The crisis at the top of English rugby erupted on Thursday evening as grassroots rebels broke cover to demand Bill Sweeney be sacked, only for the Rugby Football Union to reject a petition for a vote on their under-fire chief executive's future.
The collective, which includes 10 second-tier Championship clubs, various refereeing bodies and lower-level clubs from across the country, had called for the RFU board to dismiss Sweeney "as soon as practicably possible".
Sweeney's £1.1m compensation package, which coincided with record financial losses for the governing body and a round of job losses, topped their list of complaints.
However, they also attacked the RFU leadership's failure to do more to save liquidated clubs such as London Irish, Wasps, Worcester and Jerseys Reds, a botched roll-out of new rules around tackle height in 2023, the money spent in paying out the contracts of fired England coaches and a "loss of confidence and trust in the leadership of the game" among "the thousands of volunteers who keep the game alive".
The rebels have the support of 152 clubs and bodies, well clear of the threshold of 100 needed to trigger a Special General Meeting and a vote on Sweeney's future.
However, the RFU swiftly dismissed the call for a summit meeting of their near 2,000-strong membership and a final confrontation over Sweeney, claiming the no-confidence motion lacked the necessary signatures.
"The letter contains a number of inaccuracies," the RFU added in a statement. "It does not comply with the relevant requirements and is therefore invalid as a requisition for an SGM."
The organisers of the motion now plan to resubmit their paperwork and insist they will force the issue to a vote.
"The RFU can play for time all it likes, but this is a mass movement by a stronger, united team," said a spokesperson for the collective.
"Splitting hairs about the rules of what is or isn't a valid complaint form is merely postponing the inevitable.
"It would surely be better for the RFU to respect the wishes of more than 150 members - so far - who seek to invoke their right under Twickenham's own regulations to hold the administrators of the game to account at a Special General Meeting."
Coventry and Nottingham are among the Championship clubs supporting the removal of Sweeney
Former chairman Tom Ilube, part of the RFU's renumeration committee who approved Sweeney's recent bonus, stepped down in December.
His departure and the launch of an independent review of the scheme that boosted the pay of Sweeney and five further executives has not quelled discontent though.
If Sweeney's critics can provide the paperwork to show the necessary support, a special general meeting would be called in the midst of the men's Six Nations.
Several club officials explained their decision to support the no-confidence motion.
"The recent decision of the RFU to award bonuses to senior staff is beyond belief," said David Morton, secretary of sixth-tier Carlisle.
"The RFU keep trumpeting community rugby as the lifeblood of the game, while at the same time seemingly treating them like paupers."
"Every club I know wants to see change at the top, new leadership and a new approach to taking English rugby forward at all levels," added Paddy McAlpine, chairman of Chichester, who are also in tier six.
However, the nine professional referees employed by the RFU distanced themselves from the motion, saying they had not been consulted by the referees' union behind it and added they "have not endorsed any statements or meetings".
