Sydney Shake Up

[Rugby Central]

How about dumping Gordon and Penrith from Shute Shield and putting up Colleagues and Drummoyne. It's obvious that the later are far better run than the former and it will put the wind up the rest of the Shute Shield to get their house in order.

It might rob the west and north of teams in Shute Shield but it's fairly obvious nobody actually cares. Results are poor, attendances are non existent and (in Gordon's case) they are so poorly run as to lose money hand over fist. I'm all for developing a wider demographic but not for keeping clubs on life support when putting them down is far more merciful and gives them an opportunity to rebuild.

The "steady as she goes" attitude from Sydney Rugby is killing the game. Shute Shield clubs have no incentive to get their act together because there's no repercussions for failure.

Just look at any club facing promotion or relegation in Subbies and you'll find a desperation. Not only to win on the field but to succeed off it. They look at ways to entice players, sponsors and gather resources and only a handful have any money to actually play with. Contrast this with Shute Shield who have ABC TV coverage, bigger sponsors and greater access to...well, everything; and they just waste it.

Remove the barrier to "elite" rugby in Sydney and you will find rugby develop through ambition, good management and the vision that occurs once arrogant heads are removed from elite posteriors

 

[Inside Shoulder]

How about dumping Gordon and Penrith from Shute Shield and putting up Colleagues and Drummoyne. It's obvious that the later are far better run than the former and it will put the wind up the rest of the Shute Shield to get their house in order.

It might rob the west and north of teams in Shute Shield but it's fairly obvious nobody actually cares. Results are poor, attendances are non existent and (in Gordon's case) they are so poorly run as to lose money hand over fist. I'm all for developing a wider demographic but not for keeping clubs on life support when putting them down is far more merciful and gives them an opportunity to rebuild.

The immediate problems with this proposal include:

1. Having Easts and Colleagues in the same comp - that's so incredibly short sighted that its probably on the cards. One or other should be the senior club and the other the feeder for the senior club - and this should have been the position for years. Egos in both places prevent it from happening. The subbies structure owes most if its existence to a time when you had to get a punt from Dawes Point to North Sydney;
2. Having Drummoyne and West Harbour in the same comp is nearly as bad - it would make more sense to have Hunters Hill - but even that is too close;
3. Penrith are an expansion team: you may be too young to remember when the Campbelltown Harlequins could and should have been the object of the SRU's interest - the whole south west could have become a rugby stronghold. They had no league team...and then Wests-Balmain merged and the chance was lost. Penrith should be supported. Some of the S15 players should be sent to play there.
4. Drummoyne have had their administrative issues over the years so that there's no clear cut case for thinking that they are above whatever unidentified issues with administration at Gordon are irking you;
5. What source of income do Drummoyne and Colleagues have that could cover the costs of running a premiership team - including paying the players necessary for them to be competitive?
6. Colleagues would need to move from Woollahra 2 - they have no juniors: thats not a good look and doesn't suggest a long term future - this is part of the issue in 1.

if you want to shake up Sydney Rugby then you need a logical structure: divide the join and have a district club in each division with all of the subbies clubs affiliated to the district club. There are more details in this plan but I'll save them for anyone showing any interest.

By the way, despite the logo in the top right hand corner, I live a Tiger Woods driver from Woollahra No 2.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Penrith are an expansion team: you may be too young to remember when the Campbelltown Harlequins could and should have been the object of the SRU's interest -

Some of the S15 players should be sent to play there.

if you want to shake up Sydney Rugby then you need a logical structure: divide the join and have a district club in each division with all of the subbies clubs affiliated to the district club. There are more details in this plan but I'll save them for anyone showing any interest.

IS,
I like the cut of your jib.

There is very little value apart from ego stroking in having non-home grown contracted S15 players in clubs like Uni, and Eastwood. When they return from representative duties, they typically displace a 1st grade quality player to 2nd grade. At poorly performing clubs like Penrith and Randwick, they would similarly displace a regular 1st grader but the impact on the club, spectators, sponsors and other players (cross fertilisation of ideas) would be far more marked.

Example: Archie's Dad should be playing at Penrith. Drew Mitchell should remain with the Green Cellar dwellers.

I still think there would be opportunities in trying to grow a Campbelltown franchise.

I like the idea of a wholesale restructuring of the NSWRU/SRU along the lines you have mentioned.
There wouild be merit in a model for SRU that has geographically based District Clubs having the "franchise" for all rugby within their boundaries including Open Grade, Open Colts, subbies Grade, Subbies Colts, juniors, women's, and Schools (eventually), referees etc.

