Declining participation and ARU plans for the future

[wamberal]

On yesterday's "Offsiders", Roy Masters claimed that the "Test" match between the Australian and New Zealand Women's Loig teams drew over 300,000 on a replay - presumably on FTA.


This was during a discussion on the increasing FTA interest in women's sport, principally netball and farking AFL!!!!


Masters also made the point that it is essential to get products like these onto FTA.


Nothing about rugby in this discussion, the usual 30 seconds near the end of the programme, this week on Kurtley's injury.

 

[Braveheart81]

Yet soccer, basketball and baseball all seem to have growing player bases and I can see all these four fields lost to especially baseball who are screaming out for fields.

I put this just to add, not to any present risk, we have our 60 million dollars plus as the dollar keeps falling. My concern as I have been stressing is we need to do something in Australia and extra 2 Japanese sides will not keep the four fields.

Do those sports have growing player bases?

Most information I can find seems to suggest that participation rates in almost all sports are dropping.

Cricket has dropped considerably despite a huge amount more FTA content being available (and crowd numbers increasing massively).

I am not sure FTA coverage is a silver bullet. Soccer participation in Australia is massive at young ages regardless of whether there is content available on FTA TV. There hasn't suddenly been a huge spike with the A League and having some coverage on TV.

 

[wamberal]

FTA might not be a silver bullet. Maybe it's just bronze.


Or maybe, for a relatively new competition, like Super Rugby (let alone the NRC), it is golden.

The media landscape is changing rapidoy, that is a given. If Masters knows what he is talking about, sport will be an important asset to FTA networks, and conversely, exposure on FTA will be a given for serious sports.



When the new deal is up for renegotiation we will probably need some brave and innovative thinking. One would hope that Fox will unserstand that Australian rugby desparately needs some regular FTA exposure, which means a big punt on a Trans-Tasman competition with maybe a couple of heavily PI-strenghtened Asian teams. And at least two games a week simulcast on FTA.

 

[Braveheart81]

There's no doubt that sport is going to be increasingly important to FTA TV because the ability to stream stuff is becoming more and more accessible and sport is really the only thing that needs to be seen live.

Maybe having more FTA channels will help the situation but we are stuck with a reality where outside of test matches we don't rate nearly well enough to be on FTA in prime time.

Maybe our best hope is a Super Rugby simulcast on a secondary channel in the future.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Do those sports have growing player bases?

Most information I can find seems to suggest that participation rates in almost all sports are dropping.

Cricket has dropped considerably despite a huge amount more FTA content being available (and crowd numbers increasing massively).

I am not sure FTA coverage is a silver bullet. Soccer participation in Australia is massive at young ages regardless of whether there is content available on FTA TV. There hasn't suddenly been a huge spike with the A League and having some coverage on TV.

Look at one sport where participation is growing - touch football.

Having met their target of 500,000 participants by 2015 they are now aiming for 1,000,000 in 2020 (rubbery figures aside....)

They have achieved that with basically nil television at all - and they aren't looking for any - their rep level stuff is broadcast on Youtube

 

[Braveheart81]

Look at one sport where participation is growing - touch football.

Having met their target of 500,000 participants by 2015 they are now aiming for 1,000,000 in 2020 (rubbery figures aside..)

They have achieved that with basically nil television at all - and they aren't looking for any - their rep level stuff is broadcast on Youtube

There is big growth in the more casual sports like touch football and then activities such as gym memberships, exercise classes etc.

Participation in more traditional organised sports is dropping and in particular, numbers fall away substantially once kids hit high school and then even further for adults.

This is why things such as Viva 7s are important because these are the things that adults are doing in greater numbers whereas playing competitive team sport (particularly contact sport) is dropping substantially.

 

[half]

Strew

I read a report roughly 10 months ago about playing numbers in sport.

Overall numbers fell in those playing sport. However three sports stood out for growth being, baseball, soccer with a small growth in touch, and basketball held its ground.

AFL, NRL, RU, Netball and Cricket all had falls and soccer for the first time had more female players than netball.

Netball said having a spilt game in NZ was actually stopping netball from expanding. They needed an Australian only domestic competition and to be on FTA even if they paid for it. AFL came along who were also worried about the rise of womens soccer player numbers and had decided to run their own competition, but lacked quality players.

Netball was short of funds and could not find backers like the A-League has and people common across both boards [i.e. AFL and Netball]. Got together and essentially decided to combine. Swap memberships with the AL bring money and use their influence to help with a TV contract. RL followed suit.

Not sure what this means pertaining to the ARU boards [opps SANDZAR board] but when both the AFL and NRL concede player numbers are falling they got in partnership with netball... BUT ONLY AFTER netball decided to run an Australian only national domestic competition.

