Australian Rugby / RA

[Dave Beat]

I've weighed into the issue on the front page in a bit more detail.

Have a read and see what you think: http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/dollars-and-sense-the-aru-club-rugby-and-the-five-year-plan/

Baaaaa Baaaaa - bit of sitting on the fence there, seeing both sides - well presented.

I started another thread because of this "What is grass roots" and this one has the topic raised frequently.

To me, I have a huge paddock and I want to see more grass that simple.

From the U6's, up to first grade Premier, and shit onto the Golden Oldies - that is what grass roots is about, great seeing pops watching their grand kids.


Premier Clubs (& Subbies) has had far greater impact on kids rugby than the ARU, you disagree with this go and see an optometrist. To remove premier clubs from the picture is stupid, a change in approach and engagement - maybe. More often than not the dad's coaching and selling sausages at the mini's and juniors are still involved in the Premier clubs as volunteers etc. They are the ones growing our game.

Allot of our super players came through the grass root club system we have referred to, could they have drifted to other codes and sports if a club volunteers weren't there.

 

[barbarian]

No-one is suggesting removing the clubs from the picture though, or volunteers.

Clubs at SS level will just go back to being self-funded, as they always were.

The Dad's will still be cooking the snags on Saturday, regardless of what the ARU does.
.

 

[Dave Beat]

No-one is suggesting removing the clubs from the picture though, or volunteers.

Clubs at SS level will just go back to being self-funded, as they always were.

The Dad's will still be cooking the snags on Saturday, regardless of what the ARU does.
.

I still say if club want to do the work, and can justify grants that ring the ARU bells grants should be paid.

 

[barbarian]

Yeah potentially.

Funny that the key criticism of the article stems from people thinking no ARU funding = no Shute Shield. Which is ridiculous, of course it will continue as it always has. Just that first graders may not have as much cash in their pockets after a game.
.

 

[Dave Beat]

Yeah potentially.

Funny that the key criticism of the article stems from people thinking no ARU funding = no Shute Shield. Which is ridiculous, of course it will continue as it always has. Just that first graders may not have as much cash in their pockets after a game.
.

If clubs can justify reasons for grants, and receive funding - same way as a business plan going to a bank.

And clubs execute and show results - how the club disburses money / operates "profitably" / "in best interest" is not the worry of the ARU.

Now - before people jump and rip into a one sentence explanation - I said club / not fist grade. All players, Volunteers, Board form a club, and some of us get down there and enjoy all grades.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

If clubs can justify reasons for grants, and receive funding - same way as a business plan going to a bank.

And clubs execute and show results - how the club disburses money / operates "profitably" / "in best interest" is not the worry of the ARU.

Now - before people jump and rip into a one sentence explanation - I said club / not fist grade. All players, Volunteers, Board form a club, and some of us get down there and enjoy all grades.

I said previously that if the clubs were to present a comprehensive and measurable development plan focused primarily around kids then I'd be open to them receiving funding. However, I actually think that if they were provided those funds they and every club at every level for that matter need to be answerable for there use of those funds. Especially as their primary focus is that of development.

 

[Pieman]

Yeah potentially.

Funny that the key criticism of the article stems from people thinking no ARU funding = no Shute Shield. Which is ridiculous, of course it will continue as it always has. Just that first graders may not have as much cash in their pockets after a game.
.

And what of Premier Rugby in Queensland?
For the vast majority of players in Brisbane clubs (plus G.C.'s Bond University), I would think the thought of getting cash in their pockets is somewhat laughable.

 

[barbarian]

And what of Premier Rugby in Queensland?
For the vast majority of players in Brisbane clubs (plus G.C.'s Bond University), I would think the thought of getting cash in their pockets is somewhat laughable.

I don't know enough about Queensland to really comment on their situation, other than in broad conceptual terms as I have done in the article.
.

 

[Dave Beat]

I said previously that if the clubs were to present a comprehensive and measurable development plan focused primarily around kids then I'd be open to them receiving funding. However, I actually think that if they were provided those funds they and every club at every level for that matter need to be answerable for there use of those funds. Especially as their primary focus is that of development.

Don't disagree.
But I'd hate it to go as far as how money raised on the BBQ flowed back through the club.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Don't disagree.
But I'd hate it to go as far as how money raised on the BBQ flowed back through the club.

Funds raised by the xlub for their own uses are a different story. They don't need to be answerable on those. I am referring to any funding provided by the ARU via the state body.

 

[Gagger]

Here's my angle on it

http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/aru-needs-to-work-with-not-around-the-core-of-rugby/

 

[barbarian]

What's the financial state of the clubs up there Pieman? Are they as much in the red as some Sydney clubs?

 

[Pieman]

Here's my angle on it

http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/aru-needs-to-work-with-not-around-the-core-of-rugby/

A lot of very good points you've made there Gagger.

I also think club rugby in Brisbane is a very different beast to Sydney.

Yes both competitions help nurture a lot of talent that will go on to bigger things.

