Australian Rugby / RA

[Brainstrust]

No doubt demonstrating my ignorance, but could someone explain the this. It seems now that with the last 2 world cups Australia has suffered a $9 mio operating loss ( in both 2015 & 2019 ), attributed to the shortfall from the shortened test match programs in those seasons. World Rugby enjoys a considerable financial outcome ( as does the host nation ), but now we are in financial difficulty WR (World Rugby) is offering loans ( limited in amount and repayable). Doesn't sound like a financially viable program to be involved, does it??

 

[wamberal]

Likely due to a salt of the earth type in Hodgo.

There were quite a few Woodies players in the Force in the early years. Scott Fava, Keiran Longbottom, Sam Wykes. But yep, Hodgo of course. Not only played for the Woodies, but started with the Avoca Sharks.

As for the north shore, there are 150-year-old 'toff boy' schools with boat sheds that don't have postcode starting with two, you know. Their alumni aren't always gentlemen, though. One of the most rough as guts borderline crims I ever encountered came out of Geelong Grammar (admittedly was expelled before graduation day, but still).

When I first started playing grade for the Woodies, most of my team-mates were blue collar workers. The biggest thugs I ever saw played for Gordon, in the heart of the leafy north shore: Tim Bristow and Ken Yanz.


In those days of course the touch judges were supplied by the opposing teams, and they had no jurisdiction over anything except the sidelines and the goal posts. Anything went on the blind-side of the ref. The first scrum I packed down in when I moved into senior football our hooker was king-hit by the opposition rake, a former Australian rep (playing for Northern Suburbs, also in the leafy north shore). His jaw was smashed, never played the game again. He and I had played under 18s together.

 

[Braveheart81]

No doubt demonstrating my ignorance, but could someone explain the this. It seems now that with the last 2 world cups Australia has suffered a $9 mio operating loss ( in both 2015 & 2019 ), attributed to the shortfall from the shortened test match programs in those seasons. World Rugby enjoys a considerable financial outcome ( as does the host nation ), but now we are in financial difficulty WR (World Rugby) is offering loans ( limited in amount and repayable). Doesn't sound like a financially viable program to be involved, does it??

It's the cyclical nature of the sport.

Everyone essentially operates on that four year cycle and the income is pretty lumpy because certain tours are worth far more than others.

The funding received from World Rugby over each four year period also isn't just brought to account in the RWC year. This was meant to be 8.5m pounds in direct and indirect funding for the 2015 RWC cycle. Without going through the financials I am unsure how much is direct funding.

The participation fee for RWCs is paltry but likewise, what we choose to spend on participating in the RWC is largely up to us. We generally spend more on the Wallabies in RWC years because the team is together much longer.

 

[Ignoto]

How can RA entice them with the Asian market, that they haven't got ?

I'm not saying Australia has the golden key into Asia, more Australia and NZ working together will allow both parties to have a competition that will produce more viewable games in their timezones. It's clear, that Super Rugby is no longer an attraction as both viewership and attendance numbers are down in both countries. Continuing on is not an option this year and most likely not even next year either. So we have two years of experimentation upcoming.

I reckon that the JRU would be interested in joining a bigger competition than the J-League on the right terms. SANZAAR absolutely pillaged the Sunwolves and the JRU said fine, we're out. If you bring them to the table and treat them with respect and recognition, they will no doubt be intrigued by any such offer.

I think it's easily possible to make a pacific competition and both Aus and NZ retain their own seperate club championships. Australia can/would scrap the NRC to make their national club competition while the M10.

Having a pacific competition means you can tinker around with the time games are played and we've seen Super Rugby modify the kick offs this year. I cant recall what time works best for NZers, but surely 4pm (6pm NZ time in NZ) and then 6:30pm (AEST) on a Friday would work, then you can have games from 11am - 8:30pm AEST all Saturday and even Sunday afternoon rugby.

So from a broadcasters perspective, they will get more eyeballs on their product in the countries they care about.

 

[cyclopath]

Maybe that is because they are too complicated and rely on too much subjectivity to apply them? The fact that the game is doing okay in other countries does not actually help us very much, unless those unions that are prospering are willing to help us in practical ways. For example, they could stop raiding our player resources, or they could voluntarily pay a transfer fee to us or our neighbouring unions.


