Australian Rugby / RA

[SouthernX]

the money comes from the exact same place it does now,

I don’t know about this. There’s a commercial advantage for sponsors/broadcaster about a competition that is viewed in 4 countries as opposed to just Australia.

didn’t the players/clubs all take pay cuts recently (that never got reinstated) because we went from a precovid competition of 14 teams (with RSA, NZ, Oz and sun wolves) and went to our token 5 team super rugby AU comp?

 

[stoff]

The NBL did blow the whole thing up and re-start under private ownership by former Dodo owner Larry Kestelman. They have had some issues, but the league is up and running and is pretty succesful. They do have phenomenal junior numbers to leverage, are advantaged by demographic shifts, and can lean in to the success of one the top sporting leagues in the world though. They also didn't see a drop off in the Boomers performance as they had all their stars playing in Europe and the NBA.

Hutchison, an AFL heavy-hitter who owns the Sports Entertainment Group and radio network SEN, is reportedly weighing up a $40 million bid for the NBL team he bought back in 2021 for just $8.5 million.

https://7news.com.au/sport/media-mo...recently-purchased-basketball-team-c-14850566

They are getting $15m a year for local TV rights. There is a $1.95m soft salary cap next year. They've leveraged off a junior development program for non-draft-age high school players to do a year here prior to the NBA, which has got them a US tv deal (albeit I suspect this is not worth much at this point). The Wildcats are noted in the 2022 Sports Entertainment Group Annual Report.

The acquired business contributed revenues of $12.295 million and net profit after tax of $ 0.662 million for the 11 months to 30 June 2022. Had the business combination occurred as of the beginning of the reporting period, the business would have contributed approximately $12.500 million in revenues and net profit after tax of $0.750 million

If Rugby realises what it is and chooses to bite the bullet and live within it's means there is potential for a turn around.

 

[hoggy]

Rugby is a football code it should operate a league that most of those football codes operate, Soccer/AFL/NRL/NFL/Basketball. I didn't say we would be overnight millionaires, reality is a bummer. We should have done this 25 years ago, but now we are flat broke, and living of a credit card to pay those Wallabies to play at home in half empty stadiums.

Look I don't have all the answers, I just get sick & tired of seeing the game go down the gurgler, yet mention any alternative and immediately its NO NO rugby could never do that, so we can't have invested fans, tribalism, dedicated followers.

The proposed model is the one we can afford, which is fuck-all, but its reality, its time to sober up.

 

[stillmissit]

You are spot on with the management needing to change. And that means clearing house of any of the ex-players and recycled administrators and pretenders we have in the management ranks.

This is patently wrong. This has been done many times with different leaders who had sympathy for the grassroots and those with a hard headed approach. Nothing matters if you cannot start winning at the top where all the money is.

 

[Highlander35]

If Wallabies competitiveness is the aim of the game, 0 Bledisloes since 2002, 0 World Cups since 2003, The last Tri Nations/Rugby Championship outside of World Cup years was in 2001...

Is doing what NZ does but more shit for another 30 years the only way forward?

 

[Froggy]

I grew up with a domestic competition. It was basically clubs, and a brief competition between Sydney, NSW Country, Brisbane and Qld Country. Attendances were pretty uninspiring, but it was all amateur so that didn't matter. We would then go onto the international field and get our asses kicked. Australia didn't win the Bledisloe Cup throughout the 1950's, 1960's and 1970's. Rugby League, which had money and a much bigger following, continued to pick off our best players, and we just sat and watched guys like Fairfax, Brass, Price, O'Conner, Hawthorne etc swap codes, and as we were squeaky clean amateur they couldn't come back. Many of us may sit back and reminisce about the good old days, and I thoroughly enjoyed my playing days in the bush, but I fail to see how the game was way more successful than it is now. It was financially better off, because everyone involved was doing so for free.

 

[Derpus]

I grew up with a domestic competition. It was basically clubs, and a brief competition between Sydney, NSW Country, Brisbane and Qld Country. Attendances were pretty uninspiring, but it was all amateur so that didn't matter. We would then go onto the international field and get our asses kicked. Australia didn't win the Bledisloe Cup throughout the 1950's, 1960's and 1970's. Rugby League, which had money and a much bigger following, continued to pick off our best players, and we just sat and watched guys like Fairfax, Brass, Price, O'Conner, Hawthorne etc swap codes, and as we were squeaky clean amateur they couldn't come back. Many of us may sit back and reminisce about the good old days, and I thoroughly enjoyed my playing days in the bush, but I fail to see how the game was way more successful than it is now. It was financially better off, because everyone involved was doing so for free.

I don't think anyone is suggesting a return to amateurism?

 

[Confucius Say]

If Wallabies competitiveness is the aim of the game, 0 Bledisloes since 2002, 0 World Cups since 2003, The last Tri Nations/Rugby Championship outside of World Cup years was in 2001...

Is doing what NZ does but more shit for another 30 years the only way forward?

0 World Cups since 1999

 

[Froggy]

Not suggesting we should go back to amateur, just making a point that the holy grail of a domestic competition doesn't necessary bring success. For what it's worth, the way to progress the sport is increase player numbers at junior and club level, and increase the supporter base. And if I knew how to do that, don't worry, I wouldn't be keeping it to myself.

 

[Derpus]

I guess I think a professional domestic competition would have greater capacity for growth of the supporter base.

 

[Strewthcobber]

If Wallabies competitiveness is the aim of the game, 0 Bledisloes since 2002, 0 World Cups since 2003, The last Tri Nations/Rugby Championship outside of World Cup years was in 2001...

