Australian Rugby / RA

[WorkingClassRugger]

Fair point.
Each area may have different touch points that are measured.
Wamberal mentioned High School Rugby was strong when he played - it has now sadly almost disappeared, so high school rugby could be a touch point.
It maybe measured on improvement.
It maybe measured on change in market share.
It comes down to understanding the business, and improving the weaknesses.

Our market share is down compared to other codes, I don't see worrying about our top tier (National age teams, Private Schools etc) changing that.

I think the measurement is fairly simple. What's the % increase on kids playing regular Rugby (not 2 or 3 games, not a knockout tournament but organised week in, week out Rugby) year on year. In a given area for it to be deemed adequate it would have to double what the area's growth rate is for a pass mark. And even then that would be considered barely sufficient.

 

[barbarian]

Zero I believe. The NSWRU put forward to get a chunk for it from the ARU and the ARU knocked that back, setting off this whole shitfight

The Shute clubs spend $9m on rugby off their own bat

According to the 2014 NSWRU annual report, the NSWRU received $480k in ARU funding, and spend $735k on Premier Rugby.

The SS clubs must see some of that cash, directly or indirectly.
.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Shute shield has been the only FTA live rugby in Australia and the clubs have paid for it. The ARU now stepping in here (and with what strings attached?) isn't the same as supporting club rugby. It's also only $300k

Tax payer funded for most of it's history!

Assuming this player payment is widespread and more than a Pulver hearsay, what you've written above doesn't necessarily make sense.

What would be one of the best ways to enable a player to train like a pro and develop? Pay them.

How would you entice valuable players that younger players could learn off to stay in club rugby and share their knowledge and skills with younger players? Pay them.

I don't disagree with this, to a point. Although with the trend increasingly towards scholarships instead of actual payments I am a bit skeptical. How does having your HECS paid get you ready to play professionally?

As I understand it most of these clubs are run by volunteers and largely self funded for the petrol fumes that keep them going (not unlike GAGR!). One can bitch about them not being pro-run organisations and having petty agendas, but I wonder if the ARU is ready to get what they wish for if the clubs don't survive, as the costs involved in paid replacement may be a lot more than the ARU thinks.

Randwick make their accounts public (pdf), so you can have a look and I'll have to pick on them. They lost $80k last year on $800k revenue after a couple of better years. Within that there's lots of accountancy back and forth, but they declare $25k for player expenses, $5k for player rewards and $55k for scholarships, so we're not talking huge amounts across the player group - but it's money they didn't have (though it might be offset by uni sponsorship?).

It's this sort of stuff that the ARU are trying to prevent by trying to limit the arms race, and ensuring they survive. Randwick think they have to offer this stuff to stay competitive. But it appears that they can't do it sustainably - and what hope do the poorer or less traditional clubs have?

 

[Braveheart81]

I think the point is the money is back baby, and everyone wants a slice!

and that is part of the problem.

It is natural that everyone wants money and then when they get money they spend it.

The challenge is working out the most effective and sustainable ways to spend it and ensure that clubs don't create a situation where they are wholly reliant on that funding going forward and can't exist without it.

I think the way rugby has gone in recent years in having a pipeline from fairly early ages through to the professional game for the elite players is a pretty natural outcome.

It is unfortunate that it is becoming harder and harder for players to transition from being amateur players at an adult level to getting a crack at becoming a professional but that seems very hard to avoid. The NRC is certainly the biggest avenue for those players to get a crack and some who have had no pedigree in junior rep teams etc. will every year.

 

[Dave Beat]

I think the measurement is fairly simple. What's the % increase on kids playing regular Rugby (not 2 or 3 games, not a knockout tournament but organised week in, week out Rugby) year on year. In a given area for it to be deemed adequate it would have to double what the area's growth rate is for a pass mark. And even then that would be considered barely sufficient.

Yes I like the idea of improving growth rate - great measuring stick.
The other key age bracket that needs focus is between 11 & 13.
Then maintaining growth rate / retention as the kids age, is that done through public high schools, clubs, or both.