These Districts all affiliate to the SRU which has responsibility for several competitions, Shute Shield, Subbies equivalent, juniors, and womens.

A similar model would be replicated for Country NSW.

NSWRU would then draw together its affiliates SRU, Country RU and Tahs (& Tahs academy).

Bringing the Schools into the model will be significantly more problematic, but not unsurmountable.

NSWRU would remain the peak body but would have more of a governance role than it currently has. Significantly more power and responsibility would be transferred to SRU and the District Clubs.

The biggest problem with this simple and efficient organisational structure is that I am not sure that many of the current incumbents administering heavens game in NSW have the intellectual capacity or flexibility to actually make it work as designed.

I can not recall any successful business that has an organisational model approaching the spaghetti like structure that is Rugby in NSW. If this was submitted as a term paper by an undergraduate management student at any Business college or Uni, I'm pretty sure that the student would not be invited to participate in the honours programme.

Like you I am happy to put some more flesh on this hare brained bare bones strawman concept if there is enough interest, otherwise I will crawl back into my hole.

 

[boyo]

Would the promotion/relegation system (as used to occur between grade and subbies) have merit? Is ring-fencing the Shute Shield teams (the current situation) really appropriate?

 

[Inside Shoulder]

IS,
I like the cut of your jib.

There is very little value apart from ego stroking in having non-home grown contracted S15 players in clubs like Uni, and Eastwood. When they return from representative duties, they typically displace a 1st grade quality player to 2nd grade. At poorly performing clubs like Penrith and Randwick, they would similarly displace a regular 1st grader but the impact on the club, spectators, sponsors and other players (cross fertilisation of ideas) would be far more marked.

Example: Archie's Dad should be playing at Penrith. Drew Mitchell should remain with the Green Cellar dwellers.

I still think there would be opportunities in trying to grow a Campbelltown franchise.

I like the idea of a wholesale restructuring of the NSWRU/SRU along the lines you have mentioned.
There wouild be merit in a model for SRU that has geographically based District Clubs having the "franchise" for all rugby within their boundaries including Open Grade, Open Colts, subbies Grade, Subbies Colts, juniors, women's, and Schools (eventually), referees etc.

These Districts all affiliate to the SRU which has responsibility for several competitions, Shute Shield, Subbies equivalent, juniors, and womens.

A similar model would be replicated for Country NSW.

NSWRU would then draw together its affiliates SRU, Country RU and Tahs (& Tahs academy).

Bringing the Schools into the model will be significantly more problematic, but not unsurmountable.

NSWRU would remain the peak body but would have more of a governance role than it currently has. Significantly more power and responsibility would be transferred to SRU and the District Clubs.

The biggest problem with this simple and efficient organisational structure is that I am not sure that many of the current incumbents administering heavens game in NSW have the intellectual capacity or flexibility to actually make it work as designed.

I can not recall any successful business that has an organisational model approaching the spaghetti like structure that is Rugby in NSW. If this was submitted as a term paper by an undergraduate management student at any Business college or Uni, I'm pretty sure that the student would not be invited to participate in the honours programme.

Like you I am happy to put some more flesh on this hare brained bare bones strawman concept if there is enough interest, otherwise I will crawl back into my hole.

Not much left to say - here are the keys when do you start?

Would the promotion/relegation system (as used to occur between grade and subbies) have merit? Is ring-fencing the Shute Shield teams (the current situation) really appropriate?

The justification for setting it in stone is that it give the clubs the medium term basis for saying we'll be here for a while.
If you go down HJ's and my path there's no scope for promotion and relegation because any good subbies club is already affiliated to a district club above it and there cant be 2 clubs from the same district in the comp.
I do have reservations about giving the District Club responsibility because they have not really shown much ability in this area.
Interestingly, I heard David Hill on 702 this arvo (on the way to kids training!) defending the riot in soccer last night: he made a couple of points about the saturation of the australian market when it comes to "football" - there are 4 mainstream codes vying for attention. He asserted that rugby was in more trouble than soccer. he lost some credibility with me when he suggested league was the next most troubled. My point in citing him as authority is: Union needs to restructure from the bottom up. The code needs to own the hearts and minds of its players from cradle to grave so that they are not tempted by the false idols of league, AFL and soccer. A bottom up structure requires that parents in a district instinctively know where their kid starts his rugby career and once he is hooked he instinctively knows what his path to s 15 and the Wallabies is- the same goes for women but i have no idea of the structures in that domain.
under this structure it doesn't matter where he goes to school because he know that his district clud "fields" teams in all sorts of comps from district to 5th grade subbies - and he just stays hooked up for life. If he moves he will know from years of experience what his local district is and which are the clubs at the various levels.
the other thing Hill convinced me of is that Union and League will eventually merge at the top level: the reason is that Union has something that none of the other codes truly has and its on this Saturday night.

