A League of Nations is an idiotic proposal

Democracy: an ideal where people have freedom, equality, and the ability to make choices in how either they or their elected representatives govern a way of living and working, or, in the case of sport, playing.

- JEFF PROBYN

The desire for rugby to be run in a more democratic way is currently the focus of all who believe that World Rugby is controlled by a self-interested minority at the expense of all others, which, to a degree, is probably true.

With the results of the World Rugby election due to be released next week, all are anticipating that the self-interested elite of the sport will use their extra votes to ensure that change doesn’t happen, and everything continues on the same road with perhaps a few minor variations.

Let’s be truthful, in every democracy people generally don’t vote for what is best for all, they vote for what is best for them, which in life tends to be the same for a majority of people – but not all.

There are times when to allow an equal vote to all would be counterproductive, creating a paradox that would ultimately be bad for all.

World Rugby is such a paradox, with the suggestion that if all were equal, the game would turn what is a minority sport in all but a handful of nations, suddenly into a global phenomenon.

However, I think World Rugby should be seen like a benign dictator that is trying to slowly expand the game without financially ruining all its member unions.

Like it or not, all rugby-playing nations are envious of the money generated by the Six Nations (including the Rugby Championship) and would like to get their share.

An important point to remember is that it has taken over a hundred years for that competition to achieve the financial success it now has.