 

[kiap]

Kiap - I didn't play club here because I was in London (London French RFC)

Perhaps I undersold your playing prowess.

(just joking)

Clearly there's a connection from mini rugby, through school, Club, NRC, Super Rugby etc etc. It will vary, but for most players they will have a lot of development at club level either before or even during Super Rugby stint. So club is an critical link in that chain for those who go on to higher honours, and also for a lot of very good players who don't.

Shute shield has been the only FTA live rugby in Australia and the clubs have paid for it. The ARU now stepping in here (and with what strings attached?) isn't the same as supporting club rugby.

If they've paid something towards it, then why not keep paying something towards it?

Dog or no dog in this fight, most on here have a view on the issue and choose their side accordingly. Levels of conviction will vary, of course. As said, the Shute is a beneficial cog in the wheel. But in my view, the ARU should not be directly funding premier rugby. That goes for NSW and everywhere.

RugbyWA and the QRU aren't having their ... <ahem> ... finest years. Last I heard, ACT Rugby had only ~$2 million in the bank and a financial loss of a million last year despite a recent $11 million land sale. Are these guys demanding more club rugby dough?

So I ask this question: If the ARU has to pay into the Shute, what is the purpose of the NSWRU?

Perhaps we should all agree now to fold this moribund bunch of over-important office-holders, assorted alickadoos and hangers on who don't even want to run their own competition.

It's also only $300k

Yeah, but it goes directly to put rugby on free-to-air and frees up money that clubs might otherwise have had to pay.

Money that can now be used for a player salary or two.

Of course $300k would be an exorbitant amount to help fund a team in say, South Australia. But in Sydney, it's peanuts.

 

[RugbyReg]

there would be a minor multiplier with that $300k as clubs can sell sponsorship with the promise of some broadcast visibility. It may not be a lot, but it'd be a strong factor (if done well by the clubs).

 

[Dave Beat]

I'm sure I heard clubs contributed funding so we had club rugby on FTA, can anyone confirm?

Still say with a sensible business plan and targets club rugby in all states should the the tool to build our grass roots.
If developed well we could have a brand in allot of areas, and a brand once established grows.

 

[Strewthcobber]

I'm sure I heard clubs contributed funding so we had club rugby on FTA, can anyone confirm?

Couple of entrepreneurs did it on their own back apparently, though I wonder if any of the clubs or their sponsors contributed to the "sponsorship"

Not sure where the $300k fits in thi syear unless things aren't going to well for the main guys.

 

[Dave Beat]

Couple of entrepreneurs did it on their own back apparently, though I wonder if any of the clubs or their sponsors contributed to the "sponsorship"

Not sure where the $300k fits in thi syear unless things aren't going to well for the main guys.

I know the guys at Club Rugby TV started the process, and also Fordham jumped in and assisted as well - and it grew from there, plus the quality did as well which was awesome.

Sure I heard clubs also assisted, hence the question.

 

[Gagger]

According to the 2014 NSWRU annual report, the NSWRU received $480k in ARU funding, and spend $735k on Premier Rugby.

The SS clubs must see some of that cash, directly or indirectly.
.

As I understand it that's the funding that's been cut. Hence shitfight

 

[TOCC]

Yeah the guys who bankrolled the Shute Shield last year reportedly broke even, but I don't think they made money, and possibly unwilling to risk it again in 2016, perhaps this is the $300k that is been referenced, ARU have taken over that funding.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[I like to watch]

Couple of entrepreneurs did it on their own back apparently, though I wonder if any of the clubs or their sponsors contributed to the "sponsorship"

Not sure where the $300k fits in thi syear unless things aren't going to well for the main guys.

I think the sequence of events,was that the ARU committed to pay $300k to ensure it was telecast,then Club tv stepped in,and the $300k was no longer required.

 

[Strewthcobber]

I think the sequence of events,was that the ARU committed to pay $300k to ensure it was telecast,then Club tv stepped in,and the $300k was no longer required.

So what's the $300k being allocated for next year?

