Declining participation and ARU plans for the future

[barbarian]

I'm not disputing that it would be great to have more of a presence on FTA. But it's not the saviour that many make it out to be.

We've had this discussion a bunch of times here, and I'm not going to get into it again, suffice to say Fox Sports is a major supporter of our code - Super Rugby, NRC and now sponsoring 7s and Viva 7s across Australia.

A move towards FTA would mean sacrificing a great deal of this revenue, and there isn't an obvious source where we can recoup that.

So while FTA is a worthy goal, the decision is not as easy as many here claim.
.

 

[Tip]

Sydney & Melbourne have the highest per capita subscriptions to Foxtel in the country, completely dwarfing Adelaide, Perth & Brisbane.

Why? Each city has ~8 teams in a competition where there's only 3 FTA slots.

If the consumer gets a taste, they'll want more.

Foxtel need to grow the rugby pie instead of trying to maintain their slice of it.

 

[barbarian]

If the consumer gets a taste, they'll want more.

Why? They get a taste of international rugby each year, and by the ratings so far they aren't banging down the door for 'more'.

We love our game, but are you that sure there is such a demand for Super Rugby in the wider community?

Foxtel need to grow the rugby pie instead of trying to maintain their slice of it.

Well they are sponsoring the 7s programs to do just that.

But they have to look after their business first and foremost. And sending games to FTA doesn't help them at all. Their key trading point atm is they are the ONLY place to see Super Rugby. It's something they pay for, and taking that away will cost the game financially.
.

 

[Slim 293]

FTA Networks would love to have Super Rugby, but they're not going to fork out for it............

 

[Joe King]

So, revert back to S12? Pretty sure that was run and done in a 13-14 week time frame. I suppose if you were to look toward doing something like the conference system actually makes the most sense. Move the Sunwolves into our conference, tbe Jaguares into the NZ and keep the SA conference as is. Only run the domestic side of it. So, each team plays one another H/A for 10 games. Top 2 from each go through to a finals series where they are ranked 1-6 using points and if need be for and against. Top 2 sit out the first week with 3 playing 6 and 4 playing 5. Winners progess to the major semi-final and so on. All up it would run 13 weeks.

Then you could have your June Test window and run The Rugby Championship as part of a Test season before as above each running their own supercharged domestic competition. Question is, would the reformatting be worth more or less to broadcasters.

That would tick a lot of boxes for me personally. It would also allow them to expand into 'America' using a new conference if they wanted to (2 Canada, 2 USA, 2 Arg teams?), without affecting the existing conferences or increasing travel. Instead of the top 6, it could become the top 8. Top 2 from the Oz conference could play the top 2 from the NZ conference (1v2, 2v1) with the two winners of that playing against each other to provide the winning team to play against the equivalent winner of the SA / 'American' conference, to be the overall Super Rugby winner.

Though, it would take a big vision to see a whole host of new teams in an 'American' conference, with perhaps one more (PI team?) in the NZ conference.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

The elephant in the room is a system of talent production based on elite schools, a model which has proven to be outdated and largely incapable of feeding the needs of the Wallaby machine.
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/a...m-letting-wallabies-down-20160904-gr88x9.html

 

[wamberal]

Dear oh dear. Does he get paid for writing drivel?


Yes, the elite schools are our only remaining comparative strength. So, what should we do? Turn our backs on them?


(Note: I am the product of a state school, and have only entered the portals of a GPS School once, when we played SJC in a pres-season trial, and they handed our asses to us on a plate, as usual).


It would be nice to read something constructive, instead of a re-hashing of posts from forums like this one.

 

[Dave Beat]

I've sort of gone quite through frustration.

People say rugby has more competition out here in Australia than NZ, we have AFL, Soccer, Loig.
I wont disagree with that, but i think that is an excuse.
NZ does rugby better that Australia does rugby, that simple. Lets do rugby better than what we are currently doing.
- Our ball is oval, the soccer ball is round.
- Our game is for all shapes and sizes, others aren't.
- AFL is about kicking the ball, rugby is ball in hand.
- Loig is about counting to 5 and pill to foot.


Guys our biggest competition is unfortunately ourselves, we need to take ownership of that and do rugby better.

Keep it simple - lets do rugby better, and do it repeatedly.


I've heard reference to politics, yeah it's there, it's in life, nurture it, work with it, it is often these very people who are putting in the hours, and the time. Bitch and complain about it - shit they may go elsewhere.

