formerflanker
Ken Catchpole (46)
Perhaps the missing piece is a clash between power sources. Having a sponsor dictate the sport's strategic direction may not have gone down well at headquarters.
Australian Rugby / RA
- Thread starter Dave Beat
- Start date
Perhaps the missing piece is a clash between power sources. Having a sponsor dictate the sport's strategic direction may not have gone down well at headquarters.
Strewthcobber
Simon Poidevin (60)
What's Sydney unis position on the NRC these days? The Buildcorp board have plenty of connections back there
Sent from my D5833 using Tapatalk
Sent from my D5833 using Tapatalk
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
Standalone?
BDA
Jim Lenehan (48)
Not sure if this is the right thread to post this on but thought this might be as good as any. I've been thinking a lot about how Aus rugby can change its fortunes in the competitive sports market we have.
I would think growing the game in Australia will take a lot of work at all levels, but mostly from the bottom up. Obviously the ARU will have to invest predominantly in growing the game at the grass roots / junior level. But to be honest I don't know anything about how we might achieve that and I clearly a lot of the learned posters on this site are much better placed to comment on that.
What I do know however is that sporting a sports community is a bit of a chicken and egg scenario. By that I mean, in order to get kids engaged in the game, we need to create interest in the Australian provincial teams. There is a lot to be said for the old adage "winning solves everything". When teams are winning their fan base grows, they inspire new fans, they create general interest in the community and that usually translates to financial success. I'm a true believer that having successful super teams is key to assisting the ARU's efforts (whatever they might be) to bring more youngsters to the game.
So that brings me to my point which is how do we improve our super teams, given that, based on the current landscape, we seriously lack the depth of quality talent needed to compete with the likes of NZ which appears to have an almost comical over supply of quality rugby player. To that end, my suggestion was that the ARU consider relaxing the rules for our Super rugby franchises to sign overseas players.
I'd actually like to see our super franchises bring in some ITM Cup players who haven't yet been signed by a NZ super franchise. It seems to me to be the obvious short term solution. There is almost unprecedented depth in NZ and we could take advantage of that. I have no doubt that there are many NZ based players that would love to come play in Aus. Hell I've never met a kiwi that didn't want to move here. As seen from the NZBarbars game against the lions. There's some great players over there that don't have super contracts that would could be Super rugby worthy. I think bringing in 4 or 5 quality NZ youngsters to each of our super teams could make us more competitive. hell, poach some NZ coaches. If it improves the quality of our sides then that will only be a benefit for our players who are playing in a winning environment.
If you look at the NRL, Australia has ridiculous depth but nevertheless most teams have about 4 or 5 kiwis on the roster. We should take more advantage of the amazing playing pool that we have just a stones throw away.
Of course this is just a short term fix, but as I said above the end goal is long term. If we can improve our talent at the top, that should translate to more success long term.
Just a thought.
I would think growing the game in Australia will take a lot of work at all levels, but mostly from the bottom up. Obviously the ARU will have to invest predominantly in growing the game at the grass roots / junior level. But to be honest I don't know anything about how we might achieve that and I clearly a lot of the learned posters on this site are much better placed to comment on that.
What I do know however is that sporting a sports community is a bit of a chicken and egg scenario. By that I mean, in order to get kids engaged in the game, we need to create interest in the Australian provincial teams. There is a lot to be said for the old adage "winning solves everything". When teams are winning their fan base grows, they inspire new fans, they create general interest in the community and that usually translates to financial success. I'm a true believer that having successful super teams is key to assisting the ARU's efforts (whatever they might be) to bring more youngsters to the game.
So that brings me to my point which is how do we improve our super teams, given that, based on the current landscape, we seriously lack the depth of quality talent needed to compete with the likes of NZ which appears to have an almost comical over supply of quality rugby player. To that end, my suggestion was that the ARU consider relaxing the rules for our Super rugby franchises to sign overseas players.
I'd actually like to see our super franchises bring in some ITM Cup players who haven't yet been signed by a NZ super franchise. It seems to me to be the obvious short term solution. There is almost unprecedented depth in NZ and we could take advantage of that. I have no doubt that there are many NZ based players that would love to come play in Aus. Hell I've never met a kiwi that didn't want to move here. As seen from the NZBarbars game against the lions. There's some great players over there that don't have super contracts that would could be Super rugby worthy. I think bringing in 4 or 5 quality NZ youngsters to each of our super teams could make us more competitive. hell, poach some NZ coaches. If it improves the quality of our sides then that will only be a benefit for our players who are playing in a winning environment.
If you look at the NRL, Australia has ridiculous depth but nevertheless most teams have about 4 or 5 kiwis on the roster. We should take more advantage of the amazing playing pool that we have just a stones throw away.
Of course this is just a short term fix, but as I said above the end goal is long term. If we can improve our talent at the top, that should translate to more success long term.
Just a thought.
I like to watch
David Codey (61)
You don't need a successful wallabies/Super teams to engage the kids.
What they need is an introduction to the game, if they enjoy it, and their team whoever it is, is competitive, that's enough for them.
We've had this trickle down theory for 20 years, and look where it's got us.
The Tahs won the comp in '14, and they are setting records for poor attendance this year.
Kids can't dream about something they don't know about.
Short term fixes, if there are any, are not long term solutions.
Hard work and good processes are what is required to turn things around.
What they need is an introduction to the game, if they enjoy it, and their team whoever it is, is competitive, that's enough for them.
We've had this trickle down theory for 20 years, and look where it's got us.
The Tahs won the comp in '14, and they are setting records for poor attendance this year.
