Australian Rugby / RA

[Wilson]

Isn't it already limited to 3?

I think that's the limit for the Reds, Brumbies and tahs, the Force (and previously the Rebels) have a larger allowance.

 

[Rebel man]

Nah

With only for teams we can’t justify any overseas players unless they can become Wallabies eligible

 

[Tomthumb]

There's something to be said for bringing in a couple of experienced internationals to contribute to squad development, impart wisdom, add diversity, do a bit of marketing, etc. It's worked pretty well for the Reds this season and in seasons past.

Yes but if we are focusing on domestic players for the Wallabies it's detrimental to fill positions with foreigners and seeing good talent go overseas

 

[Wilson]

There's a balance to be struck here. The number of foreign placings will almost certainly be reduced across the board (I'm pretty sure it was when the Force were cut), but having 1 or 3 spaces still available per team gives those teams a lot more freedom and negotiating power when building squads. I'm expecting it will drop, at least for the original 3 teams, which may have been part of Tua moving on from the Brumbies and could prevent the Reds from re-signing Ravai, though it might not come into effect next year or could drop by one a year to ease it through.

Things like foreign placings, salary cap and squad sizes are probably all going to be a bit up in the air for the next year or two as the dust settles from the Rebels collapse.

 

[LeCheese]

With only for teams we can’t justify any overseas players unless they can become Wallabies eligible

Yes but if we are focusing on domestic players for the Wallabies it's detrimental to fill positions with foreigners and seeing good talent go overseas

I understand this view, but I don't think it's that black and white. If a couple of internationals can lift the standard, morale, etc. of the whole squad, then I think their value-add is absolutely worth including over a couple of lower-to-middle tier domestic players on similar coin.

Not saying there isn't room for improvement (e.g., reducing the number of internationals per squad) though.

 

[dru]

nor is it something that is obvious to everyone ie a domestic competition, if it was and viable with all parties it would have been done.

Oh come on, SMI. I'm sure there are more cogent disagreements than this.

FWIW, I think the Rebel scenario has set back opportunities hugely. I doubt we'll be in any kind of position to make a domestic change for quite some time.

The last attempt at a domestic competition was an unmitigated failure (apart from covid when anything brought a crowd.

Eh? If you are talking ARC/NRC it is completely false equivalence. A domestic comp as our primary pro comp has never been tried. I still have my Stars kit, too. Really loved watching quality rugby at Leichardt.

 

[Tomthumb]

I understand this view, but I don't think it's that black and white. If a couple of internationals can lift the standard, morale, etc. of the whole squad, then I think their value-add is absolutely worth including over a couple of lower-to-middle tier domestic players on similar coin.

Not saying there isn't room for improvement (e.g., reducing the number of internationals per squad) though.

I get your point, and agree that they can add to a squad

I just feel right now, we need to create easier pathways especially for young Australian talent. The thing is if we didn't have to lose so many overseas, they wouldn't be lower-to-mid domestic replacements, they would be genuine talent. In the current financial climate, I'd prefer every cent spent on Wallaby eligible players

 

[dru]

If we get rid of every non-Aus eligible player right now, it would increase the opportunity for Australian players by approximately a metric diddlesquat.

 

[half]

With very good reason. Change brings risk and although a keyboard warrior is 100% committed to the change, it ain't them on the sharp end of this stick. Navigating an organisation with shrinking funds into a bright future ain't for the faint hearted nor is it something that is obvious to everyone ie a domestic competition, if it was and viable with all parties it would have been done.
The last attempt at a domestic competition was an unmitigated failure (apart from covid when anything brought a crowd.
Contrary to every keyboard warrior on all sites stating a domestic comp was exactly what they and Rugby needed, very few of them got off their arse and left their keyboards to pay to watch what they all agreed they wanted.
P.S. I still have my Western Sydney Rams cap....

Very very very true.

However at some stage debate must take place, as another top down change would / will fail and fail badly. Further doing nothing will also fail IMO,

Dru over the page, put forward his idea, and to me it sounds workable. The issue is its his idea, and his idea may not be what most want.

I have been calling for a domestic league for decades, however I always said what model was chosen needed the support of the rugby community and all of that community. This will take time to discuss and reach a new model.

A key part of that community as I see it is the lost rugby community that have drifted to AFL in the main, so what is needed to bring them back.

Another point, I used to make was the lack of reaction by RA to changes around them especially if there is plenty of warning. On this point over the next 2 to 3 years some reasonably big changes are going to happen in NZ outside rugby. Means little as rugby is light years away from the next code, however these changes will have an impact

 

[Tomthumb]

If we get rid of every non-Aus eligible player right now, it would increase the opportunity for Australian players by approximately a metric diddlesquat.

Considering the amount of talent we lose in droves every year, I’d tend to disagree

 

[Proud Pig]

This still comes down to a "show me the money" argument. All of these ideas are going to cost RA significantly and it is money we don't have. The only way to create a sustainable increase in revenue is to promote local interest. A purely domestic competition will not achieve that unfortunately as there is no growth in interest in the game as all growth is channeled to NRL and AFL. Rugby is now a niche sport in this country and needs to be managed accordingly.

The BIL tour will bring in money from offshore but will have virtually no impact on interest in Rugby within Australia itself. It is a financial sugar hit that is all. The salary cap needs to be reduced not increased to be sustainable. High paid players need to go offshore to earn the big dollars and be allowed to play for the wallabies regardless of where they play. Telling them that if they want to play for their country they have to forego the significant salary they can get overseas may work while the player is still young but as soon as they have a family the money is more important. The NRL are going to continue to try and grab Rugby players if they are suitable for the game. Rugby cannot compete for their salaries so don't even try let them continue to earn overseas and stay within the game. Carter Gordan is a classic example, he went to NRL because he was told if he wants big money it doesn't exist in RA and if he goes overseas he can't play for Australia. He was not going to accept less money, this is their career it could end tomorrow they need to make money while the sun shines, so it became do I stay in Australia (NRL) or play overseas. If we still allowed him to play for the Wallabies while overseas I bet he would have gone to France or Japan and stayed in the game.

