De Vos's programme note for his team's Heineken Cup match against the Ospreys on Saturday also included objections to any RFU blueprint on nearly every level, from the moral to the legal, and raising the objection that not one time had he been approached by the RFU for his views on a future structure for the game in England.

That last accusation echoes a sentiment of Leicester chairman Peter Tom on Tuesday, who also bemoaned the lack of contact from the RFU as they plan their 'Way Forward' blueprint for England's professional game.

De Vos's statement read as follows:

"The off-field news this week has been dominated by the story in the Sunday Times of the RFU’s ‘plans’ to create a Super 10 competition, based on new franchises around the country.

"An already flawed concept was reduced to the status of the ludicrous by the exclusion from the proposed superleague of not only Sale Sharks but also of Leicester, Gloucester, Northampton, Bath and Wasps.

"The vigour of the contempt with which the wider game has reacted to these barmy proposals has forced the RFU to deny that they have any such plans, but I fear the reality may be that there is no smoke without fire.

"The plan is clearly based on the structure in the southern hemisphere where the SANZAR Unions imposed the Super 14 on top of the existing national competitions and historic clubs – hence Canterbury gave rise to the Canterbury Crusaders.

"In this model, Canterbury still contest the national title within a still competitive national league, whilst the Crusaders play in the Super 14.

"The key difference however, is that the Super 14 is an international tournament and thus can co-exist with the national league. Players can play for both club and Super 14 franchise.

"The fatal flaw in the RFU proposal is that their version for England sees the traditional clubs competing in a wholly emasculated national competition below an alternative and competing national premiership for the Super 10.

"And that is before we even begin to pick holes in the proposal based on competition law, morality, club strength, player contracts, monies invested by club owners over the past ten years and so on.

"The only rationale I can conceive of for the story is that it was based on the idiots guide to PR tactic of telling everyone it going to be Armageddon in order to later release a watered down version in the hope that the naieve old clubs and their fans will be so relieved that we sign up like sheep for the same system but one which magically includes the traditional clubs.

"If true, it is shabby, unprofessional and doomed to failure.

"The truth may be that the RFU were genuinely not behind this story, but the only truth I am privy to as CEO of the current national champions and a member of the Board of Premier Rugby is that no one from the RFU or their expensively assembled team of consultants has once picked up the phone to canvass my views.

"That, above all else, is the reason for my cynicism and my belief that the RFU are on a last ditch attempt to wrest control off the game from the people who have made it what it is – a successful, well supported and ever growing league which is the envy of most other sports."