National Rugby Championship 2014

[Train Without a Station]

You are not contracted for 16 weeks. You are contracted for a year. The season is only a part of your obligations as an employee

 

[Dave Beat]

I believe that Super Rugby players are contracted to play in whatever other competition their Super Rugby club wants them to play in. I.e. they go back to Shute Shield after Super Rugby or they play in Melbourne, Perth etc. Now that will be the NRC instead of club rugby once Super Rugby finishes.

The players aren't on holidays. They don't get to decide that Super Rugby is over so they're going to have three months off and go and holiday in Bali or something.

The Rebels and the Rams are very different employers. The Rebels are running a Super Rugby team and an NRC team. The Rams are only running an NRC team.

that's my point.
and being funded by the ARU so maybe they should have some KPI's about development of local talent and bringing them through because we have all said this comp is about development.
have a read of my posts - i want this comp to be a success as does TWAS.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Is there an inconsistency where Eastwood doesn't participate in any NRC venture but still gets to have their players available to play for the Western Sydney JV? The club will apparently not contribute in any way to the costs of running the JV but their better players still get the benefit?

I simply don't understand why Eastwood would have decided not to participate in the NRC.

A bad look quoting oneself, but I voiced my concern about the Eastwood situation way back. No need to say, but got a few posts at the time to the effect that I had it wrong. Hopefully, some announcements about squads etc will clarifiy these issues before too long.
Edit : original post was in February.

 

[Braveheart81]

that's my point.
and being funded by the ARU so maybe they should have some KPI's about development of local talent and bringing them through because we have all said this comp is about development.
have a read of my posts - i want this comp to be a success as does TWAS.

They are effectively owned by the ARU. Besides the long term loan extended to them in 2013 (to allow them to stay solvent after Mitchell's exit) there is no indication that they are being funded by the ARU any more than any other Super Rugby franchise.

This comp is about development. I am sure there will be a couple of players from Melbourne club rugby involved. Why would that mean they give up the players they already have contracted?

 

[Train Without a Station]

Based on the murmurs there will be at least 7 Melbourne based uncontracted players in the Rising's game day squad. That's before any injuries or unavailability.

The currently have a preliminary squad of 40 training to cut back and join the 16 Rebels that will be in the Rising squad.

I think it's fair to say they are attempting to develop local talent.

 

[RugbyFuture]

Let's point out that the coach for the rams is a former Eastwood coach and they have a good team, probs the best from the greater Sydney catchment area. It's just a formal commitment to the business at the rams which isn't happening

 

[Omar Comin']

I think we should stop calling the NRC the 3rd tier. It doesn't do the competition any favours.

It's not a true 3rd tier comp anyway. It's more of an extension of the 2nd tier as it will involve all the players that aren't involved with the Wallabies (i.e. the 1st tier).

Actually lets just stop using the word 'tier' altogether. Just look at it, it's a really crap word.

 

[suckerforred]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/r...974250504?nk=14cdaac960445da128ca03aacc8f341c

I take issue with the below quote:
“The game needs a footprint (in western Sydney) absolutely. The ARU seems committed to everywhere but in the game’s heartland and in the meantime the talented 15-year-olds are choosing the three other sports because rugby is not on their radar.”

I get the feeling that the ARU is ONLY committed to the game's 'heartland'. But maybe that is because I have a different definition of heartland and it does not have positive conatations when it comes to rugby.....

 

[Train Without a Station]

You can't say "it relegates club footy down the chain" and then say there is nothing in it for them, and makes no sense to be in it. That's exactly why it does. The opportunity to be a part of it, whilst spreading the burden of cost from the ARU (Note - a number of running costs, e.g. travel, are being shouldered by the ARU), keeps them relevant at the highest level below Super Rugby.

 

[Jamie]

I gave up on the Shute Shield a long time ago and I love rugby, I'm just not interseted in seeing the same teams compete time and time again on for Sydney Uni to win the comp once they get all their player back. Eastwood attitude sums it up "There is nothing in it for the clubs" They need to realise that the game is much bigger than Sydney and it si not just about the Shute Shield, I'm all for the Rams and I hope the are a success with or without Eastwood

 

[I like to watch]

i am also sure that Manly, Gordon, warringah and Norths would have no objection to putting money into the rays and have 2 or 3 eastwood players running around in the team and developing their game for "the good of the game".

What about Penrith & Parra as a good example.
They each stump up $75k as their share of funding for the Rams.Eastwood spend their $75k on upgrading their training facilities.
They each supply 4 or 5 players to the Rams,and Eastwood supply 12.
Next year those 12 Woodies players stay at TG Milner.
How long is that going to work?

 

[Pfitzy]

I think all the clubs at this point need to move past "what's in it for me?"

Accept that this is a new business venture. Break even is about the best you can expect in the first year. Probably the second. But it needs to build or SS will continue to spiral.

 

[2bluesfan]

I think all the clubs at this point need to move past "what's in it for me?"

I'm not generally a negative or cynical person but I wonder how Parra, Wests, Souths and Penrith would view a situation where Eastwood players and, importantly, staff get to supplement their income while taking no financial risk - effectively Eastwood are told that "hey, it's ok, we'll pay your way". Perhaps that is why there is now talk of a private investor. Whilst on the subject, does anyone know who the paid support staff to Brian Melrose are? Come to think of it, if the Rams constituent clubs have yet to sign a binding MOU (that's my understanding) they would not have made any paid appointments yet. Surely. Still, no problem, still 48 days to go according to the Rams website. Plenty of time

 

[I like to watch]

I think all the clubs at this point need to move past "what's in it for me?"

Accept that this is a new business venture. Break even is about the best you can expect in the first year. Probably the second. But it needs to build or SS will continue to spiral.

What's in for me makes the world go round.
It's one thing to ask the clubs to shoulder the burden of the new comp.
It's another to shoulder the burden,whilst much stronger clubs on the field,do not.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

According to Ms Robinson the Rams have signed there MOU and have a 6 person consortium to secure their finances. Also says that Buildcorp are set to sign on as title sponsor for $350,000 a year.

 

[RugbyReg]

Buildcorp with the Rams? They are a big UQ sponsor. Are they the same at Sydney Uni?

 

[Pfitzy]

What's in for me makes the world go round.

Yes, but we need a bit of vision to look past its next bank statement.

Inaction will spell the end of rugby as a professional sport in Australia, and we'll have players selected from overseas and a Super Rugby system that collapses up its own rectum, while the clubs sniper and "I told you so" from the sidelines of their own self-interest.

 

[p.Tah]

Buildcorp with the Rams? They are a big UQ sponsor. Are they the same at Sydney Uni?

Buildcorp are sponsoring the whole NRC I believe

 

[Train Without a Station]

Pfitzy is right. What's going to be in it for Eastwood when the ARU with it's TV Rights cannot compete with NRL for second choice talent, Australian rugby struggles as a result, players are of a lower quality and the small grants the ARU gives to clubs disappears. What's going to be in it for Eastwood then?

It's a fucking selfish attitude, which ironically is the sort of thing that will lead to their demise along with everybody else anyway.

Screw rule whatever number about not playing the man. Fuckwits!

 

[Jets]

What happens if the Comp becomes viable and makes money for the teams in 5 years time? Eastwood will miss out and the other clubs will get the benefit of their investment. Am I being too optimistic?

Also the Eastwood players may get the opportunity to play for one of the interstate teams, if they are short of talent in a particular area.