Australian Rugby / RA

[Muzza]

1. he's a good coach
2. perhaps he's already on a full time contract from RA and therefore saves money having to hire someone else.
3. Defense strategies have evolved since his time with the wallabies.

1. he's a good coach- Debatable- While he did well with the Waratahs when they won super rugby. He's has dropped the ball massively since then. one look at the Waratahs defence when he was in charge at the end . No to mention the wallabies.
2. perhaps he's already on a full time contract from RA and therefore saves money having to hire - This is probably more likely
3. Defense strategies have evolved since his time with the wallabies. - I bloody hope so

Still head scratching on this one

 

[RugbyReg]

What’s the recent record between the respective GF winners?

 

[Slim 293]

A nice meaty article in the Good Weekend about the state of our game and how we got to here.........

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-...ave-rugby-union-20210203-p56z7r.html#comments

 

[Derpus]

Reg (i think it was Reg) gets a mention for that article he threw up on the front page last year.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

A nice meaty article in the Good Weekend about the state of our game and how we got to here...

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-...ave-rugby-union-20210203-p56z7r.html#comments

Really good article that lays bare the past mismanagement issues and challenges rugby faces. I do agree I think rugby hit its low point and making slow climb back up. Still lot of critical decisions and inflexion points as to how quickly we climb back up vs stall and/or make two steps forward and 3 steps back. Short and long term plans important here. Example is short term we might see private equity investment, how that looks is critical but equally what we do with any private equity funds provided for investment and how invest that in the game critical to avoid 2003 lions fiasco where we pissed away the windfall made from that.

Under Castle and Hamish lot of good decisions been made (Castle led the groundwork for new broadcast deal) and hopefully continues to see good well thought through decisions made as lot of strategic blueprint decisions still to come eg future trans Tasman vs domestic comp vs how tap into Asia / growth from both footprint and fan engagement perspective. Without doubt rugby in the middle of critical period as to whether can recover and return to glory days of stronger oz rugby profile and support.

 

[dru]

Reg (i think it was Reg) gets a mention for that article he threw up on the front page last year.

One of the most important articles written at the time, and probably still is. Serious wake up call.

 

[Quick Hands]

A nice meaty article in the Good Weekend about the state of our game and how we got to here...

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-...ave-rugby-union-20210203-p56z7r.html#comments

Excellent article which highlights many of the points which I have been raising (along with many others for some time).



Unfortunately my take on the article is that many of those running the game still don't really get what the problem is.
FitzSimons gets it to a degree, but I suspect he's hankering for amateur era sentimentality in a professional world.

Super Rugby isn't the answer to the problems, whether it's TT, Super Rugby Au or the old style pan-continental model.

"Rugby has lost its theatre,” says FitzSimons. “There are no characters any more. Now we have 15 professional footballers whom no one can relate to. The key is to know who is representing us again, to care about them, and to see them win.”


He's talking about the Wallabies here, but it applies even more to Super Rugby (and also applied to NRC)

Interesting that it confirms what many have been saying - that the state-based Super Rugby franchises have been propped up financially year in and year out. You just can't run a professional sports league where the national body stops franchises from failing by bailing out poorly run bodies who have little idea how to attract new fans or even to keep the ones which they once had. (Read NSWRU)

A pro sport league works best when it employs customised versions of one of two models:

The NFL private franchise model where private individuals run the team for a profit (but recognise the need to energise a fan base for TV viewers and merchandise buyers) or the EPL/NRL model where the body of clubs who participate run the competition for a profit.

No matter which model is run, the common denominator for success is that the back office is run by highly competent administrators unencumbered by old boys networks while the unsuccessful clubs have shambolic back offices with ex-players and time-serving administrators desperately holding on to power at the expense of results.

