ARU moves to kill off club player payments: A 3rd tier, club rugby and the $60k persuader

[Quick Hands]

Great post D-Box! Really helpful (inside) information - always the best kind. Boy! Easy to see why the idea didn't stick around for too long.

UNSW, who were previously in Shute Shield have shown no signs that they are even interested in returning to that competition, let alone the next tier up. I think the universities proposal was a thought bubble from the Pulveriser.

Some may also have noted that UNSW were a sponsor of Randwick this year.

 

[It is what it is]

UNSW, who were previously in Shute Shield have shown no signs that they are even interested in returning to that competition, let alone the next tier up. I think the universities proposal was a thought bubble from the Pulveriser.

Some may also have noted that UNSW were a sponsor of Randwick this year.

The Universities proposal was developed well before Pulver was appointed. Are you absolutely sure of UNSW's intentions or just assuming/guessing?

 

[Quick Hands]

The Universities proposal was developed well before Pulver was appointed. Are you absolutely sure of UNSW's intentions or just assuming/guessing?

I assuming, on the basis that they have made no attempt in the past 30 years to return to Shute Shield that they wouldn't be interested in a competition higher than that. I think it's fair to assume that if they had designs in that regard, they'd be pushing for a return to SS first. I did speak to a guy who was involved out there (a few years ago admitedly). He basically said that they were happy playing where they were, it suited their student body and they weren't really interested going back into SS.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

And it hardly fits with sponsoring Randwick

 

[Hugh Jarse]

I think Quick Hands is referring to the UNSW Rugby Club and their happiness to stay in Subbies footy.

The sponsorship of the Wicks by the UNSW is a business/commercial decision taken by the Chancellor and Senate of the UNSW.

 

[Jets]

The University Comp idea was from RUPA. Greg Harris, current RUPA CEO, has a strong history with University sport from his time at Sydney Uni.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I think Quick Hands is referring to the UNSW Rugby Club and their happiness to stay in Subbies footy.

The sponsorship of the Wicks by the UNSW is a business/commercial decision taken by the Chancellor and Senate of the UNSW.

My information is that they wanted a JV but the Wicks turned them down

 

[Hugh Jarse]

^^^ Turning down a Joint venture with UNSW seems a little short sighted IMHO but not surprising knowing how proud some of those involved are.

I reckon that there would be some value in exploring the concept of Shute Shield district clubs taking control of all rugby within their geographic area, sort of like what I think Sub-unions do in New Zealand. This would mean that Juniors, Schools, and Subbies affiliate to their district, and there could be a much simpler flow of talent from shute shield and rep level to and from village park level.

The Shute Shield Sub-Unions would have specific development targets within their assigned area - such as fostering 7's and 15 aside rugby within public schools in their area through gala days and into Junior clubs, running academy programmes in support of Junior Gold Cup, coach and match official education programmes, scrum clinics, women's rugby.

....And then I woke up and had a coffee.

 

[suckerforred]

We still seems to be discussing how we turn Shute Shield into the fabled 3rd Tier. I think that it needs to be seperate.

Shute Shield, Premier Rugby, Dent Cup, and whatever the other comps are called to be run, and completed while Super Rugby home & away season is running.

From there I see two options -

1. A truely representative comp where the players are selected from geographical areas into about 8 sides nationally. Perhaps currently will have WA, Vic, ACT, SA&NT, Country QLD, Country NSW, City NSW, & City QLD.
The super players should be 'encouraged' to play in the sides that represent their 'heritage'. E.g. Godwin - WA, Beau Robinson - Country NSW, Taps - Victoria. No you can't force them but players at that level should be open to some sort of encouragement from the powers that be.

2. Go down the path that others have proposed as then taking the top club from Melbourne, ACT & Perth into a comp with the top 3/2 from Sydney & Brisbane. Perhaps there could be some sort of 'relegation' playoff between 3rd in Sydney & 3rd in Brisbane to see who gets to have 3 teams in the comp.

No matter which options there will be teams that are going to get flogged for at least the first few years. But this has to be a long term view. When kids see they have a pathway for higher honors and a mechanism for being for being seen by Super Clubs they will start playing rugby in their local area and things will improve. It won't happen overnight but it will happen.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

We still seems to be discussing how we turn Shute Shield into the fabled 3rd Tier. I think that it needs to be seperate.

Shute Shield, Premier Rugby, Dent Cup, and whatever the other comps are called to be run, and completed while Super Rugby home & away season is running.

From there I see two options -

1. A truely representative comp where the players are selected from geographical areas into about 8 sides nationally. Perhaps currently will have WA, Vic, ACT, SA&NT, Country QLD, Country NSW, City NSW, & City QLD.
The super players should be 'encouraged' to play in the sides that represent their 'heritage'. E.g. Godwin - WA, Beau Robinson - Country NSW, Taps - Victoria. No you can't force them but players at that level should be open to some sort of encouragement from the powers that be.