And I know that we have been around this circuit many times, but we are pretty much unique in having a domestic competitor playing a game which is also called "rugby", which uses a similarly shaped ball, and has a fair bit in common with our sport. Other than that it is far more popular, and enjoys widespread media coverage, with every game televised either or both on FTA and cable.



The AFL takes a huge share of our possible market, too of course. Yes, other major rugby countries have alternative winter sports, but from my time living in England, it seemed to me that rugby and association football could live quite happily and prosperously together.


So I demur: most of our issues do not revolve around the application of the laws.

Obviously I was referring to the issues of the laws as per my post, not all of rugby's issues in Australia to do with market share etc....
I find the proposition we need to change the laws of our game here to accomodate people who follow other sports anyway and like different laws / games somewhat obtuse.
If you think you're going to convert AFL fans to Rugby, think again. You'll have, at best, small numbers crossing over at the best of times. In my time living in Melbourne, they basically could not have given a rat's arse about rugby by and large. Changing the laws won't change that.

 

[Lorenzo]

There were quite a few Woodies players in the Force in the early years. Scott Fava, Keiran Longbottom, Sam Wykes. But yep, Hodgo of course. Not only played for the Woodies, but started with the Avoca Sharks.



When I first started playing grade for the Woodies, most of my team-mates were blue collar workers. The biggest thugs I ever saw played for Gordon, in the heart of the leafy north shore: Tim Bristow and Ken Yanz.


In those days of course the touch judges were supplied by the opposing teams, and they had no jurisdiction over anything except the sidelines and the goal posts. Anything went on the blind-side of the ref. The first scrum I packed down in when I moved into senior football our hooker was king-hit by the opposition rake, a former Australian rep (playing for Northern Suburbs, also in the leafy north shore). His jaw was smashed, never played the game again. He and I had played under 18s together.

My father (who played for eastwood in about 1960) told at least one awful story about Tim Bristow breaking a player's jaw.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

^^^
I was having a chat with a friend about NRL v Rugby and i stated Rugby seems to be growing faster elsewhere. He then said that is actually a myth and that NRL is growing just as fast if not faster - particularly in places like the Baltics and Russia.

Im not convinced the laws are up to scratch even internationally. But i agree with the sentiment that there is fuckall we can really do about that, and it won't help changing the laws here while the laws remain the same elsewhere.

Not entirely true. Rugby League is barely holding on in Russia after being all but wiped out in the early 00s. While the Russian Professional Rugby League (Union) is actually adding new teams and seeing increased investment. The Baltics are one area where we've seen a fair bit of flipping back and forth between the two. So kind of right in that regard.

 

[wamberal]

My father (who played for eastwood in about 1960) told at least one awful story about Tim Bristow breaking a player's jaw.

Tim was a bouncer at the Newport Arms. His speciality was getting himself into a fight with anybody who was brave enough, stupid enough, or drunk enough (preferably all three). Tim was not a boxer, but he did not need to be, he was big and tough and strong. He took a few, but when he landed one it was goodnight Irene. I saw him one night fighting a young chap who obviously fancied himself as a boxer. The young fella danced around, landing good little punches, Tim just sort of stood there, swayed a bit, finally saw his chance. He only needed to land one punch.


Another thing about Tim, he played second row (lock) but was also a really good goal-kicker. His pre-match warm-up routine consisted of half a dozen schooners, apparently.


BTW, Tim's brother Max also played for Gordon, he was a front-rower, and seemed like a fairly normal sort of person.


And as a final flourish to this tale of thuggery, Tim was a Shore Old Boy!!!!!

 

[Rugbynutter39]

See my bit about it being a global sport and it's a somewhat arrogant approach for us, as a struggling rugby nation, to assume the game globally needs fixing, laws-wise. Most places seem quite happy with the laws of the game in its current state. Why would we want all our players playing under multiple differing sets of laws depending on the match? Most of the issues I see centre around how the laws are applied.

