3rd tier is back in 2014 [Discontinued]

[Bruce Ross]

Given the way local government is "run" in this city, I wouldn't hold out too much hope. To give you an example, Manly Council are planning to spend $15,000,000 upgrading their swim centre, part of which includes a "multi-purpose' pool with seating for 150 people. Some genius decided that the pool should be 1.25 deep i.e. 75cm too shallow for water polo (the closest water polo facility is at Ryde). Despite 75 out of 120 submissions calling for the pool to be 2m deep the council refuses to budge, one of their reasons being that the area is low lying and might flood. The same council is spending $43,000,000 building a multi-level car park UNDER Manly Oval (which is below sea level and prone to flooding).

I wasn't advocating submissions, QH. That's too late. The time to move is when councillors are up for re-election where the strategy would be either to run candidates against the incumbents or push for commitments to a desired outcome from each of the candidates.

I realise it could never happen on the Insula but in other areas it is not unknown for entrenched councillors to give less weight to a wave of opposing submissions and more to what they have been handed in brown paper bags, and I'm not talking about a cut lunch. But if they are not reelected they are no longer on the paper bag distribution list.
.

 

[Quick Hands]

I wasn't advocating submissions, QH. That's too late. The time to move is when councillors are up for re-election where the strategy would be either to run candidates against the incumbents or push for commitments to a desired outcome from each of the candidates.

I realise it could never happen on the Insula but in other areas it is not unknown for entrenched councillors to give less weight to a wave of opposing submissions and more to what they have been handed in brown paper bags, and I'm not talking about a cut lunch. But if they are not reelected they are no longer on the paper bag distribution list.
.

Unfortunately Bruce, the same men and women are re-elected around here, Warringah Council has been sacked twice in the past 30 years and when the administration period finished, the same lot were re-elected. I assume this is because people only notice how hopeless they are when they are personally affected. As the majority are rarely affected by the same thing most staff recommendations are rubber stamped by clueless councillors or those receiving their brown paper bags carry the day.

The local mayor here spends most of her time cutting ribbons, being the patron of clubs and having pictures of herself surrounded by smiling children published in the local paper. When she is actually asked to do anything "it's in the hands of the staff, councillors can't interfere" is the standard response.

 

[happyjack]

Perth and Melbourne are in.
If the Adelaide proposal has government, university and corporate support it should be included.
NSWCRU are not interested at all.
Tuggeranong should be rewarded as the most commercial club in Australian Rugby. If the ACTRU still want to waste money then there should be 2 teams from the ACT.
Sydney Uni likewise deserve a spot from a club, tertiary institution and corporate perspective.
The northern Sydney amalgamation is inspiring, but then every club has some real collateral to offer.
Outside of this the situation is quite bleak.
Possibility of former QRU Board member and Bond Uni VC pulling money from different budgets to go it alone with Breakers and GC Rugby as a support act - still speculation.
Sunnybank would need to hire a ground and would perhaps be better off investing in commercial property at 9% return than a break even Rugby competition given their poor balance sheet position.
That is 7 teams with nothing from Qld confirmed or southern and western Sydney. Not such a bad position considering Santa comes tomorrow and we still have 5+ weeks to sort the tender process.
The comp is going to float.
QRU and NSWRU need to pull their fingers out and definitively state their vision for their states in this competition. Happy for the ARU to go free market tender but the state unions should be a little more parochial.
I think this forum needs to stop bashing groups who have the guts or assets to go it alone and start to push for some leadership from those charged with the responsibility for developing Rugby in regions that are not blue blood.

 

[Quick Hands]

Perth and Melbourne are in.
If the Adelaide proposal has government, university and corporate support it should be included.
NSWCRU are not interested at all.
Tuggeranong should be rewarded as the most commercial club in Australian Rugby. If the ACTRU still want to waste money then there should be 2 teams from the ACT.
Sydney Uni likewise deserve a spot from a club, tertiary institution and corporate perspective.
The northern Sydney amalgamation is inspiring, but then every club has some real collateral to offer.
Outside of this the situation is quite bleak.
Possibility of former QRU Board member and Bond Uni VC pulling money from different budgets to go it alone with Breakers and GC Rugby as a support act - still speculation.
Sunnybank would need to hire a ground and would perhaps be better off investing in commercial property at 9% return than a break even Rugby competition given their poor balance sheet position.
That is 7 teams with nothing from Qld confirmed or southern and western Sydney. Not such a bad position considering Santa comes tomorrow and we still have 5+ weeks to sort the tender process.
The comp is going to float.
QRU and NSWRU need to pull their fingers out and definitively state their vision for their states in this competition. Happy for the ARU to go free market tender but the state unions should be a little more parochial.
I think this forum needs to stop bashing groups who have the guts or assets to go it alone and start to push for some leadership from those charged with the responsibility for developing Rugby in regions that are not blue blood.

