Australian Rugby / RA

[Adam84]

Or it’s path dependency…

 

[hoggy]

Because any alternative may well bankrupt the game a f***en sight quicker? I quite sure in all the administration of RA and all the states (including clubs) if there was a better alternative it would be explored.
Although they (like all boards) make mistakes in general, I cannot believe that every board in Australia rugby know less about what is best for game than us . It is something I say here in NZ too (where you have same kind of comments etc).

Dan, The structural set up of the game here with its underlying slave relationship to Test rugby is the issue.

I’m sorry I just don’t buy the whole there are no other options, when you only have to cross the street to see better more financial set ups.

In fact the set up has been a success with those involved all being paid handsomely over the years, you can always back self interest, the ship may be sinking but everyone's getting paid.

It’s the failure of Test Rugby, well not so much failure as the increased burden of feeding a family that gets larger and hungrier every year, yet is unable to free up other areas of potential revenue, because they are unable to adjust or meet market forces.

Super Rugby has simply been left behind, and in doing so it has failed in growing a greater level of support to feed those ever growing relatives.
(I'm talking Australia, not New Zealand)

All that is left for the administrators to do in Australia is to operate the game on a Credit Card but sooner or later the bank is gonna come calling. Yet up to today all those players and administrators are being paid.

 

[dru]

Because any alternative may well bankrupt the game a f***en sight quicker? I quite sure in all the administration of RA and all the states (including clubs) if there was a better alternative it would be explored.
Although they (like all boards) make mistakes in general, I cannot believe that every board in Australia rugby know less about what is best for game than us . It is something I say here in NZ too (where you have same kind of comments etc).

You seemed resigned to acceptance that Super is bankrupting the game.

 

[Dan54]

You seemed resigned to acceptance that Super is bankrupting the game.

No I not at all, just replying to hoggy comment that it was, and not arguing etc, just saying it seems the best option. I don't have any thoughts or info to indicate it is in anyway.

 

[Dan54]

Dan, The structural set up of the game here with its underlying slave relationship to Test rugby is the issue.

I’m sorry I just don’t buy the whole there are no other options, when you only have to cross the street to see better more financial set ups.

In fact the set up has been a success with those involved all being paid handsomely over the years, you can always back self interest, the ship may be sinking but everyone's getting paid.

It’s the failure of Test Rugby, well not so much failure as the increased burden of feeding a family that gets larger and hungrier every year, yet is unable to free up other areas of potential revenue, because they are unable to adjust or meet market forces.

Super Rugby has simply been left behind, and in doing so it has failed in growing a greater level of support to feed those ever growing relatives.
(I'm talking Australia, not New Zealand)

All that is left for the administrators to do in Australia is to operate the game on a Credit Card but sooner or later the bank is gonna come calling. Yet up to today all those players and administrators are being paid.

Mate, I not arguing with you, was just suggesting that all the RA and States must have a better idea than us what they can do. I do agree the reliance on test rugby to can be/is a worry, but really that in itself isn't RA's etc fault, more the fact that rugby is an international sport at the very top of the tree in rugby and generally perople are lured to the top echelon in sports.
I honestly don't know what answer is, but looking over the fence at other sports doesn't in my opinion work (I sure in Aussie's case the likes of NRL and AFL would love an international market if truth was known). I am sure if Aussie rugby could operate it it's own space without outside teams etc they would be happy to do so. But we talk about monay and bankrupting game, I can say with a fair bit of confidence without test rugby, the game would be bankrupt in Aus and many countries, and we probably wouldn't even have a lot of discussion on it's merits.
If the administrators and players weren't paid, and you prefer the sport at that level, there is and will pobably be subbies country rugby etc to follow. I did that in Aus (as well as prem/super/test etc) and do same in NZ, follow the game where noone is paid etc, the level isn't as good, and I tell you there is very very few people going online to discuss the game at that level.
I can assure you the same comments are made on forums etc on NZR, and will bet any major rugby playing nation. I just think with all us people who follow the game, if it could be run easier , I would think it would be. As I say the level of people in NZ who comment that super comp is stuffed is probably same as Aus, you know it boring etc etc, but same people who put up or make these comments seem to keep watching the games on tv etc.
Really is bloody complicated I think.
I not suggesting you are wrong in your opinions about state of game, just not sure the fix is that simple.

 

[half]

No one is denying or ignoring the problems the game is facing, or the lack of investment in the women's game, including marketing. What I'm saying is the opinions of one journalist here are largely irrelevant, maybe a symptom of the disease at most.

This list, written by a different journo, could've easily included Caslick, the Levi sisters and maybe a couple of 15s players like Ash Masters and Eva Karpani. Would you have then thought the women's game was in rude health having filled a tenth of the places?

I can't speak for you or hope to understand the way your mind works but I know I wouldn't have. It's clearly a mixed bag with 7s doing phenomenally well but out of mind outside Olympic years and 15s punching above it's weight but crying out for more - more funding more publicity, more of just about everything.

