The Relationship Between the Schools, the Clubs, the Unions and the ARU

[TOCC]

Lets look at New South Wales for a moment(to the best of my knowledge):

NSWRU is the governing body, but junior grassroots investment funding is distributed by the ARU.(or has that changed?)

Waratahs Ltd are a separate organisation licensed to NSWRU whom they receive funding for the payers wages and in return pay a license fee to NSWRU.

SRU is a recently reformed body who works closely with the ARU to govern the premier club rugby clubs in NSW.

Suburban Rugby Union governs suburban teams(separate to the SRU).

NSWCRU governs country rugby, teams made up outside the Sydney region.

Junior Rugby is governed by NSWJRU which in turn has 2 member unions in the form of Sydney Juniors and County Juniors.

Schools rugby is governed by the following separate bodies: NSWPSSA, NSWCHHSA, AAGPA, CAS, ISA, CCC, Country Schools and AICES.

ASRU is the body in charge of Schoolboys representative teams, which is separate to the ARU who.




Rugby Union is obviously a seamless entity, duplication of efforts and HR waste is inconceivable given the flawless nature it is administered. No wonder the AFL looks enviously at our code, they wish they could duplicate the network we have in place...

 

[Hugh Jarse]

TOCC, don't forget that there are some Junior Village Clubs that play in SJRU competitions that are the Junior arm of a parent NSW Suburban Rugby Union Affiliate - ie Oatley, Newport, Rockdale, Petersham. Some Junior Village Clubs are the Junior Arm of a Sydney RU affiliate Like Wests Juniors, and the balance are seperate incorporated bodies that band together at times under a SRU affiliated club primarily for State Championships under NSWJRU control.

To assist the smooth and efficient control of junior rugby, geographic groupings such as Northern, Southern and Western Zones are sometimes used to assist representative selections. There were previous administrative groupings but in what some will say is a retrograde step, the Zone bodies/sub committies/administrative groupings were abandoned several years ago. There are a few administrators who believe in efficiency and effectiveness, and they have resisted the move to the centralisation model and continue to think and act along the proven super-efficient Zone lines.

Don't forget the ACT and NSW Sthn Inland Rugbu Union (AKA Brumbies). Most of their geographic domain is in NSW but they affiliate to a body Headquartered outside NSW.

....but junior grassroots investment funding is distributed by the ARU.(or has that changed?)

The funding that found its was to the Junior Jarse junior grass roots club must have been distributed from the ARU in Zimbabwe dollars because apart from the Paid SJRU Competition Administrator at Moore Park, it would be fair to say that our club received a big fat donut from ARU.

It would be fair to say that if there was any distributions from ARU to junior grass roots, then this has been hoovered up by the grass leaves, or the lawn owner.

 

[USARugger]

So, based on all I've read here on top of some personal research I think the first step towards not only streamlining the pathways for talented youngsters but also expanding and growing the game of Rugby at the Juniors level would be to loosen the grip that the schools have on the juniors game. In terms of the game as a whole this sliver of power they cling to is a bit anomalous, all of those boys will fall under the jurisdiction of the ARU sometime between their 18th and 19th birthdays. But the exclusionist-by-nature aspect of the private school game as well as a lack of true competition (having a handful of strong teams and half a league full of easy-beats is not competition) is doing disproportionate damage to the growth of the game simply because it is at the junior level - where it all begins.

This needs to be done anyway if the ARU actually wants to grow the game and develop future Wallabies. It all feels so obvious, so is this just ineptitude or is it deliberate cloistering by the ARU?

The fact that so many Wallabies come from such a small set of private schools is fucking embarrassing, and should feel that way to anyone not growing up in that environment. It is nothing short of a primary symptom of a very weak level of competition and poor developmental structures at the junior level. I believe this has been perpetuated by the disproportionate amount of power that the private schools hold over the juniors level of the game.

Any thoughts?

TOCC

So do the NSWPSSA/NSWCHHSA answer to the NSWJRU who then answer to the NSWRU who then answer to the ARU? I know that can't be right because it sounds way too fucking logical.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

So do the NSWPSSA/NSWCHHSA answer to the NSWJRU who then answer to the NSWRU who then answer to the ARU? I know that can't be right because it sounds way too fucking logical.

