Learning from the enemy – an affordable Third Tier competition

[WorkingClassRugger]

Can I just recap on some of the basic elements of the model I have proposed?

• The franchises always have on their contracted lists players who are essentially on what can be termed "hit-shield contracts", i.e., their basic role is to provide training opposition for those who make up the 22-man playing squads. The hit-shield contract players need to be playing rugby on a weekly basis in order to develop;

• Those clubs wishing to participate in the 3T competition would have to satisfy the organisers that they could meet their playing commitments. They would be responsible for providing the bulk of their participation funding;

• Those clubs seeking entry into the 3T competition are likely to be among those currently dominating the club competitions in their city. Having to provide a 3T team each week would have the consequence of weakening their other Grade and Colts teams. (This has definitely happened to Sydney Uni Australian Football Club following their entry into the NEAFL competition) Thus we will have more even club competitions;

• Given the restricted number of players in each franchise and the inevitable effects of injuries, the franchise teams would need to extensively draw on club players who would be drawn from clubs not participating in the 3T competition. Thus players from all clubs would have a pathway to regular high standard competition; and

• Australian rugby would have an effective Third Tier at very modest cost.

.

Then why not simply say "we are going to have a national club competition starting X year. We aren't restricting participation, however, to compete you must fulfill certain criteria financially to support player costs, travel and accommodation if and when needed." Seems simplistic in nature but I would bet more than a few clubs would soon realise they couldn't meet that criteria. They would soon have to decide as to whether look to attempt combined bids or just choose not to compete.

 

[Bruce Ross]

Then why not simply say "we are going to have a national club competition starting X year. We aren't restricting participation, however, to compete you must fulfill certain criteria financially to support player costs, travel and accommodation if and when needed." Seems simplistic in nature but I would bet more than a few clubs would soon realise they couldn't meet that criteria. They would soon have to decide as to whether look to attempt combined bids or just choose not to compete.

I think that is essentially how the process should work, WCR, for club entry, subject to the need for a selection mechanism if there are too many applicants. But we still need franchise participation, both to provide game time for their own second string players and to provide a mechanism for players from non-participating clubs to be included.
.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I think that is essentially how the process should work, WCR, for club entry, subject to the need for a selection mechanism if there are too many applicants. But we still need franchise participation, both to provide game time for their own second string players and to provide a mechanism for players from non-participating clubs to be included.

Well, as I alluded to in an earlier post that this competition could be played in a different competitive window to both Super Rugby and the club season meaning that not only would all the non-Wallaby Super Rugby players be available but the extended squad members. They can then represent their respective clubs in this window. With fewer teams from each comp with a mixture of independent and combined squads it would essentially provide a higher level of play alongside a higher level of opportunity for top club performers. Open one spot each combined representative sides from both Melb and Perth.

What would also be an interesting study would be the viability of a cost sharing arrangement. This is how the Rugby Super League in the USA manages its travel and accommodation issues with teams sharing the overall cost of travel. It costs each club around $22,000 per annum to compete. This could be an option.

 

[Hawko]

Bruce,

One of the factors that killed the ARC was the expense of putting players up at (reasonable) accommodation after the game. Originally players were expected to fly home after the game, but could you imagine that? Play a game of rugby and then get back on a flight for a long haul?

How to over come this?

The only issue with long haul is WA. Providing you can have a good hot shower after the game to ease the aches almost everyone should be able to cope with one hour in a plane, providing that its a couple of hours between game and flight. Injuries are different, but they can be handled as exceptions. For WA matches it has to be a chep motel overnight, with the costs spread around.

Bruce's idea has, at its core, that the players are still amateurs trying to break through to professional levels. They are, therefore, not prima donnas who have to have the best of everything, They will make do with economy seats, inexpensive food and cheap hotels in order to get a shot at making their dreams. One reason that I like his concept. Those who are put off by the basic conditions don't want it enough anyway.