These sorts of articles are a poor trailing indicator of the performance and health of the game at best. The goal certainly shouldn't be to get players on them, that's just a potential by product of any actual progress and success we can achieve, and will likely come well after the fact.

To come in doomsaying over the particular opinions of some guy is boring, useless and very on form for you.

Being fair I agreed broadly with what you posted above.

Remember I was responding to a post and it was not posted in isolation.

But, and this is the important bit. Even if it is a single lone journalist. It highlights a general dismissal of rugby which is increasing.

Further it highlights the increase in sporting competitions for media.

Go back to around 2000, the big bash an Indian dominance in cricket did not exist. Basketball was falling apart I could go on.

My post was in reaction to Hoggy's post re lack of media and less recognition in general. That rugby could be ignored I think is worthy of discussion. Not debate about it's only one article and he is wrong.

These reactions are similar over the years no matter what the issues.

Just consider around 2000 we were the number two code in Sydney, today we are struggling to hold down fourth as Basketball keeps building.

Yet anytime warning were posted the same arguments appeared

 

[dru]

No I not at all, just replying to hoggy comment that it was, and not arguing etc, just saying it seems the best option. I don't have any thoughts or info to indicate it is in anyway.

You should be more careful with your language. There is no evidence whatsoever that all possible alternative plans (a logical fallacy anyway) lead to "going broke quicker than Super" - and the statement is nonsensical if you don't think Super is going broke.

 

[Dan54]

You should be more careful with your language. There is no evidence whatsoever that all possible alternative plans (a logical fallacy anyway) lead to "going broke quicker than Super" - and the statement is nonsensical if you don't think Super is going broke.

Fair enough, but even then,if super isn't causing RA financial problems, I strongly suspect that any alternative would be more likely to, and is why they aren't being used. Was fairly simple I thought (and not at all controversial), but your point is taken.
I slightly surprised you haven't merntioned hoggy's comment which was
"Then why would you persist with Super Rugby, which is bankrupting the game in this country'

 

[stillmissit]

A 2nd NSW team doesn't have to be in Western Sydney, the whole point of a 2nd team is to maximize your market & support, to create tribalism a game in your biggest market place every weekend, another team to help create more media.

We need to grow the game in Australia & reach a bigger market and the best way to do that is through a domestic competition, Aussies understand and support that structure, which in turn helps all the other layers.

You want to support the grassroots, the best way to do that is support a domestic competition.

I always thought a North Harbour v South Harbour had some legs ie Tahs South Harbour and another is North.
The support for NSW v Qld in Union was always strong yet it seems to have lost its venom in Tahs v Reds, seems Tahs v Brumbies has some edge to it.

 

[The Ghost of Raelene]

Even though it’s a rivalry it’s hard to really buy into a Tahs v Reds game venom when they can be running 9th, 10th.

Brumbies v Tahs is only spicy when the Brumbies are the better side. Loses its gusto when the Tahs have had wins. You hear the whole “well they should win” argument.

 

[Wallaby Man]

Even though it’s a rivalry it’s hard to really buy into a Tahs v Reds game venom when they can be running 9th, 10th.

Brumbies v Tahs is only spicy when the Brumbies are the better side. Loses its gusto when the Tahs have had wins. You hear the whole “well they should win” argument.

I think the QLD v NSW thing has been let down over the last decade through marketing. It should be about guys wanting to bash the other, prepared to give blood and sold with disdain. But doesn’t really go with how rugby has wanted to push family friendly game for all, whereas most people want the barbaric nature the game can offer especially in games like NSW v QLD

 

[dusk]

I think the QLD v NSW thing has been let down over the last decade through marketing. It should be about guys wanting to bash the other, prepared to give blood and sold with disdain. But doesn’t really go with how rugby has wanted to push family friendly game for all, whereas most people want the barbaric nature the game can offer especially in games like NSW v QLD

The new tackle laws aren't gonna help that aswell.

 

[The Ghost of Raelene]

I think the QLD v NSW thing has been let down over the last decade through marketing. It should be about guys wanting to bash the other, prepared to give blood and sold with disdain. But doesn’t really go with how rugby has wanted to push family friendly game for all, whereas most people want the barbaric nature the game can offer especially in games like NSW v QLD

Good point. We do just get the matey chat before a lot of them. Very hard to go near what SOO has become and yes it’s different as players move.

Have heard more chat in the U16s. Pretty sure Onitini Large the NSW 16s captain was saying how all he wants to do is beat QLD. Loved hearing that sort of thing. Bit of fire in them.

 

[hoggy]

Being fair I agreed broadly with what you posted above.

Remember I was responding to a post and it was not posted in isolation.

But, and this is the important bit. Even if it is a single lone journalist. It highlights a general dismissal of rugby which is increasing.

Further it highlights the increase in sporting competitions for media.

Go back to around 2000, the big bash an Indian dominance in cricket did not exist. Basketball was falling apart I could go on.

My post was in reaction to Hoggy's post re lack of media and less recognition in general. That rugby could be ignored I think is worthy of discussion. Not debate about it's only one article and he is wrong.

These reactions are similar over the years no matter what the issues.

