Learning from the enemy – an affordable Third Tier competition

[Jets]

I really like Bruce's idea. Give the state teams other names, e.g.. Red Healers, Rebel Rising, Brumby Runners etc.(they all have them), so that clubs aren't playing their state teams. The great thing is that the clubs involved have access to their players and a development pathway but the club teams not involved still have a pathway for their developing players through the State "B" teams.
While it would be great for teams to be selected based on performance alone I think that to be considered a holistic approach should be taken. Clubs would have to submit finances and development plans and also have suitable facilities to be considered for entry into the competition.
And what ever happens don't pay the players. That was the biggest issue with the ARC in my eyes, they payed the players for something they would have happily done for free.

 

[I like to watch]

Dave, I think you missed my point. Which was that it's not well supported by the general public. I didn't mean to infer that it was not worthy of more support.

 

[Bruce Ross]

I really like Bruce's idea. Give the state teams other names, e.g.. Red Healers, Rebel Rising, Brumby Runners etc.(they all have them), so that clubs aren't playing their state teams. The great thing is that the clubs involved have access to their players and a development pathway but the club teams not involved still have a pathway for their developing players through the State "B" teams.
While it would be great for teams to be selected based on performance alone I think that to be considered a holistic approach should be taken. Clubs would have to submit finances and development plans and also have suitable facilities to be considered for entry into the competition.
And what ever happens don't pay the players. That was the biggest issue with the ARC in my eyes, they payed the players for something they would have happily done for free.

You make a couple of very good points, Jets, which help to flesh out the concept. But I do think that if you're going to require the clubs "to submit finances and development plans" the same should apply to the franchises. However, I wouldn't want to see this requirement applied too harshly. I'd hate to see my beloved Waratahs miss out, for example. Would the development plan have to be up to date? I'm pretty sure the 'Tahs had one when they undertook the Concord Oval project.
.

 

[Moses]

Perhaps the Aviva premiership model could work; a relegation system whereby only those who qualify need to submit plans and meet criteria for admission.

 

[en_force_er]

Bruce, I agree we need to learn from the enemy and certainly agree that the enemy is the AFL but I think we could draw a bit from the NEFL as mentioned but moreso from the Foxtel Cup.

It's a league built on existing structures meant purely for television, and that's how it needs to be.

 

[Bruce Ross]

Bruce, I agree we need to learn from the enemy and certainly agree that the enemy is the AFL but I think we could draw a bit from the NEFL as mentioned but moreso from the Foxtel Cup.

It's a league built on existing structures meant purely for television, and that's how it needs to be.

I don't quite see the relevance of the Foxtel Cup to what we need for our code, en_force_er.

Firstly, as you state, "it's a league ... meant purely for television". Rugby is a very long way off from having any real access to that medium.

Secondly, it is a competition for clubs from Australian Football's second tier which has a much longer history than their top tier. Our task is to build a third tier, i.e., an equivalent to their second tier.

Thirdly, it is a knock-out competition and therefore would not materially assist in our basic need which is to give emerging players regular exposure to high standard competition.
.

 

[sunnyboys]

Regarding State v Club. I have no club affiliation as I didn't grow up in Brisbane (but reside in Bris now), nor play club rugby so I would probably follow the State B team against Bris clubs. As we often hear, Super Rugby teams can be a bit "capital city" pre-occupied, but in this case they would be the natural home for anyone showing interest in a comp like this and either lives outside Bris or doesn't follow one of the clubs in the comp. I would think the same logic might apply in other states.

 

[thierry dusautoir]

I dont think this concept would work i think the third tier teams have to come from outside of the pre existign premier grade teams as most teams go through a cycle of being succesful to non succesful look at uni for instance back 2007 & 2008 they were weak at prem level. Now they are power houses. Randwick this year are terrible in shute shield but most years are right up there.

The premier grade competition is such an unpredictable beast at the moment i feel numbers to games are up and the level of play is on the rise at least QLD but i feel that a competition like this would be a cruel blow for teams like Wests & Norths who are back on the rise financially and on field after some terribel years. Also i feel the current decline of the coastal clubs leaves this idea to be shot down aswell.

I feel the premier competition at least in QLD needs to grow a little more before a concept like this is utilised.

