The RFU argues the proposal could jeopardise player welfare
Plans to extend the Guinness Premiership by six rounds of games from next season have been strongly opposed by the Rugby Football Union (RFU).
The clubs believe the extra matches will net them �500,000 each at a time of severe economic problems.
But the RFU argues the plan would offer only a "marginal increase in revenues", compromise the "integrity" of the league and could damage player welfare.
The Professional Game Board will discuss the plan at its next meeting.
The board is made up of the RFU, First Division Rugby (FDR), the Professional Rugby Players' Association (PRA) and Premier Rugby Limited (PRL), the umbrella body representing the 12 Premiership clubs.
However, it seems the clubs and RFU do not even agree on who will have the final say on whether the extra games are introduced.
The status quo is not an option in the current climate
Premier Rugby chief executive Mark McCafferty
An RFU spokesman told BBC Sport "consent for any PRL proposals has to come from the RFU...and we've made our position on the proposed changes to the structured season clear".
But the PRL said the Professional Game Board would make the final decision.
PRL and the RFU have four votes each on the Board, while the PRA has one, with RFU chairman Martyn Thomas holding the casting vote.
The clubs want six extra matches each, with those finishing in an even position at the end of this season playing the odd-placed finishers next term, and vice versa.
The proposal provides for an extra fixture to be fitted into the Christmas-New Year schedule when spectator demand is at a peak.
In response to the RFU's rejection of their plan, PRL issued a statement that did little to alter their collision course with Twickenham.
"PRL's clubs are disappointed with the apparently limited evaluation and premature rejection of their proposals as outlined in today's RFU statement, made before those proposals have been put to the Professional Game Board (PGB)," read a statement.
"We are confident in the �6m of annual net benefit to the Clubs, a figure the clubs themselves are clearly best placed to evaluate.
"In contrast, the RFU-proposed development cup is very unlikely to be financially justifiable in the current climate."
The RFU's management board was unanimous in its view that the PRL's proposals were "not in the best interests of elite rugby".
They argue the plans would contravene the new long-term agreement between the RFU and PRL, which came into effect on 1 July last year, and fail to address overlaps between club and international games.
It was also feared an increased league programme would add to top players' workloads and make injuries more likely, while giving clubs an extra incentive to import talent from abroad.
The RFU is eager to continue with an Anglo-Welsh competition when the current EDF Energy Cup finishes at the end of this season.
The board argues the competition is a crucial springboard for young players struggling to get game time in the Premiership or Heineken Cup, particularly at a time when only four of 14 clubs had achieved targets for English-qualified players in their match-day squads.
Yet the clubs had agreed to scrap the competition and add extra league fixtures instead.
The proposal will be the main topic of discussion when the Professional Game Board meets on 12 March, but the RFU and clubs again seem to be at loggerheads.
E-mail this to a friend 
Printable version 
Bookmark with:
What are these?