Australian Rugby / RA

[Brumby Runner]

I think it is pretty clear that the main competition that the players you are picking your test side from has to be world class.

Whilst it would be better having 5 teams playing in that competition than 3 or 4, I think it is the standard of the comp more than the number of teams playing that matters.

Our biggest issue at the moment is not the number of teams we have to pick from it's that they're not very good relative to our competitors. We have one good team.[/quote]

Truly believe you are too pessimistic with this observation BH. Since the nadir of 2017, both the Tahs and Brumbies have been competitive against any of the SA sides and both have had wins v NZ sides. This year, the Brumbies have looked to be the equal of any of the other Super sides; arguably only finishing behind the Sharks when things stopped because they'd played one less game. The Reds appear to be the team with most potential over the whole of the Super competition, the Rebels starting to look like they might realise their potential too, and despite their poor record, the Tahs were mostly competitive and could easily have finished stronger over the later part of the season had it continued after having their preseason interrupted by bush fire smoke earlier in the season.

I reckon there were very good signs for the Aus sides this year after being at least the equal of the SA sides last year. And, I am just as sure that the national side would have shown (and still will show), distinct improvement under the new and likely more effective coaching setup.

 

[sunnyboys]

 

[sunnyboys]

So is this the end of the Captains run???

 

[Quick Hands]

So is this the end of the Captains run???

What it shows is that the NSWRU and its chairman will put their own self-interest first. Special Meetings and changes to board structures aren't in the interest of those who currently monopolise the levers of power. There's a mutually beneficial and quite cosy arrangement between the RA board and the boards of the state RUs where they all look after each others interests.

If you're looking for reform of RA, don't look to the state boards for a solution.

 

[sunnyboys]

I think it’s only in newscorp and certain former captains interest that a Special General Meeting be granted at this current time. NSWRU has clearly read the room and fallen in line while the remaining states and territories after its over reach.
Hopefully this puts an end to the coup and the new chair and interim CEO can get on with solving some rather large problems.

 

[sunnyboys]

And the above comment isn’t an endorsement of the standard of management from RA in general. But rather support for blocking this obvious attempt by Newscorp to gain control and protect the 50k or so subscriptions it thinks it could lose from its struggling pay tv arm if it loses Rugby.

 

[hoggy]

It would be interesting to know what was the list of items discussed with Wiggs and what promises were given before completely condemning them, strangely enough it seems about the only thing not leaked to the press.

 

[Rebels3]

I think it’s only in newscorp and certain former captains interest that a Special General Meeting be granted at this current time. NSWRU has clearly read the room and fallen in line while the remaining states and territories after its over reach.
Hopefully this puts an end to the coup and the new chair and interim CEO can get on with solving some rather large problems.

This is how I see it as well. With QLD on board the balance of power is in the other corner for the first time in a long time. I’d say NSW has read the room and understand that the other side now has the numbers to potentially force some change and NSW acting against it might be to its detriment in the long run.

It’s not very well reported but the board (competent or not) for a long time have had many things blocked or deliberate obstruction from certain parties to retain power over time and making it difficult to affect real change.

 

[KOB1987]

It would be interesting to know what was the list of items discussed with Wiggs and what promises were given before completely condemning them, strangely enough it seems about the only thing not leaked to the press.

At that meeting, which the captains describe as “very positive”, Wiggs gave the players a number of undertakings that RA would:
• Confirm a review process, consistent with the one outlined in the captains’ Australian Rugby Review Board charter.
• Form three operating committees in the areas of 1) finance, business and governance; 2) current financial position, efficiencies, forecasts, relationships with member unions, options for appropriate corporate structures, etc; and 3) broadcasting, sponsors and relationships, creation and management of external relationships with parties to bring the required capital to the game, “Community to Wallaby”, rebuilding the links with our grassroots clubs, developing viable competition structures, revisiting performance at all levels, including high performance.

 

[Rebels3]

It would be interesting to know what was the list of items discussed with Wiggs and what promises were given before completely condemning them, strangely enough it seems about the only thing not leaked to the press.

I think that speaks volumes enough of where some leaks were coming from.

 

[wamberal]

Is it overly pessimistic? The Brumbies were a genuinely good side this year. The Rebels were 3 and 3, the Reds looked promising but were 2 and 5 and the Tahs were terrible and were 1 and 6.

Absolutely there's talent there and hopefully a golden generation coming through from our recent under 20s (which is largely why the Reds look promising).

I thought the Reds looked better than "promising". They had a tough draw, and IMHO are our second strongest franchise at the moment. They are delivering. Yes, they will get better, for sure.

 

[barbarian]

Hey guys I might move these posts to the 'Where to for Super Rugby?' thread and leave this one for admin/RA issues.

It's a blurry line but I think we've clearly crossed over it this last page or so.

 

[cyclopath]

Hey guys I might move these posts to the 'Where to for Super Rugby?' thread and leave this one for admin/RA issues.

It's a blurry line but I think we've clearly crossed over it this last page or so.

Fair enough. Although this is clearly a high agenda item for RA, so relevant here as well.

 

[VassMan]

NRL and AFL have announced their revised schedules for late May and early June respectively. NZ has announced their mini Super Rugby. Need RA to hurry up and sort out our 2020 domestic games otherwise we'll miss the boat and people will watch the other comps.

