I can't wait to hear the answer to this:
An implied threat?
Its funny how Australian schools are a major part of the ARU's pathway to Gold yet do don't contribute with a participation fee.
Its funny how Australian schools are a major part of the ARU's pathway to Gold yet do don't contribute with a participation fee.
Do School Rugby Coaches need to be Smart Rugby qualified as per the mandatory ARU requirement for club rugby?
Yet many school games do not have other sensible (and in many cases mandated) game management protocols such as roping off the playing area, accredited Assistant Referees/Touch Judges, independent judiciaries, coaches outside the playing area, water runners/kicking tee runners/trainers not wearing readily identifiable clothing etc. The lower the age group, and the lower the grade within the age group, the more haphazard these measures seem to be.
I know several young men that coached younger age groups for a variety of Schools,in their final year,or in their first years after School.Don't know the technical answer but the practical answer is "absolutely": the liability implications of not having an accredited coach would be fairly clear irrespective of the question of causation.
Yet many school games do not have other sensible (and in many cases mandated) game management protocols such as roping off the playing area, accredited Assistant Referees/Touch Judges, independent judiciaries, coaches outside the playing area, water runners/kicking tee runners/trainers not wearing readily identifiable clothing etc. The lower the age group, and the lower the grade within the age group, the more haphazard these measures seem to be.
I attended a meeting where these protocols were discussed, there was a representative from schools there and before the presentation was 5 mins old they interjected and said "I want to make it very clear that schools will not be implementing any of these initiatives" to which the reply from the presenter was "yes, yes we know schools will do what they please" Come on ARU, NSW rugby actually I don't care anyone make some changes where we have one competition 6's to 15's everyone included, schools can still have their opens and 16's competition on Saturday.
Don't know the technical answer but the practical answer is "absolutely": the liability implications of not having an accredited coach would be fairly clear irrespective of the question of causation.
But these issues rarely arise at school matches. In fact it would make an interesting study as to why some people manage to behave themselves at school matches, but carry on like yobbs at club matches.
Obviously you have never enjoyed the company of the Waverly old boys at Death Valley!
The captains of industry stopped fawning over rugby when the ARU remained somewhat aloof and disengaged with the rugby community who I consider are more diverse than you think . The "Members Only" attitude is a turn off to many in this country (that includes many well heeled and connected souls ) and is a bi-product of a bygone amateur age . The impact of having Wallabies , coaches , rep players fronting up to state schools is investing in the future of the code . Wider engagement is necessary and advisable . If the game was nurtured and developed on a wider scale at grass roots your potential supporter base could easily double over time , that will get the sponsors back . After the first 15 visits to a corporate box it quite frankly gets a bit boring . I generally have more fun rubbing shoulders with the crowd and most corporates who I know are time poor and would rather spend time with their families and catch the game on Fox . If you think rugby is "High Brow" try going to a Shute Shield or NRC game ..great atmosphere , great people from all walks of life and cultures . Many Australians are open to Rugby .and also follow League,AFL,Soccer,Basketball,Netball,Motor Racing .it is not a club anymore .the sport does not have the carrying capacity to appeal to a narrow demographic , its not polo .
The NPF is a disgrace, I assume that the ARU think that this sneaky little device won't be as noticeable as the $200 team levy.
We now have the surreal situation whereby the amateur/junior part of the game is subsidising the professional/elite part of the game.
We all wait for the answer; what exactly do we get for this participation fee?
If you do the sums this NPF is actually is the equivalent of nearly $500 per team. So a massive increase on last years $200 per team.
The average increase to clubs on their 2014 costs is 400% (to some of the clubs it is 800% - and these tend to be the poorer clubs)
At the same time the number of development officers in Sydney has halved - and they are basically on a user pays basis anyway.
Value?