The president of the Rugby Football Union has called an emergency meeting to pre-empt a revolt by the governing body’s council over the pay and bonuses scandal.

Telegraph Sport revealed that more than 20 council members had pledged their support to call for an emergency council meeting that would allow for a vote of no confidence in RFU chair Tom Ilube and put pressure on the board to sack chief executive Bill Sweeney.

Sources claimed those seeking to challenge the leadership had exceeded the threshold of 20 that is necessary to trigger an emergency meeting but had yet to serve it, while they debated the wording of the motion. The RFU’s constitution states that Sweeney must call a meeting within 28 days of receiving notice by a letter from the council members.

However, RFU president Rob Udwin sent an email to council members on Tuesday evening in a bid to defuse mounting tensions by calling an emergency meeting for Dec 18 to enable members to discuss the situation “as openly as possible” and have “calm, considered” talks. The meeting will not be minuted, nor will it be a platform for a vote of no confidence. Neither Ilube nor Sweeney will be in attendance.

The revolt has been sparked by the furious reaction across the game to revelations that Sweeney was paid £1.1 million, including an extra bonus of £358,000 while five other executive directors shared a bonus of close to £1million against a backdrop of 42 redundancies and the RFU’s record loss of £37.9 million.

The board also held a day-long strategic meeting on Tuesday that was planned, but the crisis was discussed.

Ilube’s company in administration

The RFU’s constitution states that Sweeney must call a meeting within 28 days of receiving notice by a letter from the council members.

It is also understood that clubs across the country are mobilising support to call for a special general meeting to have a vote on the leadership at Twickenham. Rules require that the chief executive must call an SGM if at least 100 members give written notice.

“More and more clubs are getting in contact and it is likely they will have more than 100 members fairly soon,” said one source. RFU rules state that the chief executive must send out a letter within 14 days and an SGM must be held within 45 days after that.

Ilube’s leadership is coming under increasing scrutiny after revelations that a company of which he was a founder and chief executive has gone into administration.

Crossword Cybersecurity plc went into administration on November 18 after it revealed it had failed to prepare its half-year accounts because of a shortage of finance staff.

The most recently published accounts in May this year stated that, under Ilube’s leadership as chief executive, losses of £3.9 million had been recorded against £4.2 million revenues. Cumulative losses were shown to total £19 million, with Ilube pocketing a £135,000 annual salary as of December 2023. He is since described as “non-executive chairman” on the company’s website.

RFU asks clubs to explain their votes

The company had announced on Sept 27 that “there have recently been changes in senior personnel within the finance function as well as a substantial cost-reduction programme involving a number of redundancies, including within the finance function.

“The combined effect of the change in personnel along with the focus on bedding in cost reductions within the group has meant that without investing in significant additional short-term resource, which the company was unable to do within the required timeframe, it was not possible to prepare the accounts by Sept 30 2024.”

The RFU has also come under criticism for asking constituent bodies (CBs), which represent clubs in geographical areas across England, why members chose not to vote for Ilube at the annual general meeting in June, when he was re-elected as chairman for a second three-year term.

It is understood that at least 20 per cent of those that voted did not support Ilube’s re-election and that Udwin, who recently blamed the furore over the governing body’s salary and bonus payments on “media spinning” and clickbait, wrote to two CBs to ask why and named the clubs and the individual who cast the vote.

In one correspondence, seen by Telegraph Sport, Udwin, who names 18 clubs, states: “We noticed that several clubs from [the CB] registered a vote or proxy vote against the resolution, as did the county union and your chair.

“We didn’t hear any concerns from the clubs about Tom [Ilube] prior to the AGM, so it was quite striking and surprising that so many clubs registered a negative proxy vote at the AGM itself.

“I wonder if you and I could have a conversation about this in the next few days to help me to understand what the issues might be. After we have spoken, if necessary, I can engage with those clubs to understand why they voted, or instructed [a council member] to use their proxy vote in the way that they did, and what reassurances we can give to those clubs that Tom is the right person to lead the organisation for these three years.”

‘It was clear our clubs lacked confidence in the leadership’

One senior source said: “Clubs were really upset that they were being asked to explain their vote. One CB just told them where to go and told them that we lived in a democracy and did not need to explain how they voted.”

Another CB replied that their clubs met regularly throughout the season and “it was clear that our clubs lacked confidence in the current leadership”.

“In particular the RFU forecast a loss of £50 million in 2023-24 and substantial further large losses over the next four-year Rugby World Cup cycle,” wrote the CB chair. “The [RFU] board do not appear to be holding the executive to account and our clubs felt that a change was necessary to recover this situation.

“Tom Ilube as chair of the board has been virtually invisible to the community game. He has made no apparent effort to engage with clubs or CBs, he definitely hasn’t reached out to [the CB] during his previous term and he has absolutely no public profile. I personally wouldn’t know him if he stood next to me. As a result, the executive do not appear to have the necessary checks and balances and are not held to account.

“The [CB’s] clubs and board believed that a new chair with rugby knowledge and greater willingness to speak publicly was required to hold the executive – and particularly the CEO – to account. Nothing has changed since the AGM and we still have the same concerns. We understand that over 20 per cent of members who attended the AGM voted against Tom Ilube and we would like to know what his plans are to regain the confidence of clubs and county unions.”

In response the RFU said that Udwin had written to two CBs “to see if we could engage with them to understand if there were any specific concerns that needed to be addressed”.