It is a true "Catch-22" situation. To grow interest in the game you need the young kids coming through seeing the best players in Wallaby jerseys performing successfully at the highest level rather than playing League and State of Origin. However, you can't convince the best and brightest players to keep playing Rugby in Australia if they can't earn the same money as they can overseas or in Rugby League. It is a self-fulfilling prophecy, the Wallabies become less relevant as the best players chase the money and Rugby in Australia becomes less prevalent as junior ranks start to thin out as the Wallabies become weaker. We all want to go back to the glory days of Australian rugby when we were one of the best teams in the world. Unfortunately, those days have been on a steady decline as money has come into all professional sports.

 

[KevinO]

Foreign players in squads works when the model is centralized. Look at Jordie B going to Leinster for a season, his in the squad as a center. Leinster has good depth at center, Ireland has good depth at center. Done deal.

Munster tried signing a foreign loose head to replace retiring Dave Kilcoyne and IRFU rejected the deal, said they only have two Irish LH in there squad and academy and need to sign someone qualified for Ireland. Yes, the system has flaws as Leinster currently has 5 good LH on there books and none of them want to move South.

It needs to be set up right, and all clubs understand the balancing act. Using LH as a example, 4 squads would need to have at least 12 between them. As long as 9 are able to play for the Wallabies, why not allow someone to have a Georgian or Argentinean prop in there squad. Or a disgruntled Bok with experience of a different style of play that can help.

 

[Wilson]

Foreign players in squads works when the model is centralized. Look at Jordie B going to Leinster for a season, his in the squad as a center. Leinster has good depth at center, Ireland has good depth at center. Done deal.

Munster tried signing a foreign loose head to replace retiring Dave Kilcoyne and IRFU rejected the deal, said they only have two Irish LH in there squad and academy and need to sign someone qualified for Ireland. Yes, the system has flaws as Leinster currently has 5 good LH on there books and none of them want to move South.

It needs to be set up right, and all clubs understand the balancing act. Using LH as a example, 4 squads would need to have at least 12 between them. As long as 9 are able to play for the Wallabies, why not allow someone to have a Georgian or Argentinean prop in there squad. Or a disgruntled Bok with experience of a different style of play that can help.

RA already has approval over all super rugby contracts and have rejected foreign contracts in the past on the grounds of "national interest" - in 2019 the Reds were blocked from signing Alivereti Veitokani and the Rebels from bringing back Frank Lomani because Cheika didn't want a direct rivals in our pool getting that experience.

Ryan puts Cheika in his place over Super Rugby signings

Former Fiji sevens coach Ben Ryan called Michael Cheika out in a tweet this week and the Cauliflower has done some digging.

www.smh.com.au

 

[KevinO]

RA already has approval over all super rugby contracts and have rejected foreign contracts in the past on the grounds of "national interest" - in 2019 the Reds were blocked from signing Alivereti Veitokani and the Rebels from bringing back Frank Lomani because Cheika didn't want a direct rivals in our pool getting that experience.

Ryan puts Cheika in his place over Super Rugby signings

Former Fiji sevens coach Ben Ryan called Michael Cheika out in a tweet this week and the Cauliflower has done some digging.

www.smh.com.au

Example of doing it for the wrong reasons, doing it to make teams build depth in a position is acceptable. Doing it at the expense of a franchise shows that Super Rugby is just an audition and not taken seriously by the governing body.

 

[Wilson]

Example of doing it for the wrong reasons, doing it to make teams build depth in a position is acceptable. Doing it at the expense of a franchise shows that Super Rugby is just an audition and not taken seriously by the governing body.

Definitely the wrong reasons, but my point was that the facility already exists in the current setup and doesn't require further centralization. The reasons are always going to be up to the current administration (I'm sure Cheika might have argued that playmaking spots were too important to give 1 of 4 over to foreign talent if the decision was ever interrogated publicly).

 

[Adam84]

Rumours that the Brumbies are close to agreeing to a centralisation agreement with RA

 

[dru]

Considering the amount of talent we lose in droves every year, I’d tend to disagree

That is an obscuration. The amount of talent lost in droves is due to insufficient teams. Right now with the ex-Rebels seeking a home, there are few slots been taken that the Rebels could use, that are otherwise filled. Much bigger issue right now is salary cap, available funds, and general commercials on a club by club basis.

 

[LeCheese]

Rumours that the Brumbies are close to agreeing to a centralisation agreement with RA

Hopefully this doesn't imply that the Brums' financial situation is worsening (or, at least, not improving), but I suspect it might

 

[dru]

This still comes down to a "show me the money" argument.

I'm going to start leaving some of this stuff alone as we are all to well aware of the cyclic discussion these considerations prompt. For now though...

With respect, I think another obscuration, PP. "Show my the money" is an issue for RA and pro rugby. If we opt to change what we are doing it is the same existing issuer, not something new or specific to a domestic comp.

That said I doubt any radical change can be progressed right now. Survival is pretty much front and centre. As we shift through the immediate to short term - there is simply nothing left, imo, in Super to justify continuation as we are.

 

[SouthernX]

Hopefully this doesn't imply that their financial situation is worsening (or, at least, not improving), but I suspect it might

just speculating but I agree that’s how this looks.

the brumbies 6 months ago were very vocal about not joining centralisation. I wonder what the change of heart is?