OffsideAgain
Frank Row (1)
This is a step in the right direction.
http://www.aru.com.au/coaching/ARPA
No costing as yet, that I can find.
http://www.aru.com.au/coaching/ARPA
No costing as yet, that I can find.
Declining participation and ARU plans for the future
- Thread starter RugbyReg
- Start date
I like to watch
David Codey (61)
$3k ............
Not sure that's the direction we should be heading.
Rugbynutter39
Michael Lynagh (62)
OffsideAgain
Frank Row (1)
Ouch, that hurts.
And a 2,000 km round trip. Not likely to happen for the grass-rooters...
WorkingClassRugger
Michael Lynagh (62)
They offer live in camps. Which are great but restrictive. I'd like tp see this model adapted to the Hockey program Quick Hands suggests.
OffsideAgain
Frank Row (1)
The National Rugby Camp at Armidale is 4 days live in.
$450.
They get 300 players every year.
https://www.nationalrugbycamps.com.au/
$450.
They get 300 players every year.
https://www.nationalrugbycamps.com.au/
half
Dick Tooth (41)
We need more of these, the costs seems relative not sure what level the 4 day course does represent.
Clearly this is not a bad thing and clearly its part of the overall answer.
My concern is when we have resources like TGM why cant we do this over say four weekends for a much cheaper course and far more accessible to grass roots coaches.
Clearly this is not a bad thing and clearly its part of the overall answer.
My concern is when we have resources like TGM why cant we do this over say four weekends for a much cheaper course and far more accessible to grass roots coaches.
Rugbynutter39
Michael Lynagh (62)
I am wondering why something like a rugby development grass roots foundation fund could be created. Have it as effectively a fund that anyone can donate to - or bequeath their will to etc.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
stoff
Trevor Allan (34)
half
Dick Tooth (41)
^^^^^^ to some of the posts above ..
In the following post please ignore Popa Smurf and his recent comments, its totally outside the purpose of the post, and arguably I am looking back many years.
There is an old business adage that says why waste money, and if you need to spend money why not spend if possible within your own circle with the proviso the service is equal too or better.
At national levels we have trained our national teams at Coffs Harbour. I have always wondered why the ARU never used TGM.
The fees would have stayed within the rugby community, advantageous other than keeping revenue in house so to speak, are TGM sits on the door step of the southern hemisphere's biggest IT and research park with many of the worlds leading companies, meaning huge opportunities for sponsorship's and arguably to relate to the changing demographics of the local community.
Moreover on the door step of the them channel 7, and close to SBS, 2 & 9 stations, with 2UE also on the doorstep or close anyway.
The cost of transport, accommodation and ground hire would have been much less.
A huge advantage would be local sides in Sydney could come and watch the teams train, talk to the players, get things signed etc.
Would have massively helped support rugby in the area and by and large assisted many aspects of rugby in Sydney, greatly assisting with player development and retention.
No reason why it can't be done now, or is there?
In the following post please ignore Popa Smurf and his recent comments, its totally outside the purpose of the post, and arguably I am looking back many years.
There is an old business adage that says why waste money, and if you need to spend money why not spend if possible within your own circle with the proviso the service is equal too or better.
At national levels we have trained our national teams at Coffs Harbour. I have always wondered why the ARU never used TGM.
The fees would have stayed within the rugby community, advantageous other than keeping revenue in house so to speak, are TGM sits on the door step of the southern hemisphere's biggest IT and research park with many of the worlds leading companies, meaning huge opportunities for sponsorship's and arguably to relate to the changing demographics of the local community.
Moreover on the door step of the them channel 7, and close to SBS, 2 & 9 stations, with 2UE also on the doorstep or close anyway.
The cost of transport, accommodation and ground hire would have been much less.
A huge advantage would be local sides in Sydney could come and watch the teams train, talk to the players, get things signed etc.
Would have massively helped support rugby in the area and by and large assisted many aspects of rugby in Sydney, greatly assisting with player development and retention.
No reason why it can't be done now, or is there?
Scrubber2050
Mark Ella (57)
The current format of Super Rugby, as we know it,is doomed.
The intention of expanding the competition across 4 countries each with different time zones makes it difficult for revenue from paying television audiences.