Back on the playing fields I back onto Somervilla Oval and you cannot have an oval so unsed and expect to hold it forever. Again while sports playing overall numbers are falling soccer and baseball numbers are growing with touch also having growth but smaller growth. Touch however can be played on any field does not have to have rugby posts.

Essentially netball to help hold onto players and grow their sport adopted for a national local domestic all Australia competition.

I know I know I know I Know we can't because of and away we go.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Overall numbers fell in those playing sport. However three sports stood out for growth being, baseball, soccer with a small growth in touch, and basketball held its ground.

AFL, NRL, RU, Netball and Cricket all had falls and soccer for the first time had more female players than netball.

I'm being a bit faciotious here but on those numbers then, it does seem that a robust free to air presence is detrimental to participation and player numbers.

Baseball, touch have essentially no TV, soccer and basketball have pretty much what we in union already have on FTA - one game a week that barely anyone watches.

Should we be promoting the overseas leagues where the talent can be concentrated and the quality of matches could be much higher than the local games?

Seems to be the way to raise participation?

 

[half]

Strewth

Don't think being on FTA is causing player numbers to fall. The bash and brain messages from media reporting and soccer mums have a lot to do with AFL and NRL player numbers falling and cricket before the BBL came along world wide was experience declining player numbers.

The less contact sports have been growing.

Touch as you mentioned earlier is the perfect example, however touch has many players from soccer, netball, cricket playing. Plus if anything its more a league connection than a rugby one.

TBH I have no idea how to solve the player number issue. My belief is we need as a starting point to have a national competition that is meaningful. The NRC is not meaningful, its played at the end of the NRL and AFL seasons for a short season by the other codes standards.

There is no magic thing to do and while as someone said in art I don't know what good art is but I don't like that. I say while I don't know the answer staying in Super Rugby as it stands IMO pays the wages of some senior players and the suits at Head Office, but does little to grow rugby in Australia.

 

[Braveheart81]

I say while I don't know the answer staying in Super Rugby as it stands IMO pays the wages of some senior players and the suits at Head Office, but does little to grow rugby in Australia.

A national competition will need more players and more suits.

I know you don't like Super Rugby but you seem to have the opinion that it is a cosy arrangement to make a few people rich at the expense of rugby in Australia and I really don't think that is true at all.

 

[half]

Braveheart

You are both right and wrong.

That I am no longer a keen fan of Super Rugby there is no doubt.

That I think it is to make a few people rich. No what I do say most of the SANDZAR revenue goes to players and suits is true. But given the system thats how it works.

I have also expressed my opinion on how to run senior rugby in Australia.

But I will concede I am very much on the outer and should stop posting about it most on this site seem to accept what we have is what we have and it shall remain so.

I don't I see that way I think as you know a break away from were we are and move to a different field.

Anyway I have had my say, no one else sees it that same as me and I seem to be upsetting a few. So I will stop.

Suggest in closing you watch over the next few weeks as netball and soccer arrange their new media deals.

In closing someone a few pages back said they had something to do with Epping rugby and I wish you luck. For those that don't know they are building millions of units and within 5 to 10 years their will be a lot more people and public space will be critical if we under use Somerville we will loose it. Two matches on a Sunday afternoons in a month on two fields just seems not enough.

 

[TheLithgowDragon]

I just watched the Force get done over by the Blues. What a waste of valuable dollars we're spending on the Force. There is no way in hell that we are going to establish rugby over there. It could be money going to put resources into school and Club rugby. No international team can be dominant without good school and club rugby and if anyone doubts that then I would love to hear how and why that is not the case. Where do we get good players if they are not nurtured from a young age. When we compare the international lure of Rugby and the money available to good rugby players at the representative level, both AFL and NRL cannot compete. We should be able to lure players on this basis alone. There are many, many talented young kids running around in Rugby League's U20's and second teir comps (Ron Massey cup et al) that have nowhere to go because league does not provide a pathway. These young blokes should have been picked up by Rugby way before they committed to this dead end journey.

 

[kiap]

WA grassroots is not too bad. 4,400 registered juniors (1,500 games).

About the same number of players for seniors. As a rough indicator, that's more than half the size of Sydney Subbies.

Number of schools involved is also growing.

 

[Quick Hands]

Braveheart

You are both right and wrong.

That I am no longer a keen fan of Super Rugby there is no doubt.

That I think it is to make a few people rich. No what I do say most of the SANDZAR revenue goes to players and suits is true. But given the system thats how it works.

I have also expressed my opinion on how to run senior rugby in Australia.

But I will concede I am very much on the outer and should stop posting about it most on this site seem to accept what we have is what we have and it shall remain so.

I don't I see that way I think as you know a break away from were we are and move to a different field.

Anyway I have had my say, no one else sees it that same as me and I seem to be upsetting a few. So I will stop.