Just consider around 2000 we were the number two code in Sydney, today we are struggling to hold down fourth as Basketball keeps building.

Yet anytime warning were posted the same arguments appeared

This is where I agree with Half.
I have just read a couple of articles in the SMH, not actually read them as they are behind a paywall, so no doubt take them with a grain of salt

One code to rule them – why soccer may be the last survivor in world footy

It may take a century, but soccer is on a path to turning league, union and AFL into niche sports in Australia.

www.smh.com.au

After an annus horribilis, can Australian rugby bounce back in 2024?

It would have been hard to plan a worse year for Australian rugby. But with 2023 in the rear-view mirror and new leadership, the code has a chance to regenerate.

www.smh.com.au

But I scrolled through the comments section of both and literally 99% of the comments on Rugby Union are negative with "Death Spiral" "Death by a "
The overwhelming negativity is becoming pervasive, sooner or later it becomes reality, I don't know what the answer is, maybe even moderate success in 2024 will help.

But IMHO the game has never dealt with the fundamental issue of a working and sustainable domestic competition, this has meant that the issue has always festered, it never gets solved.

The "where to question" is always there, solutions have never been solutions, broadcast deals, expansion, they have always been conflicted, as such have ultimately just added to the slow decline. Until you address the underlying issue.

The problem is we cannot agree with what the underlying issue is.

 

[PhilClinton]

I actually think we will see some decent upwards trajectory this year in terms of how are teams rally (surely can’t get worse) but I feel like it will all be too little too late to make a meaningful impact on maintaining a professional tier 1 game here in Australia in the long term.

I’ve mentioned it before, its concerning that a number of state unions have come out and actively pushed the whole BIL tour and home RWC as positives for why people should keep invested in Super Rugby and have faith in the game.

The reality is those milestones should be surplus benefits to our game, not a reason to keep faith. If our Super Rugby product/Wallabies performances are still so far off mark when they roll around, there isn’t any other gold at the end of rainbows.

All of the change we are seeing I think is positive, but it’s ten years too late.

 

[wamberal99]

If the article is fundamentally correct (and bearing in mind that Roy Masters hates our game with a passion) then somewhere along the downward spiral the two rugby codes will merge. In his own words, both are dominant in a few (different) countries.

I have suggested, or hoped, for some time that this would happen. It would take a revolution of course, but if there is enough money in it maybe it could happen. I think of Packer's two interventions in cricket, and league.

The vested interests of both codes would be totally opposed of course. We need a new Packer. Maybe it will be a Murdoch this time (remembering that Rupert was involved in the Super League wars of course).

 

[KOB1987]

I think rather than a full merger of league and union a more logical shift would be to be able to select players from both codes to represent at national level. This would require some rule changes so that the players can readily shift between the codes, and would primarily, if not exclusively apply to backs. Hence some collusion between the bodies that run the codes would be required. An example of a rule change that would make the 5/8 / flyhalf roles more interchangeable would be that if the halfback/dummy half in league is tackled then it results in a turnover/scrum - this would essentially make the 5/8 the primary playmaker, and this rule isn't much different to the quarterback being sacked in the NFL, and 5/8 is where you would see players like Nathan Cleary end up, and running scrum halfs like Nick Phipps have a crack at league. Another modest rule change for the 13 man code would be for a compulsory uncontested attempt to lay the ball back each tackle, i.e the ball must be behind the tackled player's torso (for example) or it results in a turnover/scrum, it can only be stripped by the defender if it's on his side. Obviously these rules are to adapt the leaguies to the international game, there wouldn't be much sense in doing things the other way around. There are other ideas I can think of, but I've said enough on the topic.

Footnote - before I get ribbed, this is just a bit of foresight into something that could realistically happen in 20 years or so to allow the codes to co-exist, I'm not suggesting it happens tomorrow.

 

[The Ghost of Raelene]

I’ve always thought if we seem happy to parachute players into Olympic 7s squads there would be NRL players more effective than some of the Rugby Players if it’s a athletic sugar hit you’re after.

 

[wamberal99]

I’ve always thought if we seem happy to parachute players into Olympic 7s squads there would be NRL players more effective than some of the Rugby Players if it’s a athletic sugar hit you’re after.

They would have to give up a whole season, though, for very little in material reward.

 

[stillmissit]

The problem is we cannot agree with what the underlying issue is.

It's been coming for a long time Dru. The fear of injury at scrum time by mothers, the reduction of school participation both in State and Private schools. Particularly where many Asian boys in Private schools prefer soccer. The abysmal lack of focus on coaching and reffing at school and clubs. These are the foundation issues and as rugby is not popular with youngsters, who seem to prefer basketball, taking tall potential 2nd rowers and other sports soccer and league taking young athletes, then the lack of transition from mini to schools to clubs to Super Rugby ensures we are losing ground.
I understand the RU putting harsher rules to reduce head issues but that just highlights people's fears about our game.
We need to start at the school level and promote a rebuild of intra-school competitions well supported by the relevant state RU.
In the short term a focus on making Super Rugby a fun night out as Force Fan has shown in a video.

might help things.