Melbourne team may kick off with 10 foreigners
By Darren Walton, 13 Nov 2009 Darren Walton is a Roar Pro
The ARU will lobby for concessions to allow Melbourne to recruit as many as 10 foreign players for the city’s entry into an expanded Super 15 rugby competition in 2011.
The concessions would help prevent Australia’s four established franchises from being depleted like the Queensland Reds were following player raids by the Western Force before their inclusion in the 2006 tournament.
Ending months of uncertainty, independent arbitrators on Wednesday granted Melbourne the 15th licence ahead of South Africa’s Southern Kings.
The decision came as a “big relief” to ARU chief John O’Neill and sparked great excitement in Australian rugby ranks.
“This is a vote for commonsense,” O’Neill told reporters in Dublin, ahead of Australia’s grand slam Test with Ireland on Sunday.
The Super 15 will comprise five teams from each of Australia, South Africa and New Zealand in a new-look conference-style format, with the competition running for 19 weeks virtually simultaneously to the NRL and AFL seasons.
Significantly, because of the new home-and-away system, there will be 20 all-Australian local derbies each season.
Wallabies coach Robbie Deans and captain Rocky Elsom both welcomed Melbourne’s successful bid – which ultimately edged out the Eastern Cape hopefuls because “the difference in broadcasting revenue between having a team in Melbourne versus having a team in Port Elizabeth was between a $15 million and $20 million cost to SANZAR”, according to O’Neill.
“It can’t help but help Australian rugby. It’s a fantastic outcome. The profile of the game will just escalate,” Deans said.
“You’ve got rugby across the calendar year. You’ve got not only rugby, but local derbies, domestic rugby.
“Those two points alone are enormous. Easily said, but huge value.
“It’s more top-end rugby and the reality is that players tend to be as good as the competitions they come out of and we’ve now got a top-end competition that will run from the start of the year to the finish.
“You can’t better that to put us on a level pegging.”
Elsom said: “It’s a big win for all parties. It’s really important to have another team and I can’t see too many down points of having a team in Melbourne.”
Australia wasn’t represented in this year’s Super 14 finals, but O’Neill and ARU high-performance unit manager David Nucifora are confident the world’s third-ranked rugby nation has the necessary player resources for a fifth franchise, in addition to the NSW Waratahs, ACT Brumbies, the Reds and the Force.
“There’s about 100 Australian players playing offshore in the northern hemisphere at the moment, so that’s quite a few,” Nucifora said.
O’Neill said the proposed concessions – which the ARU board has yet to approve – centre on granting Melbourne an increase in the number of foreign players on their books.
Franchises are currently allowed a maximum of two overseas imports, but O’Neill is proposing that Melbourne’s anticipated 30-man squad be permitted “say up to 10 (foreigners) initially with that being phased out over an agreed period”.
“It would only be a concession for Melbourne and only in the start-up phase,” he said.
“The idea is to populate this franchise with Australian players and to give the national team, the national coach and selectors a much bigger talent pool from which to choose the Wallabies.
“We could give preference to some Argentinean players – because we are keen to get Argentina into the Four Nations sooner rather than later – and Pacific Island players.
“So what we’re trying to do is set in place a policy framework that will lessen the impact on the poaching of players from other franchises.
“The only note of reality that you’ve got to inject into that is that there are players coming off contract in 2010 and we will be looking to protect the existing franchises as much as we can.
“But, equally, players who are coming off contract will be entitled to look around.”
O’Neill anticipates Melbourne will be fully functional, with a chief executive and coach in place, by March next year.
© AAP 2012Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
The Crowd Says (7) | Page 1 of Comments
Have Your Say
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (198)
- Will South African rugby force a Super 21 by 2018? (172)
- Brumbies 2012: New coach, new players, new attitude (128)
- Dan Parks and the unsolved questions of expat rugby (61)
- Pocock set to be named new Force skipper (56)
- Can the ‘Tahs win the battle after losing the Waugh? (51)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
- Chiefs continue to wait for SBW (3)
- Nathan Sharpe to retire at end of 2012 (2)
- Queensland ready for Super challenge (2)
- Australian teams at Super disadvantage (52)
- Foley excited about Samoan rugby challenge
- Force rugby coach praises his pack (2)
- The real story of how John O’Neill turned Manchester City down (62)
- Wales show Southern Hemisphere how to play running rugby (26)
- What opening matches of Six Nations taught us (18)
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (201)
- Clinical Chiefs cost rusty Rebels in Corio (9)
- Six Nations shows rugby is a parochial game at heart (5)
- Goose’s Super Rugby up-and-comer XV for 2012 (29)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
- Explore:
- Melbourne Super 15, Queensland Reds, Rugby Union, Super Rugby 2011
Rin said | November 13th 2009 @ 10:32am | Report comment
Import the Beast after the 2011 Worldcup as he probably wont have any Springbok inspirations, after the WC.
zhenry said | November 13th 2009 @ 12:18pm | Report comment
“This is a vote for commonsense,” O’Neill told reporters in Dublin
The ARU has no money for this venture, no Australian players and a serious declining TV and game audience. In a competition that is too long, too demanding for players and over exposes and exhausts the interests of its supporters. Imported players a bound to involve ‘NZ’ers.’
The only reason for its existence is a big wad of money from TV rights to enable a continuous season of Australian RU TV.
Bazaar? Will the Australian TV audience be watching? Good enough reason?
Can it succeed? All at the expense of:
The NZ Super season will have no international presence throughout its season but an international flourish during the finals. In other words NZ will have two NPC’s.
