Rebels 2014

[Ash]

Braveheart81 the advantage is twofold for franchises keeping players in their own city. Firstly, as you say, they improve their own rugby comp, potentially giving them a greater pool of local players to call on. Secondly, they can keep an eye on their player - watch their form, their development, can keep sending them to the franchise doctor, or gym, or the odd franchise training session, and so on.

I think it's highly unlikely for franchises to be particularly egalitarian with their player base, rightly or wrongly.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Improving the local comp is a very important factor. If the franchises are paying these players, they should have full rights to expect them to play locally when not required for professional duty in order to help improve the local comp and develop further talent.

There is the issue with regards to player development. In order for players to develop to the professional level they need to play at the best level possible and I agree with the Rebels sending players back to Sydney/Brisbane who do need to develop their game as this is the best avenue for them to do that. I believe any established Super Rugby players can afford play in a lower level comp though.

So in short, Bryce Hegarty, Jordy Reid, etc. I tend to agree with. Hugh Pyle, Laurie Weeks, Caydern Neville, etc. I believe should be used to develop and improve the local comp.

 

[Dave Beat]

Train Without a Station
Don't have an answer, but the door should remain with 2 way communications and traffic.

 

[TOCC]

Lets just agree that there should be something in between Brisbane/Sydney club rugby and super rugby which supports player development whilst also giving rugby fans across Australia the opportunity to watch high class rugby

 

[Scooter]

TOCC I don't think Dave Beat would agree with a third tier comp because that would mean more Manly players not playing for Manly. (Having said that the Rebels have sent a few players over to the ITM Cup instead of sending them back to Shute Shield, perhaps the Rebels think there should be a third tier).

Dave Beat I understand your frustration re: Manly players not playing for Manly once they are recruited by the Rebels or the Force. However, your suggestion of only being able to pick local juniors wouldn't work for a number of reasons.

Firstly, players like Neville, Stirzaker and maybe even Pyle would not have played Super Rugby at this stage if they had to force their way in to the Tahs team. I assume you are happy to see Manly players such as Neville and Reid play Super Rugby as opposed to them possibly spending their entire careers with Manly.

The Rebels have won 12 matches in three years and the Force have not played in the finals in their existence and that is with sides predominantly made up of NSW and Qld players plus the Rebels being helped with very good non-Australian players such as Delve and Robinson. If these teams had to field solely Vic and WA teams in all likelihood you may as well have closed the door on both operations because the results would have been way worse, possible 60 or 70 point floggings every week, the fans and sponsors would jump off and they would not be financially viable.

If you could only field local juniors guys like Elsom, Ioane and Lilo would not have been able to play Super and test Rugby until the Rebels came in (as they are Victorian juniors). Also if you fielded only local players guys like Samo would not have played Super Rugby or for the Wallabies (having said that for the sake of international competition I would prefer if he played for Fiji). Also where does Folau fit into that equation he is not a local rugby junior.

In the AFL or NRL if they recruit a player from the state leagues or NSW or Qld Cup their original club does not see them again unless they are the reserve / feeder team for the AFL or NRL club they have been recruited by. For instance, Collingwood this year recruited Kyle Martin from Frankston in the VFL, he has spent most of the year in the Collingwood VFL team and has probably even played against Frankston. (Admittedly AFL and NRL comps run for similar time frame as state leagues and NSW and Qld Cups whereas Super Rugby is over about half way through Shute Shield and Premier Rugby season).

If the local juniors only clause was brought in that would also be a restraint of trade and the ARU would be open to legal action.

Given the above and the fact that the VRU wants to improve the quality of the local competition I think you are lucky to see any of the Manly players back in the Manly team during the year.

 

[Dave Beat]

Scooter, thanks for a fair response.

All thumbs on the phone, I understand the Rebels want to promote the local comp and use their players to assist.

All I have said is keep the player traffic and communication two ways so there is support and development both ways.


3rd Tier different topic and I will PM you my thought later in the day.

 

[blues recovery]

A very emotive but frustrating topic.
Rugby last time I noticed is now a professional sport . Unfortunately it shouldn't be at Shute Shield level as the vast majority of clubs at this level do not have the means to pay players.
Therefore if a player wants to earn a living they have to join a Super Rugby club or go overseas.
Once they join a Super Club their employer has the right to direct a player as to where they play their football.
Do you see a player in the AFL, NRL or for that matter the A League playing for their junior club when not playing in their clubs main team.
This is just another example of the narrow minded thinking that is keeping our potentially great game on the bottom wrung of the football codes in this country.
The only way Rugby can prosper in this country is for Super Rugby to be as strong a competition as possible with 5 teams with the best possible programs to suit their own circumstances,
No better example than the Brumbie 52 week program that is now also turning players like Sio and Kurdriani into Wallabies

 

[Slim 293]

Thank you for the correction, I am for working together and don't agree with the Brumbies Stance, nor that of KevinO
1. How about the Rebels pick solely from their Dewar Shield.
2. How about your Brumbies pick solely from the Dent.

Slim Franchises that are happy to look over and take Sydney's talent, should be working with the Sydney clubs to promote and improve rugby. If they are not willing to work with Sydney clubs they should only work within their local comp and spend more time nurturing that.

Briefly, as this is a Rebels' thread........

The Brumbies are a professional Super Rugby team based in the ACT consisting of players from the ACT, NSW, Qld, Victoria, Western Australia, South Africa, Fiji etc etc etc

I don't see why they need to involve themselves in any way with Sydney club rugby?

And they are working with their local comp to nurture it............

 

[masai]

I don't see why they need to involve themselves in any way with Sydney club rugby?