NSWPSSA affiliates to the NSW schools - at least, they are a link (bottom left) on its website (which is more information than is available in any other way)
http://www.nswschoolsrugby.rugbynet.com.au/


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[gpsoldboy]

The fact that so many Wallabies come from such a small set of private schools is fucking embarrassing, and should feel that way to anyone not growing up in that environment. It is nothing short of a primary symptom of a very weak level of competition and poor developmental structures at the junior level. I believe this has been perpetuated by the disproportionate amount of power that the private schools hold over the juniors level of the game.

Any thoughts?

The ARU was formed in 1949. The AAGPS Rugby competition commenced in 1892 and the CAS rugby competition was first held in 1930. The schools are affiliated with the NSWSRU which in turn is affiliated with the ASRU. Do you really think that the GPS and CAS schools are ever going to be dictated to by the ARU? They are and have always been private entities that will determine what sports their attendees are involved in and in our society that is their right. The only possible hold the ARU could have over them is selections in the ASRU Australian Schools teams as the ARU funds them and subsequently controls the entity. The reason why so many Wallabies have come out of the private school system is not "fucking embarrassing" but because these member schools have been committed to investing time and money in junior rugby for up to 120 years (in the case of GPS). Imagine where rugby would be in this country if that commitment had instead been to rugby league, soccer or AFL?? The heart of the problem has been the lack of investment over many decades by the ARU and State Unions in developing the game at all levels and more money should have been invested in developing the game in the public schools system and at junior club level.

 

[USARugger]

You know that the entire reason such a disproportionate amount of Wallabies come from these few schools is the total lack of investment by the ARU into the public schools and non-school junior clubs..which is exactly what we were all talking about before your post. Needless to say I fail to see the point of your post. How is it anything less than embarrassing that the ARU has failed so spectacularly at growing and funding the juniors game that only a handful of private institutions are capable of regularly producing Wallaby-level players?

And yes by broadening the base of who exactly is contributing the athletes required to make the Wallabies (you know - the primary product of the ARU) the private schools would have less away with the ARU.

When I said it was embarrassing it was an attack on the ARU, not the schools.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

The ARU was formed in 1949. The AAGPS Rugby competition commenced in 1892 and the CAS rugby competition was first held in 1930. The schools are affiliated with the NSWSRU which in turn is affiliated with the ASRU. Do you really think that the GPS and CAS schools are ever going to be dictated to by the ARU? They are and have always been private entities that will determine what sports their attendees are involved in and in our society that is their right. The only possible hold the ARU could have over them is selections in the ASRU Australian Schools teams as the ARU funds them and subsequently controls the entity. The reason why so many Wallabies have come out of the private school system is not "fucking embarrassing" but because these member schools have been committed to investing time and money in junior rugby for up to 120 years (in the case of GPS). Imagine where rugby would be in this country if that commitment had instead been to rugby league, soccer or AFL?? The heart of the problem has been the lack of investment over many decades by the ARU and State Unions in developing the game at all levels and more money should have been invested in developing the game in the public schools system and at junior club level.

Maybe we need to define "affiliated".
I've never been to a meeting of the NSWSRU but I expect that there is little controversial discussed there because the NSWSRU has no ultimate control of any of the school systems.
If you want to modernise the administration of the game then each tier below must owe its existence to the tier above. The tier above has to be able to amend the structure, constitution and make up of the tier below, just as it is subject to the intervention of the tier above it in relation to those matters.
Thus, for arguments sake, the NSWSRU needs to be able to say to the private schools: this is a farce - in 1892 those of you that existed may have been of roughly equivalent standard but the horseless carriage has been popularised in the meantime and we need to see a competition in which the first tier schools (say 8-10 of them) are involved in a competition where they play each other. SJC, St Augustines, Trinity (or whoever) you play each other in this comp. Etc Etc Etc.
You dont toe the line - no refs etc.
SJC etc you can play the other GPS schools if you want to in a comp but it cannot be to the detriment of the official 1st Division School's Comp.
Only by that means can anyone map out a coherent and comprehensive pathway for the future.
Never happen - but that's another issue.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

In the olden days, the various village clubs and districts played a variety of pathways. Some Under 6's were playing 10 aside tackle footy, some were 15 aside, some had adopted the ARU Walla Pathways, Tackling was introduced at various ages anywhere from under 6 to Under 9's. 15 aside footy was played on a full field anywhere from Under 10's to under 13. There was a fair amount of inconsistency.