And both have long, proud histories of doing exactly that.

However, as I replied to Barbarian earlier, for the vast majority of players in Brisbane clubs (plus G.C.'s Bond University), the thought of getting cash in their pockets is probably laughable.

Being able to raise $300,000 for free to air television coverage up here? Good luck with that too.

To be honest, we struggle for any media exposure…. at any level. If we're lucky, club rugby might get a small mention in the papers at Grand Final time.

At least the QRU is making an effort here by live streaming the match of the round.

This is not a whinge…just a slightly different perspective, whilst sharing the same sentiment.

 

[Pieman]

What's the financial state of the clubs up there Pieman? Are they as much in the red as some Sydney clubs?

I think it's certainly a year to year struggle for most clubs Barbarian.
I don't have any figures to compare with Sydney clubs, but I think the only clubs that would consider themselves as being "comfortable" are probably UQ and Bond Uni ( I think they get assistance from their respective universities) and Sunnybank, which I believe get help from their local Community Sports Club. Someone closer to those clubs might be able to correct me if I'm wrong, or offer a clearer insight.

 

[RugbyReg]

What's the financial state of the clubs up there Pieman? Are they as much in the red as some Sydney clubs?

when I was at the QRU, so 2011 to 2013 it was interesting. We analysed it quite closely. For the year ended 2011 of our 20-something members (Premier Clubs plus all regions) I think only a third of them were in the black (remembering the Premier Clubs were getting big ARU cash grants then). We implemented a few programs, worked closely with them on a few areas and we all rode the success of the premiership. At the end of 2012, the figure was 67%.

If I recall the Premier Clubs then Sunnybank and UQ always ran at profit, both assisted by external entities. Easts had a dramatic turnaround but bringing on an excellent committee who put in certain structures etc and changed the club basically. Brothers and Norths struggled big time. I reckon Norths still do, not sure about Brothers but suspect they may as well. GPS are now very commercial and doing well. Souths were always up and down so I couldn't say where they stand now. Wests were always precarious too but, like Easts, they have made some good changes lately and I suspect they are working for the better.

 

[Dave Beat]

Here's my angle on it

http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/aru-needs-to-work-with-not-around-the-core-of-rugby/

Yep

 

[dru]

@Barbarian

I see Brett McKay's vote of confidence. Got to be pleased with that.

 

[barbarian]

Yeah the feedback has generally been good. Good to see people thinking about the issue, regardless of what side they take. That is to Papworth's credit.

 

[Train Without a Station]

So I had a listen to the podcast.

Bob's insight on coaching and players (specifically what he defines as a rugby player) are great. As always.

But on the club front he's happy to push the same old misleading lines. He's arguing on behalf of 12 clubs. But then says "without club rugby in Sydney, Rugby in Australia would die". I guess it's a true statement, but not in the context he means (no money for Shute Shield).

Without the Sydney clubs it might. But without the Shute Shield it would not. The vast majority would be untouched. Subbies clubs would just extend to juniors, etc.

 

[Gagger]

So I had a chat today with Ross Xenos, CEO of RUPA about how the development pathways really work for players and what role the premier clubs really play.

Turns out that if you think there's some magic pathway for talent to find their way into super squads that doesn't involve the premier clubs supporting them, you're smoking crack.

Each Super team can have up to 30 in their core playing squad, and then a maximum of 5 in their extended squad (total 35). Minimum pay for these players is around $50k

Outside of that you're in the Development Squad - these players can spend a maximum of 18 hours with the franchise per week and can't play matches for them. Outside of the 6 week U20's format therefore, all the rest of their S&C, training and actually playing competitive football, is run by their premier/shute clubs.

If you want a great example of what this looks like, check the comments in my article on the front page where TWAS gets his pants pulled down over the example of Michael Hooper, showing just what Manly's involvement was in his development, even though he is seen as a young Super prodigy.

For those who then sniff down their noses at Premier clubs paying players with money or kind, the Development Squad member's minimum pay from a Super franchise is just $1200 PER YEAR. So, if you're a player outside of the 35 Super squad and you want to give rugby a proper crack, the premier club is your lifeline. THERE IS NO ONE ELSE, except league or AFL, who will sign you up for $60k.

Should we allow there to be an arms race (because, surprise surprise, the Shute clubs are competitive between each other, IN THEIR COMPETITION and Sydney Uni has developed a strong inherent advantage)? No - but there are many ways that you can be sure that financial support for the clubs doesn't fuel this. No one is resisting this - it is a non argument.

As for the "this is hardly sustainable" line - it certainly is a whole lot more sustainable than Super Rugby, where every province is now running at a loss, some in the multi-millions. That extra $15m the ARU has earmarked for "Pro Rugby" is all about to fall into the big black hole of super rugby debt. This makes even more nonsense out of those who think a Super Rugby supported NRC is the answer to the 3rd tier - as the foundations it's based upon are bust. Yes TWAS, even in Queensland.