A letter to the ARU I hammered out just now. Feedback and suggestions welcome:
Dear members of the ARU board
I am writing to you to express my concern over your decision to cut the Western Force Super Rugby team. From reading the news, it appears that your justification for the axing of the Force is that cutting a team will make the other four franchises stronger, as the best players from the Force will move to the other four franchises and increase the strength of the teams, making them (as is implied) more competitive against New Zealand, South African, Argentinian and Japanese opposition. What you have failed to consider, are a couple of key negatives that eclipse the supposed positive you have implied above.
The first one – academies and player development.
By cutting one team, what you are doing is removing 20% of the development pathways for young men and women who want to play rugby professionally – where will you get more young players from? The Western Force, through their local academies, have produced (and helped to produce) players such as Adam Coleman, Harry Scoble, Dane Haylett-Petty, Pek Cowan, Ben McCalman and Ross Haylett-Petty among others. All are considered to be Super Rugby quality players, and some are even test quality players. Where will these players come from? The other four franchises are (presumably) running at full capacity and cutting one team will mean cutting 20% of Australian Rugby’s capability to spot and develop players like the above suggested. You have also seemingly not considered the stress the Western Force players are under regarding their future (as I have been reliably informed). If I was managing any player for the Western Force, I would encourage them to head for Europe or Japan to gain financial security for their future.
The second one – attendances and television ratings
Another thing you have failed to consider is the public’s viewing of rugby. As we all know, this sport is a wonderful game that many people are aware of, and in this competitive environment, we are fighting a battle with AFL, NRL and the A-League for the public eye. So why do you insist on shooting yourself in the foot by removing 20% of the potential audience in the Force? You may claim low attendances, but having say 5,000-10,000 people attending a Western Force game is much better than no-one in Perth attending a game because they don’t exist. The same goes for ratings. While they are nearly halved from last year (a major cause for concern), having a total of 55-60 thousand people watching a Western Force game (about 50k on television) is still better than 0 people watching because they have been cut. It is also a large potential viewership space, as there is a lack of an NRL team in Perth (and the Perth Glory finish in April-May, depending on performance) has given the Western Force an interesting niche as arguably the second most popular winter sport in Western Australia (in terms of television ratings). There has been talk of NRL expansion back into Perth in the media which, if you cut the Western Force, will seal rugby’s fate in WA. Rugby, in this time of need, requires as many people to know about it to remain in the eyes of the Australian sporting public. Cutting the Western Force will see a 20% decline in interest in rugby for the public and accelerates the death of rugby in this country
In conclusion, I strongly advise you to veto the SANZAAR proposals to remove teams and bring this suggestion for a redressing of the Super Rugby competition to the table:
I'd put Argentina in the NZ conference - play every team in your conference 2x, 3 team in 1 conference 1x, and 3x teams in the other conference 1x. 16 games, 2 byes for each team. Add in not only a bonus point for scoring 3+ more tries than your opponent, but a bonus point for scoring 4 tries.
Top 2 from each conference go through to finals (seeded - division winners get seeds 1-3, wild card teams get seeds 4-6)
QF: 4 v 5 & 3 v 6 (1 & 2 bye)
SF: 1 v lowest seed winner & 2 v highest seed winner
GF: winners of SF