 

[wamberal]

Don't lump Eastwood and Uni together, they are chalk and cheese. The last time they played, Eastwood had 3 Super Rugby players - that's right, I'll say it again - THREE. Uni had 12.

Other Shute Shield clubs had similar numbers to Eastwood, or more.

'
The other big difference between us and Student Corporation is that we develop juniors. Attack Eastwood, in any way, and you are attacking the catchment. By the way, apparently Gordon has the largest number of junior players in the country. How are they doing?


The district clubs that are doing a good job on and off the field, like Eastwood, should be rewarded, not disadvantaged, in any way.

 

[Ozzie Bob]

The competition is a geographical nightmare!

I know there are historical backgrounds to a lot of teams, but can anyone tell me why we have:

(1) Easts and Randwick- how can there possibly be enough players in the area to support both clubs?
(2) Norths and Gordon- THIS SHOULD HAVE NEVER happened. Now Norths have enticed Hunters Hill to be a junior club so they can have junior rep teams at the state carnival. There should be a merger of the two!
(3) Warringah and Manly- I know this is a quite large area, but surely it would be better to have one stronger club than the current situation.

Being an NRL fan of as merged team there is short term pain to mergers, but once some success comes along it is all forgotten!

I do think the comp should look like this:

1. Illawarra- they should have never let them slip away
2. Campbelltown - The subbies club is a powerhouse, with a few resources they could grow into something big
3. Penrith - It is a must for the game to keep them in. You let them go and NRL, AFL and Football win forever
3. Parramatta - It has been amazing to watch them have some success this year, such a large potebtial player base
4. Eastwood - The club i support, but they have to stop stealing players from other clubs, the raid on Gordon of Barry, Alc*ok and Polantski (spl) was a bit rough
5. West Harbour - THEY NEED TO GET SOME JUNIOR CLUBS UP AND RUNNING
6. Sydney Uni
7. Southern Districts
8. AN EASTERN SUBURBS BASED CLUB
9. A NORTH SHORE BASED TEAM
10. A NORTHERN BEACHES TEAM
11. NEWCASTLE - We needed to keep the wildfires going!!!!

I really support some expansion teams for a few reasons.
We need to move away from the traditional sources of players (Private schools and a few strong junior clubs) and tap into the whole potential player base. Would Kurtley Beale have made it from Mount Druit if he didn't end up at Joeys?

The Waratahs represent the whole of the state but are we truly getting the best possible players???

I think the tahs need to play games in Woolongong and Newcastle and we need club teams there to help develop the standard of rugby in the area. This would help the Tahs and Wallabies no end!!!!

 

[AussieDominance]

There is more than enough space on the North Shore to support two teams lads.

Gordon's year hasn't been great but 3 out of 6 teams could be in finals come next week.

North Shore is the heart of Australian Rugby if you get rid of Gordon the game will never recover.

I would suggest Rugby Central follows another code if he doesn't realise this.

Penrith and Parramatta are expansion areas and also need to be supported but if in the event one had to go Gordon would be one of the last on the list.

 

[Ozzie Bob]

There is more than enough space on the North Shore to support two teams lads.

Gordon's year hasn't been great but 3 out of 6 teams could be in finals come next week.

North Shore is the heart of Australian Rugby if you get rid of Gordon the game will never recover.

I would suggest Rugby Central follows another code if he doesn't realise this.

Penrith and Parramatta are expansion areas and also need to be supported but if in the event one had to go Gordon would be one of the last on the list.

I have grown up on the North Shore and i respect the need for a team in the area. However do we need Gordon and Norths?

The number of junior players in the area is immense. However i will use a subbies example. With the changing demographics of the Chatswood area, the subbies team have slipped from 1st Division (6 teams) to 6th Division and only getting their first win of the season in the last fortnight.

I think we need to consolidate the players we have and expand into areas where we can attract more players!!!! Newcastle, Illawarra and Campbelltown are areas that need our help!!!!

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I have grown up on the North Shore and i respect the need for a team in the area. However do we need Gordon and Norths?

The number of junior players in the area is immense. However i will use a subbies example. With the changing demographics of the Chatswood area, the subbies team have slipped from 1st Division (6 teams) to 6th Division and only getting their first win of the season in the last fortnight.

I think we need to consolidate the players we have and expand into areas where we can attract more players!!!! Newcastle, Illawarra and Campbelltown are areas that need our help!!!!