 

[kiap]

this competition could be played in a different competitive window to both Super Rugby and the club season

A problem there is the need for squad members of the franchises to be match hardened and ready to step up to Super Rugby when required.

That's one of the mains goals for this 3rtd tier, to bridge the standard to the higher level - where club rugby is not quite doing it now. There should be an overlap of at least the middle and latter stages of Super Rugby, IMO.

 

[Moses]

The only issue with long haul is WA. Providing you can have a good hot shower after the game to ease the aches almost everyone should be able to cope with one hour in a plane, providing that its a couple of hours between game and flight. Injuries are different, but they can be handled as exceptions. For WA matches it has to be a chep motel overnight, with the costs spread around.

Bruce's idea has, at its core, that the players are still amateurs trying to break through to professional levels. They are, therefore, not prima donnas who have to have the best of everything, They will make do with economy seats, inexpensive food and cheap hotels in order to get a shot at making their dreams. One reason that I like his concept. Those who are put off by the basic conditions don't want it enough anyway.

Perhaps a deal could be arranged with a Perth boarding school for accommodation? If they have the space you could even look at setting up a dorm or something just to get around the expense.

Can you fit a 2 metre lock in an economy seat?

 

[Hawko]

Perhaps a deal could be arranged with a Perth boarding school for accommodation? If they have the space you could even look at setting up a dorm or something just to get around the expense.

Can you fit a 2 metre lock in an economy seat?

Yes. You just have to make sure your airline partner locks up the exit row seats for the flight. There will be a minimum of 6, which should cover all the tall timber.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

The only issue with long haul is WA. Providing you can have a good hot shower after the game to ease the aches almost everyone should be able to cope with one hour in a plane, providing that its a couple of hours between game and flight. Injuries are different, but they can be handled as exceptions. For WA matches it has to be a chep motel overnight, with the costs spread around.

Bruce's idea has, at its core, that the players are still amateurs trying to break through to professional levels. They are, therefore, not prima donnas who have to have the best of everything, They will make do with economy seats, inexpensive food and cheap hotels in order to get a shot at making their dreams. One reason that I like his concept. Those who are put off by the basic conditions don't want it enough anyway.

That's essentially my thinking and as you point out what it appears Bruce is thinking to. If you look at say Tiger Airways who are offering $50 one way discounted airfares on the East Coast you could effectively only have to pay $100-120 per head for game interstate. Over let's say 30 people that would equal something in the vicinity of $3,600 - 4,500 per away game with the exception of Perth in travel. Alternatively, companies such as Tiger could be approached with sponsorship in mind but instead of providing financial assistance, for say universal jersey sponsorship (I know some would be anxious about this regarding pre-existing sponsorship arrangements .i.e. Uni and Buildcorp) that they cover all flights for travelling teams. Same could be done for accommodation in terms of Perth away games.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Perhaps a deal could be arranged with a Perth boarding school for accommodation? If they have the space you could even look at setting up a dorm or something just to get around the expense.

Can you fit a 2 metre lock in an economy seat?

I like it.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

A problem there is the need for squad members of the franchises to be match hardened and ready to step up to Super Rugby when required.

That's one of the mains goals for this 3rtd tier, to bridge the standard to the higher level - where club rugby is not quite doing it now. There should be an overlap of at least the middle and latter stages of Super Rugby, IMO.

That's something we would need to nut out early on. What is the purpose of this competition. To battle harden the extended Super Rugby squads or provide greater development and playing opportunities for the best of the club players as well as provide a higher level of play for extended Super Rugby squad member's. What I'm thinking off is essentially what the ITM Cup provides NZ. During Super Rugby the local club season commences with the cream playing for their respective provinces in the Cup after Super Rugby finishes. Cannot see why we couldn't use a model similar too Bruce's to emulate that setup as it obviously works rather well.

 

[kiap]

That's something we would need to nut out early on. What is the purpose of this competition.....