Sports fans want emotional buy-in to the teams that they support. Wayne Bennett recently spoke about what he's learnt about sports fans in Sydney since he's moved here and he's right. In Brisbane and Canberra, fans will coalesce around a combined state or Brisbane or Canberra team and invest in it. That doesn't and won't happen in Sydney. Sports fans here have emotional buy in to their own region or part of Sydney. They'll support the Waratahs when they're winning, more as a social event than anything else, but there's no emotional attachment they way that there is elsewhere in Australia. Running a state-based pro-sports model won't work in Sydney, where there is a much more significant and longstanding emotional attachment to the local area/region of Sydney.

I understand that it's not the narrative that the majority of posters here want to hear, but until rugby sorts out the mutual distrust and dislike between the NSWRU and the SRU then any pro rugby in Sydney will fail and if it fails in Sydney it's not as marketable nationwide.



“I am getting into it and buying into what it means to the club,” Bennett said.
“Everywhere you go fans grab you and remind you who you are playing.
“It’s what makes the game, it’s why I love it.

“It’s what people outside Sydney don’t get about Sydney – the genuine rivalry between the clubs here.
“Because that’s what the fans want here in Sydney. They embrace the national league, but they also embrace the club rivalry and unless you live in Sydney you didn’t realise how strong it is.”
https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nr...s/news-story/0d6524de4a2305010a9a0f00d4b5c1b1

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Excellent article which highlights many of the points which I have been raising (along with many others for some time).



Unfortunately my take on the article is that many of those running the game still don't really get what the problem is.
FitzSimons gets it to a degree, but I suspect he's hankering for amateur era sentimentality in a professional world.

Super Rugby isn't the answer to the problems, whether it's TT, Super Rugby Au or the old style pan-continental model.

"Rugby has lost its theatre,” says FitzSimons. “There are no characters any more. Now we have 15 professional footballers whom no one can relate to. The key is to know who is representing us again, to care about them, and to see them win.”


He's talking about the Wallabies here, but it applies even more to Super Rugby (and also applied to NRC)

Interesting that it confirms what many have been saying - that the state-based Super Rugby franchises have been propped up financially year in and year out. You just can't run a professional sports league where the national body stops franchises from failing by bailing out poorly run bodies who have little idea how to attract new fans or even to keep the ones which they once had. (Read NSWRU)

A pro sport league works best when it employs customised versions of one of two models:

The NFL private franchise model where private individuals run the team for a profit (but recognise the need to energise a fan base for TV viewers and merchandise buyers) or the EPL/NRL model where the body of clubs who participate run the competition for a profit.

No matter which model is run, the common denominator for success is that the back office is run by highly competent administrators unencumbered by old boys networks while the unsuccessful clubs have shambolic back offices with ex-players and time-serving administrators desperately holding on to power at the expense of results.

Sports fans want emotional buy-in to the teams that they support. Wayne Bennett recently spoke about what he's learnt about sports fans in Sydney since he's moved here and he's right. In Brisbane and Canberra, fans will coalesce around a combined state or Brisbane or Canberra team and invest in it. That doesn't and won't happen in Sydney. Sports fans here have emotional buy in to their own region or part of Sydney. They'll support the Waratahs when they're winning, more as a social event than anything else, but there's no emotional attachment they way that there is elsewhere in Australia. Running a state-based pro-sports model won't work in Sydney, where there is a much more significant and longstanding emotional attachment to the local area/region of Sydney.

I understand that it's not the narrative that the majority of posters here want to hear, but until rugby sorts out the mutual distrust and dislike between the NSWRU and the SRU then any pro rugby in Sydney will fail and if it fails in Sydney it's not as marketable nationwide.



“I am getting into it and buying into what it means to the club,” Bennett said.
“Everywhere you go fans grab you and remind you who you are playing.
“It’s what makes the game, it’s why I love it.

“It’s what people outside Sydney don’t get about Sydney – the genuine rivalry between the clubs here.
“Because that’s what the fans want here in Sydney. They embrace the national league, but they also embrace the club rivalry and unless you live in Sydney you didn’t realise how strong it is.”
https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nr...s/news-story/0d6524de4a2305010a9a0f00d4b5c1b1

That's the model going forward for the likes of Super Rugby in my opinion. Especially if PE comes on board. I'd be happy for both RA and NZR to have a seat at the table but it needs to be a separate body operating the competition as a going concern. Only then will we see the game at a domestic professional level begin to push forward.

