• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

ARU take over the Western Force.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Slim 293

Stirling Mortlock (74)
After 10 years of investment in WA from the Force and annual Wallaby test matches.........



Not really on topic, but I just wanted to use this opportunity to have a quick dig re: test matches..........

The last RC test in Perth against the Springboks only attracted a few thousand more spectators than the 2009 Italian test in Canberra.........

JON later deemed Canberra to not be 'test match worthy.'

[/micro rant]
 
T

Train Without a Station

Guest
Would an extra 35k for one game per week lead to a bigger deal?

Don't give the the BS misleading line "higher ratings would lead to a bigger deal".

Would the exact figures we are talking about lead to a bigger deal?
 

WorkingClassRugger

Michael Lynagh (62)
Would higher to ratings lead to a bigger to deal? Yes it would


I have little doubt that it would draw greater ratings and interest. My only issue is that while I'd very much like to see that I don't want it to be an the expense of the Force. If the Force were to be relocated where would that leave Rugby in WA? A token NRC squad seems a poor consolation prize.

The problem with the Force is more structural than anything else. And by that I mean in terms of the game as a whole. We needed both the NRC and JGC to have been implemented directly in the aftermath of the 2003 RWC.

Instead we are only now really seeing the structures we desperately needed 13 years ago.
 

Marcelo

Ken Catchpole (46)
Not really on topic, but I just wanted to use this opportunity to have a quick dig re: test matches....

The last RC test in Perth against the Springboks only attracted a few thousand more spectators than the 2009 Italian test in Canberra...

JON later deemed Canberra to not be 'test match worthy.'
I think if the Wallabies play some tests in Canberra the first years will be sold out but ACT is a small market for the expansion of the game and probably Union is the most popular sport there, for that reason the ARU thinks that would be a waste of time
 

Forcefield

Ken Catchpole (46)
Kyle Godwin, the Haylett-Petty brothers, Kieran Longbottom, Justin Turner, Ollie Hoskins, Kane Koteka, Brad Lacey and a few others are all locals and have been produced thanks to the Force being in place. To say the Force haven't produced any talent is just plain false.


Good call WCR. WA beat the ACT U20s and Vic U20s in the 2014/2015 U20 comps. Might have done better this year if our two best backs didnt head elsewhere (Jooste to ACT, Ngamanu to QLD). The local talent is coming through and it won't be long until they are the bulk of the squad and they reduce the Force's wage bill.
 

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
The force absolutely has its issues, but many have been down to poor football department management which disengages fans and creates difficulties in attracting quality players.

And the same could be said of the Waratahs under Hickey/Foley and the Reds under Graham. Both NSW and Qld unions have been bailed out recently by the ARU. Not quite sure why people are so keen to put the boot into the Force.

The problems of poor administration and lacklustre coaching permeate the professional game in Australia.
 
T

TOCC

Guest
We can talk about things like local derbies having appeal. But all a Sydney derby would do is reduce the appeal of the brumbies and Reds derbies. These games already have strong emotional sentiment. There's no way something that has more of an emotional draw isn't going to reduce the emotional draw of these games.

Well if this is a reason then we should never have expanded past NSW and QLD..
20 years ago Brumbies vs Waratahs wasn't even a rivalry, now it's the biggest Union rivalry in Australia. I don't think I've seen such a lack of interest in the QLD v NSW match as evidenced this year.
 
T

TOCC

Guest
Would an extra 35k for one game per week lead to a bigger deal?

Don't give the the BS misleading line "higher ratings would lead to a bigger deal".

Would the exact figures we are talking about lead to a bigger deal?

You have just rephrased your own question because you received an answer you didn't want to hear..

Quite simply, higher ratings would mean a bigger tv deal...

Or are you about to argue their is greater value in the 38k that the Force drew in WAST prime time?
 
T

Train Without a Station

Guest
No I haven't. I asked would these higher ratings lead to a bigger TV Deal.

Specifically if the 38k the force Drew was 70k.

Would this in isolation have any impact.

Your previous comment is my point. The QLD vs NSW rivalry has lost its lustre, because the brumbies vs NSW is seen as bigger.

This hasn't drawn more fans to overtake it, it's just seen the same fans ignore one, and focus on the other.

Any NSW local derby would be the same - no net gain.
 

Tomikin

David Codey (61)
I don't support any idea that see's the Force leave Perth, They have the fans there.. Get them a coach who can build a program people want to be in... That's what the ARU first objective, Throw the kitchen sink at Link to go coach there.. Get Laurie Fisher from the UK there.. Get the next Michael Cheika over there.. I don't know who it is.. But get someone who wasn't left overs... The Red's took RG from the Force look how that went..

Once the head coach is sorted, he will sort the rest of the program and the players will come.. give them a 10% living in Perth exception.. But Build it and they will come.. Canberra's not the greatest city to live in but you can't fault the super to international conversion rate..
 

Forcefield

Ken Catchpole (46)
Not really on topic, but I just wanted to use this opportunity to have a quick dig re: test matches....

The last RC test in Perth against the Springboks only attracted a few thousand more spectators than the 2009 Italian test in Canberra...

JON later deemed Canberra to not be 'test match worthy.'

[/micro rant]

But 10,000 less than you got against Fiji a year later? Go back to 2012 and we had 35k against SA. It is a shame the Aus A program is gone. That way you could have some Aus A games in Canberra and maybe swap an Aus A game (against the JABs for instance) for one of Perths Argentina tests.

I think novelty is pretty important. We play SA every two years. Even with the SA expats crowds can lose a bit of interest. Novelty brings publicity and interest from the non-diehards.

Therein lies part of the Force's problem I reckon. We need a major rebrand to bring back the interest. If you can't get it from on field results youve got to find other ways.
 

