Shute Shield 2014

[the coach]

If I was Bill you wouldn't find me having to post my responses around my workload. You also wouldn't find any interaction during the standard lunch hour of 11am to 3pm

No, I'm someone who is just tired of being told that without SS the world will end. Plus, as a past Subbies administrator who's copped a regular shafting from more than one SS Club, the hypocrisy of how tough it is really rankles.

The point I really wanted to make was, given the lack of information about the comp (I believe you mentioned becasue the idea is not fully formed) the SS Clubs in particular have the chance to take control of the situation and create massive benefits for the game.

There has been a lack of support from the administration, I can't disagree. The problem is there's been ample opportunity to make something of the SS if the effort had been made. Instead, clubs seem to have huddled quietly in ther little communist collective waiting for a corrupt and useless government to tell them what to do.

By now SS should have been a fully professional competition vying for the athletes making their way to AFL and League. Unfortunately this hasn't happened. I see this new competition breathing new life into Club Rugby, but only if they want it.

I hope you're right!
I must admit I'm perplexed about the ARU asking for expressions of interest rather than sitting down with the SS clubs (and maybe the Subbies) and deciding how to structure the 3 Sydney teams. The EOI application asks the applicants to tick a box to indicate whether they want to go it alone or join with other clubs, thus opening the door for Uni to lodge a stand alone application (doubt anyone else would). Looking at the criteria I'd reckon Uni would be successful as well. If they are 1 of the teams and the Gordon etc alliance is the second that leaves the other 7 clubs plus anyone else to make up the 3rd. That would mean a lot of players would miss out (including the Uni non-S15 players). Hopefully Uni won't apply separately.

 

[I like to watch]

I'm not sure about Uni.
If Pulver is going to allocate Super players to each new T3 team,then Uni is just another club.
Prior to the return of Super players,they are not a standard deviation above the rest.
I'm pretty confident that North Harbour & a combined side from the rest of the comp would easily beat Uni,sans super players.
So on that basis, there is no justification for a stand alone club.
Additional criteria such as junior development etc,do not increase the prospects of a stand alone SU team.

 

[Eyes and Ears]

Beale took the Tahs to the Grand Final in his first year out of school. They would've won too if he didn't get injured.

Not quite. Beale finished in 2006. That Waratahs final was in 2008. As an aside, he played for the Rams in the ARC between these 2 milestones.

 

[Rugby Central]

I hope you're right!
I must admit I'm perplexed about the ARU asking for expressions of interest rather than sitting down with the SS clubs (and maybe the Subbies) and deciding how to structure the 3 Sydney teams. The EOI application asks the applicants to tick a box to indicate whether they want to go it alone or join with other clubs, thus opening the door for Uni to lodge a stand alone application (doubt anyone else would). Looking at the criteria I'd reckon Uni would be successful as well. If they are 1 of the teams and the Gordon etc alliance is the second that leaves the other 7 clubs plus anyone else to make up the 3rd. That would mean a lot of players would miss out (including the Uni non-S15 players). Hopefully Uni won't apply separately.

I hope so too, but if you ask my wife, being right is rare for me.

I think the challenge for a joint venture a equity. Personally I prefer a representation model but understand Clubs would be hesitant to invest if none of their players get a run. On the flipside look at it from a business perspective. As an equal shareholder, they get an equal return. If one Club seems to provide most of the players it's an advantage for recruitment but that creates it's own problems and resourceing so many 3T players would cause it's own headaches. And you're giving up money to those pesky investors - partners.

The single club option may also cause mass player migration. As much as it might hurt in the short term, reduce the number of teams in SS. 1st, reserve and Colts. Players or not going to sit idle on a reserves bench in the forlorn hope someone might see them. Players will move where the opportunities are. Thus weaker Clubs get stronger. For Clubs insistant that they need a fifth grade to maintain their culture there are other competitions. Remember we're talking about the guys who won't make the top grades. Any fear that players can't come through the grades to be discovered is hogwash. If they want it they'll move. If the Club is smart it will have the identification programs in place.

There's going to be some pain but I honestly believe there are enough people out there who love the game enough to make it work.