I agree we can’t trial laws without World Rugby approval but i guess my point is because the game is struggling here being at the forefront to trial laws that speed up the game we should be keen to offer to trial and again for a domestic comp if this was the path we were to go down. Again there was no inference this would not be without World Rugby blessing to trial any proposed rule variations. Not arrogant but for me just that I guess everything should be on the table until it is taken off the table as for the very reason you outline that support for the code in this country is indeed struggling. I am ok if people don’t agree with my viewpoint but yes that is still my viewpoint on this.

 

[Brumby Runner]

So we're essentially back to the NRC and wondering whether a bit of tinkering can turn that into a viable product.

It's going to be really challenging.




They can only get so low though. It's really only the young players that can hang around for those minimum value contracts. If you're in your mid-late 20s and that's the option available you are probably pursuing a different career instead and just playing club rugby (like plenty of players do).

BH I think there is a chance it could be viable. Making a bigger deal out of having a national champion after the competition concludes will help, and if the Wallabies are then selected primarily (with some Giteau-rule players) from that competition, it will grow in reputation, I believe. There will need to be a whole lot more and better marketing put in place, of course.

The main risk to whatever takes form after COVID-19 will be the willingness of Shute Shield teams to participate especially if they go through the first year or two without winning the whole shebang.

 

[Micheal]

BH I think there is a chance it could be viable. Making a bigger deal out of having a national champion after the competition concludes will help, and if the Wallabies are then selected primarily (with some Giteau-rule players) from that competition, it will grow in reputation, I believe. There will need to be a whole lot more and better marketing put in place, of course.

The main risk to whatever takes form after COVID-19 will be the willingness of Shute Shield teams to participate especially if they go through the first year or two without winning the whole shebang.

The problem is that Sydney is so big, that consolidating the Shute Shield done to 2 or 3 teams (the max that the quality of the competition could maintain) for a higher level competition is so hard.

Northern Sydney -- Gordon, Eastwood, Norths, Manly, Warringah

Western Sydney -- Paramatta, West Harbour

Central Sydney (the Waratahs) -- Randwick, Easts, Sydney Uni

Where do Souths go?

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

The problem is that Sydney is so big, that consolidating the Shute Shield done to 2 or 3 teams (the max that the quality of the competition could maintain) for a higher level competition is so hard.

Northern Sydney -- Gordon, Eastwood, Norths, Manly, Warringah

Western Sydney -- Paramatta, West Harbour

Sydney (the Waratahs) -- Randwick, Easts, Sydney Uni, Souths.

Where do Souths go?

^There you go.

 

[dru]

Yes, I read what you wrote. I'm unsure why you think a domestic competition would be a revenue generator.

The Wallabies will continue being a revenue generator. We clearly need to find a new option as the tier below that but I think Micheal's point is valid that the money available to pay players will be much lower unless we have a lot of external funding (private owners willing to lose money). A broadcast deal and ticket sales isn't going to come close to making it self sufficient to any reasonable professional level.

I think this is the route we will be going down but I think there needs to be an expectation that it is going to require a lot of private funding to be viable.

So the income is from the WBs and Super spends it. Super costs we are told because, not enough games at sensible times, teams disappearing for chunks of time etc etc.

The key to a domestic comp is that those issues are resolved.

Private funding is ideal in any case, but the domestic comp has commercial benefits that Super cant match.

Again
Money from WB - Super spend vs Money from WB - <less than Super spend>.

 

[Micheal]

^There you go.

Well - we've solved it.

Northern Sydney
Western Sydney
The Waratahs

Queensland 1 - The Reds
Queensland 2

Melbourne Rebels
Western Force
ACT Brumbies (they take Country NSW as a region)

+ look to expand to Newcastle, Fiji, Samoa, Tonga.
+ the stronger of Twiggy's weird Asian teams (e.g. Hong Kong).

8 teams to start, looking to expand to 12 over time. Pacific Islands teams would draw mean crowds at Western Sydney games.

Randwick, Easts and Sydney Uni (e.g. the elitish clubs of the Shute Shield) taking the Waratahs brand will create instant tribalism. Northern Sydney and Western Sydney will hate them.

Play games at the smallest grounds possible. E.g. Brookvale Oval and North Sydney oval for the Northern Sydney team.

 

[Braveheart81]

So the income is from the WBs and Super spends it. Super costs we are told because, not enough games at sensible times, teams disappearing for chunks of time etc etc.