 

[RedsHappy]

I think it is pretty clear that the main competition that the players you are picking your test side from has to be world class.

Whilst it would be better having 5 teams playing in that competition than 3 or 4, I think it is the standard of the comp more than the number of teams playing that matters.

Our biggest issue at the moment is not the number of teams we have to pick from it's that they're not very good relative to our competitors. We have one good team.

Indeed. Perhaps the gravest error of unthinking hubris and dangerously poor strategic policy in Aust rugby's recent history was the JO'N-fed notion that 'Aust rugby must have a national footprint' and 'the quantity of pro rugby played each week matters or is a high priority' (even at the expense of quality of team and playing outcomes).

So we proceeded to invest in and insist upon opening franchises in WA and VIC that have clearly proven to be financially and fan-base-wise unsustainable. Further, we just established them, plonked them down, we did not carefully ensure the managerial and coaching calibre was there in all respects to ensure these teams became seriously competitive (in the way the NRL did so convincingly with the Storm).

We know the rest.

What we must do now is radically shrink the no of pro teams down _to the level whereby we are sure we have the standard of management and good-to-excellent levels of competent coaching (general and technical) so as to be reasonably confident these remaining teams can be built to a sound quality of playing capability_. That is, where the quantity of players and teams is carefully balanced with the requisite quality of holistic developmental capability.

The notion that we design a new comp around some fictionally ideal no of teams is thus recklessly fallacious for 2020+ Australian pro rugby. We must chose a no of pro teams solely on the basis of the 'quality first, quality-led' principle and then expand only when we have the proven broadly-based results to do so safely, but that time is now many years away.

 

[RedsHappy]

Fair enough. Although this is clearly a high agenda item for RA, so relevant here as well.

Hugely - the ugly duckling that Super Rugby had become - perpetuated and not corrected as yet by RA - is the biggest single contributor IMO to the degraded state (in multiple respects) of Aust pro rugby today.

Remembering that late last year RA was happy to sign off on a only a marginally tweaked version of Super Rugby for 5 more years from 2021 on. And then took this model to broadcasters as baked in. To have continued down that path - even with some OK media $s funding it - would have moved us from seriously crippled (with just enough potential for some sort of recovery) in 2020 to irrevocably catastrophic (with nothing but a shrinking amateur base left, if that) by, say, 2023.

 

[KOB1987]

Hamish McLennan has been confirmed as the new director (not Chairman at this stage) and has pronounced he is going to overhaul the code, by pushing for a State Of Origin series and a Big Bash Style Super Rugby. Whatever that means.

 

[Omar Comin']

What we must do now is radically shrink the no of pro teams down _to the level whereby we are sure we have the standard of management and good-to-excellent levels of competent coaching (general and technical) so as to be reasonably confident these remaining teams can be built to a sound quality of playing capability_. That is, where the quantity of players and teams is carefully balanced with the requisite quality of holistic developmental capability.

The notion that we design a new comp around some fictionally ideal no of teams is thus recklessly fallacious for 2020+ Australian pro rugby. We must chose a no of pro teams solely on the basis of the 'quality first, quality-led' principle and then expand only when we have the proven broadly-based results to do so safely, but that time is now many years away.

This is probably true if the primary goal is maximising the performance of the Wallabies, but that is only one potential goal for professional rugby in Australia. An alternative goal might be to spread the professional game as far and wide as possible and maximise the number of people in Australia who consider themselves genuine fans of the sport.

One way to think about this is to ask yourself whether rugby has done better in Australia or France over the last 25 years? The Wallabies have been ranked above France the majority of the time since the sport went professional, and the French national team has underperformed in general. On the other hand France has the biggest and most popular professional domestic competition in the world, with two tiers of professional clubs.

 

[RedsHappy]

This is probably true if the primary goal is maximising the performance of the Wallabies, but that is only one potential goal for professional rugby in Australia. An alternative goal might be to spread the professional game as far and wide as possible and maximise the number of people in Australia who consider themselves genuine fans of the sport.

One way to think about this is to ask yourself whether rugby has done better in Australia or France over the last 25 years? The Wallabies have been ranked above France the majority of the time since the sport went professional, and the French national team has underperformed in general. On the other hand France has the biggest and most popular professional domestic competition in the world, with two tiers of professional clubs.

I like you thinking OC, but not on this point of debate, in that:

- France has a population of 67m​

- There is there no winter NRL and AFL and soccer all as a bundle of football codes creating massive winter code competition in our popn of 23m​

- Most of the French rugby teams are dominated by private money (highly unlikely at present as a means to rebuild Aust rugby IMO)​

- The 6N is a major money spinner for French rugby, more so than TRC (with its very high T&A costs etc) is for RA here​

- Rugby in Aust today is in a dire state; to me it is unimaginable to see how it can be restored just by more and more pro teams per se and irrespective of their competitive calibre. esp given all the above factors​

 

[Up the Guts]

Hamish McLennan has been confirmed as the new director (not Chairman at this stage) and has pronounced he is going to overhaul the code, by pushing for a State Of Origin series and a Big Bash Style Super Rugby. Whatever that means.

He is very well connected with the Murdochs, if he can’t get Fox to broadcast rugby no one can.