2. Go down the path that others have proposed as then taking the top club from Melbourne, ACT & Perth into a comp with the top 3/2 from Sydney & Brisbane. Perhaps there could be some sort of 'relegation' playoff between 3rd in Sydney & 3rd in Brisbane to see who gets to have 3 teams in the comp.

No matter which options there will be teams that are going to get flogged for at least the first few years. But this has to be a long term view. When kids see they have a pathway for higher honors and a mechanism for being for being seen by Super Clubs they will start playing rugby in their local area and things will improve. It won't happen overnight but it will happen.

I'd prefer the representative model. However, I doubt the country teams would be viable when considering the distances required to be travelled in order to train and compete for players. Same for SA and the NT. A combined team would be unworkable in that regard.

The best way of approaching it would be to either 1) Split Sydney into two or three 'regions' and similar for Brisbane or 2) look to involve the likes of the Illawarra and Newcastle/Hunter alongside a Sydney squad.

 

[wamberal]

FWIW, not much probably, we used to play North Harbour vs South Harbour firsts and seconds, back in the dim dark distant past. These games were a precursor to the Sydney vs Country match, which was always a very competitive game. I suppose the changes in rural employment have put paid to that, no more jackeroos and the like. Rich graziers sons playing rugby for a few years before taking over the spread.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

FWIW, not much probably, we used to play North Harbour vs South Harbour firsts and seconds, back in the dim dark distant past. These games were a precursor to the Sydney vs Country match, which was always a very competitive game. I suppose the changes in rural employment have put paid to that, no more jackeroos and the like. Rich graziers sons playing rugby for a few years before taking over the spread.

I don't see any reason why they couldn't resurrect that concept to form teams in some sort of representative national competition. North Harbour/South Harbour and Newcastle/Hunter (being the strongest Country Union).

 

[suckerforred]

I'd prefer the representative model. However, I doubt the country teams would be viable when considering the distances required to be travelled in order to train and compete for players. Same for SA and the NT. A combined team would be unworkable in that regard.

The best way of approaching it would be to either 1) Split Sydney into two or three 'regions' and similar for Brisbane or 2) look to involve the likes of the Illawarra and Newcastle/Hunter alongside a Sydney squad.

You might be right and maybe the regions can be different. But if this is going to be run as a 'professional' thing - i.e. the palayers are paid to play & it is funded properly - then hopefully the tyreny of distance will be over come with being able to get teams together for the 2-3 weeks leading up to the start of the competition.

The other option is have the acadamy/eps players of the Super Rugby franchises all stay together and those play as a team. So you will have, for example, the Baby Reds plus a rep side from Brisbane. But this is going to mean even more lopsided games.

We need to stop being so Sydney/Brisbane/Insert-larger-centre-here if we are going to grow the game. There are players, young & old, in the regions that give up because they do not get a chance and can't see a pathway. At best they give up playing any sport, at worst they end up in league or AFL because those codes make the effort to broarden the appeal & availability.

Not saying it is a perfect plan but we have to start some where.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

^^^ Turning down a Joint venture with UNSW seems a little short sighted IMHO but not surprising knowing how proud some of those involved are.

I reckon that there would be some value in exploring the concept of Shute Shield district clubs taking control of all rugby within their geographic area, sort of like what I think Sub-unions do in New Zealand. This would mean that Juniors, Schools, and Subbies affiliate to their district, and there could be a much simpler flow of talent from shute shield and rep level to and from village park level.

The Shute Shield Sub-Unions would have specific development targets within their assigned area - such as fostering 7's and 15 aside rugby within public schools in their area through gala days and into Junior clubs, running academy programmes in support of Junior Gold Cup, coach and match official education programmes, scrum clinics, women's rugby.

..And then I woke up and had a coffee.

That would actually be a interesting exercise. I wonder how many of the current clubs would be interested in forming their own 'Unions' in aid of autonomy and development within their allotted districts.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

We need to stop being so Sydney/Brisbane/Insert-larger-centre-here if we are going to grow the game.

I have great sympathy for this view.
The ARU want to be very careful that in pursuiing this aim (if it is their aim) they do not harm their current major source of players.
The issues that need to be resolved would take in the order of 5 to 10 years to resolve if they were approached systematically and with the primary goal of first doing no harm to the game.
The ARU, however, is pursuing a solution in the very short term.

 

[Quick Hands]

I have great sympathy for this view.
The ARU want to be very careful that in pursuiing this aim (if it is their aim) they do not harm their current major source of players.
The issues that need to be resolved would take in the order of 5 to 10 years to resolve if they were approached systematically and with the primary goal of first doing no harm to the game.
The ARU, however, is pursuing a solution in the very short term.