You've used NSWRU and vision in the same sentence which I assume is a Christmas wish. In the words of a former AFL commercial "I'd like to see that!"

I think that the western 4 in Sydney are well on the way as well.

 

[turnovertwopasses]

Bruce seems to think this threads all about uni (shock me) and afl...

 

[Quick Hands]

One argument that I don't really understand is that Sydney Uni shouldn't be allowed to stand alone because they would be too strong. The logical follow on from this is that they should be part of a joint venture, but isn't the purpose of a joint venture to make the joined entity stronger than the individual parts? Using this logic, a joint venture would make Sydney Uni stronger wouldn't it?

 

[Dave Beat]

Bruce seems to think this threads all about uni (shock me) and afl.

Bruce maybe Uni, so we can have some fun with him like we do with Tummy Carter, but his posts are always fair and constructive. Don't think your post is much chop

 

[MACCA]

Perth and Melbourne are in.
If the Adelaide proposal has government, university and corporate support it should be included.
NSWCRU are not interested at all.
Tuggeranong should be rewarded as the most commercial club in Australian Rugby. If the ACTRU still want to waste money then there should be 2 teams from the ACT.
Sydney Uni likewise deserve a spot from a club, tertiary institution and corporate perspective.
The northern Sydney amalgamation is inspiring, but then every club has some real collateral to offer.
Outside of this the situation is quite bleak.
Possibility of former QRU Board member and Bond Uni VC pulling money from different budgets to go it alone with Breakers and GC Rugby as a support act - still speculation.
Sunnybank would need to hire a ground and would perhaps be better off investing in commercial property at 9% return than a break even Rugby competition given their poor balance sheet position.
That is 7 teams with nothing from Qld confirmed or southern and western Sydney. Not such a bad position considering Santa comes tomorrow and we still have 5+ weeks to sort the tender process.
The comp is going to float.
QRU and NSWRU need to pull their fingers out and definitively state their vision for their states in this competition. Happy for the ARU to go free market tender but the state unions should be a little more parochial.
I think this forum needs to stop bashing groups who have the guts or assets to go it alone and start to push for some leadership from those charged with the responsibility for developing Rugby in regions that are not blue blood.

Great overview & insight. Think the new comp should look after existing rugby regions as they are struggling - build these up first then try to develop elsewhere.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Bruce seems to think this threads all about uni (shock me) and afl.

Say what you want about Uni but I don't see Bruce coming in with any unsolicited spruiking. Every comment he has made has been in response to somebody else making a genuine query.

Tall Poppy Syndrome and attitudes like you display are a good reason why the game is in the shit.

 

[the coach]

Anyone know whether the teams who are initially selected for the NRC are in for the first 2 years or do they have to re-apply for the second year? What happens if they are uncompetitive or don't fulfill the criteria in year 1?

As I've suggested before, Uni are the only Sydney team (IMO) who satisfy the criteria and I don't really see why they shouldn't be allowed to compete as a stand alone. As I think Bruce suggested they have been preparing for this since the ARC and seem to me to be in a good position to go it alone. Given the number of S15 players they have if they are don't stand alone some of their players will either not be involved or will have to be allocated to other teams and then we're back to the farce of the ARC ie no tribal loyalty as the SS players are scattered to the winds.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Let's face it, a stand alone bid has much less likelihood of future conflict between parties. JV's are more of a necessary evil than an ideal situation.

 

[ChargerWA]

But that's the beauty of having a competition that can grow as it matures. If say 5 years down the track any of the JV teams feel they are strong enough they can apply to peel off on their own. In the case of the 4 team northern JV that would still leave 3 teams and ideally over time this is what should happen until the big teams are stand alone and the smaller teams stay together. It will help bring equality to the competition in absence of a draft or other mechanism.