 

[en_force_er]

I don't quite see the relevance of the Foxtel Cup to what we need for our code, en_force_er.

Firstly, as you state, "it's a league . meant purely for television". Rugby is a very long way off from having any real access to that medium.

Secondly, it is a competition for clubs from Australian Football's second tier which has a much longer history than their top tier. Our task is to build a third tier, i.e., an equivalent to their second tier.

Thirdly, it is a knock-out competition and therefore would not materially assist in our basic need which is to give emerging players regular exposure to high standard competition.
.

I didn't say we should cut and paste it Bruce, merely learn from it's good points.

Firstly, it's packaged in a way that's palatable for television which equals exposure.
Secondly, it uses existing set-ups and does not create new ones.
Thirdly, it disproves the notion that players will need to be paid more to play in this kind of competition than they are already paid to play in say, the Shute Shield.
Fourthly, it's a short tournament. That makes it more affordable.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

I've been thinking about this a bit and I like the concept in general. I think most people accept that Sydney and Brisbane club footy is the strongest in the country, so having the top clubs from those competitions is a good thing. On the other hand, it's also a very good thing for players from the non-rugby states to be able to play more regularly against the other talent across the country.

You could have something like the top three or four sides in Sydney and Brisbane (with promotion/relegation) playing against the 2nd XV's of the Force, Rebels and Brumbies. I don't like the idea of the 2nd XV's of the Reds and Tahs being involved, as I think that thins out the talent from the clubs too much.

The major issue I see is funding the travel requirements and the fact that a lot of these guys have day jobs. Not so much a problem for the players in the Super rugby franchises, as they are at least semi-pro, but it would be for a good number of first grade players.

I wouldn't restrict any of this based on age, BTW. Just get the best quality players playing each other on a regular basis and the standard of the comp will take care of itself.

I've got many more thoughts, but they aren't well organised at the moment so I won't embarrass myself by sharing them.

 

[Moses]

I dont think this concept would work i think the third tier teams have to come from outside of the pre existign premier grade teams as most teams go through a cycle of being succesful to non succesful look at uni for instance back 2007 & 2008 they were weak at prem level. Now they are power houses. Randwick this year are terrible in shute shield but most years are right up there.

The premier grade competition is such an unpredictable beast at the moment i feel numbers to games are up and the level of play is on the rise at least QLD but i feel that a competition like this would be a cruel blow for teams like Wests & Norths who are back on the rise financially and on field after some terribel years. Also i feel the current decline of the coastal clubs leaves this idea to be shot down aswell.

I feel the premier competition at least in QLD needs to grow a little more before a concept like this is utilised.

Promotion / relegation would take care of this - teams that don't perform will be relegated and next year not involved in the 3T comp.
Teams who come into form will be able to step up.

 

[Karl]

I like it. Bruce, how do you see the concept being given material form and then promoted, supported and made real?

Strategy and plans are great, whats the execution?

 

[en_force_er]

I've been thinking about this a bit and I like the concept in general. I think most people accept that Sydney and Brisbane club footy is the strongest in the country, so having the top clubs from those competitions is a good thing. On the other hand, it's also a very good thing for players from the non-rugby states to be able to play more regularly against the other talent across the country.

You could have something like the top three or four sides in Sydney and Brisbane (with promotion/relegation) playing against the 2nd XV's of the Force, Rebels and Brumbies. I don't like the idea of the 2nd XV's of the Reds and Tahs being involved, as I think that thins out the talent from the clubs too much.

The major issue I see is funding the travel requirements and the fact that a lot of these guys have day jobs. Not so much a problem for the players in the Super rugby franchises, as they are at least semi-pro, but it would be for a good number of first grade players.

I wouldn't restrict any of this based on age, BTW. Just get the best quality players playing each other on a regular basis and the standard of the comp will take care of itself.

I've got many more thoughts, but they aren't well organised at the moment so I won't embarrass myself by sharing them.

I've been spouting ideas not too dissimilar to the ones discussed here for years, it's good to know great minds think alike.