Apparently $750k required to get it on the air

 

[wamberal]

So what's the

$300k being allocated for next year?

Apparently $750k required to get it on the air

Presumably the 750 pianos would be offset by advertising revenue?

 

[Dave Beat]

With it being Commercial TV and improving Im sure advertising provides a return and reduces the expence.

Ha ha as Wambers just said.

 

[dru]

As I understand it that's the funding that's been cut. Hence shitfight

All unions get funding from ARU. How the unions spend it is up to them. If NSWRU has any sense, they wont skew funding from other areas to the SS clubs.

 

[Dave Beat]

All unions get funding from ARU. How the unions spend it is up to them. If NSWRU has any sense, they wont skew funding from other areas to the SS clubs.

Dru - you keep referencing SS but you have a Red Cuddly Koala as you state of preference. Why?
I will reference your premier comp even though it is with unqualified knowledge.
What every your Premier Team is and they put a concerted effort into juniors for the season and has a 25% improvement on mini player up take next year.
- that is great for your clubs brand.
- engages supporter base.
- highly likely increases Reds supporter base.
- increased Levy to ARU.
Again only if goals are met is a grant paid. In no way have I ever said a hand out. The above can be replicated in each state.
There are guys at the ARU, NSWRU, QRU that are no doubt putting in an effort but to maximise engagement and penetration it is a team effort and clubs should be involved.

It is about engagement, yeah the junior club I'm involved with is only 3 years back on the scene. We are one of Manly's Village Clubs and whether it be Manly, NSWRU, all area's have been great.

QRU, NSWRU, ACTRU, VRU, WARU don't have the man power to grow and promote Australian Rugby by them selves, if we sit on our fat asses expecting them to improve our game we will be gobbled up and spat out. Each RU should look at engaging the clubs to assist in growing our game - as above, if it grows allot of areas benefit. With results come grants, with no result there are no grants.

It should not be missed over the years our Premier Clubs Australia wide have played a significant roll in Australian Rugby.
However with Professionalism the roll they play has also changed and needs to be looked at and managed.

To create a business plan you need all sorts of data that i don't have access to, or the volunteer time to invest. So I will focus on my back yard and if others do the same in theirs our game gets better - but I'm a nobody simply having a crack

 

[TOCC]

ARU have provided a bailout to the the Force, it's in the Australian today that the ARU have acquired the intellectual property rights and super rugby license of the Western Force for $800'000. Apparently the ARU retained the IP rights of the Rebels when they sold them and would look to acquired the IP rights of the existing franchises in the future, but the Force needed the money and that's why they were sold now.

Can elaborate more on this? Are the Force now under control of the ARU since they own the license? What value can you place on IP rights in a comp like super rugby.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[dru]

@Dave Beat, there is no need for confusion. I am an ex-pat Qlder who lives in Sydney. The questions/discussions I have responded to are generally couched around wanting direct funding from the ARU to the SS clubs in order fundamentally to assist them further their professional aspirations. Those aspirations are not voiced as such but are pretty much understood. If the funds are not for professional payment, other arrangement via the Union are fine and dont need to be circumvented.

I'm glad you see the funding from ARU to the unions, and recognise the work put in by those unions. Completely concur with funding used this way.

I dont howver agree with funding by the ARU to assist Shute Shield professional aspirations. I see that as contrary to the strategy and drive of professional rugby in Australia.

Where people are saying that the ARU is removing a tradition of direct funding to the Premier Clubs, is this accurate? I dont know the answer to this, but outside of the Shute Shield, how much has ARU directly funded Premier Clubs in other States than NSW? My understanding is little.

I temain comfortable with this statement:

"All Unions get funding by the ARU. How they spend it is up to them. If NSWRU has any sense, they wont skew funding from other areas to the SS clubs."

With respect to your sleight of hand regaring my origins, you think a Qlder has no entitlement to comment on the requested direct funding which is not offered anywhere else? If the Qld Premier Clubs were in the news with faux outrage to Pulvers response (you're not pissing ARU money against the wall) I'd be saying the same thing.