 

[the coach]

I'm not sure about Uni.
If Pulver is going to allocate Super players to each new T3 team,then Uni is just another club.
Prior to the return of Super players,they are not a standard deviation above the rest.
I'm pretty confident that North Harbour & a combined side from the rest of the comp would easily beat Uni,sans super players.
So on that basis, there is no justification for a stand alone club.
Additional criteria such as junior development etc,do not increase the prospects of a stand alone SU team.

I know this is only a hypothetical discussion, but are you suggesting that if Uni did succeed in entering a team they wouldn't necessarily have access to their S15 players? Have you seen / heard something which suggests the ARU is going to allocate S15 players to the 3 teams? I would have thought that the NH consortium is assuming they (esp Manly) will have the S15 players who are aligned with the member clubs.

 

[I like to watch]

Yeah I did read somewhere that the ARU would be allocating the pro's to each new franchise,but can't recall where.
I would expect the majority of players would be assigned to their junior clubs,however Perth and Melbourne players might be the main group that are allocated to where the ARU sees the best use of their resources.

 

[Crashy]

The clubs behind the North Harbour team have openly declared their support of the NRC and have worked out that an alliance is what the ARU wants. If at least 1/3 of the comp sees value in the NRC at this early stage) then you'd think the rest will as well.
I read that the Wicks are putting forward a team in conjunction with UNSW which potentially is appealing, but I see that Uni are putting forward a stand alone team. jesus Uni - can't you ever think beyond yourselves?? no-one wants a stand-alone club in the comp and worse still farking uni.

 

[Crashy]

i really dont want to Uni-bash but seriously - if they are accepted as a team it will create some veryt heated rivalries, for example, every other club vs Uni...

 

[I like to watch]

How are the Wicks any different to Uni?
A team in conjunction with that Rugby powerhouse UNSW?
Please!
If either of these clubs do not submit joint venture bids with other SS clubs,they should miss out entirely.

 

[Crashy]

Would love to see the Rams resurface. They have 4 clubs to feed them and Eastwood is about to see the construction commence for the $25 million centre of excellence - you'd imgaine games would attract punters at Concord, St Marys ( for example) Parra stadium and Eastwood.
I just dont know why Uni, Wicks, Easts and South just join up as Sydney Fleet or something - perhaps no-one wants to get into bed with Uni?

 

[Done that]

Beside providing a pathway for aspiring club players to higher honors,surely the new competition should also be about promoting Rugby in general & enlarging it's supporter & player base.
I don't believe that a stand alone club would do anything to increase the interest in Rugby in members of the general public, or lead to increased numbers of young people wanting
to play the game.
This competition should take the opportunity to introduce a "tribal" support base for each team.This is surely best achieved by introducing teams who represent geographical areas,
& or combinations of teams from a particular area.
The success or failure of the competition & therefore it's continuance, will largely be influenced by the support & interest generated amongst the public, & I for one don't see this
being able to be successfully achieved by including stand alone teams.

 

[Dave Beat]

Beside providing a pathway for aspiring club players to higher honors,surely the new competition should also be about promoting Rugby in general & enlarging it's supporter & player base.
I don't believe that a stand alone club would do anything to increase the interest in Rugby in members of the general public, or lead to increased numbers of young people wanting
to play the game.
This competition should take the opportunity to introduce a "tribal" support base for each team.This is surely best achieved by introducing teams who represent geographical areas,
& or combinations of teams from a particular area.
The success or failure of the competition & therefore it's continuance, will largely be influenced by the support & interest generated amongst the public, & I for one don't see this
being able to be successfully achieved by including stand alone teams.

So true - North Harbour V those Eastern Suburbs princes on the Southern side of the Hbr.

 

[FilthRugby]

G'day fellas, I've been watching some Shute Shield highlights from years past, and I'm just wondering how many clubs has James Harvey been to?

 

[Hawko]

Yeah I did read somewhere that the ARU would be allocating the pro's to each new franchise,but can't recall where.
I would expect the majority of players would be assigned to their junior clubs,however Perth and Melbourne players might be the main group that are allocated to where the ARU sees the best use of their resources.

I was about to reply to your previous post when I read this one. I have been following the start-up announcements closely and I have not seen anywhere that the ARU will allocate out the Super players. If they do it that way they will have a riot on their hands and will resurrect the major cost blowout that doomed the ARC.

