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

[Dave Beat]

Can't find @BeastieBoy comment that QH just referred to.

BeastieBoy I have a soft spot for the Beasts as my old man played in one of the Beasts teams that won all grades, (or had all grades in the finals) 30 + something year ago. They had their reunion about 2 or 3 years ago and it was a great day - It is also a great example as to the reason why the SS clubs should not be ignored. When I say - I'll elaborate that is why the ARU should not ignore them, but support them.

But in saying that, I do think now is the right time to create the 3T and the clubs that are ready should / could lay the foundations so others could develop or it could evolve into joint venture type models.

 

[TOCC]

Why the desperate need to have a 3T for 2014?
The ARU cannot afford to fuck this up.
Do the research,workshops etc that takes time,so that we get something that will add to the Rugby landscape,and not be detrimental to the game.

Because there are so many self-involved people involved in rugby union both at 'grassroot' level and the professional level who are unwilling to make sacrafices for the greater good of the game.. You can have workshop after workshop but at the end of the day there is no one solution that will appease everyone as there are too many people looking out for their own interests, ultimately a decision needs to be made..

A decision by the ARU which is largely opposed by NSW club rugby, a byproduct of the ARU Governance review which removed the NSWRU boycott powers perhaps?

 

[Dave Beat]

Forgive the defensiveness of my comment but WTF.

There are 30 Senior Suburban Clubs in Sydney fielding between 3 and 6 grades each plus another 20 or so fielding between 1 and 3 teams. The sheer arrogance of your comment shows why the SS is falling apart. As part of one of those many Clubs and involved in one of Sydney's largest Junior Clubs I can categorically state the the District SS Club contributes between Buckleys and Sweet FA that is not driven by self interest. So please don't spout crap like "Where is the community base" when the SS has deliberately ignored it for years.

These Clubs will happily go on quite nicely without the SS and wil most likely thrive as the SS collapses under its own arrogance and players move to Subbies for a game.

I don't like this latest bout of cerebral flatulance coming out of St Leonard's but as long as those in the SS believe the universe will end without them, the quicker they will force the ARU's hand to screw them over.

Thinking I know what grass roots team your talking about - I'm not that surprised. Hoping it changes going forward for you.

 

[Rugby Central]

Just an observation, it's interesting how everyone seems to be saying that whatever shape the 3T takes, it has to involve the Super Rugby players. So what your saying is we should make those professional players play more rugby and limit the opportunities for players coming through the Clubs. This develops player depth how?

Using the Super Rugby Clubs means that the 2nd teir is also the 3rd tier and theres little space for players outside the system. That's just perpetuating the current situation. Not to mention the more games these guys play, the less money there is for developing other players. And lets not forget injuries. I'm sure the Franchises would see the benefit in flogging their players for a few more matches in a lower competition...not

Do I have all the answers, don't know. But I have submitted a national structure to what limited contacts I have that includes nearly every senior Club in the major metroplitan centres across Australia, showing a clear pathway from the Jabiru Bushratz (Darwin) to the Wallabies. There is a pathway for regional players, though the detail is less due to lack of knowledge, experience and information on my part. Interestingly, I also believe it can be done for less than the ARU spent on it's HPU and community funding. (2012 Financial Statements)

I most definitely don't know it all but unless everyone from the bottom up is included, then nobody is going to be interested.

By the way there is one naive hole in my submission. I have assumed that players are willing to work hard and prove they have earned the right to play at a higher level. Probably never get off the ground.

 

[I like to watch]

Because there are so many self-involved people involved in rugby union both at 'grassroot' level and the professional level who are unwilling to make sacrafices for the greater good of the game.. You can have workshop after workshop but at the end of the day there is no one solution that will appease everyone as there are too many people looking out for their own interests, ultimately a decision needs to be made..

A decision by the ARU which is largely opposed by NSW club rugby, a byproduct of the ARU Governance review which removed the NSWRU boycott powers perhaps?

