The Pulverisation of Australian Rugby

[Quick Hands]

The sad fact for the SS clubs is that the funding would have inevitably gone, anyway. I doubt the ARU ever had intentions of funding comps in Sydney, Brisbane, greater ACT area, Melbourne and Perth. With the Super XV sides now all concentrating their players in the local comps, the local comps will improve over time and the Sydney and Brisbane comps will eventually supply a lesser porportion of players.


I will repeat this has been going around and around for pages, but at the end of the day the following is true (as far as I am aware):
1. the ARU is nearly broke (and would have probably gone broke without the increased TV deal)
2. they have cut costs everywhere, including an ill thought out and silly junior levy
3. SS clubs are a very important part of player development, but that importance will be slowly diminished somewhat by the NRC and rise of other captial city competitions

I agree with your points 1, 2 & 3. And I respect your difference of opinion on other matters - at least you have advanced coherent and logical arguments.

I wouldn't know why the ARU wouldn't want to provide some assistance to club competitions in Sydney, Brisbane, Canberra, Melbourne and Perth as IMO the higher the standard of club competitions, the better for the levels above.

I find it strange that as recently as 2012, the ARU seems to have taken over funding SS and Premier rugby from NSWRU and QRU and suddenly withdraws it. What was the strategy behind taking over the funding I wonder? And what is the new strategy?

 

[Quick Hands]

Dave just tell me how many expansion teams in sports have managed to be self sustaining?

The AFL for example is pumping hundreds of millions into the Gold Coast and GWS over a decade or more.

You do understand the whole concept of an investment right? As the game gains profile the market is more lucrative for sponsorship and broadcast numbers which helps the Tv deal. In addition the profile builds the junior participation which leads to more players.

The difference is Melbourne may be self sustaining, based on the decades of decline the SS probably won't as a whole.

Brisbane Broncos?
West Coast Eagles?
Adelaide Crows?

 

[Train Without a Station]

20 years ago before salary growth which reached extraordinary levels in the mid 90s as well as growth in the performance department development?

 

[Quick Hands]

I was just answering your question - you didn't put a time frame on it

And I do support the Melbourne expansion and have no argument with the ARU funding it either. And I would have thought that either the ARU or the VRU would want to support the Melbourne grade competition as well.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Haha I guess you're right. We only need to look at the Canterbury bulldogs to see how a self sustaining expansion team can survive?

 

[Strewthcobber]

I find it strange that as recently as 2012, the ARU seems to have taken over funding SS and Premier rugby from NSWRU and QRU and suddenly withdraws it. What was the strategy behind taking over the funding I wonder? And what is the new strategy?

The ARU conducted the "Premier Rugby Taskforce Review a few years ago. You can google info on it

From my understanding the review found that many of the clubs in Brisbane and Sydney were not being operated sustainably, and the biggest problem for the clubs was they were spending too much on player payments - money they simply didn't have.

So the strategy is to remove grants that were being used to pay players (even though the $$$ were supposed to be to pay for high performance coaching etc), to reduce the money the clubs can use for player payments, and reduce the players exopectations of what payments can be made.

The commitments cannot keep being made at the level that they were at, it was sending half the competition broke. There's even suggestions of blanket bans on all player payments.

 

[It is what it is]

So the ARU takes away their funding from clubs and then thinks it can mandate how the clubs spend money that the ARU didn't give them.
That'll do me.

 

[Train Without a Station]

So the ARU takes away their funding from clubs and then thinks it can mandate how the clubs spend money that the ARU didn't give them.
That'll do me.

Well club people are concerned that the ARU is letting them just go broke

 

[Quick Hands]

The ARU conducted the "Premier Rugby Taskforce Review a few years ago. You can google info on it

From my understanding the review found that many of the clubs in Brisbane and Sydney were not being operated sustainably, and the biggest problem for the clubs was they were spending too much on player payments - money they simply didn't have.

So the strategy is to remove grants that were being used to pay players (even though the $$$ were supposed to be to pay for high performance coaching etc), to reduce the money the clubs can use for player payments, and reduce the players exopectations of what payments can be made.

The commitments cannot keep being made at the level that they were at, it was sending half the competition broke. There's even suggestions of blanket bans on all player payments.

Simple solution to that is to go back to the tied grants system.

 

[Hugie]

I'm a big fan of pay for performance. I've long felt that the ARU should contract the districts and zones to undertake the development work that it (NSWRU or Sydney/country) seems unable to do itself .
This could take the form of:

• local schools competitions
• 7s gala days
• junior marketing
• etc

Payment shouldn't be made until after the event and the targets have been met i.e. like true contracting.
This then becomes another source of revenue for the district/zones plus the ARU should get most of the money back via increase team fees ($200- an extra team/yr), more bums on seats at Super 15 games and Wallabies games and more eyes on the TV.

