Draft for Oz S15?

[RugbyReg]

The ARU is seriously considering introducing a draft-style mechanism to distribute young talent around the five Australian Super 15 franchises from 2010.

Under the proposal, each of the teams - the Brumbies, Melbourne Rebels, New South Wales Waratahs, Queensland Reds and Western Force - would contract 30 players plus five rookies.

The 25 rookies would be placed in a combined talent pool, known as the "Expanded Player Squad", which could be tapped by any of the teams if they incurred injuries during the season.

If the system was in place during 2009, for example, when Western Force sustained injuries to backrowers David Pocock and Richard Brown at the start of the season, they could have recruited a young flanker such as Michael Hooper, who at the time was on an academy contract at the Brumbies but rose to the first team.

It is understood the Super 15 teams would bid for the rookies at an auction every September.

The proposal would reduce the warehousing of talented young players in state academies and provide them with experience at Super rugby level.

The EPS proposal is being driven by ARU high performance manager David Nucifora, who was exposed to a similar system in New Zealand while coaching the Auckland-based Blues.

Given the draft nature of the proposal, it would require the support of the Rugby Union Players Association, which is discussing the idea with the ARU as part of the renegotiation of the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

Acting RUPA chief executive Omar Hassanein supported the proposal in principle, but would not officially endorse it until he had fully digested the details of the scheme, which could have wide-ranging ramifications.

"I can see the reasoning behind it," Hassanein said.

"Everyone is supportive of a system which encourages the best players to be on the field.

"Until we see the details it's hard to say whether it's great or something we would oppose. In principle it's good, but there are things needed to be ironed out."

Waratahs chief executive Jim L'Estrange said there was some validity to the idea but he was concerned about the affect it would have on teams' succession planning and culture building.

"No one wants to warehouse players, but you don't want to break your culture or your succession planning," L'Estrange said.

"There are also IP (intellectual property) issues to consider with players jumping from one team to another.

"Also, if a player plays one game for his new team he can't go back to his old team.

"There will be a lot of discussion among the CEOs. We have to do the right thing by Australian rugby and the teams. We'll have to weigh it up."

Brumbies chief executive Andrew Fagan was more positive, describing the idea as a "solid concept".

"We don't have a competition beneath the Super 14 to develop players," Fagan said.

"This concept would expose an additional 25 players to Super rugby.

"We already did it this year when we let (Brumbies academy hooker) Nathan Charles go to the Force. There is merit in it."

Fagan said he wanted to know how the scheme would be paid for before he backed it.

"I still have questions about how it will be funded," Fagan said.

"There's a lack of clarity about that. I don't have an extra $200,000 to pay for it.

"The money would have to come from elsewhere."

 

[cheezel]

It makes sense, although most teams are fairly generous with there academy players when another team has a few injuries.

 

[AussieDominance]

All I can say it needs a lot of work. What reward do states like NSW & QLD get when they produce the majority of these juniors & yet get them pilfered by other states in NSW's case the Brumbies mainly & in QLD's case the Force.

This could possibly lead to the weaker junior development states not giving wholehearted effort to producing local juniors( I mean the Brumbies have already been given a leg up by taking over a part of the NSW development system).

ACT Schools have been nothing but poor over the last few years is that the Premier states fault? Of course Fagan would describe it as a 'solid concept'.

Im all for a development system that still requires the weaker junior development franchises(Brumbies, Force & Melbourne) to actually put some effort in.

 

[scrubber]

All I can say it needs a lot of work. What reward do states like NSW & QLD get when they produce the majority of these juniors & yet get them pilfered by other states in NSW's case the Brumbies mainly & in QLD's case the Force.

This could possibly lead to the weaker junior development states not giving wholehearted effort to producing local juniors( I mean the Brumbies have already been given a leg up by taking over a part of the NSW development system).

ACT Schools have been nothing but poor over the last few years is that the Premier states fault? Of course Fagan would describe it as a 'solid concept'.

Im all for a development system that still requires the weaker junior development franchises(Brumbies, Force & Melbourne) to actually put some effort in.

Don't know the answer but understand Force, ACT and Rebels will only suck the talent produced by NSW and QLD - great for up and coming players but as said no reward for QLD and NSW who thru programs develop these kids into soon to be contracted players then lost to the developing state

 

[Reddy!]