 

[Quick Hands]

Note the long term strategy implicit in the AFL expansion compared with rugby. (my bold)

And I note in passing that in 3 short years AFL at Newington has gone from 1 team to 5 teams, while rugby has shrink in every age group.


“These things are generational. They don’t happen overnight. I don’t think it’s been a deliberate strategy by the AFL to say, ‘let’s take rugby union’s supporters’. But the AFL long ago identified that every participant brings along a commercial partner. In other words, if my kid’s playing footy, I go and watch footy, and so does my wife and my parents. Participation brings commercial benefits.

“The most important thing you have in any business model is control of your business. That’s what the AFL has. The attitude in rugby is if we beat the All Blacks, the game will be OK. Any business that depends upon one focal point to develop its income stream is always going to be susceptible to failure.”

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl...ening-at-rugby-s-expense-20210416-p57jtz.html

 

[hifflepiff]

“The most important thing you have in any business model is control of your business. That’s what the AFL has. The attitude in rugby is if we beat the All Blacks, the game will be OK. Any business that depends upon one focal point to develop its income stream is always going to be susceptible to failure.”

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl...ening-at-rugby-s-expense-20210416-p57jtz.html

This right here is the single biggest issue in Australian rugby and why its so important to build a sustainable domestic competition.

 

[wamberal]

This right here is the single biggest issue in Australian rugby and why its so important to build a sustainable domestic competition.

Building a sustainable domestic competition would take a huge heap of money over a number of years. It would also require the establishment of something approaching a consensus amongst the bulk of the code's stakeholders.

The AFL and NRL competitions are built on the foundations of existing franchises from two existing competitions. That worked for them. Soccer built a new comp from new franchises. Their success is mixed.

Which would we do? One franchise each from WA, VIC, and the ACT? Four from QLD, five from NSW, maybe.

Would we retain existing club identities, wherever possible, following the lead of the AFL and NRL? That is where the trouble starts, especially in NSW. The strongest "club" is Sydney University. The others, at a guess, on playing strength and financial criteria would probably be Gordon, Eastern Suburbs, Norths, Warringah - at a guess, or did I say that.

Throwing any of those franchises to the wolves (having already kicked Randwick, Manly, Southern, West Harbour, Eastwood, Parramatta and Penrith out) would take a lot of courage, because it is absolutely certain that a lot of supporters, volunteers, and players would walk. Maybe to subbies.

The challenge might be simpler in QLD. I do not know.

The only way we would know is if the game of rugby in Australia was handed over to a Commissioner, who is given a budget of, let's think of a number? $100 mill? More?

Would it be possible to sell the franchises? Not the existing five in Sydney, I would have thought, nor the four in QLD. Maybe the other three.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Building a sustainable domestic competition would take a huge heap of money over a number of years. It would also require the establishment of something approaching a consensus amongst the bulk of the code's stakeholders.

The AFL and NRL competitions are built on the foundations of existing franchises from two existing competitions. That worked for them. Soccer built a new comp from new franchises. Their success is mixed.

Which would we do? One franchise each from WA, VIC, and the ACT? Four from QLD, five from NSW, maybe.

Would we retain existing club identities, wherever possible, following the lead of the AFL and NRL? That is where the trouble starts, especially in NSW. The strongest "club" is Sydney University. The others, at a guess, on playing strength and financial criteria would probably be Gordon, Eastern Suburbs, Norths, Warringah - at a guess, or did I say that.

Throwing any of those franchises to the wolves (having already kicked Randwick, Manly, Southern, West Harbour, Eastwood, Parramatta and Penrith out) would take a lot of courage, because it is absolutely certain that a lot of supporters, volunteers, and players would walk. Maybe to subbies.

