A Proposal For A New Third Tier Competition In Australia

[Scott Allen]

How does 148 games each year in a new third tier competition at a cost of only $160,000 sound?

Find out how I think it can be done at http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/a-proposal-for-australias-third-tier-competition/

 

[Jiggles]

If that $160,000 means cutting JONs ARU Chardonnay budget then I find this proposal outrageous and preposterous!

 

[Inside Shoulder]

How does 148 games each year in a new third tier competition at a cost of only $160,000 sound?

Find out how I think it can be done at http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/a-proposal-for-australias-third-tier-competition/

How much do you reckon a first division team would incur in additional wages in this comp?
Do you think 2nd division teams would have to pay their players?
Are ITM cup players all paid?

 

[Blue]

If that $160,000 means cutting JONs ARU Chardonnay budget then I find this proposal outrageous and preposterous!

Pinot Grigio. Chardie is so last year.

But seriously someone told me the only reason he canned the ARC was that he would guaranteed not be making his bonus which is tied ti ARU profitability. I'm sure it was meant as a joke though? Was it? Huh?

Sorry. Thread hijack.

 

[TOCC]

No... JON's return to the ARU was politically tied in with him canning the ARC..it was effectively a proviso of some members supporting his return

 

[TOCC]

I like the concept, the practicality and the cost effectiveness of your proposal...

My only point to add is that there shouldn't be any more then 8 teams if we want to even come close to the quality of currie/itm cups..

My theory on this is that both countries have greater depth then Australia, so we shouldn't be planning to spread the talent across more teams, we should keep it minimalist..

 

[Scott Allen]

How much do you reckon a first division team would incur in additional wages in this comp?
Do you think 2nd division teams would have to pay their players?
Are ITM cup players all paid?

I don't know what Sydney teams are paying players in the Shute Shield now so am probably not the best to comment on player payments.

Obviously would have to be commercial so if you're going to allocate $50,000 to extra player payments for a nine week competiiton, you'd have to find a sponsor/investor to cover that.

Some clubs couldn't / wouldn't do that and so may target doing well in the division two competition with existing players.

 

[Scott Allen]

I like the concept, the practicality and the cost effectiveness of your proposal.

My only point to add is that there shouldn't be any more then 8 teams if we want to even come close to the quality of currie/itm cups..

My theory on this is that both countries have greater depth then Australia, so we shouldn't be planning to spread the talent across more teams, we should keep it minimalist..

Understand your theory but that would mean asking some clubs to vote themselves out of the competetion, which is unlikely to happen.

Having two divisons is a bit of a halfway step. Some clubs would still have to vote themseleves out of division one but they have a shot at getting into division one the following year so this may be achievable.

 

[TOCC]

Understand your theory but that would mean asking some clubs to vote themselves out of the competetion, which is unlikely to happen.

Having two divisons is a bit of a halfway step. Some clubs would still have to vote themseleves out of division one but they have a shot at getting into division one the following year so this may be achievable.

Well I guess it depends what your priorities are and what you want the 3rd tier to achieve...

For me, consolidating the top players of club rugby into a significantly smaller competition is the only way to really improve the quality of 3rd tier rugby and subsequently improve the player depth.

Apologies I don't mean to be negative..

 

[Richo]

Scott, it's a very interesting proposal. But isn't this more of a national club championship than a genuine third tier? Doesn't a third tier need to reduce the number of player positions available so that the quality of competition is higher? Or do you see the divisions as achieving this?

 

[Jiggles]

I like the third tier idea, but I think a bigger issue is the junior pathway. In all seriousness if you are not in one of the big 8 rugby schools in Brisbane or the big 15 (there abouts) in NSW/ACT then you are pretty much lost to rugby. There is virtually no club competition from about U/14s to Colts.

 

[wamberal]

I like the third tier idea, but I think a bigger issue is the junior pathway. In all seriousness if you are not in one of the big 8 rugby schools in Brisbane or the big 15 (there abouts) in NSW/ACT then you are pretty much lost to rugby. There is virtually no club competition from about U/14s to Colts.

Correct me if I am wrong, but the big problem is that NRL clubs are happy to sign kids up from the age of 14.

We cannot, and should not, compete with that.

 

[Jiggles]

Correct me if I am wrong, but the big problem is that NRL clubs are happy to sign kids up from the age of 14.

We cannot, and should not, compete with that.

I don't know anything about that, and I dont really have an opinion on whether we can or cannot or should or should not compete with that. My point is that if you do not go to one of the big rugby schools, your options to play rugby are pretty limited, and even then the standard is pretty poor.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I don't know what Sydney teams are paying players in the Shute Shield now so am probably not the best to comment on player payments.

Obviously would have to be commercial so if you're going to allocate $50,000 to extra player payments for a nine week competiiton, you'd have to find a sponsor/investor to cover that.