Yeh, when QLD produces 99% of all Super rugby players in Australia and the Wallabies, it's hardly fair for the future of the Reds.

 

[Biffo]

Yeh, when QLD produces 99% of all Super rugby players in Australia and the Wallabies, it's hardly fair for the future of the Reds.

:

If so, why do the Reds include so many from outside Queensland?

 

[Reddy!]

Yeh, when QLD produces 99% of all Super rugby players in Australia and the Wallabies, it's hardly fair for the future of the Reds.

:

You are correct Reddy! and I have no idea what I'm talking about

I know

 

[Moses]

Yeh, when QLD produces 99% of all Super rugby players in Australia and the Wallabies, it's hardly fair for the future of the Reds.

At the risk of letting some facts cloud your judgement, here's a piece Noddy wrote on the subject.

20 / 121 is not very close to 99%

 

[cyclopath]

Maybe Reddy! works for Lehmann Brothers or some such outfit, so numbers aren't his strong suit?

 

[Biffo]

Maybe Reddy! works for Lehmann Brothers or some such outfit, so numbers aren't his strong suit?

I doubt that Reddy! works.

 

[matty_k]

I was thought the general rule for Reddy's comments was to dial them back by a factor of about 5 or 6.

I love (i'm assuming) his enthusiasm about Qld. I wish I could match it about the 'Tahs.

 

[DPK]

I was thought the general rule for Reddy's comments was to dial them back by a factor of about 5 or 6.

I love (i'm assuming) his enthusiasm about Qld. I wish I could match it about the 'Tahs.

WJ's got it covered.

 

[matty_k]

And isn't it beautiful.

but to get back on track a draft could a good thing if handled correctly and if those who developed the player get properly recognised/compensated.

 

[Biffo]

Yeh, when QLD produces 99% of all Super rugby players in Australia and the Wallabies, it's hardly fair for the future of the Reds.

At the risk of letting some facts cloud your judgement, here's a piece Noddy wrote on the subject.

20 / 121 is not very close to 99%

Great work by Noddy, great work.

There is no single reliable measure of "who belongs to whom", because that concept is a nonsense in the context of a professional sport in a nation dominated by immigrants.

 

[matty_k]

As I said it needs to recognise the body/state/franchise that developed the player

 

[#1 Tah]

i dont think that many of the players would like this if they were loyal to their state

 

[Moses]

It would kind of suck being a young player and suddenly being shafted over to Perth for a season with all your family and friends in Sydney... but then again plenty of young people have to travel for work, many enjoy the change.

 

[Biffo]

i dont think that many of the players would like this if they were loyal to their state

Simple. Players would have to choose between (1) becoming one of the five, with the possible risk of being sent elsewhere and (2) declining the 5 and waiting for a contract in the 30.

 

[Spook]

All I can say it needs a lot of work. What reward do states like NSW & QLD get when they produce the majority of these juniors & yet get them pilfered by other states in NSW's case the Brumbies mainly & in QLD's case the Force.

This could possibly lead to the weaker junior development states not giving wholehearted effort to producing local juniors( I mean the Brumbies have already been given a leg up by taking over a part of the NSW development system).

ACT Schools have been nothing but poor over the last few years is that the Premier states fault? Of course Fagan would describe it as a 'solid concept'.

Im all for a development system that still requires the weaker junior development franchises(Brumbies, Force & Melbourne) to actually put some effort in.

There were 7 players on the pitch from ONE school in Canberra in the Reds V Brumbies game. Stop talking shit. The Brumbies also represent Southern NSW but you keep ignoring that.

 

[Jets]

Yeh, when QLD produces 99% of all Super rugby players in Australia and the Wallabies, it's hardly fair for the future of the Reds.

At the risk of letting some facts cloud your judgement, here's a piece Noddy wrote on the subject.

20 / 121 is not very close to 99%

Great work by Noddy, great work.

There is no single reliable measure of "who belongs to whom", because that concept is a nonsense in the context of a professional sport in a nation dominated by immigrants.

I think Reddy is more focused on where players were schooled and developed their game. Noddy's article was focused on where players were born.