Kids can't dream about something they don't know about.
Short term fixes, if there are any, are not long term solutions.
Hard work and good processes are what is required to turn things around.
amirite
Chilla Wilson (44)
There's literally two 10s who've started most of the season for Aussie Super Rugby teams brought in under this logic. And that's just two examples.
You seem very well meaning, but I think you're poorly researched.
The last thing the "fix Australian rugby" conversation needs is more misinformation.
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
Sukkar has a seat at the directors table and is on the board nimnation committee.
There's a serious governance problem when she withdraws money because her strategic view is not adopted.
The gene pool in oz rugbyadmin, particularly, needs refilling.
The Women's comp is not about where the womens game is now, it's about where it should be in the future. When Sevens was announced as an Olympic sport we had no women as household names in Australia. Now young girls can look at Shannon Parry, Charlotte Caslick and Sharni Williams to look up to. We need a comp that provides a pathway to the top.
Who would have thought last year that a Women's AFL comp would be viable? It turned out to be a great competition.
Buildcorp have been great for the game in Australia and should be applauded for all they have done. They have made a stand on the NRC but that hasn't seem to have made an impact on their investment in numerous clubs and in the Wallaroos.
I think a Women's NRC would be a good development for the game in Australia and would lead to a top down growth of the game. There is a real hunger for women's sport at the moment and rugby need to get on board as XV's is a game that can suit everyone.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Who would have thought last year that a Women's AFL comp would be viable? It turned out to be a great competition.
Buildcorp have been great for the game in Australia and should be applauded for all they have done. They have made a stand on the NRC but that hasn't seem to have made an impact on their investment in numerous clubs and in the Wallaroos.
I think a Women's NRC would be a good development for the game in Australia and would lead to a top down growth of the game. There is a real hunger for women's sport at the moment and rugby need to get on board as XV's is a game that can suit everyone.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
kiap
Steve Williams (59)
Not sure on that, but it's a good idea.
Give Clyne the boot (don't let the door hit your arse on the way out, Cam) so Josephine Sukkar becomes the new Chairwoman.
She has brought more to the table than ol' patsy.
You don't need a successful Wallabies team....... but fuck me it helps.
I acknowledge your point but it has to be a two-handed approach. Kids need a good introduction to the game but they also need heroes to aspire to, posters on the wall. I had Eales and Larkham (and look at me now- the ultimate hybrid, a devastating mix of physicality and skill).
.
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
Wouldn't be hard - but she's got or had a clear conflict of interestNot sure on that, but it's a good idea.
Give Clyne the boot (don't let the door hit your arse on the way out, Cam) so Josephine Sukkar becomes the new Chairwoman.
She has brought more to the table than ol' patsy.
I like to watch
David Codey (61)
Putting your awesomeness aside for a moment.
seems to me that the ARU is using a two handed approach.
They are giving the pros money hand over fist, and unfortunately game development is only getting the fist.....
Yeah no arguments there.
It's really interesting that we have never had the type of debate that is happening in cricket at the moment. Where the Player's Association loudly acknowledges the importance of grassroots development, and actively campaigns for that part of the game to get a big slice of the pie.
Think the RUPA deal comes up this year as well. Given the ARU's contract negotiation skills we could see Bernard Foley be given the keys to Bill Pulver's house.
.
Not sure on that, but it's a good idea.
Give Clyne the boot (don't let the door hit your arse on the way out, Cam) so Josephine Sukkar becomes the new Chairwoman.
She has brought more to the table than ol' patsy.
Sukkar has been one of the four people on the nominations committee for the appointments of Clyne, Broderick, McLean, and Marlow.
So there's a reasonable chance Clyne is one of the things she has brought to the table.
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
Very good
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
That's D Clyne - Despite Broderick's intimate connection with the Shore mafia its hard to fault her appointment; Patsy on the other hand relieved me of any risk of having to pay CGT on my few NAB shares for most of my adult life, so I guess I owe him something.Sukkar has been one of the four people on the nominations committee for the appointments of Clyne, Broderick, McLean, and Marlow.
So there's a reasonable chance Clyne is one of the things she has brought to the table.
RedsHappy
Tony Shaw (54)
Has this absolute gem of ARU-related gossip and insider-stuff been posted elsewhere?
'ARU's lost sponsorship could trigger boardroom change' - Roy Masters, SMH Online, June 9, 2017
Well, here goes:
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/rug...trigger-boardroom-change-20170608-gwnaav.html
'ARU's lost sponsorship could trigger boardroom change' - Roy Masters, SMH Online, June 9, 2017
Well, here goes:
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/rug...trigger-boardroom-change-20170608-gwnaav.html
RedsHappy
Tony Shaw (54)
Reds emergence as rugby heros in SE Queensland in 2010-12 was massive for code participation in almost all levels, 'lots of positives around rugby', increased media coverage, etc, etc.
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
Her conflict of interest does not evasporate because she is a woman. Alan Joyce is head of a major sponsor so why don't we put him on the board so he can wield his influence well beyond his voting power?
This is just replacing one form of cronyism with another.
This is just replacing one form of cronyism with another.
I don't think Roy Masters has really done it intentionally but if you add together the points he has raised that
a. Sukkar is on the nominations committee
b. is unhappy with the choices made by the ARU and
c. that could trigger a push for changes to the board,
it insinuates that she could use her position to put people on the board who will do what she wants.
a. Sukkar is on the nominations committee
b. is unhappy with the choices made by the ARU and
c. that could trigger a push for changes to the board,
it insinuates that she could use her position to put people on the board who will do what she wants.