Learning from the enemy – an affordable Third Tier competition

[WorkingClassRugger]

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.

Player development would be the primary focus. However, it's still more than worthwhile discussing options that could be employed to keep the financial burden imposed on those involved to a minimum. What I am suggesting at no stage actually mentions TV income. More the use of the medium to advertise mutually beneficial sponsorship arrangements that should be chased in order to keep the financial burden of expenses such as travel and accommodation t a minimum. It would be highly dependent on the composition of such a competition but I believe if said competition could organise such arrangements and could get some TV exposure that meant the financial strain was of a minimal nature then the money that would have otherwise been spent on such a competition could be put to better use elsewhere.

Additionally, while this would be a developmental exercise. We shouldn't rule out people actually wanting to see it. I most definitely would but its not possible for me to make to the grounds to do so. For something like this to succeed it needs to have a strong business model with clear defined objectives and I while streaming would be an option it's not quite at the point where it could provide adequate competition exposure I believe would be required. Television would be needed.

 

[It is what it is]

Just a thought, but is rugby getting enough return in sponsorship ($$$/Contra) from the 'must have' products and services the game requires.
Clubs at all levels of competition from school and juniors through to senior representative rugby must have rugby balls, insurances, strapping tape, playing strips, mouth guards and other staples.
Could these suppliers be approached for greater contributions to sponsor a 3rd Tier comp in return for purchasing support from the participating teams plus potentially their juniors etc?
Every buck helps.

 

[Richo]

Player development would be the primary focus. However, it's still more than worthwhile discussing options that could be employed to keep the financial burden imposed on those involved to a minimum. What I am suggesting at no stage actually mentions TV income. More the use of the medium to advertise mutually beneficial sponsorship arrangements that should be chased in order to keep the financial burden of expenses such as travel and accommodation t a minimum. It would be highly dependent on the composition of such a competition but I believe if said competition could organise such arrangements and could get some TV exposure that meant the financial strain was of a minimal nature then the money that would have otherwise been spent on such a competition could be put to better use elsewhere.

Additionally, while this would be a developmental exercise. We shouldn't rule out people actually wanting to see it. I most definitely would but its not possible for me to make to the grounds to do so. For something like this to succeed it needs to have a strong business model with clear defined objectives and I while streaming would be an option it's not quite at the point where it could provide adequate competition exposure I believe would be required. Television would be needed.

I wasn't having a go at your thoughts in particular, more just that rugby needs to be very careful about biting off more than it can chew. Given the packed sporting environment in Australia, its important - IMO - that any 3T have very clear, narrowly defined and achievable objectives.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I wasn't having a go at your thoughts in particular, more just that rugby needs to be very careful about biting off more than it can chew. Given the packed sporting environment in Australia, its important - IMO - that any 3T have very clear, narrowly defined and achievable objectives.

I didn't take your comments in that way. Just thought it would be good to discuss in that context.

 

[Bardon]

Just a thought, but is rugby getting enough return in sponsorship ($$$/Contra) from the 'must have' products and services the game requires.
Clubs at all levels of competition from school and juniors through to senior representative rugby must have rugby balls, insurances, strapping tape, playing strips, mouth guards and other staples.
Could these suppliers be approached for greater contributions to sponsor a 3rd Tier comp in return for purchasing support from the participating teams plus potentially their juniors etc?
Every buck helps.

Also getting potential sponsors like hotel chains involved could be a good way to reduce costs. Being the official hotel chain of the <insert name of competition here> in exchange for deeply discounted hotel rooms to keep the cost down for traveling teams.

Another way to gain exposure for the competition on TV would be to have a reality show that either followed a couple of the players/teams away from the games. These kinds of shows can generate interest on top of coverage of games. It can also bring new audiences to the competition who'll want to see how their favourites from the show are doing. That's how my sister got into rugby through school of hard knocks it piqued her interest in rugby. Then she started watching Rugby internationals whereas before she'd only watch soccer. It wasn't long before she said she preferred Rugby to soccer.

Other advantages of reality shows are that they are relatively cheap to make and can be shown during the week rather than having to compete for prime sporting real estate on the weekends.

There are definitely plenty of good ideas in this thread to be able to start a pretty good proposal for a third tier competition. However one thing the thread can't provide is the will, within the ARU, needed to take those ideas further.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Also getting potential sponsors like hotel chains involved could be a good way to reduce costs. Being the official hotel chain of the <insert name of competition here> in exchange for deeply discounted hotel rooms to keep the cost down for traveling teams.