I cannot see the Melbourne, Canberra and Perth NRC clubs giving up any of their non-Wallaby Super players. They would go ballistic!

I cannot see Perth domiciled players moving to Sydney for two months or more to play for the Sydney or Brisbane clubs unless they have their travel, relocation and accomodation/meals costs paid for by the Sydney/Brisbane clubs. That's what bankrupted the ARC!

The conflict and argument over who gets what player would probably end up in the Courts. What happens when THP A gets allocated to new club B and the coach thinks he's useless? That coach has to find another good THP from the leftovers. What chance of getting a good one given the paucity of good THP's in Australia?

[As an aside, this is why I expect the GF to be between two of those three clubs, who will be virtual Super squads with a couple of extra locals.]

IMO it just won't work unless the city based teams (Melbourne, Canberra, Perth) keep their Super players. How the Sydney and Brisbane Super players get allocated or chosen may leave one or more teams under strength but that's life. Someone always has to come last.

 

[I like to watch]

I assume Perth and Melbourne players would stay,as opposed to coming back and playing fir their SS aligned side.
I would have thought that was where the ARU might have to flex it muscles to ensure the outposts remain suitably manned.
I would have thought the Brisbane based sides might be tough as well, plenty of talent only to be split 2ways,and a strong local comp to fill in the gaps.

 

[Tomikin]

I was about to reply to your previous post when I read this one. I have been following the start-up announcements closely and I have not seen anywhere that the ARU will allocate out the Super players. If they do it that way they will have a riot on their hands and will resurrect the major cost blowout that doomed the ARC.

I cannot see the Melbourne, Canberra and Perth NRC clubs giving up any of their non-Wallaby Super players. They would go ballistic!

I cannot see Perth domiciled players moving to Sydney for two months or more to play for the Sydney or Brisbane clubs unless they have their travel, relocation and accomodation/meals costs paid for by the Sydney/Brisbane clubs. That's what bankrupted the ARC!

The conflict and argument over who gets what player would probably end up in the Courts. What happens when THP A gets allocated to new club B and the coach thinks he's useless? That coach has to find another good THP from the leftovers. What chance of getting a good one given the paucity of good THP's in Australia?

[As an aside, this is why I expect the GF to be between two of those three clubs, who will be virtual Super squads with a couple of extra locals.]

IMO it just won't work unless the city based teams (Melbourne, Canberra, Perth) keep their Super players. How the Sydney and Brisbane Super players get allocated or chosen may leave one or more teams under strength but that's life. Someone always has to come last.

It was from Laurie Fisher saying that he wouldnt stand in the way of having brumbies players allocated if thats what happens. . Obviously he may have heard something

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

 

[Slim 293]

It was from Laurie Fisher saying that he wouldnt stand in the way of having brumbies players allocated if thats what happens. . Obviously he may have heard something

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

I think that was just a response to the hypothetical "what if?"

However, I don't think it would be in the best interest to have these players randomly dispersed around the country.........

Sure, the NSW and Qld teams have the players from their respective Super Rugby franchises thinned out, but then they get the next best players available to them from the club scene........

Likewise, the Canberra, Melbourne and Perth teams should only be able to draw non-Super Rugby players from their own local competitions........

So hypothetically, the Perth and Melbourne teams currently have less Super rugby players taken away on Wallaby duty, but in return they rely on the weaker local competitions.........

Anyways, that's my opinion......... otherwise it just unnecessarily completes matters........

 

[FilthRugby]

Sorry I may have confused people before, I meant to ask 'how many clubs has Dave Harvey been to?' I watched old SS highlights and seen him play for Warringah and Norths and now apparently he's going to the Wicks?

 

[Eyes and Ears]

4 Shute Shield clubs - Parra, Gordon, Norths, Warringah. Wicks would be No 5. Another poster reported he was going back to Norths.

 

[the coach]

Sorry I may have confused people before, I meant to ask 'how many clubs has Dave Harvey been to?' I watched old SS highlights and seen him play for Warringah and Norths and now apparently he's going to the Wicks?

I'd be surprised if he's going to the Wicks.....we don't pay our players