Slowly ARU, NSWRU and SJRU started getting the districts and clubs to toe a standardised Walla, Mini, Midi pathway line through the threat of denial of Insurance cover and referee support. IMHO rugby lost 3 x as many kids to Loig as we gained/retained because there was no contact in the Under 6-U8 group. They went to Loig because the parents and kids wanted to tackle at that age group. Most didn't come back. Those kids would be in the U17- U20 age group now, and this may explain why there is a bit of a reduction in playing numbers in that age grouping. That is for another story.

Denial of referees and Insurance are very powerful levers that the ARU, NSWRU, NSWJRU, SJRU can use to get their affiliates to do what they desire such as Ground Marshalls, roping off grounds, First Aid officers, etc. Village clubs do not have sufficient resources to go it alone.

The Sydney and Brisbane Private Schools have the resources to be able to go it alone.

They can grow their own referees, or pay for their own. Sport is part of the curriculum, so player numbers and recruiting is generally not an issue. They have their own insurance cover. The School Teachers coaching teams are covered by insurance. They have their own competitions, rules and judiciaries. If there wasn't a NSW Schools RU rep team, they associations would play each other regardless and most likely have interstate rep clashes.

A very strong part of the DNA of the school and marketability of their product is the Sporting and co-curricular Associations they belong to. They will not give that up willingly. .

ARU and subordinate affiliated bodies have very little ability to direct what has to go on within schools, and it would take more money than ARU can lay their hands on before they could even contemplate genuinely directing the school how they are to conduct their rugby business.

Scots for example pulled all their kids out of the NGS this summer. They obviously believe that they can do better. Joeys doesn't allow their boys into NGS. I'm told that this is primarily due to the logistics of moving boarders around.

 

[USARugger]

To be honest I'm far less concerned over the amount of influence the ARU has over these schools than I am about how much the ARU relies on these schools for talent development and how little they've done to build up the alternate juniors programs.

It's antiquated and very stupid to me but not the core issue. The core issue is that there are maybe only a dozen juniors programs in Australia that are of a high enough quality to produce Wallaby-level players with any regularity.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

I think you are being overly generous in your assessment of about 12. I reckon it is significantly less than that.

There is some reasonably valid criticism that we select out future elite at 16 years of age and that is it, and that if you (or your boy) misses out then they might as well forget about their dreams of representing their country.

The perception is that Late developers don't get a look in.

The reality is somewhat different. NGS selection helps but is no guarantee. There are planty of NGS and JGS graduates that for whatever reason don't kick on.

18 out of 28 in the Under 20's going to Jnr RWC are National gold squad (NGS)graduates. The other 10 got there through sheer hard work at club, or colts levels through various academies and programmes having not being identified as a 16 year old for NGS.

I concur with your overall thrust that ARU has done very little relatively speaking to grow the base of the pyramid in the Junior ranks outside the traditional catchment areas. Scott Allen has done a rather simple comparison between what the Darkness spend on community development compared to what ARU have spent, and while it is not like the comparison of gun ownership in the USA compared to Australia, there is a very marked difference in their approach to expenditure on grass roots development.

It will be interesting to see what Mr TBA, the soon to be appointed General Manager of Participation at Rugby Central, does to discharge his commission. I just hope he can count.

 

[Kenny Powers]

You don't improve something by rubbishing the successful.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I think you are being overly generous in your assessment of about 12. I reckon it is significantly less than that.

There is some reasonably valid criticism that we select out future elite at 16 years of age and that is it, and that if you (or your boy) misses out then they might as well forget about their dreams of representing their country.

The perception is that Late developers don't get a look in.

The reality is somewhat different. NGS selection helps but is no guarantee. There are planty of NGS and JGS graduates that for whatever reason don't kick on.

18 out of 28 in the Under 20's going to Jnr RWC are National gold squad (NGS)graduates. The other 10 got there through sheer hard work at club, or colts levels through various academies and programmes having not being identified as a 16 year old for NGS.

I concur with your overall thrust that ARU has done very little relatively speaking to grow the base of the pyramid in the Junior ranks outside the traditional catchment areas. Scott Allen has done a rather simple comparison between what the Darkness spend on community development compared to what ARU have spent, and while it is not like the comparison of gun ownership in the USA compared to Australia, there is a very marked difference in their approach to expenditure on grass roots development.

It will be interesting to see what Mr TBA, the soon to be appointed General Manager of Participation at Rugby Central, does to discharge his commission. I just hope he can count.

