1. I believe in club rugby, have played it and watched it and been a member for more years than I can count, just about. My club chose me, I happened to have been born in Eastwood. More than fair, not advocating for anyone who already has an affiliation to a club to change, just ones like for example Rob Simmons who came from QLD
2. If we want the best for our players, at all levels, they should be free to choose for whom they play, as a general principle. I assume that a lot of them will want to play for the team that is closest to their home. They're employees, sometimes they have to do things theyre not going to 100% enjoy, again like every single other job on the face of the earth. As far as having to travel a little further in order to get paid well to kick a footy around, i think they'd be going ok
3. Forcing players to travel long distances just for the sake of an affiliation is just weird. What is gained from this sort of involuntary relationship? The example I used is valid. If a player is a full time professional his first allegiance is to the elite team that he represents, would the Tahs, for example, want Hooper to attend training at Penrith a couple of times a week? It's really not that far, from Moore Park to the Riff is about an hour, most people spend that long on a commute to work normally. As for whats to be gained? Growing the game of rugby is gained, helping create a level playing field, ensuring teams like Penrith arent a laughing stock, showing that NSWRU actually give a fuck about the area. They aren't paid to just play footy they're ambassadors for the code using your logic junior club visits should never occur because they are too far away for players to attend and their focus should be on the tahs. Using Hooper as an example is just horrible, he isn't required at shute shield training and was a junior there so of course he is entitled to stay at Manly. However if there were a fringe tahs player that moved from another state who lived in Manly, then yes they would be required to go
4. If a player is on the way up, what is gained by removing him from the district club for which he has played for a year or two, or longer and requiring him to travel long distances - at his own expense? Again advocating new players, not ones that already have an affiliation, as for at their own expense, its part of their job! Nobody else bitches and moans when they have to travel around for work, it's a requirement of the job
5. This sort of authoritarianism might work in some countries, but it would not work in Australia. Literally just listed like 5 scenarios withing NSW rugby league where the practice is commonplace, and even more strict than what i'm suggesting