Because they rely on Sydney and Brisbane club rugby for their very existence, and at the moment they're sucking these competitions dry and giving nothing back. The attitude in Canberra, Victoria and WA seems to be that the northern states are in possession of some magical eternal wells of rugby talent that are powered by your smug indifference. They give no thought as to what goes into producing the talent that they exploit for their success.

Well, I'll tell you what goes in. Private membership, corporate sponsorship and NSWRU/QRU funding. Nowhere on that list is there any trace of input from Canberra, Victoria or WA. Yet you think that because they're paying the player a salary, the franchises have the right to do as they please?

I'm not quite in the same camp as David Beat on the issue of where a Super franchise should be permitted to recruit from. There are obviously not enough professional contracts at the Waratahs and Reds alone for all of the talent coming through those states. What I would love to see is for the Brumbies, Rebels and Force to become affiliated with maybe two clubs each from the Shute Shield and Premier Rugby.

In this arrangement, they would provide their club affiliate with an annual compensation for the Super rugby playing rights to all of the club's players. This would allow the Super franchises to continue to source players from Sydney and Brisbane, as well as benefiting the local club competitions in two ways.

Firstly, it would provide fair compensation for what is currently an exploitative practice, allowing the clubs to reinvest in the development of future players. Secondly, it would help to even out two presently imbalanced competitions, because it would encourage players to spread out between clubs for a better chance at a Super contract. Once a player has been contracted, it is entirely the franchise's prerogative as to where he plays his club rugby, but there would be an incentive for the franchise to not only help their domestic competition but also their interstate affiliates.

 

[Cat_A]

I like where you're going masai - compensation to clubs of some kind for an exploitative practice.

Rather than restricting where players play, perhaps a "transfer fee" paid to the club as a thanks (sort of) that could go towards developing further players? It might only be 1-2% of the contract value for each player, but it would add up and it would start to address some of the issues Dave Beat sees too. And in times like this in clubland every dollar counts!

 

[Dave Beat]

masai an ali - in my thoughts above I did refer to a feeder club, with the same idea as.

What I would love to see is for the Brumbies, Rebels and Force to become affiliated with maybe two clubs each from the Shute Shield and Premier Rugby.

In this arrangement, they would provide their club affiliate with an annual compensation for the Super rugby playing rights to all of the club's players. This would allow the Super franchises to continue to source players from Sydney and Brisbane, as well as benefiting the local club competitions in two ways.

although didn't explain it in detail.

 

[TOCC]

I like where you're going masai - compensation to clubs of some kind for an exploitative practice.

Rather than restricting where players play, perhaps a "transfer fee" paid to the club as a thanks (sort of) that could go towards developing further players? It might only be 1-2% of the contract value for each player, but it would add up and it would start to address some of the issues Dave Beat sees too. And in times like this in clubland every dollar counts!

Yet the ARU already provides funding for both the Sydney and Brisbane competitions :/

 

[Braveheart81]

Surely a transfer fee at this point in time would just be robbing Peter to pay Paul.

 

[masai]

Yet the ARU already provides funding for both the Sydney and Brisbane competitions :/

The ARU gave NSW $1 million last year. They gave Vic $570k. I'm all for trying to improve the weaker states to the point where everyone is able to contribute equally to a Wallabies squad, but NSW and Qld clubs are hurting right now and it's because they don't get enough compensation for what they're providing to Australian rugby.

 

[Dave Beat]

Surely a transfer fee at this point in time would just be robbing Peter to pay Paul.

The thoughts being posted for 2014 - a Peter is want to rob but also bend over Paul. As said above clubs nurture, build, from the grass roots and look to promote their players into Super Rugby.
What comes back from Super Rugby Franchises?

As I have said all along, I'm all about supporting the growth of rugby in the weaker stakes. But lets do it together with a common goal, door open so communication and players can flow both ways.

 

[Braveheart81]

The ARU gave NSW $1 million last year. They gave Vic $570k. I'm all for trying to improve the weaker states to the point where everyone is able to contribute equally to a Wallabies squad, but NSW and Qld clubs are hurting right now and it's because they don't get enough compensation for what they're providing to Australian rugby.

Surely there is also the other side of the coin where the lure of professional rugby contracts is encouraging people to play club rugby.

Does the availability of a few more players for a few more games a year solve the financial woes of club rugby?

It's not like the Super Rugby franchises and the ARU are strong financially either. Australian Rugby across the board is being stretched pretty thin.

 

[Dave Beat]

Does the availability of a few more players for a few more games a year solve the financial woes of club rugby?

It's not like the Super Rugby franchises and the ARU are strong financially either. Australian Rugby across the board is being stretched pretty thin.

Super Rugby Franchise and the ARU - out of interest what was JOC (James O'Connor) payout for not meeting his KPI's. I'm curious why they aren't financially strong?

Australian Rugby punters like us who put forward, ideas and thoughts to improve and promote the game where in reality it is thin.

 

[Slim 293]

I'm sorry masai but your idea is not a realistic proposal and just causes way too many complications, starting with the fact it restricts teams from choosing the players they want and in return limiting players on where they can play........

And I think it's a bit rich for the Sydney clubs to expect something in return from the other Super Rugby teams.

 

[Dave Beat]

I'm sorry masai but your idea is not a realistic proposal and just causes way too many complications, starting with the fact it restricts teams from choosing the players they want and in return limiting players on where they can play....

And I think it's a bit rich for the Sydney clubs to expect something in return from the other Super Rugby teams.

I haven't seen you put anything realistic forward.

 

[Slim 293]

The current scenario is perfectly fine.