I agree with much that you raise.
I believe that the ARU would best serve our interests by making a decision based upon knowing all the facts first.
It's one thing to decide on a course of action because you believe the advantages outweigh the negatives.Its another thing to make these decision without knowing or considering the negatives.
Bear in mind the ARU presented an option to the clubs which involved them playing on grounds that are otherwise utilised (cricket).
I think that demonstrates the depth of thinking and research the ARU have invested in this issue to date.

 

[It is what it is]

My concern is that the ARU will make its 3T decision based primarily on its own poor financial predicament.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

As part of one of those many Clubs and involved in one of Sydney's largest Junior Clubs I can categorically state the the District SS Club contributes between Buckleys and Sweet FA that is not driven by self interest.

So that would be a junior club somewhere between Parramatta Campbelltown Windsor and Penrith would it?

 

[Braveheart81]

Just an observation, it's interesting how everyone seems to be saying that whatever shape the 3T takes, it has to involve the Super Rugby players. So what your saying is we should make those professional players play more rugby and limit the opportunities for players coming through the Clubs. This develops player depth how?

Using the Super Rugby Clubs means that the 2nd teir is also the 3rd tier and theres little space for players outside the system. That's just perpetuating the current situation. Not to mention the more games these guys play, the less money there is for developing other players. And lets not forget injuries. I'm sure the Franchises would see the benefit in flogging their players for a few more matches in a lower competition.not

I think the general expectation is that a third tier competition happens after Super Rugby during the test rugby season so that it involves the lower half of the Super Rugby players but not the test players (much the same as the ITM Cup or Currie Cup).

You'd then combine those players with the top echelon of Shute Shield/Premier Rugby players to create a competition that has all the quality players that are on show at the back end of the club rugby competitions but with less than half the total number of players/teams so the standard is much higher.

 

[Dave Beat]

Just an observation, it's interesting how everyone seems to be saying that whatever shape the 3T takes, it has to involve the Super Rugby players. So what your saying is we should make those professional players play more rugby and limit the opportunities for players coming through the Clubs. This develops player depth how?
Yes I think they should be playing rugby.
No I don't think it would limit player development, the clubs / entities with the 3T licence would have their 2nd grade players stepping up to challenge themselves in first grade.
And in my suggested model it would have the Force, Rebs, Brumbies would have their club players stepping up to play and develop in 3T.

Using the Super Rugby Clubs means that the 2nd teir is also the 3rd tier and theres little space for players outside the system. That's just perpetuating the current situation. Not to mention the more games these guys play, the less money there is for developing other players. And lets not forget injuries. I'm sure the Franchises would see the benefit in flogging their players for a few more matches in a lower competition.
Lost me with the 2nd / 3rd at the start. In the NRL they view the club comp at the marketable tier, and promote off that. Plus some of the returning players have not had got good game time - I.e. Jordy Ried, Eddie O, to name just 2. That said I'm only providing ideas,

Do I have all the answers, don't know. But I have submitted a national structure to what limited contacts I have that includes nearly every senior Club in the major metroplitan centres across Australia, showing a clear pathway from the Jabiru Bushratz (Darwin) to the Wallabies. There is a pathway for regional players, though the detail is less due to lack of knowledge, experience and information on my part. Interestingly, I also believe it can be done for less than the ARU spent on it's HPU and community funding. (2012 Financial Statements).
It was well thought out, and provided a good read - did you get a response?

What I have ended up with is a model that has the successful clubs going onto the next step, and the Super Franchises also being able to develop their locals in a rep team.
I opted for this because the ARU isn't that financial and has us fighting with the cricketers for playing strips.

 

[Quick Hands]

I honestly believe that the best thing that the ARU could do would be to set a commencement date of 2015, spend the next 12 months working out the best way forward and then 6 months puytting things in place.

As I said before, if it's done properly no-one needs to be destroyed.

A couple of points:
While giving the 4 strongest SS clubs a licence sounds appealing at first glance, it also alienates 8 other clubs.