Instead of the 2nd XV in Qld and NSW it'd be better to have a "Select XV" or "Barbarians XV" depending on how you want to brand it. Basically what this means is NSW and Qld name the best players from outside of the clubs participating thus giving the bloke from Penrith as much of a crack as the bloke from Uni. This could also mean the more talented blokes from the Country Rep teams getting a crack but they'd have to be very generous with their time, as is the issue with all country athletes I guess.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I've been spouting ideas not too dissimilar to the ones discussed here for years, it's good to know great minds think alike.

Instead of the 2nd XV in Qld and NSW it'd be better to have a "Select XV" or "Barbarians XV" depending on how you want to brand it. Basically what this means is NSW and Qld name the best players from outside of the clubs participating thus giving the bloke from Penrith as much of a crack as the bloke from Uni. This could also mean the more talented blokes from the Country Rep teams getting a crack but they'd have to be very generous with their time, as is the issue with all country athletes I guess.

Then why not just rename the 2nd XVs Sydney and Brisbane and create a second squad in each of the two cities for player's looking at getting a crack at those ahead of them. Sydney could have a Western Sydney team playing out of TG Milner and a Sydney team out of say Coogee Oval. Brisbane could split into North and South or something like that.

 

[Jets]

Then why not just rename the 2nd XVs Sydney and Brisbane and create a second squad in each of the two cities for player's looking at getting a crack at those ahead of them. Sydney could have a Western Sydney team playing out of TG Milner and a Sydney team out of say Coogee Oval. Brisbane could split into North and South or something like that.

This is starting to sound a lot like an old comp the ARU ran once. What was that called again?

 

[en_force_er]

Then why not just rename the 2nd XVs Sydney and Brisbane and create a second squad in each of the two cities for player's looking at getting a crack at those ahead of them. Sydney could have a Western Sydney team playing out of TG Milner and a Sydney team out of say Coogee Oval. Brisbane could split into North and South or something like that.

Because then you're funding 2 specially assembled sides instead of one AND you're pissing off the club power brokers which is part of what sunk the ARC to begin with.

Use the parts we've already got in place and only add bits when necessary.

 

[Richard D. James]

To echo others sentiments, very good idea Bruce. I've been thinking along similar lines recently and have come to two conclusions.

1. We need to decide why we want a third tier.

Is it because there is a desire from Rugby supporters for another competition to support? Or do we just want something that will help develop more players?

If you want both, then we need a third tier. If you just want to develop more players than maybe we can look at something like the NFL combine. The ARU invites all the hot prospects to a few weeks of training/matches and we all get a look at what they can do. Simple and cheap.

2. If we want a third tier, what should it look like.

If I recall correctly, Sydney clubs like Uni have stated that they want to go it alone in any third tier comp. Initially I thought this was overly self-serving but after some thought I would agree. They should go it alone. Some of these clubs have built really great systems for producing players. Some of these clubs have over a hundred years of history behind them. And some these clubs have really dedicated, passionate supporters including many on this forum.

Any third tier competition needs to tap into that existing support, we simply can't create teams from sratch and expect them to be well supported. We already have to do that for Super Rugby.

So, in my opinion our third tier needs to start with Sydney and Brisbane club rugby. Two consolidated, standardised, competitions that form our third tier. Along with this, the comps in Perth, Melbourne (I'm not sure what level the Canberra comp would be at, so they could be included here or go it alone) are given funding and infrastructure with the long term goal of bringing them closer to the Sydney/Brisbane levels.

Then, we have our National championships, an extension of the Australian Club Championship (with better marketing). A very quick rundown, say the top three Sydney clubs, the top two Brisbane clubs, the top Canberra club and the Perth and Melbourne Barbarians (made up of locals and those signed to the appropriate super rugby team). Eventually you would want the top clubs from these comps to compete, but in the meantime a barbarians style rep team would suffice. Then, to further save costs you break the teams out into two conferences which already halves the travel to and from Perth making things cheaper. Then the top two from each conference go into a semi final round, then a final. Similar to the World Cup format.

Last year it would have looked like this:

1. Eastwood
2. Syd Uni
3. Whoever came third in the Shute Shield, I can't remember.
4. Sunnybank
5. Brothers
6.Tuggeranong
7. Perth Barbarians
8. Melbourne Barbarians

Personally, I would love to see these famous old clubs go at it

Now there are many logistical and political issues to overcome here, but I feel most of them could be removed or at the least mitigated with clear regulations and governance from the ARU (things like all the good players wanting to play for the already successful clubs, even though this already happens).