Another way to gain exposure for the competition on TV would be to have a reality show that either followed a couple of the players/teams away from the games. These kinds of shows can generate interest on top of coverage of games. It can also bring new audiences to the competition who'll want to see how their favourites from the show are doing. That's how my sister got into rugby through school of hard knocks it piqued her interest in rugby. Then she started watching Rugby internationals whereas before she'd only watch soccer. It wasn't long before she said she preferred Rugby to soccer.

Other advantages of reality shows are that they are relatively cheap to make and can be shown during the week rather than having to compete for prime sporting real estate on the weekends.

There are definitely plenty of good ideas in this thread to be able to start a pretty good proposal for a third tier competition. However one thing the thread can't provide is the will, within the ARU, needed to take those ideas further.

On the first point. That's exactly what I have been suggesting and I'm glad someone else see's the sense in it. I would also look to do that with an airline. I have suggested universal sponsorship deals across all participating teams. Focus on the budget providers.

I'm not too sure that would work but certainly does involve some of the 'outside the box' thinking that would be needed for such a venture.

And finally, I think we are not at a point where we really shouldn't being waiting with bated breath for the ARU to announce much of anything in this regard. It probably about time that this was attempted as a independent venture. Link to the ARU structures yes, but it should be a grassroots based push.

 

[Bardon]

And finally, I think we are not at a point where we really shouldn't being waiting with bated breath for the ARU to announce much of anything in this regard. It probably about time that this was attempted as a independent venture. Link to the ARU structures yes, but it should be a grassroots based push.

The Green and Gold Rugby Trophy has a nice ring to it. Would work well with an official sponsors name in the title too.

 

[kiap]

..... while streaming would be an option it's not quite at the point where it could provide adequate competition exposure I believe would be required. Television would be needed.

Richo went all polite, so I'll have a go.

Television would be not needed for a 3T competition. It's a "nice to have" but the planning should mostly be framed around making do without it. How much TV coverage is there of the NEAFL, a well-organised competition that's been up and running for a while now? Looks to me like it's mostly web-based tv.

Don't forget that the ARU were paying a broadcaster in 2007 to cover the ARC, fer cryinoutloud. What's really changed since then to increase the marketability of lower tier rugby on mainstream TV? Not much, IMO.

Initial broadcasting possibilites, should they exist, may only be on a non-profit basis. The ABC's one-match-a-week coverage of the Shute Shield in Sydney springs to mind. But there are no real guarantees there either with increasing public broadcasting requirements for women's sport, and budgetary constraints.

Australian Rugby needs to get the 3T going, with costs kept under control. If TV can happen then go for it, but they should be starting with web-based coverage and moving up from there.

 

[Garry Owen]

And what's a fair game day ticket price for working class punters like me?

 

[Braveheart81]

And what's a fair game day ticket price for working class punters like me?

I would say up to $20 which was similar to the ARC from memory.

 

[Richo]

Make kids free. All registered rugby players $10. Everyone else $20.

Sausage sizzles galore.

 

[sunnyboys]

Re. Getting rugby on tv. One of the big advantages that the NBN will bring is the chance for lesser known sports to deliver telecasts to TV's via the NBN. That for me is an exciting prospect for rugby below Super level.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Make kids free. All registered rugby players $10. Everyone else $20.

Sausage sizzles galore.

I would add in a $15 fee for registered social members of Rugby Clubs or S15 Franchise Social members. Could possibly reduce the fee for that group to $10 to make it easier for the ticket booth staff. This measure to encourage people to become members of the clubs. There are plenty of them out there in clubland really struggling.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Re. Getting rugby on tv. One of the big advantages that the NBN will bring is the chance for lesser known sports to deliver telecasts to TV's via the NBN. That for me is an exciting prospect for rugby below Super level.

I agree, in time. However at present it's still in its infancy in Australia as a viable mainstream broadcasting options. This will of course change sooner than many of us would imagine but for now in terms of reach it's necessary to look toward traditional broadcasting mediums to achieve such goals.

For those who don't see some sort of mass exposure as necessary. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that one. I see it as an integral element in developing mutually beneficial sponsorship deals that I believe would be necessary to either eliminate or significantly lessen the financial burden that would be incurred upon participating teams. Without the opportunity to offer the exposure of that some sort of TV agreement would offer the prospect of having to fully fund the entire proportion of the costs involved would deter potential participants that otherwise could organise themselves leading to player's that really should be playing at a higher from playing or having to jump clubs.