Gagger

Nick Farr-Jones (63)
Staff member
But no other Super Rugby province has more than one team?
Because Australia is unlike SA or NZ in that Rugby is the dominant code in those markets. They plonk a team anywhere and it's got players, followers, coaches and a shot at the title. Plonk a team in WA and you see the result 13 years on. Reality is that NSW has double the players of the nearest state, and there's plenty more opportunity in league recruitment heartland Western Sydney.

But BBL and A league all go around the country
Again, comps where the code is either dominant, or without a real competitor (A-League). ALSO, note that they BOTH have two teams in Sydney. They wouldn't be that stupid not to, would they?

Where will the player come from for it though?
They'd come from the Force for a start! NSW already supplies the Force, Rebels and Brumbies. Even without the development of new players in Western Sydney, you'd have plenty, without the need for begging players across the nullabor or bringing in washed up saffas.

But what would it achieve?
To start with, another contender. If we have to stick with 5 teams (for SANZAAR) then the best thing for Aussie rugby is to have a team that can compete. If you can draw the players and the coaches (which the Force can't, a team in Sydney can) then you can win.

And if you can win you get the fans and dollars, THEN what you find is that in a catchment the size of Perth - but where the dominant code is one where people pick up the ball and run with it - you start to find a 10x plus boost to playing stocks in Australian rugby vs the valiant and hard won trickles out of Perth.
 

Slim 293

Stirling Mortlock (74)
But 10,000 less than you got against Fiji a year later?


The 15,000 against Fiji wasn't a great crowd, but that was a match that wasn't going to attract a large crowd anywhere at that time, and Canberra's smaller size only exacerbated it...........
 

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
I don't support any idea that see's the Force leave Perth, They have the fans there.. Get them a coach who can build a program people want to be in. That's what the ARU first objective, Throw the kitchen sink at Link to go coach there.. Get Laurie Fisher from the UK there.. Get the next Michael Cheika over there.. I don't know who it is.. But get someone who wasn't left overs. The Red's took RG from the Force look how that went..

Once the head coach is sorted, he will sort the rest of the program and the players will come.. give them a 10% living in Perth exception.. But Build it and they will come.. Canberra's not the greatest city to live in but you can't fault the super to international conversion rate..

That any club that can endure Richard Graham AND Michael Foley and still have anyone going to their games is evidence of rugby support. Look at Foley's handiwork at the Waratahs and Graham's efforts at the Reds and what happened at each of those places during their respective tenures - massive decline in supporter base and corporate support and both of those franchises suffered financial losses.
 

brokendown

Bill McLean (32)
one of the reasons test match numbers in perth are dwindling is that Subi oval is a shit ground to watch rugby-hence the switch this year for the Argies game to NIB stadium
 

barbarian

Phil Kearns (64)
Staff member
But what would it achieve?
To start with, another contender. If we have to stick with 5 teams (for SANZAAR) then the best thing for Aussie rugby is to have a team that can compete. If you can draw the players and the coaches (which the Force can't, a team in Sydney can) then you can win.

And if you can win you get the fans and dollars, THEN what you find is that in a catchment the size of Perth - but where the dominant code is one where people pick up the ball and run with it - you start to find a 10x plus boost to playing stocks in Australian rugby vs the valiant and hard won trickles out of Perth.

I'm with you until this.

Ultimately, if our W Syd team become 'contenders', it would just be at the expense of another Aussie side. We've got a limited talent pool, and moving the Force back closer to home doesn't change that. The players that the Force are losing out on (due to distance) aren't then going to League, AFL or overseas, they are just going to other Super teams.

I just think this 'more players = victory = $$$ = fans' is a bit simplistic, as the Tahs have shown over the past three years. They have the first two down pat, but where are the fans? Where is the cash?

I think on the whole Western Sydney is a better option, but I don't think the choice is cut and dried. I don't think it would be a guaranteed success.
.
 

Groucho

Greg Davis (50)
The JGC and NRC are not intended to be money making. They are primarily development initiatives of which Perth desperately needs. The ITM Cup in New Zealand has never made a profit as a competition.

$25m in higher ARU revenues means there is enough to keep these going.


Absolutely right.

I think there's some woolly thinking about money, sports and rugby in this country.

A sport being 'professional' doesn't mean it must be profitable, unless it has investors to satisfy. Woe be the day when sport becomes about shareholder value. The commercial purpose of rugby in Oz is to take money in one way, and spend it in another. So money comes in from TV, and gets spent on the grassroots.

Obviously, the more income there is then the more we can do for the game, and a healthy cash reserve makes the sport more secure, but it's not the job of the sport to make profits: it's to spend them. It's not the role of the ARU to make money: it's to organise rugby.

The most important people in rugby in Australia are the players, at every level. The unpaid officials come next. Then the fans who go to games. The Norms who flick the TV button are a distant last.

We often act as though we're the main stakeholders in sport, because we pay the bills, but we're not. The purpose of the game is to provide something for people to play, not for people to watch.

The Supe provinces aren't organised to make profits. Their business model is to be subsidised by the ARU. There's nothing wrong with that. That subsidy is their share of that money. It would be wonderful if they could routinely generate a surplus from gate takings and sponsorship, but often they can't. That would require a re-organised television deal.

When they make a 'loss', that's not a failure. It's expected. When they make a 'profit', that's a bonus.

Of course they're not intended to make terrible losses either. Mismanagement is mismanagement. The reason they get ARU money is so that they can spend it effectively.

I think the Force is a special case. They've never recovered from the Firepower fiasco. They lost key players, suffered a great deal of bad press, had to re-organise financially, recuitment suffered, results suffered, and the game in Perth declined from where it might have been.

As a current Perth resident, I find Force games at NIB incredibly exciting. It's a great 'product'.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top