 

[Richard D. James]

and to add to the issue of not all the players being able to play for the top clubs, right now we have no players playing in a true third tier. Some of them is better than none of them. Also it's a start and can always be expanded.

Also, in regards to using the Brumby Runners/Junior Tahs I feel these teams will always feel like "B" teams and won't ever generate the same passion from supporters.

Premier grade Club sides are the undisputed pinnacle of that level of competition and will always be preferable to a "B" team, imho.

 

[Karl]

The AFL has set up in the non-traditional Aussie Rules states a Second Tier competition which has some features which could be adapted to create a viable Third Tier competition for Australian rugby.

The NEAFL competition operates across Sydney, Brisbane, the ACT and the Northern Territory. It includes the reserve sides from the Sydney Swans, GWS Giants, Brisbane Lions and Gold Coast SUNS. The rest of its teams are club sides from the two major cities and the two territories.

In Australian rugby the reserve teams from the Super franchises only play a very limited number of games, largely against one another, and do not have the opportunity to participate in a regular ongoing competition. At the same time there are serious imbalances in playing strength between the Premiership clubs in both Sydney and Brisbane.

Both of these problems can be addressed by setting up a new Third Tier competition, which might have the imaginative working title of the 3T competition. Each of the Australian Super franchises would enter their reserve sides in the 3T. Then existing clubs would be invited to apply to be included. It can be anticipated there would be at least one application from the ACT plus a number from both the Sydney and Brisbane Premiership ranks. The club applications would be assessed on the basis of defined criteria.

Let us say that in its first year the 3T would consist of 10 teams, 5 Super franchise and 5 club sides. The competition format would consist of a single round of 9 games followed by a 2 week finals series. Importantly 3T would run concurrently with Super Rugby and the Sydney and Melbourne club competitions. Games would be played either on Sunday afternoons or as early fixtures to Super games.

The Super franchises would use players from their own contract or training squads plus players recruited only from those clubs in their city which were not themselves involved in 3T. This would provide a pathway for players from all clubs to experience high level competition.

Clubs involved in 3T would still have to fulfill their normal Saturday afternoon obligations, meaning that they would have to have sufficient playing strength to field an additional team. The fact that their best players would be involved in 3T would serve to diminish some of the present disparities in playing standard within the Sydney, Brisbane and probably ACT competitions.

Players involved in 3T would continue to live in their home cities thus eliminating the need to pay relocation and accommodation expenses. Franchises and clubs would be free to make their own decisions as to what remuneration, if any, their players would receive. Ideally 3T should be conducted basically as a pre-professional competition.

The main cost involved in mounting 3T would be air travel for teams playing interstate. This could be funded from sponsorship income plus a grant from the ARU which will be the ultimate beneficiary from the new competition.

There might be difficulties initially in gaining TV coverage of games but this is likely to become a relatively minor problem in the near future. The NEAFL competition already makes use of live video streaming and the rapid emergence of other forms of new media will greatly diminish the existing operators’ control over what is broadcast.
.

My gut tells me we shouldn't get too far away from this. This just seems workable.

 

[MrTimms]

There is plenty of merit in discussing this, but there are two things that need to be considered.

1. Need buy in from the current grass roots. We need to ensure that the current clubs are not excluded from playing, or they just get pissed off and self interest will see them kill it.
2. Keep costs low.

A competition involving the Shute Shield/QPR clubs needs to be at the heart of it. I think a two conference system, much like Super Rugby in that the Sydney conference plays other Sydney conference teams home and away and the Brisbane Conference team once and the same for Brisbane Conference. (Builds on existing rivalries/derbies and reduces need to travel so much). It is admirable to try and include Victoria and WA, but point 2 needs to be considered.

You can start with a 4 or 5 teams per conference base and expand, either through additional conferences or additional teams included in each conference down the track, but it is important to manage the costs and let it grow on an organic level. The choice of which teams get to be included can happen on a promotion/relegation system within the current existing respective comps, This would encourage clubs to maintain their presence in the current club environment to ensure they stay in the big league.

Just another idea, a little different to the others.