There used to be 3 first division clubs on the North Shore line and at that time Chatswood was a power house.
Times change.
Hunter Hill's move to Norths made sense on many levels: a lot of kids who deserved a chance at state champs were missing out because Gordon had twice as many junior clubs, and hence players, as any other club.
In reality the geography divides between Norths and Gordon at about Northbridge and everything south of aline running along there is and should be norths.
Norths and Gordon would be the unhappiest of mergers: when I was at Norths in the 90's they were still smarting over the Laurie Monaghan field goal that sent them into 2nd division for about 15 years and that was after they had got back to first division.
And when I was at Gordon they were so up themselves that the idea of a merger with anyone but god would be abhorrent.
This general area should be able to support 2 first division teams.
As for the East - neither club is doing a good job particularly with their juniors. Start a new one!

 

[Ozzie Bob]

There used to be 3 first division clubs on the North Shore line and at that time Chatswood was a power house.
Times change.
Hunter Hill's move to Norths made sense on many levels: a lot of kids who deserved a chance at state champs were missing out because Gordon had twice as many junior clubs, and hence players, as any other club.
In reality the geography divides between Norths and Gordon at about Northbridge and everything south of aline running along there is and should be norths.
Norths and Gordon would be the unhappiest of mergers: when I was at Norths in the 90's they were still smarting over the Laurie Monaghan field goal that sent them into 2nd division for about 15 years and that was after they had got back to first division.
And when I was at Gordon they were so up themselves that the idea of a merger with anyone but god would be abhorrent.
This general area should be able to support 2 first division teams.
As for the East - neither club is doing a good job particularly with their juniors. Start a new one!

I agree there would always be people against the merger. I follow the Wests Tigers in the NRL and it took me a while to get used to the merger, but the success has meant that Kids are now growing up to support the merged team.

I think mergers would be good for the game allowing strong clubs to keep their juniors instead of them all wanting to go to Uni.

The mergers would also allow the administration to support expansion areas and grow the game.

How many players that have played for the Wallabies and Tahs in the last 15 years have come from outside Sydney, Canberra or Brisbane?

We need to get players from Woolongong, Newcastle, Southern NSW, Townsville, Cairns, and Country areas playing for their states and therefore the Wallabies!!!!!

 

[Inside Shoulder]

We need to get players from Woolongong, Newcastle, Southern NSW, Townsville, Cairns, and Country areas playing for their states and therefore the Wallabies!!!!!

I agree but the costs become prohibitive and these teams are not going to be competitive to start with because these areas are all league areas and there is no escaping the fact that the ARU has left junior development to the schools and those schools are in Sydney, Brisbane and Canberra.
Also the kids who aren't at the private schools need to be targeted within Sydney as well.

 

[SteveMerrick]

You may want to ask the two clubs you are putting forward, I suspect Drummoyne have lost interest in the Shute Shield since their last effort at that level resulted in the club almost becoming but a memory, whilst Colleagues have contested the first division of suburban rugby for almost 80 years and have never expressed a desire to consider moving to the district (Shute Shield) competition, in fact it is said that the Colleagues by-laws that were written when they incorporated the club specifically states the club will not move from the suburban competition.

I think Suburban rugby provides an environment for players who are not interested in the training that the grade clubs demand , there has been players over the years who move between the two levels of competition more than once . To suggest that they become a feeder club to a grade club is to show no understanding for what drives these clubs and to disregard how and why they were started - in the case of Colleagues they were not started to be a feeder to Easts etc.

Anyway my two cents worth..

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

The immediate problems with this proposal include:

1. Having Easts and Colleagues in the same comp - that's so incredibly short sighted that its probably on the cards. One or other should be the senior club and the other the feeder for the senior club - and this should have been the position for years. Egos in both places prevent it from happening. The subbies structure owes most if its existence to a time when you had to get a punt from Dawes Point to North Sydney;
2. Having Drummoyne and West Harbour in the same comp is nearly as bad - it would make more sense to have Hunters Hill - but even that is too close;
3. Penrith are an expansion team: you may be too young to remember when the Campbelltown Harlequins could and should have been the object of the SRU's interest - the whole south west could have become a rugby stronghold. They had no league team.and then Wests-Balmain merged and the chance was lost. Penrith should be supported. Some of the S15 players should be sent to play there.
4. Drummoyne have had their administrative issues over the years so that there's no clear cut case for thinking that they are above whatever unidentified issues with administration at Gordon are irking you;
5. What source of income do Drummoyne and Colleagues have that could cover the costs of running a premiership team - including paying the players necessary for them to be competitive?
6. Colleagues would need to move from Woollahra 2 - they have no juniors: thats not a good look and doesn't suggest a long term future - this is part of the issue in 1.

if you want to shake up Sydney Rugby then you need a logical structure: divide the join and have a district club in each division with all of the subbies clubs affiliated to the district club. There are more details in this plan but I'll save them for anyone showing any interest.