Trouble is, that currently most of the dosh comes from South Africa. Seems they would be happy ro enter a NH comp (with very similar time zone to their own)
At some point in time (maybe 10 years ??????) we will have a real Trans Tasman Competition only between Australian and New Zealand franchises. If that occurs we need to get our house in order. It may be that Australia does need to shrink to 4 teams (obviously the Reds being one of those
) The concept would need to be marketed very well and I believe sufficient revenues could be received.
Even with that format it may be possible to have a RC style of comp in which we play SA, Argies and NZ once (for the RC) and back up a further 2 times against the Kiwis for the Bled (game 1 would also be included)
My theory won't be tested for quite a while.
The intention of expanding the competition across 4 countries each with different time zones makes it difficult for revenue from paying television audiences.
Trouble is, that currently most of the dosh comes from South Africa. Seems they would be happy ro enter a NH comp (with very similar time zone to their own)
At some point in time (maybe 10 years ??????) we will have a real Trans Tasman Competition only between Australian and New Zealand franchises. If that occurs we need to get our house in order. It may be that Australia does need to shrink to 4 teams (obviously the Reds being one of those
) The concept would need to be marketed very well and I believe sufficient revenues could be received.Even with that format it may be possible to have a RC style of comp in which we play SA, Argies and NZ once (for the RC) and back up a further 2 times against the Kiwis for the Bled (game 1 would also be included)
My theory won't be tested for quite a while.
stoff
Trevor Allan (34)
Mainly because of this: http://www.rugby.com.au/en/news/2016/05/11/07/07/new-aru-facility-to-centralise-teams
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
p.Tah
John Thornett (49)
Guess who's back...... Pappy's back, but this time it is about grassroots rugby. I have a lot of time for Brad Harrison, helped me get on the pitch a number of times. Not sure why he looks so pissed off in these photos
Article is on the decline of juniors on the North Shore. I can't specifically comment on the numbers of players but I believe the downward trend. The article in a round about way is linking Premier rugby to the juniors. Apart from the Gordon age rep teams I don't think Gordon has specific juniors. Chatswood, Lane Cove, Roseville etc are distinct jr clubs but I didn't think Gordon currently had a great deal of involvement with them (except Terry Preston who does a heap for Chatswood)
As mentioned many times by others, I'd be happy for the ARU to provide funding to the clubs if those funds were directly used to boost and support juniors.
I believe Norths and Manly are already quite involved with their local juniors Norths Pirates and Manly Roos but I'm not sure if their reach goes to Mosman and Harbord etc
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...n/news-story/5cba2807a1c4aa4b436120a19406154d
Article is on the decline of juniors on the North Shore. I can't specifically comment on the numbers of players but I believe the downward trend. The article in a round about way is linking Premier rugby to the juniors. Apart from the Gordon age rep teams I don't think Gordon has specific juniors. Chatswood, Lane Cove, Roseville etc are distinct jr clubs but I didn't think Gordon currently had a great deal of involvement with them (except Terry Preston who does a heap for Chatswood)
As mentioned many times by others, I'd be happy for the ARU to provide funding to the clubs if those funds were directly used to boost and support juniors.
I believe Norths and Manly are already quite involved with their local juniors Norths Pirates and Manly Roos but I'm not sure if their reach goes to Mosman and Harbord etc
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...n/news-story/5cba2807a1c4aa4b436120a19406154d
half
Dick Tooth (41)
You don't need that level of facility to run junior coaching course. Again its ARU not team driven. This may seem a strange issue to raise but the AFL have a lot of team based training facilities and today so does league, Penrith have a 40 million dollar facility.
Even soccer is developing via their clubs training facilities. Below are a couple and whats interesting is how well they are marketed but that aside it does show we need these kinds of facilities and I still think a smaller scale using Rugby assets like TGM make sense.
BTW soccer is investing heavily, the second vid OMG those Melbourne City folk who run that management team. The first is the Central Coast second is M City. My questions is we should have at least 3 Super teams with this kinda stuff. Before you ask were is the money the CC one is mainly borrowed money as I understand it. They are worth watching if for no other reason to see what our Super teams are up against. The promotin and marketing is light years from where we are and its because they run themselves in a national domestic comp.
stoff
Trevor Allan (34)
You were asking about a facility for national teams, but apparently now it needs to belong to a fourth tier club. There are five other sets of elite rugby facilities around the country in varying guises. Those belonging to or hired by the super rugby franchises. None of those get close to AFL facilities like those belonging to Collingwood, or Hawthorn's planned Dingley base, but none of the franchises have 70,000 members or are funded by billion dollar tv deals. None of the clubs come to close to what state league sides have, and probably not even what large suburban Aussie rules teams have.