We also have to take into account that the TV landscape has changed somewhat with the introduction of the digital platform and the need for local content provides the opportunity for such a competition to offer itself up for no fee just to gain the exposure. Look at ONE for example. While they refocused their orientation away from a primarily sports FTA option (mainly because the sports they chose have no actual relevance in the Australian context) they still dedicate a significant portion of the air particularly on the weekend to sports broadcasting. At present in terms of Australian based content they broadcast the ANZ Championship and the NBL. I have no issue with the ANZ Championship (good to see Women's sport given its due exposure) but could anyone seriously believe that a such a competition as we are discussing with the inclusion of the right entities couldn't out rate the NBL. If we were to offer the package and purely cost value (being all it would cost them to broadcast it), you may well be surprised by the response. The opportunity to sell more advertising slots would be attractive on a product that you don't have to pay for outside of your own current production costs.

 

[nomis]

This has been one of the more intelligent articles I've read on this topic. And the comments that have followed have also been really worthwhile reading. I think everything worth saying has already been said, but for the same reason one continues to talk about something they're excited about...

It seems to me that the primary aim needs to be for player development with no financial burden. As a secondary consideration, it should be set up to allow fans of all clubs to take an interest in it.

As the original article outlines, I think the 5 x Super reserve sides need to be included at the very least. The infrastructure is basically there, costs are minimised, they need the game-time (if it’s durning the Super Rugby season), and if they’re not included then many fans of clubs that don’t make the cut, and who might otherwise take an interest in this, are potentially excluded with no real connection to any team.

Another 5 places should be offered to any club that can meet the particular requirements (esp. financial). I suspect that this would lead to many clubs combining their bids to even have a chance. And if there’s going to be more applicants than places available, perhaps all clubs will think about combining. If they were to do this along the old ARC lines with 3 x combined Sydney teams and 2 x combined Brisbane teams, then perfect!

The timing of it needs to be worked out. An earlier start (March-April) would be (slightly?) better financially, provide game time for the Super reserve sides, provide better build-up for JRWC players, and cause minimal disruption to the club season.

A later start (Sept) would be better for player development overall with the non-test Super players mixing it up (like in the ARC), and with possibly no disruption to the club season.

I take it the original article was suggesting that it would actually be better for the club season to play the 3T concurrently, as it would help to level out the playing field among the clubs. And besides, on a permanent basis, this might end up minimising cannibalisation if a stand-alone club in the 3T naturally looked beyond it’s own club ranks to fill it’s playing roster anyway.

It’s a tricky one! But even if it started later in Sept to maximise player-development, I would still have the Super reserve sides playing each other (plus the PI nations) during the Super Rugby season. Although, this might be too much to ask.

 

[The Red Baron]

I am not sure if this idea has been floated yet, but for those worried about coverage we could consider the following:

• Negotiate with the ABC to televise the 'match of the round' in the metropolitan area. Similar to the coverage that the ABC currently provides for the Shute Shield
• Arrange for other matches to be broadcast via local radio

Not sure of what the costs involved would be though.

 

[Forcefield]

Surely you could give the rights to a third tier rugby comp to one of the commercial channels. We didn't have commercial digital channels back in 2007 so you'd think they would have space to fill. I think if it got off the ground people would watch it. Televising the 'match of the round' only seems like a bit of a waste of time.

 

[The Red Baron]

You have to start small. At inception, no commercial television station, digital or otherwise, will want a bar of the competition until it is viewed as a profitable venture.

As the primary focus would be on developing pathways to the professional ranks, television and radio coverage is a secondary consideration. This is why I proposed the ABC model.

 

[Dave Beat]

TV viewing or supporter attendance?
Everyone has, and is allowed different views - the ARC didn't interest me as the players were disbursed everywhere. I will use Uni as an easy example - their players may have been running around for 3 different teams - I wouldn't have a team to follow.
If it was structured Nth Harbour, Sth Harbour, Western Sydney I think there would be some Origin type battles. The 3T also needs to benefit club rugby - the games could be shared around and follow First Grade under lights.
Nth Hbr - Manly, Rats, Nths, Gordon.
Sth Hbr - Easts, Wicks, Uni, Souths.
Wests - Eastwood, Parra, Emus, Wests.
NSW Country,
ACT,
QLD - how many rep teams

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

You have to start small. At inception, no commercial television station, digital or otherwise, will want a bar of the competition until it is viewed as a profitable venture.

As the primary focus would be on developing pathways to the professional ranks, television and radio coverage is a secondary consideration. This is why I proposed the ABC model.

I think you may be surprised. One televise the NBL with an average rating of 30,000. Ratings that if on other channels would have seen the programming except that the NBL gave them the rights without charge. They have now managed to negotiate the rights back onto Ten proper for the upcoming season. Rugby could do this and return a greater return in term of viewership than the NBL. It really needs to be considered.