And so the obsession with the "third tier" strikes again.
When will they learn? Remember the Ricoh Cup? Or the Australian Rugby Championships, full of made-up teams no-one cared about (was it the West Sydney Rams? No-one knows. No-one cares)?
The difficulty with the third tier is that it's totally artificial. Right or wrong, the Rugby supporter base is club-based. Look, I'm going to be overseas on Saturday, but you can bet I'll be checking my phone every few minutes to get Grand Final updates. But I wouldn't cross the road to watch the South Sydney Shireboys play the Perth Quokkas.
So, where are the players for this competition going to come from? Mostly, they will be the Super Rugby leftovers after the international season starts. So, how exactly will we improve the standard of Austraian Rugby by having the same bunch of players ending their Super seasons and then facing each other again in a less intense, less serious competition?
Yes, I know, they do that now - they go back to Shute Shield, or wherever. But that's important. Because there they carry out a really important function. Look, let's say you're a young back playing for Southern District (by way of example - I don't have any specific guy in mind). And you do well in the juniors, and you're a star in Colts, so you go into First Grade never having played against anyone older than you. And then you hit a Sydney University team full of Super 15 backs. I suspect you learn a thing or two that afternoon. And when you get ready to press for a Super Rugby contract, you have a better idea of what's required, because you've seen it at first hand. That's why it's a good thing tha these guys go back to their clubs - they strengthen the base of the game.
Now, the ARU proposal does the opposite - it turns the Shute Shield into the Kentwell Cup. And the problem with that is that, over time, clubs will wither and die. Why put all that effort into developing young players just so they can turn 21 and never see you again?
Australian Rugby has three tiers: international, provincial and club. Instead of futzing around looking for another tier that no-one wants, the better option would be to devote resources to club Rugby to make it better and stronger.
Have you watched the ITM Cup on TV this season? The standard isn't frighteningly good. Eastwood would come close to winning it, I'd reckon. Shute Shield could be a fantastic competition if it had just a few more competitive clubs. Now, addressing that issue would be an ARL initiative I'd support.
Oh, and by the way, if you're not convinced, have a look at cricket. Thirty years ago, Test players turned out in about one third of the Grade games. What that meant was that you didn't progress to the next level until you'd done well against the Waughs or made runs against Geoff Lawson or Mike Whitney. It was a great system for developing young talent. Now the average age of most First Grade sides is about 22, and they never see a Test player until they play a Test match, when they freeze like rabbits in the headlights. It has been a disaster for cricket, removing representative players almost entirely from the base of the pyramid - not a model for Rugby to emulate.