We've waited this long, I'm with you, I'd much rather hasten slowly and get this right.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

You might be right and maybe the regions can be different. But if this is going to be run as a 'professional' thing - i.e. the palayers are paid to play & it is funded properly - then hopefully the tyreny of distance will be over come with being able to get teams together for the 2-3 weeks leading up to the start of the competition.

The other option is have the acadamy/eps players of the Super Rugby franchises all stay together and those play as a team. So you will have, for example, the Baby Reds plus a rep side from Brisbane. But this is going to mean even more lopsided games.

We need to stop being so Sydney/Brisbane/Insert-larger-centre-here if we are going to grow the game. There are players, young & old, in the regions that give up because they do not get a chance and can't see a pathway. At best they give up playing any sport, at worst they end up in league or AFL because those codes make the effort to broarden the appeal & availability.

Not saying it is a perfect plan but we have to start some where.

At first the objective should be to just get the thing up and running. The next objective should be to ensure that each team are as competitive as possible. What will secure its success would be to take care of both of those issues first and then begin to worry about reaching out to other areas. I will also note that taking what Wamberal posted, they could resurrect the North/South Harbour concept and the best country region (Newcastle/Hunter) to compete. This would provide players in both the city and country with a pretty clear pathway in both respects.

You mention the AFL and NRL. Outside of the main centres in both NSW (we'll include Canberra for these purposes) Qld and Melbourne the
NRL only has teams in Newcastle (400,000+) and Townsville (200,000) people. Hardly small regional centres.

For blokes from the bush they have to move for the opportunity to compete in the NRL and similar the AFL. This would be the same in any proposed National Comp in Rugby. The making the concept more appealing and available would be to improve the level of its expose which will be the big issue.

 

[Quick Hands]

At first the objective should be to just get the thing up and running. The next objective should be to ensure that each team are as competitive as possible. What will secure its success would be to take care of both of those issues first and then begin to worry about reaching out to other areas. I will also note that taking what Wamberal posted, they could resurrect the North/South Harbour concept and the best country region (Newcastle/Hunter) to compete. This would provide players in both the city and country with a pretty clear pathway in both respects.

You mention the AFL and NRL. Outside of the main centres in both NSW (we'll include Canberra for these purposes) Qld and Melbourne the
NRL only has teams in Newcastle (400,000+) and Townsville (200,000) people. Hardly small regional centres.

For blokes from the bush they have to move for the opportunity to compete in the NRL and similar the AFL. This would be the same in any proposed National Comp in Rugby. The making the concept more appealing and available would be to improve the level of its expose which will be the big issue.

Only problem with "just get the thing up and running" is that if it's not done correctly, it will just collapse like the ARC and take a bucket load of money with it. Rugby doesn't have the money to sustain losses like the other football codes can. That money is then not available to be spent on junior development, expansion etc.

We're constantly told that the reason the ARU is not doing something is because they don't have the cash. Nothing can be implemented unless it is financially viable.

Time also needs to be spent canvassing the pros and cons of the many different versions circulating. On this thread alone we have regional rep teams, stand alone club teams, amalgamated club teams, qualification through current state competition, country teams, capital city teams, university based teams, start from scratch franchises and on and on it goes. No-one really knows what the best option is, because no-one in authority has taken the time to research the thing thoroughly - which includes at the very least asking the leading clubs how they think they could participate and seeing how existing resources and infrastructure can be used.

Whilst I believe that a 3rd tier is desirable, I don't believe that it is some sort of holy grail which needs to be persued whatever the cost.

 

[It is what it is]

We've waited this long, I'm with you, I'd much rather hasten slowly and get this right.

Cautious haste?

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Only problem with "just get the thing up and running" is that if it's not done correctly, it will just collapse like the ARC and take a bucket load of money with it. Rugby doesn't have the money to sustain losses like the other football codes can. That money is then not available to be spent on junior development, expansion etc.

We're constantly told that the reason the ARU is not doing something is because they don't have the cash. Nothing can be implemented unless it is financially viable.

Time also needs to be spent canvassing the pros and cons of the many different versions circulating. On this thread alone we have regional rep teams, stand alone club teams, amalgamated club teams, qualification through current state competition, country teams, capital city teams, university based teams, start from scratch franchises and on and on it goes. No-one really knows what the best option is, because no-one in authority has taken the time to research the thing thoroughly - which includes at the very least asking the leading clubs how they think they could participate and seeing how existing resources and infrastructure can be used.

Whilst I believe that a 3rd tier is desirable, I don't believe that it is some sort of holy grail which needs to be persued whatever the cost.

Of course. I didn't mean to just throw it together without the appropriate degree of planning and preparation. What I meant was after the undertaking of all those elements to get it up and running.

I differ in that I don't necessarily think its desirable but essential to ensure our continued competitiveness both at Super Rugby and Test levels. It's a proven format. Though I do agree, it must be done properly to ensure that it doesn't end up a financial burden like the ARC did.