The challenge might be simpler in QLD. I do not know.

The only way we would know is if the game of rugby in Australia was handed over to a Commissioner, who is given a budget of, let's think of a number? $100 mill? More?

Would it be possible to sell the franchises? Not the existing five in Sydney, I would have thought, nor the four in QLD. Maybe the other three.

We don't need to have 5 franchises from NSW or 4 in Queensland. We don't necessarily even need a purely domestic based competition. What we need is for any structure which in all likelihood will be a TT competition to be run as a commercial enterprise with a defined pathway for growth from a 12 team structure to an eventual 16 team structure over a set timeframe. This would require the competition to be run independent of the national Unions with the primary goal of develop it as a going concern. Not as merely an extended Wallabies/ABs trial.

The reason the AFL is as successful as it is comes right down to planning. And it's something we should take into account. Straight off the bat there should be plans for a new team in both Sydney and Brisbane/QLD within a 5 or so year period. I'd prefer it to be a WS team but I'd even support one based in the city's north from a Sydney based perspective. It should be done with PE in mind and allow for more open recruitment in order to ensure maximal competitiveness.

From there there should be a second longer term plan or around 10 years to implement Syd 3 and Aus 9. Importantly each of these plans need to come with defined and actionable community engagement and participation development in the period leading into their inception.

 

[wamberal]

We don't need to have 5 franchises from NSW or 4 in Queensland. We don't necessarily even need a purely domestic based competition. What we need is for any structure which in all likelihood will be a TT competition to be run as a commercial enterprise with a defined pathway for growth from a 12 team structure to an eventual 16 team structure over a set timeframe. This would require the competition to be run independent of the national Unions with the primary goal of develop it as a going concern. Not as merely an extended Wallabies/ABs trial.

The reason the AFL is as successful as it is comes right down to planning. And it's something we should take into account. .

The reason that the AFL is successful is that every kid in Melbourne adopts a team almost before they are weaned. Yes, they were quick off the mark to understand the value of a national product in terms of the needs of their big sponsors, and that is why they expanded from an existing popular competition.

Another reason is that their game is locally governed, the rules can be tweaked at will. It is perceived as being fast and exciting. Just about every game draws a large, involved, crowd, which adds to the sense of theatre.

Planning is okay when there is something to plan. What is the identity of your 12 teams? All artificial entities? Sorry, won't work. Both the NRL and the AFL are based on a significant base of traditional rivalries and followings.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

The reason that the AFL is successful is that every kid in Melbourne adopts a team almost before they are weaned. Yes, they were quick off the mark to understand the value of a national product in terms of the needs of their big sponsors, and that is why they expanded from an existing popular competition.

Another reason is that their game is locally governed, the rules can be tweaked at will. It is perceived as being fast and exciting. Just about every game draws a large, involved, crowd, which adds to the sense of theatre.

Planning is okay when there is something to plan. What is the identity of your 12 teams? All artificial entities? Sorry, won't work. Both the NRL and the AFL are based on a significant base of traditional rivalries and followings.

Never suggested 12 teams. I suggested adding 4 more over a 10+ year period. I also suggested that as part of a properly planned pathway community engagement and participation development programs would need to be implemented in the years leading in. I suggested the likes of North Sydney in my example as the girth of clubs would actually make this an easier task. Yes, it would impact the Tahs but that's not necessarily a bad thing. Might make the organisation get more proactive to protect and develop the territory is has left.

You're entire stance is negated by the existence of the GWS Giants. I actually grew up in the 'Greater West'. I even still live in that area. Everything involved with the team is down to planning. Every kid that shows up wearing their kit hasn't been guided to the club before they were weaned. They are the result of well planned and implemented community engagement programs. Not some deep engrained affinity for the game built over generations that a lot of club advocates like to allude to when they refer to tribalism. And I can tell you. If there are more AFL clubs in my region of the 'Greater West' then it's only a small increase because it very much still a very League dominated area.

