How to fix the wallabies

[Gnostic]

I think "fixing" the wallabies has already started. I think it started 2 years ago with the NRC. And I think that is giving us some short term pain for long term gain.



The NRC takes the best players and mixes them in with our next tier of players. That raises our tier two players, but what does it do to our top players? Do they really play their best in the second tier? Probably not - yet. That may drive some poor habits during game time by WB potentials, not big differences, but how much difference does 1% make at test level.



As the NRC quality continues to rise - and I think it has and will continue to do so - then our best players will rise and the whole player stock will rise around them. It is not quite root growth of the game, but it is at least branch growth.



In the mean time, expect another two years of being walloped occasionally and otherwise some inconsistent play and some games you have to watch through your fingers as we drop yet another ball with the try line beckoning. But it is a building phase - and will always have to be a building phase because they day we think the Wallabies are "fixed" is the day we stagnate and go backwards.

If you want to post Bill use your real name.

As discussed elsewhere the NRC does SFA to develop players and skills as needed now. It might in 10 years time but I doubt it or the ARU will exist.
Tell me how a short competition and coaching exposure improves the base skills failures in the Wallabies?

 

[Train Without a Station]

So where previously fringe super rugby players would only play against the best 180 players in Sydney, they are now playing against full time professionals and around the best 60 club players in the country and this provides absolutely zero development?

What rubbish.

Almost all of these players are there because they have excelled at club level. Continuing to excel unchallenged is not going to develop and prepare them for the levels above.

 

[Gnostic]

Yeah TWAS - what rubbish. The Qld sides are the Reds players not involved in the Wallabies + extended squad members and a few clubs for good measure. I expect Brisbane City will walk it again this year. Maybe Qld "Country" or whatever it is will provide the challenge.

My arguments against the NRC are well known and posted once or twice elsewhere. and I won't de-rail this thread with them further, as your supporting posts are also repeated.

I do not see the NRC as a solution or part of a solution for the Wallabies, I don't even see it as a genuine pathway or even a higher standard of Rugby than Club. I know you will disagree strenuously so don't bother to reply.

 

[Quick Hands]

Yes, having Brad Thorn playing in the NRC will fix the Wallabies.

 

[Sully]

Yeah TWAS - what rubbish. The Qld sides are the Reds players not involved in the Wallabies + extended squad members and a few clubs for good measure. I expect Brisbane City will walk it again this year. Maybe Qld "Country" or whatever it is will provide the challenge.

My arguments against the NRC are well known and posted once or twice elsewhere. and I won't de-rail this thread with them further, as your supporting posts are also repeated.

I do not see the NRC as a solution or part of a solution for the Wallabies, I don't even see it as a genuine pathway or even a higher standard of Rugby than Club. I know you will disagree strenuously so don't bother to reply.

Hey mate. Just because you've posted them doesn't mean we agree with you. Weird huh?

 

[Train Without a Station]

"Don't even see it as a higher standard of rugby than club".

Well try watching with your fucking eyes open.

 

[half]

TWAS

I have enormous respect for your indebt rugby knowledge, and knowledge of our history, and moreover you written ability is very good and you overall argue in a logical sense.

Me my knowledge is mainly personal, i.e my experiences, further as I have said before my wife is a teacher and a soccer, softball and swimming person so I also have almost an equal understanding of the other codes.

Without trying to drag up old embers that went out decades ago, we as a sport were approached in the middle of a Super League War to establish along with NZ & SA a three way competition and test series.

AS most know I believe, this resulted in our state teams becoming club teams and effectively destroyed the Sydney & Brisbane club competition despite the fact they were on FTA TV on the ABC.

TWAS you acknowledge we are sliding back a little year on year. Putting our hopes in a 7 week 8 team competition is fanciable. Starting near the peak of the NRL and AFL seasons with most games at the peak of the AFL and NRL seasons with finals played at the start of the A-League and just after a Socceroo match.

7 weeks plus finals is better than we had for current player development but the issues and problems are well below this level.

