Why a national club competition won’t work
Roar Guru By Rhys Thompson, 24 Jun 2008 The Crowd is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- club rugby, Manly, Rugby Union, Super Rugby
Every year the same discussion comes up: how do we get a national rugby competition started up that will be viable, attractive to the masses, and exist as a vital development pathway for players to reach the next level?
In simple terms, it just won’t work.
Why? Am I being negative about the future of the game here? No. I’m realistic about what the rugby community will and won’t accept.
One of the great things about club rugby, at least in the major cities, is the tribalism and the stories behind the games make the games what they are.
Anyone who saw Manly vs Warringah play to a packed house at Rat Park last weekend will tell you that the atmosphere as the two teams fought for the Bayfield Cup was electric.
The problem with a national club comp is that you can’t create teams and expect there to be atmosphere, and you can’t create rivalries within two years of a competition starting.
The beauty about club rugby is that supporters can feel like they are on the field with the players, such is the passion that they have for their team.
And you can have all this for a maximum of about $10 on a Saturday afternoon.
Why would any rugby fan pay their good money to watch a team which they don’t feel really represents them, especially when they don’t know any of the players.
The administrators need to find other ways to bridge the gap between club and Super 14 football because supporters will only support what they have an affinity with, whether it be their local club, the state or their country.
Love this article? Nominate it for The Roar’s Armchair Sports Writer Award. Or vote now for this week’s nominated articles.
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- club rugby, Manly, Rugby Union, Super Rugby
June 24th 2008 @ 2:16pm
sheek said | June 24th 2008 @ 2:16pm | Report comment
Andrew,
The ARC was designed to give us a NRL style national comp, but was proved too costly. Listening to John O’Neill the other weekend, he didn’t say “never again” re a national comp model. But clearly, until a model can be found to be cost effective, it won’t get a run with O’Neill.
I like the national provincial model for several reasons.
1. Same teams/franchises. No need to duplicate (a failure of the ARC) teams, players, coaches, CEOs, anything.
2. Seamless transition from supporting provincial team in S14 (or whatever) to national comp & back again.
3. Only 5 teams (I would like to add SA at a later date – Rome wasn’t built in a day). This means, with home & away, only 8 matches over 10 weekends, plus a final. Short & tight.
4. By truncating S14, there’s enough ‘window’ opportunities for S14, incoming Wallaby tours, premier club rugby, 3N, national comp & outgoing Wallaby tours.
I’m sure Yikes was pulling our legs when he suggested two full rounds of S14…..26 games, 13 home & 13 away. You’d have to pay the players several million dollars each (per season) – they wouldn’t last beyond 3 seasons with all that travel!
But like I said in my previous post – look at Pura Cup, ANZ Cup & Currie Cup – they are my inspirations for a national domestic provincial comp.
June 24th 2008 @ 2:20pm
Westy said | June 24th 2008 @ 2:20pm | Report comment
Just another note . After watching the Australia A v Tonga game the next person who tells me league players cannot play rugby did not see Tahu. If he cannot play than most of our regular s better pick up their socks.
June 24th 2008 @ 2:29pm
sheek said | June 24th 2008 @ 2:29pm | Report comment
Westy,
In my model having Western Sydney play NSW, or Qld, or ACT, etc seems odd. Can we call them Western NSW? But I do see your point, & it is very valid. Sydney is strong enough to house two provincial or national teams.
But again, I am a nationalist – I want to see rugby union strong in every state, not just the eastern seaboard.
Changing the topic slightly, you are right what you say about Sydney club rugby. Followed by the passionate few. And if the NSWRU isn’t interested in helping Penrith & Parramatta develop, how serious are they about expanding rugby anyway?
Another hobby horse of mine – what is Sydney University doing playing in a district comp? Apart from taking up the place of a district club & cornering players who might otherwise be helpful playing for other district clubs?
At present there might be not enough quality players to go around 12 Sydney premier clubs. I would take the best players from Sydney University, Eastern Suburbs & West Harbour & turn them into a super inner city club – Sydney.
This reduces the comp from 12 to 10 teams. Hopefully, Penrith & Southern Districts would pick up some decent players. Uni, Easts & Wests can still exist in suburban rugby. As a former Easts Colts player, may my soul NOT be sent to eternal damnation for suggesting this!
June 24th 2008 @ 2:36pm
Matt said | June 24th 2008 @ 2:36pm | Report comment
The problem with reducing the number of Super games Sheek would be the loss of revenue, as the attraction for a local game would be less at present.
That said, I agree that more emphasis should be placed on local teams, rather than the Super Franchises (as it appears will be happening by 2010).