Suggest in closing you watch over the next few weeks as netball and soccer arrange their new media deals.

In closing someone a few pages back said they had something to do with Epping rugby and I wish you luck. For those that don't know they are building millions of units and within 5 to 10 years their will be a lot more people and public space will be critical if we under use Somerville we will loose it. Two matches on a Sunday afternoons in a month on two fields just seems not enough.

Keep posting you views half. There's only a few of us on these threads who want to challenge the status quo and think outside the square. I know how you feel. Sometimes the relentless naysayers can get you down, but I comfort myself in the knowledge that the way that things are being done isn't working.

Being in the minority doesn't make you wrong.

 

[Quick Hands]

I just watched the Force get done over by the Blues. What a waste of valuable dollars we're spending on the Force. There is no way in hell that we are going to establish rugby over there. It could be money going to put resources into school and Club rugby. No international team can be dominant without good school and club rugby and if anyone doubts that then I would love to hear how and why that is not the case. Where do we get good players if they are not nurtured from a young age. When we compare the international lure of Rugby and the money available to good rugby players at the representative level, both AFL and NRL cannot compete. We should be able to lure players on this basis alone. There are many, many talented young kids running around in Rugby League's U20's and second teir comps (Ron Massey cup et al) that have nowhere to go because league does not provide a pathway. These young blokes should have been picked up by Rugby way before they committed to this dead end journey.

Rugby needs to get off its obsession with schools. The schools are well run and well resourced - run far better than they would be if they came under the ARU/NSWRU administration. All the other sports mentioned on this page have one thing in common - they are junior club based not schools based. Yes, they are played in schools - but in all cases the school thing is just the icing on the cake. In rugby, school sport has become the cake and the icing and junior clubs are the stuff left in the mixmaster.

There are two things straight away which could be done to improve this:

10s and 11s should be playing 15 a side not 12 a side. What happens is that when we move from minis, we set up teams in 10s based on 12 a side - for which you need about 17 players per team. Any more and the kids don't get enough game time. Play two years of that and all of a sudden its 15 a side and you need 20-22 players. So you're in the position where you have too many players for one team and not quite enough for two. We are just making things more difficult for ourselves - and I can see no apparent advantage in terms of what goes on the field in terms of 12 or 15 a side.

The second thing is that there is no need to have the younger age groups playing in Sydney wide competitions. In the past 3 weeks, my junior club has played away games at Blacktown, Dural and Blue Mountains. I'm rusted on and it doesn't really affect me that much, but I know that there are some parents who hate it. Our competition is a junior rugby league in which the same kids don't have to leave the northern beaches to play. And I know that there are teams of roughly the same ability as ours spread across 3 different divisions who could play a reasonably local competiton. This is not meant as a particular criticism of SJRU - it's just that they have set themselves up to fail. It's not possible to grade 80 teams with the time frame and variables that we have.

As another comparison, my daughter plays junior hockey (numbers also on the rise) and even a much smaller sport like that doesn't have a Sydney side competition in the younger age groups. Sydney is split into 3 zones who each run their own competiton (where have I heard of that before?????)

 

[half]

Quick Hands

Thanks for the post.

On juniors I must agree with you comments pertaining to junior competition spreads.

Although I am rugby first, two of my sons turned to the dark side and played soccer. Only one son played rugby, errr 2 actually bi=ut the other for only one year.

The difference between rugby districts and soccer association in running junior competitions is light years apart.

If I am honest I enjoyed far more going and watching the two boys in soccer than the other playing rugby. Its hard to describe and I am finding it difficult to put into words but I will have a go. First by and large the competition was generally local, second the parents were on the whole far more open to those lacking knowledge in soccer in rugby even at park level people new to rugby and lacking in knowledge are not taken under arm and things explained more made feel unwelcome because of their lack of knowledge.

As you said the school / park club does not exist the schools are made work within the association rules were local park teams are top of the pile. Finally they have so many players they can always find a level you can play in. The score and winning is not seen in the same light as many rugby parents do.

Back to my Somerville experience they played on the weekend and I went down and watched and talked to a few old hands I knew.

They have five senior teams left, no junior teams, Hillview who used to play at Eastwood oval or at least train their no longer exist.

Remember Epping rugby is a decent punt kick from TGM, and Woodies test players always come to Epping presentation days. But I did a straw poll and asked 14 people [huge survey in a bias area I know] but my question was do you care about the NRC. They all said not really.

Quick Hands I feel many in rugby lack the courage they want our players to have. As I see it and I will use Shakespeare's quotes do we die a death of a thousand cuts, die on our feet or beg on our knees. I just think everything is going backwards and those in charge are so tied to SANDZAR they cannot think beyond it.