With great rugby comes culture, mateship, enjoyment, lets do rugby better.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I agree got to be careful around foxsports as major supporter but we need to do things around the edges to get more rugby on FTA to get wider exposure and following - particularly outside the traditional grass roots of private schools.

It is a pity Newscorp did not buy out channel ten and then would be less of a commercial dilemma where could air rugby on both channel 10 and foxsports.

To have no games on FTA will always inhibit the growth for the simple fact 70% of the population you are missing being able to market the game to, unlike league or AFL etc.

If we always stay just bound to foxsports we would have to be accepting rugby as just a minor niche sport.

There is no doubt the balance is wrong with nearly all rugby below Test matches on foxsports (outside of shute shied on 7two). Expecting all to move to FTA equally silly but need a better balance if to grow the sport in oz and increase participation as already 70% of kids grow up in houses where they have no chance to watch the domestic super rugby sides. Any wonder why it makes it easier for them to watch and get interest in league or AFL.

I really don't think you can discount the importance to get more rugby product on FTA as this is critical to the future of rugby and that I am actually sure of.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

You are missing the point - by only having x games of test rugby on a year on FTA means you don't have enough product to really get engaged on as a fan so how can you expect to build a loyal following based on wide spaced limited number of games a year (out of mind out of sight also springs to mind).

You are missing those who want to regularly click on and watch a sport regularly and how do you expect people to see only a few wallaby games on FTA a year get any sort of ability to get a regular following. These are the fans you want to engage with and get following your sport but how can rugby do that when only has access to 30% of the market.

If people at higher levels in Rugby Administration think that not finding a way to get more rugby on FTA is a top priority then we have go the wrong people in these positions. Period.

It is about getting access to a wider addressable market and whilst you are only on foxsports you only have access to 30% of the market and 70% of the kids wanting to following a sporting team regularly have no choice but to take the FTA regular offering of AFL or League.

It is not that hard to work out the big limitations of the current broadcast model for rugby. Big bash on cricket done well as on FTA - NRC again is limited as only accessible to 30% of the market. Already inhibiting the ability to grow a fledgling competition.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Sorry Barbarian I do disagree with your views the way they are presented on so many fronts.

There are ways to structure deals so don't cripple Foxsports financial support whilst gradually getting more rugby product out there. Whether that be have limited but regular delayed games replayed on FTA etc or whatever - I don't have to work out how this could work but those at senior levels of rugby administration do.

We are competing against other football codes who have 100% access to the wider population (or if want to be exact 97% or whatever who have televisions) compared to 30% or so who have Foxtel and probably even less who have foxsports subscription. Cripes only just realised this - we are probably actually only talking about something like 10% of the population who has a foxsports subscription.

How the hell is this a way to grow the game if you only have something like 10% access to the market (via those with foxsports subscriptions)!

If people don't think this is a problem (particularly those involved in key decisions for the direction of the game) then it just shows to me how dire rugby is and has little hope for much of a future beyond a dwindling minor niche sport.

 

[Dave Beat]

When i grew up Fox was animal we saw in the country.
There was one television in the house, and i had to hop up and turn a dial to change channels.

PLUS - we were outside having fun, playing sport.

Is TV all its cracked up to be -
- If you wanted to watch soccer on FTA this year how would you have gone.
- I also reckon there is more rugby on fox than AFL, and Soccer, maybe more than league if you look at all the Soup, Top 14, Test, NRC, Mitre 10, Japan's Top League. The product is there.

I'll take it one step further - Media. We hardly get a write up in the paper at the moment, who's responsibility is that, surely there are some good rugby stories out there at present.

The above is sitting on your arse watching sport, that will not help grow it, that will not put it out there and make rugby better.

I feel our biggest problem is ownership, own the problem, and fix it.
Do rugby well, then
Do rugby better, and enjoy it.
then repeat, and repeat, and repeat.
People will gravitate towards fun and enjoyment and it will grow.
Yes systems, processes, and reviews are all part of it - that is improvement.
Keep it simple - if you don't have the ball you can not score a try.

 

[Dave Beat]

You are missing the point - by only having x games of test rugby on a year on FTA means you don't have enough product to really get engaged on as a fan so how can you expect to build a loyal following based on wide spaced limited number of games a year (out of mind out of sight also springs to mind).

.

Every one is allowed to be different, I get more enjoyment going down to the local oval with my kids to watch the Shute Shield than flicking on the TV.

The kids also enjoy running around and having fun with their mates kicking the pill around.

What is better for rugby development?

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Actually reading that article helps sum me up to the problem

Our current model relies on independent schools (which only make up 35% of schools) who play rugby - and over the last 20 years they have offered much wider choices with AFL, soccer etc offered.

