After ten days of bitter stand-off in the row between the Scottish Rugby Union (SRU) and the Edinburgh club, the first glimmer of hope flickered through yesterday. It was a long way short of a breakthrough, and there are still plenty of hurdles before anything resembling peace is declared, but for the first time there was a chance that the two sides might actually start talking to each other.

The first cracks in the barrier separating the sides emerged in mid-afternoon yesterday when the union responded to overtures from Bob Carruthers, the Edinburgh owner, making two significant concessions.

First, the governing body is willing to look into his offer of mediation in the dispute over money that lies at the heart of the quarrel. Secondly, it back-tracked on the threat to prevent Edinburgh playing any matches because they had resigned their associate membership of the union.

In principle, the union’s decision to drop its more belligerent stance at the start of the week should mean that the two sides will soon start meaningful talks. However, relations between the main personalities on both sides are at such a low point, and there are so many potential obstacles to be overcome, that there is no guarantee.

The first potential flash point comes tonight when Edinburgh are due to face a disciplinary panel set up by the union after the club ordered their Scotland players to train with them and not with the national squad, which is preparing for the World Cup.

The SRU statement yesterday read: “Scottish Rugby confirmed that Edinburgh Rugby would be able to play rugby under the auspices of a professional team, providing Edinburgh Rugby were to agree to abide by reasonable conditions, including full acceptance and compliance with IRB regulations and appropriate SRU bylaws and rules, such as those relating to discipline, doping control and general ethical issues.”

This could present Carruthers with an immediate dilemma. He has said that he is prepared to attend tonight’s hearing only if it is fair, which means nobody from the union management or its legal representatives can be involved. If he boycotts it, however, the union could accuse him of refusing to accept its disciplinary rules, and could again put his club in limbo by banning them from playing.

He intends to fight the case on the basis that the release period had been agreed between the SRU and the club and it was the union that was at fault by unilaterally attempting to change the deal.

The union says IRB regulations give it the right to demand players whenever it wants, though its case is weakened by the precedent it set in February when it refused to demand disciplinary action against English clubs that withdrew players from training, though it did lodge a protest, and in 2004 when it failed to demand action against English clubs that refused to release players for an international against Australia.

In the long-run the important breakthrough will come if the union accepts mediation, as offered by Carruthers on Tuesday, when he also spelt out that the only alternative would be a long, damaging and expensive court battle in which the sport in Scotland would be the big loser.

Yesterday’s statement held out hope on this, saying: “Scottish Rugby is confident that it is complying with its contractual agreements with Edinburgh Rugby on all matters. A process of mediation would not change the contractual obligations that currently exist, but if Mr Carruthers feels that it would provide an environment to reexamine many of the areas of alleged dispute, Scottish Rugby is prepared to discuss this matter further with its legal advisers.”

The dispute covers two main areas. Carruthers says that the SRU has failed to pay Edinburgh all the money that was due to them in the contract signed when he bought the club. He says a bill due in November was paid late and a six-figure sum is still outstanding. The union denies this.

As a separate issue, he says that there are problems from the original contract that need to be settled. The biggest is that he was led to believe the income from taking part in the Heineken Cup and Magners League was being evenly split between the clubs. In fact, the agreement gives Edinburgh only about a quarter of the amount paid to the union for entering teams in the Heineken Cup, even though next season it will be half of the Scottish representation in the tournament.

The division of Heineken Cup income was the sticking point that scuppered talks earlier this year, but Carruthers has intimated that he is now prepared to settle on the basis of the deal that was on the table then.