Some clubs couldn't / wouldn't do that and so may target doing well in the division two competition with existing players.

Obviously you think $50k is in the ball park - i had assumed it would be more: that would be doable for some but not all as I perceive the solvency of the shute shield clubs.
A problem which would, therefore, need to be considered is maintaining a viable shute shield comp: there would be a tendency for any club in shute shield that was also in div 1 to attract the better player to their shute shield team as well.
do you see that as needing to be addressed or is that part of the acceptable division between good and not so good teams that you write of?

 

[Scott Allen]

Scott, it's a very interesting proposal. But isn't this more of a national club championship than a genuine third tier? Doesn't a third tier need to reduce the number of player positions available so that the quality of competition is higher? Or do you see the divisions as achieving this?

That definition of third tier would probably be ideal but if you don't get the clubs onside I think any third tier / national compettion will fail. Reducing the number of teams down means some teams will miss out of the competition altogether and I don't think clubs will approve of that. Ignoring clubs and going with ARC type teams will lead us back to the problems the ARC teams had.

Is it better to achieve something or keep going around in circles forever looking for the perfect solution that I don't think will ever be implemented?

Hence the two divisions where every club is still involved in the competition and can basically decide - go large and aim for division one or settle for division two. This will probably end up with a third tier compettion consisting of division one clubs and an extended club compettition consiting of divison two teams.

 

[Scott Allen]

Obviously you think $50k is in the ball park - i had assumed it would be more: that would be doable for some but not all as I perceive the solvency of the shute shield clubs.
A problem which would, therefore, need to be considered is maintaining a viable shute shield comp: there would be a tendency for any club in shute shield that was also in div 1 to attract the better player to their shute shield team as well.
do you see that as needing to be addressed or is that part of the acceptable division between good and not so good teams that you write of?

IS, I'm just guessing on the $50k number but I think some clubs could and would spend more than that to bolster their playing ranks to win the comp (particularly in Sydney). Is that a good or bad thing? My view is that a market based solution is going to improve our standard of rugby.

There will be very strong clubs who will always be in division one and that will mean the standard of that compettion will be very good, which ulimately creates a genuine third tier competition in this country.

There will be other clubs who say we're not going to devote the resources to try and compete, we'll stay in division two, earn some more dollars playing more homes games, maybe win some prize money in the division two competition and won't go broke trying to get into division one. Some smaller clubs will bring in an investor or joint venture with another club and aim to get into and compete in division one. That would create more competition and competition has a tendency to lift standards.

No club would be forced into deciding which way to go and their place in existing compettions isn't jeapordised either.

No losers in this, just decisions as to which way a club wants to go.

 

[Scott Allen]

Well I guess it depends what your priorities are and what you want the 3rd tier to achieve.

For me, consolidating the top players of club rugby into a significantly smaller competition is the only way to really improve the quality of 3rd tier rugby and subsequently improve the player depth.

Apologies I don't mean to be negative..

Not negative - I also think it would be ideal to have a significantly smaller competition.

However if the clubs won't support that, isn't it better to implement something rather than have a better solution on paper that no-one can implement.

I also think that the proposed division one will become the smaller third tier compettion over time.

 

[TOCC]

Not negative - I also think it would be ideal to have a significantly smaller competition.

However if the clubs won't support that, isn't it better to implement something rather than have a better solution on paper that no-one can implement.

I also think that the proposed division one will become the smaller third tier compettion over time.

Maybe the concept could eventually be sold as a 'promotion/relegation' type system..
Natural course will take place and the elite/wealthy clubs will rise to the top..

 

[Scott Allen]

Maybe the concept could eventually be sold as a 'promotion/relegation' type system..
Natural course will take place and the elite/wealthy clubs will rise to the top..

And that natural course would provide a smaller third tier competition that is probably needed.

However no club's position in existing club competitions would be lost and any club could change course at a any time and spend the money to develop their program and playing roster to aim for promotion or cut back in those areas and accept that they would face relegation.

No forced decisions, just let the market decide but keep the existing club competitions as they are so no club is any worse off than they are now.

 

[Richo]

And that natural course would provide a smaller third tier competition that is probably needed.

However no club's position in existing club competitions would be lost and any club could change course at a any time and spend the money to develop their program and playing roster to aim for promotion or cut back in those areas and accept that they would face relegation.

No forced decisions, just let the market decide but keep the existing club competitions as they are so no club is any worse off than they are now.

Agree with you about not waiting around for a perfect answer. Promotion/relegation could certainly evolve into the right kind of system. Finding a way to get the clubs to buy into any 3rd tier system is, as you say, essential. Your approach might solve that problem, as well as building in an extended transition period. IMO, it would be great to see something shift and -- given the lack of appetite for wholesale change -- a system like this could work.

Do you plan to send this material to the ARU? Or to some of the top clubs?