I think you know that we are singing from the same sheet, HJ.
But there has been one recent development that really heartened me: Cam Crawford.
Apart from the school he attended this is, in my view, the bio we should be looking for: http://www.waratahs.com.au/Waratahs...PlayerPage/tabid/182/playerid/54/Default.aspx
Never got higher than GPS 2nds, albeit in a different position than he is currently playing. He has had to pursue life beyond rugby because rugby can't support him, and maybe never will. He has debuted in s15 at age 24 when the bloke who kept him in that GPS 2nds team, KB (Kurtley Beale), is off The rails indefinitely.
I reckon his maturity despite his lack of experience is one of his greatest attributes. He may never play a test but a few more blokes with lives outside rugby might make the Tahs a better place.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[USARugger]

You don't improve something by rubbishing the successful.

You also don't try to build a pyramid in reverse. Nobody here is rubbishing the private schools, just the obvious cloistering by the ARU and the utter lack of support for village/local/subby junior's programs.

 

[USARugger]

In the olden days..

Thanks for the history lesson! Totally serious, I'm largely in the dark when it comes to that stuff. Most of this knowledge really isn't available online, thank goodness for crowdsourcing.

I agree the specifics of U6-10 rugby are another discussion than the one we've been having so far. My personal philosophy for that age group is that the most important thing is just to get the kids on the field and playing with the ball. Skills, tactics, and serious rugby can come after. They are still just little kids at that age, let them have fun.

Denial of referees, etc are all carrots and sticks USAR uses here. Makes sense that it outright works here because there aren't really any entrenched rugby institutions here. Even for the ones that may be considered so (Xavier, Gonzaga, Jesuit, Prep, etc) it is in no way worth pissing of USAR, and they have no reason to on top of that.

To be honest I think taming the schools is a secondary or tertiary priority right now anyway. As you said they have way too many resources and a committed and deeply entrenched lot willing to defend them to the death, at least it would seem so. Widening the base by growing and funding the subby/village clubs should be the most immediate priority.

I don't know enough about the particular Scots and Joeys situations to comment but shouldn't the ARU already be compensating the players for excessive travel and moving costs related to representative selection?

How about the public schools though? If the ARU were to step in and start funding those programs as well surely they would have a good amount of say in what happens there? I'm not sure what the financial landscape of the Australian public school system is like, to be honest.

Sorry if I repeated anything from my first response in there, this post deserved a longer and more fully fleshed response than I initially provided.

I think you are being overly generous in your assessment of about 12...

You're likely correct, I was being very generous with my estimate.

On the topic of elite development starting at 16, this isn't a phenomenon specific to Rugby Union in Oz. It's a pretty standard trend you'll see in all sorts of sports all over the world. From a sports science perspective the window to develop elite athletic ability starts very young and it is a pretty critical period in which certain traits and skills can be developed and established in ways that aren't as easily (or at all) attainable later in life. The basis of all this is called Long Term Athlete Development or LTAD (rugby is classified as a late specialization sport).

I know it doesn't feel like a particularly great system for late-bloomers and that would be because it isn't. It is, at least for now, the most widely accepted way to develop elite athletes. It's one those things that does work for 'most', just not 'all'.

To be honest though over 1/3 of the U-20 squad coming from outside the NGS is a good thing. That's actually not a bad statistic at all. Wherever those boys were at 16-19 they were seemingly getting coaching and developmental assistance on par or better than what they would have gotten at NGS. Which is another can of worms entirely, if Joeys/Scots do have a legitimate point here then the solution is pretty simple, improve the NGS program outright or provide the proper incentives (can you return $2mil in boardroom shiraz if you have the receipt?) for a stronger coaching/developmental staff to join.

On top of investing more in raw cash (and much more if you were to do a proportional comparison) than the ARU the NZRU as has a pretty linear and uniform developmental structure through from U-9 to Super Rugby (for the most part) which is why their players seem to transition so smoothly lots of the time. They also tend to develop their players a year or two slower than has been happening in Oz recently.