Same can be said of the Eagles and Dockers. The Crows and Port. The Lions and Suns. And even the Swans. Some had the advantage of being set up in AFL strongholds but none of them with the exception of Port were originally local clubs. All franchises (yes, in Melbourne the Swans and Lions were once clubs and still have a local base but they were very much franchises upon their arrivals in Sydney and Brisbane) that were implanted and had to draw in fans through engagement etc.

Another good example is the BBL. I know many older people who absolutely hated it. At least publicly. But the sheer number of Thunder and Sixers tops you see kids wearing in the summer is testament to the long term plan of growing the fan base with you a lot of those franchises are looking to do.

The issue here isn't the game inability to be an attractive option for kids to play. Or whether a new franchise will be able to draw in fans. It's the games willingness to actually put in work to build anything worthwhile in this regard. Instead opting to look for the easy way forward and making excuses why it would just be too hard and insurmountable to literally do what one of it's main competitors has been for 30+ years.

 

[wamberal]

You're entire stance is negated by the existence of the GWS Giants. I actually grew up in the 'Greater West'. I even still live in that area. Everything involved with the team is down to planning. Every kid that shows up wearing their kit hasn't been guided to the club before they were weaned. They are the result of well planned and implemented community engagement programs. Not some deep engrained affinity for the game built over generations that a lot of club advocates like to allude to when they refer to tribalism. And I can tell you. If there are more AFL clubs in my region of the 'Greater West' then it's only a small increase because it very much still a very League dominated area.

You are totally missing the point. It was the enormous financial and political strength of the VFL that enabled expansion. Not "planning". Everything they did was incremental.

Same can be said of the Eagles and Dockers. The Crows and Port. The Lions and Suns. And even the Swans. Some had the advantage of being set up in AFL strongholds but none of them with the exception of Port were originally local clubs. All franchises (yes, in Melbourne the Swans and Lions were once clubs and still have a local base but they were very much franchises upon their arrivals in Sydney and Brisbane) that were implanted.

The Swans almost went broke. Aussie Rules was enormously popular in WA and SA which made the path easy for their involvement in a national competition.

The issue here isn't the game inability to be an attractive option for kids to play. Or whether a new franchise will be able to draw in fans. It's the games willingness to actually put in work to build anything worthwhile in this regard. Instead opting to look for the easy way forward and making excuses why it would just be too hard and insurmountable to literally do what one of it's main competitors has been for 30+ years.

Planning would address precisely those issues. At the end of the day we are a relatively minor professional sport in Australia. The game can barely tread water these days. Where will the financial and other resources come from to build this utopian future? And please don't say they will come from "planning". That is just going around in circles.

 

[eastman]

Planning is okay when there is something to plan. What is the identity of your 12 teams? All artificial entities? Sorry, won't work. Both the NRL and the AFL are based on a significant base of traditional rivalries and followings.

We've tried to make the Shute Shield a legitimate third tier through the ARC/ NRC and it hasn't worked. You can't elevate and leverage the existing Shute Shield structure and expect it to be sustainable - the clubs couldn't functionally scale and their catchment is too small for widespread interest.

I think Super Rugby AU/ TT with some minor tweaks (in line with WCR's ideas) is the best we can do under the current constraints (and not completely bankrupt Rugby AU in the process). In the next 5 to 7 year's we should look to add one/ two additional teams being a Western Sydney or Southern Brisbane team. Let's change the name of the NSW Waratahs to the Eastern Waratahs to reflect who they actually represent and let's build tribalism using the East/ West or North/ South divide.

Obviously this would require 'proper' professional planning and stakeholder engagement including aligning existing clubs with the new franchises.

 

[wamberal]

We've tried to make the Shute Shield a legitimate third tier through the ARC/ NRC and it hasn't worked. You can't elevate and leverage the existing Shute Shield structure and expect it to be sustainable - the clubs couldn't functionally scale and their catchment is too small for widespread interest.

