interview. Thank you.

Thursday, for most of us should be a fairly decent