 

[USARugger]

As a side note..how exactly does selection for the Aussie Schoolboys side work? I just noticed other sports call it their U-18 side..interestingly enough. When I went through the 2012 ARU Report every single player from the Schoolboys side was listed as affiliating with a public or private university, not one mention for a local club. So my question is which one of these three is the reason why: A) Only boys currently representing their public/private institution are selected B) The current school which the player attends is listed regardless of who they actually play rugby for C) No local clubs were able to produce a player good enough to qualify for the Schoolboys side.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

To be honest though over 1/3 of the U-20 squad coming from outside the NGS is a good thing. That's actually not a bad statistic at all. Wherever those boys were at 16-19 they were seemingly getting coaching and developmental assistance on par or better than what they would have gotten at NGS. Which is another can of worms entirely, if Joeys/Scots do have a legitimate point here then the solution is pretty simple, improve the NGS program outright or provide the proper incentives (can you return $2mil in boardroom shiraz if you have the receipt?) for a stronger coaching/developmental staff to join.

A very good point well made.

As a side note..how exactly does selection for the Aussie Schoolboys side work? I just noticed other sports call it their U-18 side..interestingly enough. When I went through the 2012 ARU Report every single player from the Schoolboys side was listed as affiliating with a public or private university, not one mention for a local club. So my question is which one of these three is the reason why: A) Only boys currently representing their public/private institution are selected B) The current school which the player attends is listed regardless of who they actually play rugby for C) No local clubs were able to produce a player good enough to qualify for the Schoolboys side.

I think this is due to the fact that it is a schools side.
IIRC Tony Melrose was playing grade for the Two Blues when picked for the Australian Schools side in 1977(?): he was eligible because he was still at school. No doubt he was listed as coming from his then high school. I think this means (B) is the correct position.

Most if not all the private schools will not permit their 1st XV players to play village rugby. Many if not all would have played village rugby.
To be eligible for selection in the Aus Schools team or the state schools teams:
1. A student who is in full time attendance at a secondary school and is undertaking a course leading to the appropriate school based Year 12 exit credential (e.g. HSC, VCE,etc..) is eligible.
There's more information here: http://austschools.rugbynet.com.au/default.asp?type=library

 

[USARugger]

Inside Shoulder

Thanks for clearing that up for me. I'd be interested to see where the kids all played their junior rugby but I don't think that information was included in the ARU Report. Gonna have to dig some more this week and see if I can come up with anything. I do support the idea of completing a basic education being a requirement, sets a good standard for the game.

 

[Hugie]

USARugger,

The School boys teams are draw only from the schools i.e boys playing for their school then school association etc. The club systems tend to name their teams U18 U14 etc or Colts.

I don't see any reason to attack the private schools system (other than to question thier ethics in that they say they don't offer rugby scholarships and have signed a letter saying they don't, however this is for them and their conscience only).

The model I am pushing is:

1. The ARU pay the districts to run the CHS (public schools) and the CCC (Combined Catholic Colleges) comp for them. There is no way these systems will run a rugby comp. all too difficult. There are some very motivated rugby teachers within these systems but the barriers are too overwhelming. So go around it.
2. The CHS and CCC comps (could be combined) would be seen as a feeder to the local clubs e.g. maybe a 5 game comp with an opens and U16 team only.
3. The districts would then take over training the CHS and CCC local regional teams. A model that I saw work with Southern Districts and the local CCC rep team. They took a huge interest in the team and made no secret of the fact they wanted the boys to go to their Colts program.
4. The program be run as part of the districts Colts program and be used as a feeder to the districts Colts teams.
5. The funding from the ARU be performance based ONLY ie the districts get paid only if they meet growth targets, eg a min target, target, bonus target.

This model has means that those with a strong motive to make it work are running it, it only pays for results, the cash goes straight to the districts without passing through layers of admin (I don't even know what these structures do, how they add value), it uses existing structures and assets so doesn't need new structures (which automatically attact costs).

USARugger in NSW and Qld 70% of the boys go to a CHS school and 20% a CCC yet most rugby players come from the remaining 10%. This good and bad news, the bad what on earth is the ARU doing? the good is wow growing the game should be really, really easy.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

USARugger,
The School boys teams are draw only from the schools i.e boys playing for their school then school association etc. The club systems tend to name their teams U18 U14 etc or Colts.

This does not seem to be correct: if you follow the links in my earlier post you will see that even home schooled kids are eligible for the Australian Schools team.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I do support the idea of completing a basic education being a requirement, sets a good standard for the game.

There is no such requirement - there is definitely encouragement.
I would say that its less demanding than the way the NFL teams draft out of college - some enormous percentage of draftees complete a bachelors degree - do they not?
Of course, if you believe one of the theories behind "Money Ball" (the book) watching a kid in college is a much better means of determining his fitness for pro sport than how he went in high school.