Playing the team at a existing home ground has a similar impact.

If the ARU stopped to think for a moment they might find that they could use existing resources far better than the have/have nots proposal.

Ideally you cover the whole of the Sydney area with your 4 teams and realistically there's only one club that can stand alone.

There's also an idea out of the old VFL that could be used. All of their clubs are inner city, so rather than rationalise, they allocated outer suburban areas to clubs. Again, only 1 SS club could do this, but the others could come together in geographically aligned franchises.

A team based in Sydney's south east based on Easts, Randwick and Southern D. Play at a central ground (not Woollahra, Coogee or Forshaw) David Phillips, Kogarah or other. Sydney Beaches?

A team based in Sydney's north based on Manly, Warringah, Gordon and Norths. Play at Brookvale Oval or other ground (not Manly, NSO, Chatswood or Rat Park) Northern Sydney somethings?

A team based in Sydney's north west based on Eastwood, Parra, Penrith and WH. Play at Parramatta Stadium. Western Sydney Rams?

A team run by Sydney Uni & given responsibility for everything south west from Camberdown to Cambelltown. Suggest they call themselves Sydney United or something not Sydney University. Play at a rectangular ground in that area - Belmore Sports Ground? (Canterbury Juniors are already affiliated to Syd Uni)

Everone feels that they have some ownership of the entities, no-one feels that their neighbours are trying to put them out of business.

Just a thought.

Remember, we don't need to destroy anything or anyone.

If you don't have the money, you have to be smart.

Your costs are the same no matter what the team is called or where it's based, but your opportunities for revenue go up the more exposure that you have.

 

[Spieber]

So that would be a junior club somewhere between Parramatta Campbelltown Windsor and Penrith would it?

He could well be referring to area, in which case the sole junior club servicing the above four mentioned locales would indeed be the largest in Sydney, although I think he is referring to one nearer my back door.

 

[Dave Beat]

He could well be referring to area, in which case the sole junior club servicing the above four mentioned locales would indeed be the largest in Sydney, although I think he is referring to one nearer my back door.

I think you would be warmer than warm.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I honestly believe that the best thing that the ARU could do would be to set a commencement date of 2015, spend the next 12 months working out the best way forward and then 6 months puytting things in place.

As I said before, if it's done properly no-one needs to be destroyed.

A couple of points:
While giving the 4 strongest SS clubs a licence sounds appealing at first glance, it also alienates 8 other clubs.

Playing the team at a existing home ground has a similar impact.

If the ARU stopped to think for a moment they might find that they could use existing resources far better than the have/have nots proposal.

Ideally you cover the whole of the Sydney area with your 4 teams and realistically there's only one club that can stand alone.

There's also an idea out of the old VFL that could be used. All of their clubs are inner city, so rather than rationalise, they allocated outer suburban areas to clubs. Again, only 1 SS club could do this, but the others could come together in geographically aligned franchises.

A team based in Sydney's south east based on Easts, Randwick and Southern D. Play at a central ground (not Woollahra, Coogee or Forshaw) David Phillips, Kogarah or other. Sydney Beaches?

A team based in Sydney's north based on Manly, Warringah, Gordon and Norths. Play at Brookvale Oval or other ground (not Manly, NSO, Chatswood or Rat Park) Northern Sydney somethings?

A team based in Sydney's north west based on Eastwood, Parra, Penrith and WH. Play at Parramatta Stadium. Western Sydney Rams?

A team run by Sydney Uni & given responsibility for everything south west from Camberdown to Cambelltown. Suggest they call themselves Sydney United or something not Sydney University. Play at a rectangular ground in that area - Belmore Sports Ground? (Canterbury Juniors are already affiliated to Syd Uni)

Everone feels that they have some ownership of the entities, no-one feels that their neighbours are trying to put them out of business.

Just a thought.

Remember, we don't need to destroy anything or anyone.