My fear is we are addicted to SANDZAR revenue, like a gambler we keep doing what hurts us for another spin of the wheel.

Soccer growth in juniors has resulted in cricket, AFL & league investing heavily in junior recruitment. Basketball also is expanding its player base.

I honestly think some people in the general community think we are part of some international rugby competition akin to Redbull and its plan shows.


Your thoughts on what could replace SANDZAR . How could we do it, please don’t answer we can’t because that is like lying in bed with live support. We need to get up stand on our feet have faith in our game.

 

[half]

Hey mate. Just because you've posted them doesn't mean we agree with you. Weird huh?

Equally it does not mean he is totally wrong.

There are many aspects of the NRC I like and many I don't.

I also share the view it is still a long way from approaching perfect.

In fact I don't know anyone who thinks it can solve most things.

An issue for me is what I want the NRC to achieve, and what others want it to achieve.

If its main purpose is to prepare players for Super Rugby and hopefully national teams then so be it.

I want the NCR to be the driving force behind developing a national domestic competition. When first announced I am sure this was one of its tenants. However like all things rugby the national team needs have trumped all other goals.

Long term I can't see people funding year on year a national training competition.

 

[Gnostic]

"Don't even see it as a higher standard of rugby than club".



Well try watching with your fucking eyes open.

Real intelligent. Such biting debating points. I'm out of my intellectual depth.

 

[Gnostic]

Hey mate. Just because you've posted them doesn't mean we agree with you. Weird huh?

No worries Sully, I never asked for agreement I was responding to the intellectual debate of a two word reply that responds to the points raised. I acknowledge that some don't agree and likely never will. That's fine, doesn't change my POV, not weird at all.

Maybe I've just got my "fucking eyes" closed eh.

 

[No4918]

I don't think many people have said the NRC is the answer to all the problems. In theory I believe there are definitely benefits to having such a competition but I guess the extent of that will be easier to see in several years time if it manages to survive.

The game needs the NRC and grass roots plus other changes if it is to thrive. Each piece of the puzzle must come together. This costs money though. There may be differences of opinion about relative importance but not all can be done at the moment unfortunately. And that situation doesn't look like improving any time soon.

 

[daz]

RWC15 Finalists.

Basically same team, same coaches as only 9 months ago. I'm not thrilled with this year so far either, but in all honesty, the Wallabies season this year is a pretty fair reflection of the Oz Super Rugby campaign.

Just saying that some of the hyperbole being thrown around in this thread needs to take a deep breath and a knee-bend. Let's see the year out before we all defect to AFL.

 

[wamberal]

Let's see the year out before we all defect to AFL.

I would hate to be Chubby Cheika right now. But if I were I would be looking forwrd to the end of the year too, and if things are still as awful as they look right now, I would be giving serious thought to going back into the fashion business.

 

[Quick Hands]

.

An issue for me is what I want the NRC to achieve, and what others want it to achieve.

If its main purpose is to prepare players for Super Rugby and hopefully national teams then so be it.


Long term I can't see people funding year on year a national training competition.

These are the essential problems half. In trying to be all things, the NRC isn't really doing any of them as well as it might.

If it's purpose is to prepare players for super rugby, then it is completely illogical to play the NRC under different laws, which by definition mean that players and coaches will approach matches in a different way. The style of play in the NRC bears little resemblance to the style of play in super rugby (or for that matter the style of rugby played in SS and its equivalents). So it sits off to the side of any flow chart doing its own thing.

If it's purpose is to arouse and promote interest in the code, then as you have indicated it is played at a time of the year when there is little or no media exposure available. It should be noted that the timing of the NRC is of the ARU's making - it wanted something parallel to Currie Cup and Mitre 10 Cup in NZ. Again totally illogical as the game in Australia faces different challenges to what it faces in NZ and SA (not sure that the game faces any challenges in NZ).

But when I have raised these points, I am set upon by a certain group of posters who construe raising questions as criticism and/or opposition.

 

[RedsHappy]

'How to fix the Wallabies'.....