 

[Muglair]

What is missing is a common plan, to grow and develop - we aren't seeing this.
Some posters are say SS goes and play may disburse to various clubs and we are suppose to hope.
A business needs a plan, at the moment it appears very there is not one - rugby is a team sport - maybe ARU needs to involve the teams.

Finally up to date with my reading. There is mostly ill informed comment on here. Some are quite knowledgeable about elite player development, others on structure and finance and others on how their local club competition is funded and operated etc. Needless to say sometimes we all stray out of our area of expertise.

The problem we all face is a lack of information and transparency. Is it really necessary for us all to grub around looking for information, postulate theories for rebuttal so we can draw other info out from each other and try and come to a sense of satisfaction that our game is heading in the right direction. Frankly I don't know where it is heading or why. Let alone any guide as to how well we are progressing apart from IRB rankings and RWC results. Which don't really give much guidance on the domestic game and its health in Australia.

Of course the ARU should be doing this for us. We sort of understand that expenses need to be cut although the ARU is understandably cautious about letting the world know about their true financial situation. I am sure I have read denials somewhere that it will be broke in 2015. At the end of the day I am not uncomfortable about grants being cut to SS and Premier clubs. I would like to know in more detail why that expenditure cut has been made in preference to others or why that money is being diverted to other more important activities.

Of course that may generate some demand to know about how success will be measured in those alternate untouched or newly funded activities. Transparent glass houses are not an area that the ARU is comfortable sitting in.

 

[I like to watch]

Compare the way we do it to our Kiwi neighbours.
http://files.allblacks.com/comms/2013_Annual_Report/NZR-AR-2014-Full-Version-WEBSITE.pdf

I particularly like their scorecard and how they list their allocations on page 5.
In a snapshot you can see what their aims are,and how they are measuring their performance(management not players).
I know more about their priorities than I do about the ARU's,despite reading their annual reports and most of, if not not all related articles.

It's an old but true saying,that what doesn't get measured,doesn't get done.

 

[Muglair]

A comment was made that all sports had stumbled or failed in the transition to professionalism (sorry I cannot attribute it, but I am not wading back through this thread for anything).

I found this interesting as it underlines one of my hobby horses; been the playing of the "sport" and "business" cards. IMO clubs succeed on and off the field when they get both right. By the "sport" I mean the values etc. Playing performance tends to follow not drive off-field success although it is circular as well. I get frustrated when the four football codes play the sport card when they want something or need to avoid something and the business card when they need to breach sport values or screw someone.

The NRL seems to have finally decided that it is too hard. Dave Smith correctly identifies that each incident has a detrimental impact on the image and financial health of the game. It seems that the strategy is now just to eliminate these from the game. The NRL sees upside by converting "soft" fans into supporters. Forget sport and its values, the NRL is now in the business of entertainment and the players are its paid shiny squeaky clean actors.

My own prediction. Sport is much more than this and the NRL will lose some of its core supporter base. What implications does this have for grass roots RL, should it be run by the NRL business machine? Where do core supporters turn to satisfy their need for sporting values?

Not really our problem fortunately. Rugby as a game and a culture / way of life is much bigger than elite rugby and can survive on its own on the smell of an oily rag. On the other hand the cross roads is approaching fast at the elite/ARU level as we still wrestle with the issues around player conduct.

The current administration is a failure. It needs to set a transparent agenda and be willing to be held accountable.

 

[Strewthcobber]

The problem we all face is a lack of information and transparency. Is it really necessary for us all to grub around looking for information, postulate theories for rebuttal so we can draw other info out from each other and try and come to a sense of satisfaction that our game is heading in the right direction. Frankly I don't know where it is heading or why. Let alone any guide as to how well we are progressing apart from IRB rankings and RWC results. Which don't really give much guidance on the domestic game and its health in Australia.

Of course the ARU should be doing this for us. We sort of understand that expenses need to be cut although the ARU is understandably cautious about letting the world know about their true financial situation. I am sure I have read denials somewhere that it will be broke in 2015. At the end of the day I am not uncomfortable about grants being cut to SS and Premier clubs. I would like to know in more detail why that expenditure cut has been made in preference to others or why that money is being diverted to other more important activities.

Muglair, I reckon the ARU is actually fairly good (or at least better than they get credit for) at putting this sort of stuff out there. The Annual reports and financial statements are available for the last 10 years. The Arbib review and the board's resolutions are all available. Read all of those and you'll have a pretty good picture of both the financial position and what the governance looks like in the future.

There's plenty of strategic leaks to Georgina Robinson and Wayne Smith.

I guess my question is what would you specifically like them to be doing that they are not already? And bare in mind the vast, vast majority of rugby people could not care less about financial positions and strategic reviews. And they certainly have no interest in seeing any of it published.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Interestingly their Chairman takes home $72,000NZ which is around $65,000 today compared to Hawker with $20,000. Perhaps I missed it but I can't find Tew's remuneration.

This section I found interesting.