Is doing what NZ does but more shit for another 30 years the only way forward?

It's not the only way forward, but doing something different doesn't guarantee success either.

Pay our domestic players less, lose more potential Wallabies OS and chances are we end up with a worse Wallaby side.

Would the Lions tour again if they felt there was little chance of competition?

There's still plenty of "Wallaby competitiveness" to lose

 

[Derpus]

It's not the only way forward, but doing something different doesn't guarantee success either.

Pay our domestic players less, lose more potential Wallabies OS and chances are we end up with a worse Wallaby side.

Would the Lions tour again if they felt there was little chance of competition?

There's still plenty of "Wallaby competitiveness" to lose

Just sounds like clinging desperately to an already failed model in the hopes of retaining what dregs we have left.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Just sounds like clinging desperately to an already failed model in the hopes of retaining what dregs we have left.

I feel that a competitive Wallaby team is important, and we have no idea how bad things could really get if our national team falls further (which may happen anyway).

I also think that having more teams of players earning less money probably means our Wallabies are worse than they are now (both because the best players leave for other countries, and those that stay aren't playing at a high enough level)

 

[hoggy]

I don't think anyone is suggesting a return to amateurism?

Surely you know the drill by now, any change is either a return to the Victorian days or moving to a North Korean Eutopia.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

If we were to go to a domestic comp only I think we'd also have to accept going open slather with Wallaby selections. We can talk about the A-League and the NBL but the national sides attached to those two sports have open selection, We would be utterly shit in both were it not for the players we can select from outside the country. I'd argue that we're pretty shit at soccer anyway.

If the money to fund the game here comes from the Wallabies, then we would need to do everything we can to keep the top side strong.

 

[Strewthcobber]

It's not just an open selection policy though.

In contrast to, say, South Africa, how many of our top 35 players are also eligible for another national side, and if we pay them less, how many would explore those options?

The comps we pick from for soccer and B-ball don't have nationality tie ins linked to payments like a lot of rugby does

 

[dru]

The proposed model is the one we can afford, which is fuck-all, but its reality, its time to sober up.

Hoggy, on the whole I am completely with you, but this post of yours is way to optimistic. We start with not that far ago and RA's clumsy attempt to shrink to greatness, now we have it by default. [That there spells the timetable where changing the system presented itself.] The status quo is living beyond our means, and shrinking. We don't have the funds for 5 teams, and now should expect those funds, (maybe suitable for 4 teams) to be reduced. And so on.

Highlighted by our utterly disastrous RWC and plummet in the world rankings. And a follow up that showed, in contrast with the claims that we earn money from the Wallabies, that the RWC cost a fortune. And does apparently, every 4 years. Not something mentioned much in the past or now - when claiming our pro comp is dictated by the Wallabies.

Regarding your bold text, that was for me some time ago.

Would the Lions tour again if they felt there was little chance of competition?

What makes you think this is not on the cards irrespective of an alternate competition? How long are the Lions going to be that enthusiastic about a team ranked 9? Can you see the Lions being organised for an Italy tour? Italy are ranked ahead of us ffs.

***

We are reacting way too late, and right now need to deal with a downtrend in which there would appear to be no evidence of a pending turnaround. We've missed the obvious timing for a swap to domestic. Cross fingers the opportunity presents again. Everything else seems to lack a grounding in reality.

 

[Joe King]

I made a similar comment to this on the Bidwell article:

There are two options:

1. Have Super Rugby in order to keep all the best players in NZ and Oz, and in order to better prepare players for test rugby.

To make this model work for Australia, Super Rugby needs to go back to its roots. When Oz had only 3 teams, Super Rugby was a great competition and the Wallabies were great too. And the Wallabies were able to single-handedly convert a nation into rugby-lovers. It really did work as a model.

The decline in the Wallabies competitiveness and the decline in the appeal of Super Rugby as a competition correlates to the increase in Oz Super Rugby teams. Coincidence? I think not.

I think this model could still work for Australia with 4 Super Rugby teams, but it needs a structure underneath it to better build the Super Rugby teams. I have advocated for a simple structure over in the 3rd tier thread.

2. The second option is to drop Super Rugby and each country have their own national domestic comp in order to reach and grow the fan-base in each country.

They are the two options. What is NOT an option (in my opinion) is trying to combine the two. This has been our big mistake and has ruined both Super Rugby as a comp and (I would argue) also the Wallabies. The old ARU should never have tried to expand through Super Rugby in order to create a national footprint and give it a pseudo domestic vibe—without a well-established third tier already in place. They needed to do one or the other.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

It's not just an open selection policy though.

In contrast to, say, South Africa, how many of our top 35 players are also eligible for another national side, and if we pay them less, how many would explore those options?

The comps we pick from for soccer and B-ball don't have nationality tie ins linked to payments like a lot of rugby does

That's an excellent question and not one I have a ready answer to. My guess is that plenty of our PI players (either through birth or heritage) would be in that category.

 

[Tomikin]

I feel that a competitive Wallaby team is important, and we have no idea how bad things could really get if our national team falls further (which may happen anyway).

I also think that having more teams of players earning less money probably means our Wallabies are worse than they are now (both because the best players leave for other countries, and those that stay aren't playing at a high enough level)

I don't know if this is true we might have a little drop in standard but more opportunities and with a champion cup with NZ Japan Aus, we still get that cross over but have the excitement of an Australian final series not long ago we had 22k in Canberra for super au final and 40k in Qld... Doesnt that tell you what the fans want to see...


EDIT:- this also builds excitement for the cross over games, that false hope , like a Tahs preseason