The ‘international presence throughout’ is to blood NZ players for the AB’s. Travel and money would force this anyway but a smaller competition would enable more international games.
The NZ NPC will need to be reduced from 14 teams to 10 teams. The NPC is the nursery competition for the AB’s and a 14 team competition will best serve NZ player development.
The lure of NZ players to Melbourne to help fill the Australian player void could be catastrophic for NZ. Mr Tew would say; ‘But that has always been the case.’ No it has not, the conditions now in Australia, have never existed before.
From a NZ point of view this 5th Australian Franchise is a huge loser.
Mr Tew actively encouraged it. He did so, presumably because he considers increased TV rights will help NZRU debt. The economic cuts to the NPC are being defined by Tew as 10 rather than 14 teams. Some prominent NZ’ers have pointed out that cuts have to be made regardless of the number of teams, the number of teams is not the crucial issue.
What happens when that wad of money dries up, which it will in the near future when the huge issue of peak oil hits. Mr Tew needs to think about what is in NZ’s long term interests, focusing the NZ rugby public on, and building a sustainable NPC should be Mr Tew’s clear focus.
Gavin Fernie said | November 13th 2009 @ 12:42pm | Report comment
I am not your typical South African rugby supporter. There are numerous aspects of the game and the way it is manipulated behind the scenes by our misguided and twisted government which appal me. So, the SANZAR election of Melbourne as the fifth Australian franchise to participate in the Super 15 makes economic sense to me; what does not make sense is that the competition is bloated with at least 3 and possibly 5 teams too many.The crowd appeal in South Africa for the lower end of the log teams, and similarly in Australia, was demonstrably low in this year’s competition. The standard of rugby was even lower. Greed on the part of the SANZAR nations totally overrides common sense. What Australia badly needs is a local competition equivalent to the Currie Cup and the Air New Zealand Cup, not manufacturing a puffed up franchise operating out of a footie stronghold. I like Melbourne enormously as a city. I think it has all the attributes to host a strong, viable sporting franchise; but I do not believe that a cobbled together professional outfit with up to 10 mercenaries makes for a constructive step toward promoting the game of Rugby Union in Victoria. It is all about greed at the expense of really promoting the game. The idea of another franchise emanating from South Africa is even dafter. What the competition needs is to have the whole competition trimmed to 12 teams, 4 from each country; not puffed up even more than the current bloated parade. What Australia needs is a strong, vibrant local competition incorporating all the states and with big sponsorship backing.
Republican said | November 13th 2009 @ 1:03pm | Report comment
And yet some continue to push the line that we do have the depth.
It will be more of the same ie, Robbing Peter to pay Paul, unless an offshore generic team is the concession to the new Melbourne Franchise.
Myself, I would not bother turning up to barrack for such an outfit but then, I am of the old school that believes blood is thicker than H2O.
These are very interesting times for Oz ra ra – indeed.
Oo roo
Gavin Fernie said | November 13th 2009 @ 3:28pm | Report comment
Spiro and his fellow contributors create a sports forum in a column,the likes of which we simply do not have in South Africa. The lively and informative debate, with the exception of a few rabid dingoes who proliferate and pollute all open forums with their particularly inane and plain dumb personal issues, is refreshing and interesting. Spiro is a beacon of passionate, well informed opinions. He reminds me of the characters who covered sport in America at the height of football, baseball and boxing. Now, it is rare to find a well versed specialist in any sphere of sports journalism.
As for Australian rugby, it is sadly amusing to read the coverage in U.K. sports columns reporting on the rugby test played at the”Swing low sweet Poms” stadium last weekend. One would have thought that Martin Johnson’s behemoths(most of the backs are bigger than the forwards and half as skillful; not saying much) almost beat the Wallabies. I thought that with a strategist and thinker at flyhalf;Berrick Barnes; and an instinctive player like Giteau at inside centre, the Wallabies would have scored at least two more tries. AAC’s try was magnificent, and Genia looks like the next great Australian scrumhalf in the making, in the tradition of Kenny Catchpole, Nick Farr-Jones and perhaps Gregan. Elsom is a fine player and the right man to take the Wallabies to the 2011 RWC. My long shot tip for the RWC crown in N.Z.is Australia. What odds?
Photon said | November 13th 2009 @ 8:05pm | Report comment
Gavin
The South African administration is not perfect, but every administration has its problems.You’re very niave if you can’t see why the SARU would oppose Australia having a fifth franchise, you’re even more niave if you don’t think there’s gonna be scouts coming here from Victoria looking to get our youngsters to go play for this Australian Franchise. And for the record, the arbitrator said the only problem with the Spears bid was that they would lose more money and that it was actually the superior bid.
Gavin said | November 16th 2009 @ 9:44am | Report comment
Photon
You have missed the point completely. What has the obvious fact that SARU would oppose a fifth franchise being awarded to an Australian locale or scouts touting for the Melbourne whatevers got to do with the already bloated Super 14 competition being inflated by another team and even more matches stretching over a ridiculously long time period? The only reason is greed on the part of ALL the participant bodies and the naivete of onlookers who don’t understand that the players are being used to swell the coffers of sponsors, and not add value to the annual rugby calendar.Check out the crowd support over the years for the teams at the bottom of the log. I am perfectly aware what the arbitrator said about the non viability of the Spears. Any clot could see the economics involved in the choice of another team to be added to the competition with the might of sponsors calling the shots. As for the South African administration, I don’t need to say anything more about them; they do it all for me all the time.