The key to a domestic comp is that those issues are resolved.

Private funding is ideal in any case, but the domestic comp has commercial benefits that Super cant match.

Again
Money from WB - Super spend vs Money from WB - <less than Super spend>.

Except under this sort of proposal that money required to fund the tier below will need to fund more teams.

If the broadcast agreement drops massively and Super Rugby ends as we know it essentially meaning the broadcast agreement is for test rugby, doesn't whatever new comp is left get told that they should establish their own broadcast deal?

Currently Rugby Australia is effectively paying the salaries of around 140 professional players both through direct Wallaby payments and distributions to the Super Rugby teams to cover player payments. This gives us the base of professional players to try and ensure we have a decent pool of players to pick from for the Wallabies.

If the money available drops substantially does that change to RA deciding that they will fund say 80 professional players in Australia either directly or via contributions for specific players of importance via their teams? You could then have a situation where those teams have to fund the remainder of their playing list through private ownership and their other revenue.

 

[KOB1987]

Well - we've solved it.

Northern Sydney
Western Sydney
The Waratahs

Queensland 1 - The Reds
Queensland 2

Melbourne Rebels
Western Force
ACT Brumbies (they take Country NSW as a region)

+ look to expand to Newcastle, Fiji, Samoa, Tonga.
+ the stronger of Twiggy's weird Asian teams (e.g. Hong Kong).

8 teams to start, looking to expand to 12 over time. Pacific Islands teams would draw mean crowds at Western Sydney games.

Randwick, Easts and Sydney Uni (e.g. the elitish clubs of the Shute Shield) taking the Waratahs brand will create instant tribalism. Northern Sydney and Western Sydney will hate them.

Play games at the smallest grounds possible. E.g. Brookvale Oval and North Sydney oval for the Northern Sydney team.

Nah fuck that, put Country NSW in with the Western Sydney team. The Brumbies have the Southern Inland region already.

 

[Micheal]

Nah fuck that, put Country NSW in with the Western Sydney team. The Brumbies have the Southern Inland region already.

In what world is NSW Country related to Western Sydney?

 

[KOB1987]

In what world is NSW Country related to Western Sydney?

In what world is NSW Country related to the Brumbies? It’s part of NSW not the ACT. The Brumbies have enough quality players, a rep side built from Parra/West’s will get smashed by all of the sides you propose. So if you throw the players from the actual NSW Country rep sides in with them it might make the team remotely competitive.

 

[Pfitzy]

It is pretty clear that no domestic professional competition will work unless certain clubs are allowed to appear as themselves.

So, let them.

Once they pay the franchise fee to participate, we'll see whether they've got the business acumen to sustain a club as a commercial operation.

Because fuck knows they don't seem to have it right now.

 

[dru]

Except under this sort of proposal that money required to fund the tier below will need to fund more teams.

If the broadcast agreement drops massively and Super Rugby ends as we know it essentially meaning the broadcast agreement is for test rugby, doesn't whatever new comp is left get told that they should establish their own broadcast deal?

Currently Rugby Australia is effectively paying the salaries of around 140 professional players both through direct Wallaby payments and distributions to the Super Rugby teams to cover player payments. This gives us the base of professional players to try and ensure we have a decent pool of players to pick from for the Wallabies.

If the money available drops substantially does that change to RA deciding that they will fund say 80 professional players in Australia either directly or via contributions for specific players of importance via their teams? You could then have a situation where those teams have to fund the remainder of their playing list through private ownership and their other revenue.

Funded
a) from saving in international travel, accommodation and away from homes expenses.
b) from more home games to build a greater sustainability from the clubs themselves
c) greater broadcast "ability" hopefully over time landing better $broadcast opportunities - for the pro comp, not the WBS.

I would MUCH prefer to run domestic here with a largely level talent spread, than to introduce NZ teams or even PI/JAPAN. UNLESS something happened to level the team talent, which it wont in NZ, so leave them out.

Happy to consider a Champions Cup style thing at the end. NZ can have their Super franchises, we need rep teams selected from the domestic comp, two teams only, that ensure potential WB players are included. But if it's just a pointless no chance of the Aus domestic teams achieving anything, I dont want part in that either.