Yeah, that conflict would need to be resolved. Mind you, Bruce's proposal was to have overlap with club rugby and Super Rugby.....

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.

I suppose the State 2nd XVs now get three games in against the PI sides during the Super Rugby season. Maybe they could play each other to add four more matches while waiting for APC-2.0 to start, if the ITM season timing were to be copied.

 

[Jets]

The more I think about this the more I would like to see this comp being played at the start of the year. Play it from Feb or March up to the June test window. This would allow for good quality matches for those looking at pushing into Super teams, it would also provide matches for the U20 squad players so they are physically prepared for the JRWC and it would allow for players to return to club land and still have club rugby as an important part of the rugby landscape.
The advantage I see with this time frame is that it wouldn't extend the season any longer than it currently is.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Considering the ARC was shut down as it was bleeding money, I think minimizing costs is the biggest thing that needs to be looked at. I know it's been said before but starting with a 5 team competition home and away made up of the state 'A' teams is probably the best way to go about this. That means for the players outside the super rugby 22's, they have 8 games against competition which should be at a standard between super rugby and club rugby to test their skills.

In addition the most feasibly way to run this is to have these games coincide, as curtain raisers, to the super rugby derbies. The biggest issue with this is the lack of season continuity, as, for instance, while a super team is on SA tour, their 'A' team will be left standing around like spare dicks (well playing club rugby actually, but dropping back for a 3 week break isn't exactly ideal).

From here I think the best growth would be to simply transplant the club teams that can fund it, into this. Sydney Uni and Tuggernong had the money to go now? Great. Fill their fixtures in around the existing fixtures. A 7 team comp isn't ideal, but it's better to have 7 teams that can afford to be there than 10 with 3 that can't for example.

The next thing is player payments. I don't think it would be right to completely rule it out. This would require a high level of commitment. However maybe it's best to look at more of a match payment, than contract system.

I think from something like this you could get organic growth, whilst tapping into the existing supporter bases for Super rugby and club teams.

 

[Train Without a Station]

The more I think about this the more I would like to see this comp being played at the start of the year. Play it from Feb or March up to the June test window. This would allow for good quality matches for those looking at pushing into Super teams, it would also provide matches for the U20 squad players so they are physically prepared for the JRWC and it would allow for players to return to club land and still have club rugby as an important part of the rugby landscape.
The advantage I see with this time frame is that it wouldn't extend the season any longer than it currently is.

Jets I totally disagree with the time frame. If anything I think it is more important it runs when there is internationals and no super rugby. The biggest issue in this country is the step down in quality of rugby players who aren't playing for the national team are exposed to once super rugby is over.

 

[Forcefield]

If there were 4 Perth "home" games, we could have one against Queensland say in Darwin and one against someone else in Adelaide. The crowd wouldn't be too bad since these two don't get much rugby.

Aspiring Super Rugby players in Perth will have to get used to that kind of travel anyway.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Considering the ARC was shut down as it was bleeding money, I think minimizing costs is the biggest thing that needs to be looked at. I know it's been said before but starting with a 5 team competition home and away made up of the state 'A' teams is probably the best way to go about this. That means for the players outside the super rugby 22's, they have 8 games against competition which should be at a standard between super rugby and club rugby to test their skills.

In addition the most feasibly way to run this is to have these games coincide, as curtain raisers, to the super rugby derbies. The biggest issue with this is the lack of season continuity, as, for instance, while a super team is on SA tour, their 'A' team will be left standing around like spare dicks (well playing club rugby actually, but dropping back for a 3 week break isn't exactly ideal).

From here I think the best growth would be to simply transplant the club teams that can fund it, into this. Sydney Uni and Tuggernong had the money to go now? Great. Fill their fixtures in around the existing fixtures. A 7 team comp isn't ideal, but it's better to have 7 teams that can afford to be there than 10 with 3 that can't for example.

The next thing is player payments. I don't think it would be right to completely rule it out. This would require a high level of commitment. However maybe it's best to look at more of a match payment, than contract system.