Fuck me, you ask for something, it's pointed out it is occurring and now it is too centralised. How would any club fund an elite sporting facility without ARU help?
And I don't think there is an upper level of acceptable facility for a junior coaching course.
Melbourne city is part of City Football Group which means oil money. Money is no object. Do you know any gulf billionaires looking for a Shute shield side?
half
Dick Tooth (41)
^^^^^
Two things first to run most coaching courses to a mid level which was what we started talking about does not need a Moore Park type facility. TGM or similar meets the needs. Further the various national teams can also train at a TGM type facility.
Second I am not saying we don't need a Moore Park facility, however my point with the above two bids was to highlight what ALL the other codes are doing.
Its nearly always club / team driven who in turn provide players for national squads.
The Central Coast Mariners for the most part are not wealthy in any sense of the word but they have produced a facility that generates income. We are suppose to be the business code. An example the Mariners at there facility have a pool, and gym, and some specialised small fields, the Mariners book themselves in and hire them out when they are not using them. A lot of the money is borrowed and their is some government funding as well.
I am so over in-spite of all the best intentions that almost everything we do ends up supporting our national teams. The NRC had a two fold purpose in the initial talks first to further develop players and second to grow rugby into the broader community. It did not tale long for player development to become the 1,2,3, 4 most important aspect.
In summary we don't need massively expensive facilities to develop local, coaching structure. Second while happy to have the Moore park facility that goes without question, its just that as always to me its for senior and junior national teams.
Concord would be a almost perfect for the Tahs to have a training facility, its already built, easy to get to, has building etc. Its not only about spending its about as I posted earlier as much as possible keeping revenue in the Rugby community.
Two things first to run most coaching courses to a mid level which was what we started talking about does not need a Moore Park type facility. TGM or similar meets the needs. Further the various national teams can also train at a TGM type facility.
Second I am not saying we don't need a Moore Park facility, however my point with the above two bids was to highlight what ALL the other codes are doing.
Its nearly always club / team driven who in turn provide players for national squads.
The Central Coast Mariners for the most part are not wealthy in any sense of the word but they have produced a facility that generates income. We are suppose to be the business code. An example the Mariners at there facility have a pool, and gym, and some specialised small fields, the Mariners book themselves in and hire them out when they are not using them. A lot of the money is borrowed and their is some government funding as well.
I am so over in-spite of all the best intentions that almost everything we do ends up supporting our national teams. The NRC had a two fold purpose in the initial talks first to further develop players and second to grow rugby into the broader community. It did not tale long for player development to become the 1,2,3, 4 most important aspect.
In summary we don't need massively expensive facilities to develop local, coaching structure. Second while happy to have the Moore park facility that goes without question, its just that as always to me its for senior and junior national teams.
Concord would be a almost perfect for the Tahs to have a training facility, its already built, easy to get to, has building etc. Its not only about spending its about as I posted earlier as much as possible keeping revenue in the Rugby community.
Scrubber2050
Mark Ella (57)
Just an aside
My wife went to a private school yesterday
Girls in Year 4 and other year levels, playing AFL.
The AFL sent 2 younger people (about 18-20) to be the official referees.
It was just a game between students of the same school.
My wife went to a private school yesterday
Girls in Year 4 and other year levels, playing AFL.
The AFL sent 2 younger people (about 18-20) to be the official referees.
It was just a game between students of the same school.
I like to watch
David Codey (61)
That's one way to go about it.
The other is to offer live in camps at $3k a pop.
Not hard to pick which is the winning strategy.
T
Train Without a Station
Guest
That's pretty disingenuous ILTW considering the below link seems to imply that the ARU are rolling out the Game On Program at primary level to any school that is interested:
http://www.aru.com.au/news/newsarti...n-rugby-launches-new-national-schools-program
http://www.aru.com.au/news/newsarti...n-rugby-launches-new-national-schools-program