My gut feeling is and I could be wrong, but those who have run and do run Rugby in Australia have come as kids through the private school system. They place the private schools at the top of the pile.

Moving club rugby to Sunday as I was told on the weekend has killed Epping juniors and from what they tell me a number of other clubs.

Another thing is and I will be honest I am saying what a teacher at Barker told me about 7 months ago. He said within 10 years soccer will be the main sport in Sydney's privates schools from almost nothing a few years ago he believes across the private schools soccer players now out number rugby players. So its an investment in a shrinking asset.

 

[Strewthcobber]

If we lose the private school investment in rugby, which is essentially a massive subsidy in our game's development then we have no hope. It's investment that can't be replaced from within the game.

The next obvious question is why are the school kids choosing soccer or touch or baseball etc over our game (or other contact sports)?

 

[half]

Strewth

You are asking the wrong question and because of that reached the wrong conclusion.

If soccer does become the main sport in private does not mean rugby will disappear. Nor will the investment in coaching etc, it may come down a little but it will never disappear.

Why is soccer becoming the sport of choice for many well the reasons are many the soccer mum, the fear of being hurt, recent reported cases of spinal injuries even if RL they carry through.

However arguably the two biggest reason is the changing demographic of the school population and the parents. Today many more Asian students with parents who do not share or are aware of rugby traditions. These people are far more open to soccer.

The second reason and again its simply grassroots management in that soccer does it better than any other sport. I had asked the teacher at Barker the key reason behind his statement and he shook his head and said its so F****g obvious and he said he had written to the ARU about it.

At school level especially high school rugby places the year 12 student and the final year team as the best. Soccer does it in years 8 & 9 therefore getting in early and letting students study in years 11 & 12.

Its called the Bill Turner Cup and its Australians biggest school tournament.

Have a look at this site and more to the point look at the private schools heavily involved. Especially look at the top 32 schools in the finals its on the front page of their web site. Its also worth having a look at this site its history, development and that it has captured the interest of many teachers and their parents. Because of the U 15 part, students studies are not interfered with in the "ATR" mark years as students prepare for HSC exams. However the concept of a 400 + knock out competition means the winning school or even top 32 school is considered an achievement. As I said soccer does grassroots things so much better than any other code.

http://www.billturnersoccer.com.au

In the 2015 results a number of private schools made the final 32 in both boys and girls.

 

[Quick Hands]

If we lose the private school investment in rugby, which is essentially a massive subsidy in our game's development then we have no hope. It's investment that can't be replaced from within the game.

The next obvious question is why are the school kids choosing soccer or touch or baseball etc over our game (or other contact sports)?

Having a good club based competition doesn't mean that you lose schools. It just means that you improve the game at junior club level.

Unfortunately, I'm old enough to remember when things were different. In times of old the GPS and CAS competitions were just as well run as they are now, but we also had a vibrant junior club rugby competition which was played on Saturdays. It was basically impossible to play both, but the club juniors had enough players to not need private school players - this is where the problem lies and this is the part of the game which needs to be re-invigorated. Junior club games used to start at 9am with the 10s and finish with the 18s playing at 3pm. Just in the Manly and Warringah areas, junior club rugby used to fill grounds all day every Saturday - now half of these grounds have soccer posts, and the grounds that are used for rugby sit idle most Saturdays, with the occasional minis central venue and the occasional subbies game and on Sundays are used for a couple of hours at most.

Interestingly, the fatal flaw of relying solely on schools is becoming evident. Half of the GPS schools in Sydney now have more soccer teams than rugby teams and Aussie Rules has now broken through and there are a couple of teams here and there. A generation ago rugby ruled the schools, but this is becoming weaker as time passes.

 

[Quick Hands]

Quick Hands

Thanks for the post.

My gut feeling is and I could be wrong, but those who have run and do run Rugby in Australia have come as kids through the private school system. They place the private schools at the top of the pile.

Moving club rugby to Sunday as I was told on the weekend has killed Epping juniors and from what they tell me a number of other clubs.

Another thing is and I will be honest I am saying what a teacher at Barker told me about 7 months ago. He said within 10 years soccer will be the main sport in Sydney's privates schools from almost nothing a few years ago he believes across the private schools soccer players now out number rugby players. So its an investment in a shrinking asset.

I've been saying the same thing for years, but no one wants to listen.

EDIT: I was at the Northern Zone meeting many years ago when the move to Sunday rugby was discussed. Pretty much everything that a few of us who opposed it said would happen, has happened. While in the short term it provided a sugar hit of a few more players, long term it has proved disasterous. What has also happened is that private school players who also play Sunday juniors are also eligible for district rep teams (which they never were in the past when school and club played at the same time). So the parents of these boys will fight any return to Saturday rugby to the last breath.

Rugby has become all about vested interests and the elite.