If you don't have the money, you have to be smart.

Your costs are the same no matter what the team is called or where it's based, but your opportunities for revenue go up the more exposure that you have.

That's the exact model that I would prefer. It would be easier financially speaking for clubs and likely produce a much better standard of play if there was a concerted effort to in effect chase the regional Rep model.

The Sydney Uni idea is an interesting one. Especially the idea of linking with the Campbelltown region. In terms of juniors is not actually a bad idea. The Harlequins from what I've been told had over 200 kids on their books this season and Camden has juniors that with enough investment could grow well into the future when you take into account all the residential growth occurring out this way. Given the choice, aligning with Uni would be an attractive proposition.

 

[Hawko]

There is some real consensus developing in this thread with I think one issue that is dividing the contributors:

Do you go with the top four Shute teams or do you create separate franchises?​

​

Can I suggest that if we went with a hybrid model by adding just one team to the mix we might cover both to the betterment of all:

• A western Sydney team made up from the best of Penrith, West Harbour and Parramatta. Call them the Rugby Wanderers and hopefully align them with the A-League team and share facilities/grounds. They would probably be the bottom team for the first year or two but with SRU help they could grow and could become the western presence that rugby needs. Penrith, West Harbour and Parramatta would lose roughly five players each from Shute played on Saturday - maybe less if the SRU guided some good Islander heritage players their way.
• A Manly team based at ?where but allowed to draft three players each from Warringah and Norths.
• A Sydney Uni team. I would expect that the Uni two's playing on Saturday would still be very competitive in Shute Shield as the non-test Super players came back to join the third tier team. Would have to play at the Canterbury RL ground, which would require some political muscle to prise the Bulldogs to share. Uni no 1 is required for cricket.
• An Eastwood team based around Millner facilities but allowed to draft three players from Gordon.
• A Southern Districts team based at Forshaw Park but allowed to draft three players from each of Easts and Randwick.

Shute plays Saturday, Third tier Sunday, bench players for 3rd tier to be chosen from Saturday players (this emphasises the pathways). Shute would still be competitive and viable under this model, but perhaps a little more even.
If we are going to get this going in 2014 I think that the five Sydney team model be announced with Wanderers coming into the comp in 2015. To keep the QLDers happy you'd probably have to give them another team in 2015. I don't know Brisbane well but I assume you could organise their three best club teams for 2014 in a similar way and hoover up the outliers for a fourth team in 2015.

The biggest concern I have is with costs. Everyone in the comp has to understand that this is a no-frills environment. Melbourne and Brisbane are one night's accomodation, taking the flight home on Sunday night. Canberra is a coach trip from Sydney and a plane ticket to Brisbane and Melbourne. Everyone going to or from Perth takes the red-eye Sunday night. Accomodation has to be shared rooms, basic facilities and meals. My back-of-the envelope figuring is around $400,000 in total before a four team knockout finals series. That's a lot of coin before you've paid the players one single dollar to play with club expenses (equipment, jerseys etc.) on top of that. But if the ARU pays the t&a expenses, minimal game fees ($200 per game) and the ground fees (say a total of $1M) and the clubs the other costs its doable. If some club wants to pay star players more then they can, but the ARU costs would be limited to the $1M. The ARU would have to audit the clubs to ensure they did not overspend their income.

 

[BellyTwoBlues]

That's the exact model that I would prefer. It would be easier financially speaking for clubs and likely produce a much better standard of play if there was a concerted effort to in effect chase the regional Rep model.

The Sydney Uni idea is an interesting one. Especially the idea of linking with the Campbelltown region. In terms of juniors is not actually a bad idea. The Harlequins from what I've been told had over 200 kids on their books this season and Camden has juniors that with enough investment could grow well into the future when you take into account all the residential growth occurring out this way. Given the choice, aligning with Uni would be an attractive proposition.