Then the main rugby product is limited to those who have a Foxtel subscription PLUS a foxsports subscription.

AFL if we take as an example is not only played in large number of public schools but increasingly in the hearland of rugby junior nurseries ie. independent schools.

And on top of that they have access to 97% of the market via FTA presence. Kids grow up wanting to be part of the incrowd - and given most of the kids have only exposure to other football codes played on FTA they are less likely to be part of the social click talking about rugby (what' rugby?).

These are the two biggest long term problems rugby has to solve:
1. How to get more non independent schools offering rugby (bigger part of the market and kids in those schools wanting to play it.
2. How to get more rugby product on FTA to get wider exposure and access to more potential fans.

These two problems are highly correlated btw. As get 2 get more pull for 1. If rugby does not find solutions for these 2 problems (not saying overnight but working towards solving these with clear plan as long term goal) then Rugby in this country is fucked!

 

[Dave Beat]

These are the two biggest long term problems rugby has to solve:
1. How to get more non independent schools offering rugby (bigger part of the market and kids in those schools wanting to play it.
2. How to get more rugby product on FTA to get wider exposure and access to more potential fans.

I'll agree with # 1.
With regards to # 2, do 1 well, and do rugby well that can happen.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Dave

There is nothing wrong with what you outlined (taking the kids to the game) but if you want to grow the game you need more product on TV and FTA as they have the penetration. It is about easy access - and easiest way to get access to your fans (or more importantly potential NEW fans) is through broadcast on FTA given penetration, then hopefully they get more interest and want to go watch games live, beg their dads to take them, take out Waratahs memberships etc. Respectfully you were missing the point Dave.


You would know is that it is TV money that largely drives the growth of the game. Yes foxsports important financial supporters but limits the of the pie as they only capture those with foxsports subscriptions whilst if got wider appeal for the product and got on FTA (and hence get more appeal and FTA willing to pay for those rights and hence will offer more money as they can get more eyeballs if product in demand as have access to 97% of the market - not just the 10% or so with foxsports subscriptions.)

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Dave

Correlation both ways. Do 1 well - creates demand for 2. Do 2 well creates more demand for 1.

 

[Quick Hands]

I think that you and I pointed this out about 3 or 4 years ago?

 

[Quick Hands]

Yes, the elite schools are our only remaining comparative strength. So, what should we do? Turn our backs on them?

No, you don't turn you backs on them, but we have to realise that they simply can't produce enough talent to fill a competitive Wallabies team on a long term basis.

Having a strong, well-run schools competition is fantastic. I think the point is that if we want to be competitive on a regular basis at tier 1 international level, then we also need a strong junior club structure working parallel to the schools. Just like it was when I went to a state high school and played junior club rugby in the 1970s.

It's not an either/or debate. The pie has to grow or we are well and truly stuffed.

 

[Quick Hands]

(Note: I am the product of a state school, and have only entered the portals of a GPS School once, when we played SJC in a pres-season trial, and they handed our asses to us on a plate, as usual).


.

As I posted on another thread, this was what the Australian Schools team looked like when I was at school. All those highlighted in bold would have played CHS rugby on a Wednesday afternoon and junior club rugby on a Saturday (as we all did in those days).

Australian Schools Squad 1980.

11 from State CHS schools
11 from the private systems
1 from Sydney BHS which is a state school playing in GPS

Rick Allen Ku-ring-gai High School NSW
Darren Anderson The Southport School QLD
Wally Barnier Shore School NSW
Paul Bowman Waverley College NSW
Greg Burrow Shore School NSW
Ian Donaldson Pennant Hills High School NSW
Robert Featherston Sydney Boys High School NSW
Damien Frawley Gregory Terrace QLD
Stephen Halliwell Northmead High School NSW
Andrew James James Ruse Agric High School NSW
Andrew Jones Chatswood High NSW
Grant Killen Maroubra Bay High NSW
David Knox Matraville High School NSW
Tom Lawton The Southport School QLD
Cameron Lillicrap Brisbane Grammar School QLD
Matthew Lindley Canberra College (Phillip College/Stirling College) ACT Geoff Manteit Gregory Terrace QLD
Darren McCarthy Marist College, Ashgrove QLD
Michael Murray St Joseph's College, Hunters Hill NSW
Brett Papworth Epping Boys High School NSW ***
Ken Smith Matraville High School NSW
Steve Tuynman Hunters Hill High School NSW

Now, while I don't agree with everything that Brett Papworth says, he does have street cred.