Next article
Four Glasgow players drafted into Scotland squad
Previous article
Glasgow target Super 12 player
Got an opinion?
Discuss this article in the comments section or register with the glasgowwarriors.com forum.

Search this site

Wednesday September 17, 2025
Academy duo called in by Edinburgh
Young Warriors will have a part to play
Monday September 15, 2025
Surgery for Huw Jones
McKay says it's good to be back
Sunday September 14, 2025
Hard work paying off for Watson
Friday September 12, 2025
Glasgow Warriors 40–31 Northampton Saints
Thursday September 11, 2025
Glasgow team to take on Northampton
Wednesday September 10, 2025
Doing things differently suits Roddy Grant
Monday September 08, 2025
Lancaster settling in well
Sunday September 07, 2025
Zander Fagerson to miss start of the season
Saturday September 06, 2025
Bath 47 - 14 Glasgow Warriors
Friday September 05, 2025
Glasgow team to face Bath

March 07, 2005

No cash increase for Glasgow?

Posted by Editor on March 7, 2005 10:55 PM | 10 comments | Print | E-mail author
It seems that Glasgow won't benefit from the sudden loosening of the purse strings in relation to the Scottish professional teams.

In today's Times, Lewis Stuart reports that "the understanding around Murrayfield is that most of the extra £1 million released to the professional clubs for next season's budget has gone to the Borders, who have been the worst-funded since the club came into existence three years ago. Edinburgh will get a little more than their present budget, while Glasgow have come out of the deal worst, with no significant increase even though they are certain to be one of Scotland's Heineken Cup entrants next season."

You can read the article here


Comments
Posted by McDruid on March 8, 2005 12:40 PM | Reply to this comment

I have a good contact with access to the corridors of power who told me - when the SRU General Committee chucked out MacKay - that this financial arrangement was the purpose of the coup and would be the result of it. Borders rule (with Edinburgh's connivance)! And it does not matter that the Borders District have the smallest number of clubs, the smallest number of players and the smallest number of supporters, while Glasgow district has the largest number of clubs, players and supporters. In the Borderers' eyes their case is more deserving! Do we agree? Do we go along with this chicanery? And why are these things being decided before the new governance structure is put in place at Murrayfield? Is it relevant - or just a smoke screen?

Posted by hugh on March 8, 2005 01:42 PM | Reply to this comment

Nothing changes-Borders rule lets hear from George Blackie

Posted by ballinj on March 8, 2005 04:02 PM | Reply to this comment

I am going to stop visiting this website as everytime I log on I just end up depressed.

Glasgow deserve to get some extra cash as a reward for the improvement in performance this season and so they can give players like Swindall, Thomson, and the fullback thingiemybob the professional contracts they so richly deserve for their performances this year.

Posted by Alan on March 8, 2005 06:01 PM | Reply to this comment

..and borders club fans deliberately boycott the pro team..like the "double header" where the club fans made a point of walking out before the Borders/Glasgow game!
Can Glasgow do anything about this? We don't have anyone to speak for us now. How can we express our annoyance to SRU? How many folk are registered on this forum now? Can we have our say?

Posted by hugh on March 8, 2005 06:28 PM | Reply to this comment

back to George Blackie President elect?

Posted by McDruid on March 8, 2005 10:50 PM | Reply to this comment

George Blackie's been a waste of space for years. Can't string even a few words together to make a speech, so how can he represent Scottish Rugby? Nor has he represented Glasgow rugby, so why don't we return him to the mutual halitosis of the dentist's chair? At least he can only get up one nose at a time there.

And we have Bill Nolan and Archie Ferguson, who have been known to disdain the party line and even support Hawks in some of their tussles with the Mugabe-esque politburo in Ramsay Street (How's that for a geographical scramble?). Perhaps Bill and Archie could fight Glasgow's corner in the Budget stakes, or at least let us know why the Glasgow Ws are losing out?

Posted by Phall on March 9, 2005 10:48 AM | Reply to this comment

You see this guys is why it is important to support the clubs in the district. In the long term it is Glasgow (And Caledonia) against the establishment.

Posted by hugh on March 8, 2005 11:23 PM | Reply to this comment

Its time for the Accounts Commision to audit the SRU's books if public money is involved

Posted by jinty on March 9, 2005 08:00 PM | Reply to this comment

we should use the new law on freedom of information - the SRU is a public body is it not?

Posted by Phall on March 10, 2005 12:36 PM | Reply to this comment

No. The SRU is a private organisation for FOI purposes, wholly owned by the member clubs.

Add a comment to this article

If you're replying to an existing comment, please use the 'Reply to this comment' link above the entry. This will display the comments in a way which is far easier for other readers to follow.