There's a masterful piece of rugby analysis here:

http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/analysis-wallaby-kicking-woes/#disqus_thread

Then follow that with a good look at the 2 videos that the Comments poster H Bomb has added under his alias under that blog essay, these two are just as good if not better regarding the same subject - the massive price the Wallabies are paying for consistently poor kicking skills. And 'massive' is not hype when your read and watch through this material.

These Wallaby (and Aus Super just as much) deficiencies in one of the most important core rugby skills have been glaringly evident for many years now.

It's a shocking indictment of our elite coaching capabilities and MO that zero improvement has been made in such an obvious area of Australian rugby deficiency.

Our whole set-up requires far, far better skills coaching in depth concentrated upon a group of players of a size that we can afford to coach with high calibre input. This cost serious money to inject the right specialists into the right places and formats, this takes serious managerial focus and resourcing. It surely means that other things, other possibilities must be sacrificed and not done, and that is typically what good high-level management and strategy is all about.

But our 'spare' resources and funds have essentially gone to the propagation of 'the national footprint', namely the Force and Rebels, literally tens of $ms of ARU resources have gone there, and single digit $ms still do go there.

Quantity, scale, 'prestige' vs other codes' sizes, and not true competitively upgraded rugby playing quality, has been the core strategy of the last decade. Even the NRC is essentially about 'more players, more playing time' not necessarily heightening the skills base of a viable national core of players. Feeding into the NRC are generally poorly coached Super players bringing with them insufficiently high standards as they themselves have not been coached properly. So there is no or limited 'pass through' of enhancing excellence to NRC club players, there are just more rugby games in August and September, typically played to very small crowds.

Now witness and assess the consequences of a top-down, quantity-driven strategy at the heart of our code.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Well Gnostic clearly you're not capable of having an intelligent debate on the NRC if you can't even acknowledge a competition that pits full time professionals against the best 60 club players across the nation is a higher standard than a metropolitan club game.

I never said you had to like the NRC or think it's wonderful. But it's absolutely ludicrous to say it's not even a higher standard. Otherwise most club players would dominate the competition, not be the weaknesses.

 

[The torpedo]

Jesus this thread isn't called the "bitch and moan about the problems in the wallabies and ARU" it's called "how to fix the wallabies" (and ARU). QH and Gnostic (and TWAS, half among others) you aresaying what the problems are (which is correct, you've got to know what the problem is to solve it), but you DON'T PROPOSE ANY SOLUTIONS.

 

[The torpedo]

But our 'spare' resources and funds have essentially gone to the propagation of 'the national footprint', namely the Force and Rebels, literally tens of $ms of ARU resources have gone there, and single digit $ms still do go there.

The reason why is so the Force can survive. I think that the rebels aren't receiving ARU funds anymore as they found owners. You've got to survive to thrive.

 

[tragic]

'How to fix the Wallabies'...

There's a masterful piece of rugby analysis here:

http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/analysis-wallaby-kicking-woes/#disqus_thread
.

It's not that those skills are completely absent. We just don't make them a selection priority.
England didn't chose their best playmaker at 10 - they chose their best kicker, and arguably it won them the series.
We constantly pick the best exponents of running rugby but ignore kicking and the set pieces to our detriment. We pick players out of position and lacking key skills in their role.
It's not just skills coaching that has to improve.
It's prioritising those skills in selection, so the players have an incentive to excel.

 

[RedsHappy]

The reason why is so the Force can survive. I think that the rebels aren't receiving ARU funds anymore as they found owners. You've got to survive to thrive.

Wrong I'm afraid. They the Rebels are still receiving substantial ARU $ms per annum (on a diminishing basis over this and IIRC the next 3 years) as part of the sale of Rebels to a private consortium.

In a very real sense the ARU - after investing vast sums in the Rebels - paid and will continue paying the private consortium to take the Rebels off their hands.

And FWIW rugby sources of mine in MEL state that close-in rumours are circulating that the new consortium is going to have to approach the ARU to increase this subsidy as it's not meeting all of its immediate financial goals.