Provincial Unions and Franchises
During the year the Group paid grants to Provincial Unions of $8,966,000 (2012: $8,318,000) in accordance with the criteria set out in the Provincial Union Funding Review. In addition the Group provided funding to Provincial Unions and Franchises of $12,512,000 (2012: $11,856,000) for hosting of All Blacks Test matches and other specific Game Development amd Competition initiatives.

The Group made a loan to the Wairarapa Bush Rugby Football Union of $130,000 (2012: Nil) during the year.
The Group received $439,000 (2012: $1,287,000) repayments of loans and advances from rugby Provincial Unions and Franchises. The Group charged interest of $54,000 (2012: $85,000) during the year on all loans to Provincial Unions and Franchises.
The balances outstanding of loans and advances at the end of the year are stated in Note 9 to these financial statements.

Associate members
During the year the Group paid grants or paid for services with the following Associate Members: New Zealand Deaf Rugby
Football Union $15,000 (2012: $10,000), New Zealand Rugby Foundation Inc. $250,000 (2012: $250,000), New Zealand Schools Rugby Council $146,000 (2012: $145,000), New Zealand Universities $17,500 (2012: $17,500), Rugby Museum Society of New Zealand Inc. $31,000 (2012: $30,000).

From my understanding, the NZRU does not pay any grants towards their clubs directly, only to the provinces which are made up of groups of clubs, much like the ARU does to the Franchises.

 

[Muglair]

Fair call Strewthcobber. I am basically going off the fact that no one here can articulate them.

I do not have sufficient time or interest to read GAGR and look at all that stuff. Perhaps I will cancel my account and spend the time reading up on that stuff.

At the end of the day though I do not believe the role of the average supporter is to wade through that stuff and form their own opinion. Most of the time that will result in different views and opinions being formed by each individual anyway.

Most of us must rely on paid commentators and retired GAGRs to be across all of the information and assist us by drawing that together. To some extent that is the real value of this site to me. However I do not think there is enough cogent and transparent information out there to enable the majority of supporters to be properly informed. Just look at the number of different views on this thread as to what the real world looks like, and how it will be improved.

Naturally, as a public service, I cannot mention those threads but point out that controversy continues to rage on the subject in the complete absence of any further information from the ARU on what happened and why certain decisions were made. A conspiracy theorist might even opine that some are happier to let the rage (and damage to the game) continue rather than expose failings in the systems and create any demand for accountability.

On field performance follows off field excellence. There are a range of possible outcomes in RWC 2015 but given the current off-field performance the outlook for professional rugby beyond 2016 has to be bleak.

 

[Dave Beat]

Fair call Strewthcobber. I am basically going off the fact that no one here can articulate them.

I do not have sufficient time or interest to read GAGR and look at all that stuff. Perhaps I will cancel my account and spend the time reading up on that stuff.

At the end of the day though I do not believe the role of the average supporter is to wade through that stuff and form their own opinion. Most of the time that will result in different views and opinions being formed by each individual anyway.

Most of us must rely on paid commentators and retired GAGRs to be across all of the information and assist us by drawing that together. To some extent that is the real value of this site to me. However I do not think there is enough cogent and transparent information out there to enable the majority of supporters to be properly informed. Just look at the number of different views on this thread as to what the real world looks like, and how it will be improved.

Naturally, as a public service, I cannot mention those threads but point out that controversy continues to rage on the subject in the complete absence of any further information from the ARU on what happened and why certain decisions were made. A conspiracy theorist might even opine that some are happier to let the rage (and damage to the game) continue rather than expose failings in the systems and create any demand for accountability.

On field performance follows off field excellence. There are a range of possible outcomes in RWC 2015 but given the current off-field performance the outlook for professional rugby beyond 2016 has to be bleak.

yup

 

[Strewthcobber]

Mulgair, Dave, I'm sympathetic to the time issue, but if you want to have a discussion about the Aru, governance, transperacy, financial conditions etc etc and you haven't even flicked through the readily available Annual Report then I don't really know what to say.

Other than I dont think you can really criticise the ARU for not keeping you properly informed

 

[Muglair]

Not a fair call Strewthcobber. Such a requirement as to self education of all relevant facts and matters is an anathema to the spirit of this site.

I do that for a living and if the ARU want to pay me to go through all of their shit and set out their shortcomings in detail and some recommendations going forward then I will do so happily.

In the meantime I merely comment on the bleedingly obvious failures.

 

[Dave Beat]

Mulgair, Dave, I'm sympathetic to the time issue, but if you want to have a discussion about the Aru, governance, transperacy, financial conditions etc etc and you haven't even flicked through the readily available Annual Report then I don't really know what to say.

Other than I dont think you can really criticise the ARU for not keeping you properly informed

understand.
my wish and idea's may sound critical, just ideas about the importance of our grass roots.
no doubt there are trolls and if just one thought is picked up and we benefit - well how good would that be.
dont think i've had a go at the aru for taking the grant away, but i have explained the importance of the aru supporting grass roots.

note support can come in various forms - TWAS always references $ - time at schools, and with juniors maybe worth a hell of allot more