Hardly a surprising comment that one

 

[BellyTwoBlues]

I honestly believe that the best thing that the ARU could do would be to set a commencement date of 2015, spend the next 12 months working out the best way forward and then 6 months puytting things in place.

As I said before, if it's done properly no-one needs to be destroyed.

A couple of points:
While giving the 4 strongest SS clubs a licence sounds appealing at first glance, it also alienates 8 other clubs.

Playing the team at a existing home ground has a similar impact.

If the ARU stopped to think for a moment they might find that they could use existing resources far better than the have/have nots proposal.

Ideally you cover the whole of the Sydney area with your 4 teams and realistically there's only one club that can stand alone.

There's also an idea out of the old VFL that could be used. All of their clubs are inner city, so rather than rationalise, they allocated outer suburban areas to clubs. Again, only 1 SS club could do this, but the others could come together in geographically aligned franchises.

A team based in Sydney's south east based on Easts, Randwick and Southern D. Play at a central ground (not Woollahra, Coogee or Forshaw) David Phillips, Kogarah or other. Sydney Beaches?

A team based in Sydney's north based on Manly, Warringah, Gordon and Norths. Play at Brookvale Oval or other ground (not Manly, NSO, Chatswood or Rat Park) Northern Sydney somethings?

A team based in Sydney's north west based on Eastwood, Parra, Penrith and WH. Play at Parramatta Stadium. Western Sydney Rams?

A team run by Sydney Uni & given responsibility for everything south west from Camberdown to Cambelltown. Suggest they call themselves Sydney United or something not Sydney University. Play at a rectangular ground in that area - Belmore Sports Ground? (Canterbury Juniors are already affiliated to Syd Uni)

Everone feels that they have some ownership of the entities, no-one feels that their neighbours are trying to put them out of business.

Just a thought.

Remember, we don't need to destroy anything or anyone.

If you don't have the money, you have to be smart.

Your costs are the same no matter what the team is called or where it's based, but your opportunities for revenue go up the more exposure that you have.

Think we're getting close on this one.

As for the grounds, in my opinion one of the reasons, and I stress ONE of, for ARC falling over on cost so much was ground hire. So playing out of Parra stadium certainly won't help ease that concern.

But there's plenty of smaller grounds around to be used for the first season start up. In the inner city, perhaps Henson Park could be considered. Outer west, St Marys Stadium should also be considered but so too could some of the other grounds around like the council controlled grounds at Wenty Leagues, Guildford leagues, Marconi Stadium etc etc.

We would of course, with public interest and media attention growing after a year or two and sponsors fighting each other to get on board look to move to those larger grounds mentioned like Kogarah, Parra Stadium, Campbelltown Stadium, Brookie but for start up, I think it would need to be at the smaller suburban grounds

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Hardly a surprising comment that one

I know.

Though, if either Parra or Penrith could present a more attractive option then it would certainly be worthwhile. At present Campbelltown are aligned with the Illawarra comp but that is only part of a four yer agree in which I think will enter its fourth year next year. Large untapped region with a club that has no real competition and thus has strong numbers.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

There is some real consensus developing in this thread with I think one issue that is dividing the contributors:

Do you go with the top four Shute teams or do you create separate franchises?​

​

Can I suggest that if we went with a hybrid model by adding just one team to the mix we might cover both to the betterment of all:

• A western Sydney team made up from the best of Penrith, West Harbour and Parramatta. Call them the Rugby Wanderers and hopefully align them with the A-League team and share facilities/grounds. They would probably be the bottom team for the first year or two but with SRU help they could grow and could become the western presence that rugby needs. Penrith, West Harbour and Parramatta would lose roughly five players each from Shute played on Saturday - maybe less if the SRU guided some good Islander heritage players their way.
• A Manly team based at ?where but allowed to draft three players each from Warringah and Norths.
• A Sydney Uni team. I would expect that the Uni two's playing on Saturday would still be very competitive in Shute Shield as the non-test Super players came back to join the third tier team. Would have to play at the Canterbury RL ground, which would require some political muscle to prise the Bulldogs to share. Uni no 1 is required for cricket.
• An Eastwood team based around Millner facilities but allowed to draft three players from Gordon.
• A Southern Districts team based at Forshaw Park but allowed to draft three players from each of Easts and Randwick.