I think from something like this you could get organic growth, whilst tapping into the existing supporter bases for Super rugby and club teams.

I agree with you on the window in which such a setup could be played. Either throughout or during the latter stages of the Rugby Championship would be ideal in my eyes as it would allow for a competitive level of Rugby to still be played for the Super Rugby squad member's not required for Test duty and time enough to prepare the club teams after the respective seasons.

I think it needs to either be one of two models being either clubs based or 'provincial' as I cannot see people really getting behind the hybrid model of Super Rugby A squads and clubs. Someone needs to say as I suggested previously that this competition is at X point in time and is open everyone and anyone providing they can meet a strict criteria regarding travel, accommodation, player and facilities costs. If teams from Melbourne and Perth are to be involved (and I think they really should) make it clear that they would be preferably in the form of their traditional representative forms in the Gold and Axemen squads to ensure maximum competitiveness.

Only a handful of clubs will be able to do this as a stand alone venture. We are all pretty certain who they are. Other's may need to look toward combined bids in order to compete. If so, so be it. In the case of the Canberra based options Tuggeranong are clearly head and shoulders above all else but if could come to an arrangement to participate as a unified bid then that would be great. The point would be to get the clubs to invest in the competition.

In terms of costs, I touched on this last night. The competition and its competitors will need to utilise budget options in terms of flights and look to enforce a one day turnaround policy. As previously, a cost sharing arrangement would certainly be worthwhile looking into on this front, another approach would be to approach the appropriate budget airlines and hotels to arrange sponsorship deals that in exchange for exposure via a universal jersey deal or something would instead of providing financial aid would instead either look to cover at least a significant proportion of the costs associated with the travel and accommodation aspects to the competition.

Finally, the question of exposure via TV comes to mind. A competition as such would in my mind require at lest one game a week (Saturday) and ideally two (Thursday evening and Saturday) to begin to garner any real interest or attention. As with the ARC this may require some sought of levy to do so. Not ideal but it would allow for some input on how it was broadcast. This leads me into a suggestion that will likely prove less popular than others. If the clubs involved do initially have to pay for the telecast then I would suggest getting whichever broadcaster ( most likely the ABC) to run ads scrolling at the bottom of the screen during play. I know I hate the idea as well and I'm the one suggesting it. But, with the purpose of cutting costs to a minimum and garnering the sponsorship arrangement I suggest above it may be a necessary evil.

 

[Jets]

So if current clubs were to be involved which ones are in a position to do it?I would say Sydney Uni, Tuggeranong, Sunnybank and Qld Uni. Any other clubs out there with the finances to be involved at this stage?

 

[Richo]

Lots of good ideas here, but I think there is some muddling of objectives too. It seems to me that a 3T comp in Australia has to have player development as its primary objective. It will help "grow the game" by improving the quality of Australian Super Rugby teams, not by grabbing viewers itself.

This means that it's financial viability is the single most important element - viability that has to be entirely distinct from things like tv income. Questions like when it should be played must defer to cost (and, secondarily, to its immediate utility to Super Rugby teams).

If such a comp eventually develops the fan interest of the CC or NPC, it could evolve into something more like those competitions. Leapfrogging the bare bones, development and utility driven stage is not wise.

 

[Braveheart81]

I agree that cost has to be the major consideration. It must be marketed to the players and the rugby community as a development competition requiring buy in from the players. It is not there for them to make extra money but to provide them with greater opportunities to further their rugby career.

Economy flights, budget hotels, modest match payments etc.

One of my friends plays for the Hills Eagles in the NEAFL competition and they certainly only get some assistance with costs of going interstate. I think plane fares are paid for and that is about it.

 

[Jets]

To be honest I'd be keen to support anything at this stage. The ARU need to get something in place and while it might not be perfect it will evolve into a better competition over time and support will grow. The point is to provide a development pathway for players as the primary goal. Lets just get something done.