The Rugby Football Union has announced an independent review of its controversial executive pay scheme as a growing grassroots rebellion threatens to force out bosses Bill Sweeney and Tom Ilube in a matter of weeks.

The pair could face a seismic vote of no confidence early next year, with a motion calling for their dismissal gathering support among grassroots clubs.

If the motion reaches the threshold of 100 signatories from clubs throughout England, a special general meeting must be held within 45 days – a timeline that would decide Sweeney and Ilube’s future by the end of February.

According to correspondence from the motion’s supporters, it has already attracted the support of 187 clubs, comfortably enough to put Sweeney and Ilube’s future on the line.

A two-thirds majority vote would then be required to oust chairman Ilube and press RFU directors to remove chief executive Sweeney whose compensation package triggered this crisis at the top of the English game.

In November it was revealed that Sweeney was paid £742,000 in the year up to June 2024, significantly up from the £430,000 he received in the Covid-affected year of 2019-20 after taking office in 2019.

However, his 2024 pay was also supplemented by a bonus of £358,000, as part of a ‘long-term incentive plan’ (LTIP) scheme signed off by chairman Ilube and intended to recognise the salary sacrificed by senior leaders during the pandemic, while being linked to various parts of the organisation’s performance.

In total, Sweeney was paid £1.1m.

The RFU declared record £37.9m operating losses last month, only a few weeks after announcing plans to lay off more than 40 staff in the latest round of redundancies.

The RFU also shed jobs in 2018 and 2020.

The RFU council, which represents the national game to the organisation’s executive, held an emergency meeting on Wednesday and confirmed “an immediate independent review of the circumstances that led to the LTIP being introduced and executed”.

In a statement, the RFU said: “Council recognises the reputational damage that has been done to the sport over the past month and is committed to rebuilding trust with our member clubs.”

The council also called for “a radical change in the way that the RFU communicates, setting out clearly all the work that is being done to address the issues that clubs have raised”.

“One of council’s clear responsibilities is to hold the board to account,” said RFU president Rob Udwin, who will meet with Sweeney and Ilube on Thursday to “agree a way forward”.

“Tonight’s meeting and its outcomes is a clear demonstration of this process in action.”

BBC Sport has spoken to a number of RFU employees who have described staff anger at the level of pay awarded to senior staff, while two former bosses – Graeme Cattermole and Francis Baron – have already called on Sweeney and Ilube to resign, external over the issue.

The motion does not limit its criticisms to levels of executive pay.

It also cites several other motivations behind its attempt to force out Ilube and Sweeney, including the financial losses incurred by the RFU, its handling of the second-tier Championship and a bungled change in the laws around tackle height in 2023.

It claims that “the thousands of volunteers who keep the game alive and running have now lost confidence and trust in the leadership of our game”.

In relation to senior executives’ pay, the motion adds: “The RFU has received a large amount of sustained negative reaction across stakeholders throughout the game.”

The referees’ union, Championship and National League 1 clubs joined the call for change at the top in the run-up to the council’s emergency meeting.

The possibility of the 62-member council, which includes representatives from the county game, universities, the military, lower leagues and players, making its own move against the leadership was averted as the meeting did not allow for a vote under RFU rules.

Andy Cosslett, Ilube’s predecessor as RFU chairman and the originator of the controversial LTIP scheme, attended to answer questions, with other officials explaining how it compared to pay structures at other organisations and how the RFU was measured against its targets.

Oxfordshire RFU, which has one representative on the council, said it had, external “listened to our clubs and decided to add our voice to call for a special general meeting of the RFU”.

“We will respond to any potential meeting requisition if and when it is received in the appropriate format,” an RFU spokesperson said.