Shute plays Saturday, Third tier Sunday, bench players for 3rd tier to be chosen from Saturday players (this emphasises the pathways). Shute would still be competitive and viable under this model, but perhaps a little more even.

If we are going to get this going in 2014 I think that the five Sydney team model be announced with Wanderers coming into the comp in 2015. To keep the QLDers happy you'd probably have to give them another team in 2015. I don't know Brisbane well but I assume you could organise their three best club teams for 2014 in a similar way and hoover up the outliers for a fourth team in 2015.

The biggest concern I have is with costs. Everyone in the comp has to understand that this is a no-frills environment. Melbourne and Brisbane are one night's accomodation, taking the flight home on Sunday night. Canberra is a coach trip from Sydney and a plane ticket to Brisbane and Melbourne. Everyone going to or from Perth takes the red-eye Sunday night. Accomodation has to be shared rooms, basic facilities and meals. My back-of-the envelope figuring is around $400,000 in total before a four team knockout finals series. That's a lot of coin before you've paid the players one single dollar to play with club expenses (equipment, jerseys etc.) on top of that. But if the ARU pays the t&a expenses, minimal game fees ($200 per game) and the ground fees (say a total of $1M) and the clubs the other costs its doable. If some club wants to pay star players more then they can, but the ARU costs would be limited to the $1M. The ARU would have to audit the clubs to ensure they did not overspend their income.

Mate, you could cut out the cost of accommodation if you adopt a fly in/fly out policy. The schedule for this competition shouldn't conflict with the club comps. So playing on a Saturday should be a option. Teams could catch an early flight out. Play and then fly back that night.

I know it would be tough on the players. But its a similar method to the one the NBL has employed throughout the years to keep costs under control.

The only location where accommodation would be needed is Perth. It's unavoidable.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Think we're getting close on this one.

As for the grounds, in my opinion one of the reasons, and I stress ONE of, for ARC falling over on cost so much was ground hire. So playing out of Parra stadium certainly won't help ease that concern.

But there's plenty of smaller grounds around to be used for the first season start up. In the inner city, perhaps Henson Park could be considered. Outer west, St Marys Stadium should also be considered but so too could some of the other grounds around like the council controlled grounds at Wenty Leagues, Guildford leagues, Marconi Stadium etc etc.

We would of course, with public interest and media attention growing after a year or two and sponsors fighting each other to get on board look to move to those larger grounds mentioned like Kogarah, Parra Stadium, Campbelltown Stadium, Brookie but for start up, I think it would need to be at the smaller suburban grounds

Yes, yes and yes.

If a Western Sydeny team did enter St Mary's would certainly be one of the options I'd look toward. Campbelltown Stadium would be an interesting one. The local council are a little upset with both the NRL and A League teams that are supposed to represent the area as between both they will use the facility a grand total of 5 times next season. Could be a bit of a bargain if brokered right.

The other option is to choose one locale in each city (this isn't my idea, HJ suggested this) and play double headers.

 

[TOCC]

What I want to know, if having clubs like Sydney Uni alligned themselves with junior clubs in the Cambletown area is mutually beneficial, why hasn't it happened already..

Many of these ideas could be implemented today at a shute shield level but they aren't, and there must be a reason for it... Is it because they aren't practical at this level, they haven't been thought of or the return isn't worth the investment?

So why hasn't a club as professionally run as Sydney Uni done some of the things people on here are suggesting like renaming themselves to appeal to a wider demographic, aligning themselves with junior clubs to secure development pathways, played games out Western Sydney to tap into that pool.... As far as I'm aware Canterbury Juniors approached Sydney Uni about affiliating themselves with the club, not the other way around.