A Proposal For A New Third Tier Competition In Australia

[Sully]

We have a third tier. We call it the Shute Shield and the Brisbane Premier League.

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk HD

 

[Dave Beat]

With Super starting in Feb, are you p reposing the third tier start in Dec/ Jan? I thinking the Shute Shield could become the 3rd tier, with the top 4 club comp following.
Maybe start the SS in Feb as well and play full home and away.

 

[p.Tah]

We have a third tier. We call it the Shute Shield and the Brisbane Premier League.

A true 3rd tier can't have 22 teams. Our current third tier has more teams than the ITM and Currie Cups combined.

 

[p.Tah]

With Super starting in Feb, are you p reposing the third tier start in Dec/ Jan?

No just running alongside Super Rugby. Folau wouldn't have played Super Rugby last night he'd have played in the curtain raiser.

 

[Dave Beat]

No just running alongside Super Rugby. Folau wouldn't have played Super Rugby last night he'd have played in the curtain raiser.

I wonder why the ITM cup doesn't run next to Super Rugby - running alongside would be stupid. After all aren't we trying to work / compare towards other successful 3t models.
You say a true third tier can't have 22 teams, if the top 4 was post Super, and post SS it might be 8 - 10 teams.

 

[Sully]

A true 3rd tier can't have 22 teams. Our current third tier has more teams than the ITM and Currie Cups combined.

What a weak argument. The clubs are already established so just use what's there.

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk HD

 

[Scott Allen]

Regardless of the merits of any of these arguments it seems clear that we are going to have four tiers.

Servo made his preference clear for each Super Rugby franchise to have an academy that will play against each other as the third tier. Club rugby will be the fourth tier.

He took this model to the ARU board meeting last week - I doubt he would have talked about it before the board meeting if he hadn't already got support for this plan.

 

[No4918]

Do they keep playing after the the Super Rugby season? Are players not required for wallaby duty staying in the acadamy sides robbing the usuals of there positions and clubs of there stars?

 

[Scott Allen]

Do they keep playing after the the Super Rugby season? Are players not required for wallaby duty staying in the acadamy sides robbing the usuals of there positions and clubs of there stars?

He didn't reveal any detail at that level - just said that was his preference and I've heard he's also told the super franchises that's what he wants in meetings he had with them before taking the proposal to the board.

Can't see why the franchises wouldn't have told him that they support the idea as if it goes ahead it would mean they'd get their academy funding that was taken away two years ago.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

This weekend highlighted again why we need a third tier.
- Folau is very talented but should be given more time before being thrust into Super Rugby. Based on this weeks game he would have benefitted from more game time with less pressure. We don't have a third tier so he has to play Super Rugby.
- the Kings, who many Saffas believe are the 7th best team in SA after Griquas beat the Force. The Kings have been playing in the SA third tier for a while.

Except that even if he was a kiwi there would be no club and no NPC prior to s15 so it would make no difference

 

[p.Tah]

What a weak argument. The clubs are already established so just use what's there.

Having players spread across 22 teams is a Weak argument? I have to disagree, sorry. If it was a sound structure for a true third tier we'd have great depth across the Super Rugby sides. Looking at some of the acquisitions of the Rebels and the Force I'd say that the SS and Brisbane PL aren't developing the players to Super Rugby standard. That's not a criticism of the clubs it's the fact the top of the top premier rugby players are scattered across the comp. A development league needs all these players in 8-10 teams so the talent is concentrated. The best are playing with and against the best.

I also believe that picking the top 4 or so teams from each of the premier competition will be detrimental to club rugby across the cities in the long run.

I am a huge supporter of club rugby because of the connection to the community. However I don't believe it maximises the community connection as much as it could. If it capitalises on this it will maintain its importance and relevance to Australian rugby.

Wallabies, Super rugby and the academies can be the professional razzle dazzle made for TV 'products'. Club rugby is the community that embraces those outside the rugby family and brings them it. I have a number of second generation Australian friends who are mad AFL fans. When their families came to Australia they knew no-one, but they found friends at the local footy club in Adelaide and Melbourne. They didn't play the game themselves but they went to the club houses and became one of the community.