Shute Shield did not want to be made into a third tier through the ARC. I went to as many ARC games as I could. Along with a couple of other hundred other spectators. The rugby was actually pretty good, it was on FTA.

I think Super Rugby AU/ TT with some minor tweaks (in line with WCR's ideas) is the best we can do under the current constraints (and not completely bankrupt Rugby AU in the process). In the next 5 to 7 year's we should look to add one/ two additional teams being a Western Sydney or Southern Brisbane team. Let's change the name of the NSW Waratahs to the Eastern Waratahs

Pretty unambitious objective, I would have thought. Hardly going to revolutionise the game here.

Obviously this would require 'proper' professional planning and stakeholder engagement including aligning existing clubs with the new franchises.

I have done a bit of "proper" planning in a very large and successful sporting organisation. There is nothing magical about it. But it is overwhelmingly important to go through a strategy development process, and to set achievable objectives, bearing in mind the strengths and weaknesses of the opposition (and your own organisation) AND the available resources, before developing an action plan.

It does help if you have a popular sport to begin with.

 

[hifflepiff]

We've tried to make the Shute Shield a legitimate third tier through the ARC/ NRC and it hasn't worked. You can't elevate and leverage the existing Shute Shield structure and expect it to be sustainable - the clubs couldn't functionally scale and their catchment is too small for widespread interest.

I think Super Rugby AU/ TT with some minor tweaks (in line with WCR's ideas) is the best we can do under the current constraints (and not completely bankrupt Rugby AU in the process). In the next 5 to 7 year's we should look to add one/ two additional teams being a Western Sydney or Southern Brisbane team. Let's change the name of the NSW Waratahs to the Eastern Waratahs to reflect who they actually represent and let's build tribalism using the East/ West or North/ South divide.

Obviously this would require 'proper' professional planning and stakeholder engagement including aligning existing clubs with the new franchises.

Yep Waratahs become Sydney Waratahs and find an individual or collection of individuals that can stump up the cash for a West Sydney team, ala MLR (Twiggy?).

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

You are totally missing the point. It was the enormous financial and political strength of the VFL that enabled expansion. Not "planning". Everything they did was incremental.

Almost as though they identified areas in which they saw potential in which to grow into and put in place the necessary elements be it financial or political in order to get things moving forward.

The Swans almost went broke. Aussie Rules was enormously popular in WA and SA which made the path easy for their involvement in a national competition.

And yet they persisted. And kept to the goal of building the fan base that now supports the club.

Planning would address precisely those issues. At the end of the day we are a relatively minor professional sport in Australia. The game can barely tread water these days. Where will the financial and other resources come from to build this utopian future? And please don't say they will come from "planning". That is just going around in circles.

We're comfortably 3rd in terms of professional football codes and like 4th when you include Cricket. That's based on ratings not my own assumptions. That's a reasonable base in which to grow from. I'm not suggesting we'll grow to AFL proportions. Nor should we with our resources. But building out to a point where we as many as 9 teams in a TT competition with the right planning is achievable.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

We've tried to make the Shute Shield a legitimate third tier through the ARC/ NRC and it hasn't worked. You can't elevate and leverage the existing Shute Shield structure and expect it to be sustainable - the clubs couldn't functionally scale and their catchment is too small for widespread interest.

I think Super Rugby AU/ TT with some minor tweaks (in line with WCR's ideas) is the best we can do under the current constraints (and not completely bankrupt Rugby AU in the process). In the next 5 to 7 year's we should look to add one/ two additional teams being a Western Sydney or Southern Brisbane team. Let's change the name of the NSW Waratahs to the Eastern Waratahs to reflect who they actually represent and let's build tribalism using the East/ West or North/ South divide.

Obviously this would require 'proper' professional planning and stakeholder engagement including aligning existing clubs with the new franchises.

Honestly, some times it feels as though some within our game tend to view the game as their own little secret club. And it's easier to protect that club by sowing the idea that we're just too small and it will be just far too hard to do anything. So we might as well not even try. Just stay in our comfortable little bubbles.