By the way, despite the logo in the top right hand corner, I live a Tiger Woods driver from Woollahra No 2.

You dear sir are on the money. If such a 'shake up' were to occur a club of the likes of the Harlequins should absolutely be at the top of the list to be included as a new district. The potential still exists in the area to develop the game particularly in the public schools. Coming from the area and having actually played my junior Rugby at the club Campbelltown has the potential to build a strong club with pre-existing junior structures.

 

[Ozzie Bob]

I agree but the costs become prohibitive and these teams are not going to be competitive to start with because these areas are all league areas and there is no escaping the fact that the ARU has left junior development to the schools and those schools are in Sydney, Brisbane and Canberra.
Also the kids who aren't at the private schools need to be targeted within Sydney as well.

I agree entirely, but we gave The Wildfires (Newcastle) and Illawarriors (The Gong) 2 years each. That was never enough time to make an impact. By reducing the number of Sydney based teams you allow the new clubs a leg up by recruiting players that are not required in the newly merged clubs.

We need to develop players from new areas such as Campbelltown, The gong and Newcastle to not only increase participation but ultimately improve the Tahs and Wallabies by having more players to pick from.

The junior state carnivals should no longer be dominated by Eastwood, Gordon, Warringah and Parramatta. We should see sides from the Hunter, Illawarra, Country areas such as Tamworth, Bathurst/Orange and the Riverena involved and competing well!

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I agree but the costs become prohibitive and these teams are not going to be competitive to start with because these areas are all league areas and there is no escaping the fact that the ARU has left junior development to the schools and those schools are in Sydney, Brisbane and Canberra.
Also the kids who aren't at the private schools need to be targeted within Sydney as well.

That's why if any restructure were to occur you wouldn't just parachute them straight into the competition ll at once. It should be staggered. The first would be Newcastle who could likely compete immediately, give the Illawarra 2 to 3 seasons to develop their squad and infrastructure and provide Campbelltown with a 5 season integration plan. A restructure should be planned an introduced gradually in a controlled manner.

 

[Rugby Central]

IS, you're right about Colleagues and Easts being next to each other. I was using those clubs as an example of Subbies clubs that dominate swapping with Shute Shield Clubs that struggle. I agree Campbelltown is an ideal development opportunity and nothing should be ruled out. My reason for starting this post was to start discussion about ways to improve rugby in Sydney.

AussieDominance, your ignorance is matched only by your arrogance.

"North Shore is the heart of Australian Rugby if you get rid of Gordon the game will never recover."

It's attitudes exactly like this that are killing rugby union. Are you trying to tell me that St. Ives, Barker Old Boys, Knox Old Boys, Lindfield, Roseville, Killara West Pymble, Brothers, Chatswood and Lane Cove would all pack up their tents and go home if Gordon wasn't in the Shute Shield. Of course Shore, Knox, Barker, St Aloysius and many other private school's rugby programs would just cease to be because there was no rugby at Gordon. I'm also sure Norths would consider it an absolute travesty if Gordon folded. Forgive the outburst but when the state of Rugby Union is struggling it's so frustrating to hear someone repeat the attitude that caused the problem.

I agree that a straight transplant of Newcastle/Illawarra/Campbelltown would unlikely succeed in the short term but keeping teams in Shute Shield simply because they think the game can't survive without them is ludicrous.

 

[Aussie D]

If this proposed restructure were to occur the Shute Shield competition should be reduced to two grades along with U21 and U19. That way you can limit the hoarding of players and cut down on expenses for the clubs.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

That's why if any restructure were to occur you wouldn't just parachute them straight into the competition ll at once. It should be staggered. The first would be Newcastle who could likely compete immediately, give the Illawarra 2 to 3 seasons to develop their squad and infrastructure and provide Campbelltown with a 5 season integration plan. A restructure should be planned an introduced gradually in a controlled manner.

Im not saying these arent good plans/ideas/hope dreams.
But how long have Penrith been in Shute Shield? 15 years?

 

[Hugh Jarse]

^^ and can that Clubs inability to prosper to be seen as a failure on behalf of previous administrations at NSWRU (ARU when the receivers were brought in) and now SRU, possibly compounded by the prevailing outdated and predatory attitude and thinking from other Shute Shield clubs?