The struggling financial side of the current NPC doesn’t really bode well for NZ as a model to copy, but the on-field results speak for themselves.
However, far more money could be generated for Provincial (NPC) rugby if all the emphasis was not placed on the Super Comp and it’s artificial franchises. I wouldn’t imagine that the English or French domestic competitions would be doing very well if each nation only had 5 fully professional teams and if the Heineken Cup was the only place you could watch international players out side of the 6 Nations.
This is the route that the SH is going down however. We are moving away from the tribal Manly, Randwick, Manawatu, Bay of Plenty, Free State or Wester Province supporter to the generic and appathetic Blues, Stormers or Cheetahs supporters.
These are fair weather supporters who are after a sexy product rather than a victory for their team. And we wonder why we need the ELV’s.
If you want an example of how to not to start a succesful comp then the lack of tribalism for the ARC and Super14 teams would be a good place to start.
Sheeks truncatic idea has real merit. But I’d prefer the season be mixed, like that of the European season, with the same team playing in both the National domestic comp and the Super Cup.
June 24th 2008 @ 2:36pm
Rhys Thompson said | June 24th 2008 @ 2:36pm | Report comment
Sheek,
In both New Zealand and South Africa, rugby is by far the most popular sport across the countries, with no real competition. You cannot compare it, especially when rugby is possibly to fourth in the line of foty codes at this time. Unless you get a financial backer who is not prepared to see any return on investment, its just too costly.
Contrary to what people might think, I am not negative, but i am a realist about what can and can’t be achieved
June 24th 2008 @ 3:13pm
True Tah said | June 24th 2008 @ 3:13pm | Report comment
Sheek,
The issues with Uni have been present for a while, as they do not have to maintain the junior base of the other clubs.
Matt,
you talk about the regional identities possessed by Western Province, Manawatu and Free State, which is lacking in the more generic Stormers, Hurricans and Cheetahs. Did this lack of identity prevent the Stormers averaging over 45,000 this year? However I see your point, but where does that leave Australia?
We have nothing to compare to Currie Cup or ANZ Cup, the ARC was an attempt, but it failed for a lot of reasons, and should be marked as the wrong way to start a comp.
For too long Aussie rugby has relied on NZ and SA, whilst neglecting domestic situation. I honestly think that professional rugby relies on NZ, and given the financial troubles affecting NZ rugby, they might be relying on us also.
June 24th 2008 @ 3:18pm
The Link said | June 24th 2008 @ 3:18pm | Report comment
Rhys Thompson – how well do you know South African sport? Last time I checked Football was the most popular sport in South Africa. Agree with your broader point though, many posters have Rugby overtaking other codes based on potential, not on a cold objective assessment of the realities facing the code.
June 24th 2008 @ 3:33pm
True Tah said | June 24th 2008 @ 3:33pm | Report comment
The Link,
what Rhys was referring to was that in South Africa, if a young man is likely to be a good rugby player, then chances are he will be exposed to it at some stage – soccer is the most popular sport, but I can think of a few Springbok players (Jantjes and Habana) who the SA soccer authorities would love to have in their side.
Both of these guys played soccer and rugby growing up, but ultimately decided to stick with rugby. Arguably South African soccer would be stronger still if the Afrikaaners were interested (given that their ancestors are Dutch, German and French, who are amongst the best soccer sides in the world).
Rugby has a hell of a lot of problems to deal with, I trust that those entrusted with managing it will intend to deal with these.
June 24th 2008 @ 3:34pm
Midfielder said | June 24th 2008 @ 3:34pm | Report comment
As the player agent in the movie Tommy C ………… says …………SHOW ME THE MONEY ……… it cost heaps to run.
FUNDING Rhys ? ?
June 24th 2008 @ 3:35pm
sheek said | June 24th 2008 @ 3:35pm | Report comment
Well then Rhys,
To use an old Alan Jones quote – “you can’t reach for the stars if you won’t get out of bed”. Or something like that.
So let’s make rugby union the best football code in Australia. More precisely, let’s make rugby union the best that it can be.
True Tah,
Re the ARC, don’t throw the baby out with the bath water, to use a very, very old saying. The concept of the ARC was sound, but the structure of that comp had a lot wrong about it – top 30 Wallabies (off to RWC) missing, teams not playing at a true home ground (East Sydney at North Sydney oval; North Shore players at Central Coast); too much duplication of resources, etc.
Blame the administration of Flowers, not the concept. Having given the ARC the green light, the ARU did the equivalent of asking the fledging comp to go out & play with both feet tied together & one arm behind the back.
Of course, the ARC was doomed to failure! Keep the arguments coming!!