Which is probably a good reason why 8 teams is plenty to start with. No need to install teams that are marginal propositions just to flesh the comp out.

 

[turnovertwopasses]

C

Say what you want about Uni but I don't see Bruce coming in with any unsolicited spruiking. Every comment he has made has been in response to somebody else making a genuine query.

Tall Poppy Syndrome and attitudes like you display are a good reason why the game is in the shit.

cheap shot

 

[turnovertwopasses]

Right so if uni get in by themselves, how can they knock back a bid from the Galloping Greens? (Randwick)

 

[wamberal]

Right so if uni get in by themselves, how can they knock back a bid from the Galloping Greens? (Randwick)

Yep, that would be great for the game, wouldn't it? Randwick and Uni. Fantastic.

 

[Quick Hands]

Right so if uni get in by themselves, how can they knock back a bid from the Galloping Greens? (Randwick)

Firstly, Randwick would struggle to get anywhere near Uni in terms of meeting the criteria and secondly, being a district club as opposed to a university, Randwick standing alone shuts out a great portion of SE Sydney from involvement in 3T.

Whether people like it or not, Sydney University have resources which the district clubs cannot hope to match. Hasn't this been the complaint of some for so long? How then could a district club, which has struggled on and off the field for the past 5 years or more, stand alone at a higher level? It makes no sense at all. How does a team which struggled into 8th place in the SS, qualify for 3T?

 

[Dave Beat]

Firstly, Randwick would struggle to get anywhere near Uni in terms of meeting the criteria and secondly, being a district club as opposed to a university, Randwick standing alone shuts out a great portion of SE Sydney from involvement in 3T.

Whether people like it or not, Sydney University have resources which the district clubs cannot hope to match. Hasn't this been the complaint of some for so long? How then could a district club, which has struggled on and off the field for the past 5 years or more, stand alone at a higher level? It makes no sense at all. How does a team which struggled into 8th place in the SS, qualify for 3T?

100% accurate, and put simply so there is no confusion.

 

[RugbyFuture]

Firstly, Randwick would struggle to get anywhere near Uni in terms of meeting the criteria and secondly, being a district club as opposed to a university, Randwick standing alone shuts out a great portion of SE Sydney from involvement in 3T.

opposed to usyd which blocks out anyone who didn't go to usyd, and takes one of the limited franchise spots with them?

There are 3 franchises allocated for sydney lets say. You include USyd, which region are you going to not give a team? The region with all the juniors, the region rugby's trying to push into desperately or the region which has bred success for the last 20 years?


Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk

 

[Dave Beat]

opposed to usyd which blocks out anyone who didn't go to usyd, and takes one of the limited franchise spots with them?

There are 3 franchises allocated for sydney lets say. You include USyd, which region are you going to not give a team? The region with all the juniors, the region rugby's trying to push into desperately or the region which has bred success for the last 20 years?


Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk

Thought the same, and hence the reason why NSW maybe 4
Wicks, Beasties, Souths,
Nth Harbour
Uni
Rest

 

[Hugie]

I have a different view. I think that the advantages that Sydney Uni have, will largely be neutralised by the professional nature of the 3T comp..
Sydney Uni's big advantage is that it can provide "in kind" payments that the other clubs can't. The 3T comp will allow JVs to match these "in kind" payments and top them up with cash.
For the comp to work I believe that:

• Each game will need to generate over $100k i.e. about 5000 crowd. Based on $1000- match payment to each player and $30k for coaches and staff. I can't see Sydney Uni getting 5000 to each home game, it doesn't now. FOXTEL won't be happy with smaller crowds. The Uni ground will struggle with a crowd of 5000.
• The ARU don't have the money (nor inclination) for grass routes development, an important part of any bid will be that some of the profit will be spent on grass routes development. Sydney Uni's bid will be weak on this criteria, compared to the JVs.
• The ability of the JVs to provide good coaching, support, mentoring and full time training (for about 12 weeks, lead up and the season) will match Sydney Uni's.
• Yes Sydney Uni have cash on hand but this will disappear very quickly without cash coming in the gate.

Overall if Sydney Uni gets a stand alone franchise it will be because the competing bids are weak.
This is a real possibility, but don't blame Sydney Uni if it happens.