Australian Rugby / RA

[Dan54]

Is it bot a risk with trying to rely on Billionaires etc. Remember what happened with Gold Coast soccer team when Clive Palmer got pissed off? He just folded team. Not suggesting that would be norm, but really concerns me when a heavy reliance of a moneyman etc.

 

[The Ghost of Raelene]

Isn't there also the case of families winding things up when the person who put cash into the side isn't around anymore? Happened to Toronto in the MLR which is probably the scale we'd end up with.

 

[Wilson]

Thanks Adam. That $1m was a typo!

Rebels were between $2 and $3m over the last three years (from the administrator's report) - and just to add the Waratahs inc have been significantly less than NSWRU whenever we see it split out like in 2022 - $1.6m for tahs)

2022 was not exactly a normal year for that - the tahs went without a major sponsor form that season, so you'd expect to see the number be significantly lower than other years for Waratahs inc.

I do agree they have done a very poor job of engaging what should be a relatively friendly sponsorship market though, they look to be leaving millions on the table every year.

 

[stillmissit]

You can have a discussion about cutting costs and fiscal responsibility for player's wages without needing to completely change their income to an incentive/bonus scheme.

I work in an industry where we're competing in a highly competitive market for talent; incentive and bonus schemes are part of the solution for recruitment and retention, but finding quantifiable and measurable KPIs for bonus payment makes it a highly subjective topic. We cap bonus schemes at 30% of their base salary, with most sitting less then that.

For Wallabies, most would be on about 20% incentive/bonus loading from matchday payments if they're playing a full season. I really don't see how cutting the base wage to less then that would assist, or what quantifiable metric you would use to assess/justify further.

When I was working it was a highly competitive and lucrative group where the guys were expected to earn 350- 450k (~100k base + 200-300k+ if they hit or exceeded their targets - 20 years ago), they got moved on if they failed to get their numbers.
Rugby is a VERY competitive market both for players and for performance. In that environment, winners drink champagne and losers are expected to learn from their losses. Not sure we are learning from our losses.
I suspect a base living wage + incentives to win might be a better model than the current one where nothing is changing apart from losing disillusioned players to a larger market.

 

[Braveheart81]

I suspect a base living wage + incentives to win might be a better model than the current one where nothing is changing apart from losing disillusioned players to a larger market.

Why would good players accept that when literally every other prospective employer is offering them a guaranteed salary?

 

[Highlander35]

Is the move to performance/incentive based contracting coming with an open selection policy for the Wallabies or are we staying domestic only?

 

[LeCheese]

When I was working it was a highly competitive and lucrative group where the guys were expected to earn 350- 450k (~100k base + 200-300k+ if they hit or exceeded their targets - 20 years ago), they got moved on if they failed to get their numbers.

It's all relative to norms though - that type of remuneration package may have been typical for employers in your industry, but it is not the case for employers of rugby players (i.e. across other competitions and codes). We have to remain competitive and realistic (in terms of both player expectations and sustainability) if we want to keep anything resembling talent.

 

[Tomthumb]

Is the move to performance/incentive based contracting coming with an open selection policy for the Wallabies or are we staying domestic only?

Domestic only. There needs to be an incentive for players to stay

 

[Highlander35]

Domestic only. There needs to be an incentive for players to stay

SO we're killing both Super Rugby and the Wallabies.

 

[stillmissit]

Why would good players accept that when literally every other prospective employer is offering them a guaranteed salary?

Is that true? That playing in France, UK or Japan is money and no incentive payments.

 

[Tomthumb]

SO we're killing both Super Rugby and the Wallabies.

Exactly what state are they in now?

No super success outside of wooden spoon’s, and a national team that can’t get past the pool stage of a World Cup and hasn’t sniffed the Bledisloe in 2 decades

Can’t risk losing that wonderful success

 

[Highlander35]

Exactly what state are they in now?

No super success outside of wooden spoon’s, and a national team that can’t get past the pool stage of a World Cup and hasn’t sniffed the Bledisloe in 2 decades

Can’t risk losing that wonderful success

If you want to be Wales, be Wales.

I'd prefer to they try and be Argentina if you're heading down this path.

 

[Wallaby Man]

It's all relative to norms though - that type of remuneration package may have been typical for employers in your industry, but it is not the case for employers of rugby players (i.e. across other competitions and codes). We have to remain competitive and realistic (in terms of both player expectations and sustainability) if we want to keep anything resembling talent.

100%

We cant compare being a professional athlete with the corporate world, they just aren’t comparable. I might not be the worlds best at it, but I could basically guarantee given the resources, education and patience I could just about do any job of anyone on these threads, to a satisfactory level and you be able to do mine. I might never get to an exceptional level but I could be competent.

Now as an athlete, no matter how many resources, education and patience my employer had, I could never be even a satisfactory level pro athlete. It’s why unlike 99% of the professions out there, they are essentially in a position of power when it comes to contracting.

 

[Derpus]

Exactly what state are they in now?

No super success outside of wooden spoon’s, and a national team that can’t get past the pool stage of a World Cup and hasn’t sniffed the Bledisloe in 2 decades

Can’t risk losing that wonderful success

We can get even worse which is all your idea will achieve.

 

[Tomthumb]

We can get even worse which is all your idea will achieve.

We are just as likely to get worse keeping the same backwards system, as we have for the last 20 years

 

[Strewthcobber]

For the last 20 years each player already has ~$200k per year incentive based payment at risk through each year based on match payments available for Super Rugby and tests.

If you perform well enough to get a Wallaby jersey you get it, if you don't, then you don't.

Under the CBA the player pool has to be spent on players. Whatever incentive you setup, a pro rugby player is going to get the money

 

[mst]

God that figure for the Tahs is pathetic! Thanks for this Adam.

Especially considered by many to allegedly be in the true centre of Rugby in Australia.

 

[Adam84]

When I was working it was a highly competitive and lucrative group where the guys were expected to earn 350- 450k (~100k base + 200-300k+ if they hit or exceeded their targets - 20 years ago), they got moved on if they failed to get their numbers.
Rugby is a VERY competitive market both for players and for performance. In that environment, winners drink champagne and losers are expected to learn from their losses. Not sure we are learning from our losses.
I suspect a base living wage + incentives to win might be a better model than the current one where nothing is changing apart from losing disillusioned players to a larger market.

what kind of quantifiable metrics are you placing on players in order for them to qualify for these bonuses which are now supposed to make up large chunks of their salary, around 70% in some cases.

 

[Strewthcobber]

I read an article once that analysed every rugby stat and it found almost every one had no predictive power at all as to which team won the game, except one.

Which ever team kicked the most was the only stat correlated with victory.

So I propose all pro rugby players in Australia get paid per kick. Let's do it

 

[Sir Arthur Higgins]

OK, but then you are picking TT for the Wallabies from OS because he isn't staying here on a NZ or Australian Super Rugby salary.

Which seems a bit counter-productive

That’s the point
You are eligible for nz and aus as long as you are in super
Why would the top up be any different? We want you to stay in super and play for country - here is your top up to do so.