That is what the Sydney and Brisbane clubs need to continue to foster further. Rather than trying to position themselves as the Super Rugby development League. This is not that appealing to spectators. what is appealing is developing and feeling part of the community. The clubs need to be the place the community goes to meet and an enjoyable rugby game or two also happens to be played. I don't mean a couple of old ex-players hanging around a bar. It needs to be a big inclusive family day.

One major appeal of the NRL is the connection to the suburbs such as Leichart Oval. The NRL wants to ditch these venues for more centralised games as part of a 4 stadium strategy in Sydney. This is rugby's opportunity to step up and be the community game. The game that is played in or near your suburb. To achieve this we need teams across the cities.

I hear that in some SS suburbs people don't even know they have a premier rugby team. That is what Club Rugby needs to rectify. A third tier of promoted Premier rugby teams teams won't achieve that either. In fact it may splinter the chance to develop the community connection.

 

[Dave Beat]

Regardless of the merits of any of these arguments it seems clear that we are going to have four tiers.

Servo made his preference clear for each Super Rugby franchise to have an academy that will play against each other as the third tier. Club rugby will be the fourth tier.

He took this model to the ARU board meeting last week - I doubt he would have talked about it before the board meeting if he hadn't already got support for this plan.

Please NO!!!

 

[Sully]

Pretty certain Scott has the good oil.

 

[Dave Beat]

Sully, I know.
It just means quality players are taken away from games a family can afford to attend. If these games are played as curtain raisers, they won't even be shown on Foxtel.

 

[p.Tah]

It just means quality players are taken away from games a family can afford to attend.

Dave a family of four can get a Tahs 2 game membership for $95. That's less than $50/game. I don't know what everyone's finances are but I thought was quite reasonable. If there are curtain raisers that's actually 4 games.

 

[Dave Beat]

Dave a family of four can get a Tahs 2 game membership for $95. That's less than $50/game. I don't know what everyone's finances are but I thought was quite reasonable. If there are curtain raisers that's actually 4 games.

I have a boy @ 5, and a daughter @ 7, who have a great time on a Saturday arvo. I'm not going to hike into town, or Homebush, I will spend more time watching them than the game, then hike back to the car to be home after 10. I will simply watch it on Fox.
In the old days, there was cricket in the nets, touch up at the oval, now it seems to be TV, Nintendo, and all sorts of things to keep the kids from being active.

 

[No4918]

Any thoughts on the proposal put forward by Servo?

Not a fan of many aspects. 60 mins a game? New rules supposedly without IRB approval? Huh?

 

[p.Tah]

Any thoughts on the proposal put forward by Servo?

Not a fan of many aspects. 60 mins a game? New rules supposedly without IRB approval? Huh?

Where has this been reported?

Edit: just saw it on the G&GR front page

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Just watched and I have the feeling that it will end up being a bit half arsed to be brutally honest. I want it to work, I want to believe it will, but, I just cannot see Pulvers concept really generating any real interest be it from fans, sponsors or broadcasters.

The only way it might work is if they create its own window (allowing players to play for their clubs) and look to the likes of NSW and QLD to field a second side each. Either that or somehow convince their NZ equivalents that its a good idea and get them on board.

 

[en_force_er]

I think the academy based model is a poor one because it runs into the same problem as the ARC, for 3 of the teams you have to get a shit load of tradies, students, businessmen, etc. and move them to a different city for a 1 or 2 months spell (i.e. Melb/Perth). That's expensive and difficult to rationalise.

I think a similar but better system would be for ACT, Vic, and WA to run Super rugby Academy sides with fringe Super Rugby players (EPS + blokes who usually miss out on the 22), some of the better locals, and a hand full of willing Qld/NSW club players. At the same time NSW and Qld would field 2-3 rep teams each. I'd say for NSW the teams would be Sydney City, Western Sydney, and NSW Country Gold (a squad that already plays once a year consisting mostly of country players playing in the Shute Shield, and some who are willing to take time away from their lives in country NSW for the duration of the tournament).

Does this system lack tribalism? Yes, I suppose. But it's realistic and provides a fair pathway. Tasman in NZ's ITM Cup is a new province who has not traditionally existed but the fans accepted them, I think fans would accept the system above.

Remember, this league is about development of players/coaches. Everything else is 2nd priority.