A new decade, a new life for rugby
Roar Guru
By rugbyfuture, 3 Jan 2010 rugbyfuture is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- ARU, Melbourne Rebels, Olympics, Rugby Union
Rugby in Australia is currently failing at all three levels of the game. That is administratively, professionally and in popularity/recruitment. There is hope, however, that the growth of the game globally, with the Olympics and internally with the Rebels, will bring about change.
These factors, along with the possible revival and reinvention of the failed ARC, spell out a new decade and possible rebirth of the game.
It has only been 15 years since Rugby Union went legally professional, and Rugby can only be considered a child in business. Where Rugby League and Aussie Rules have been professional and responsive to the public, outside of the players and direct administration for decades, Rugby Union is only now learning to respond. It had its first years in professionalism, beloved by those who thought it was a cute baby, managed to reach school and do well at the Rugby World Cup, and is now learning about self-identity and the direction it should lead.
But every mistake is a lesson learned, and this is the statement Rugby should precede into the new decade with.
There is not only promise of the Olympic Sevens tournament (which shares opinion with 20/20 cricket in what its merits are and whether it’s a real part of the game) but from the promises of John O’Neill (which should be taken with a grain of salt) a new marketing campaign, a new ARC in the works and from some perspectives and a good Wallabies future.
Enthusiasm for the game amongst its supporters is growing, even if numbers are waning, with many people of the community willing to take it into their own hands to contribute and spread the game back to the public.
This leaves the evolution of the laws, which will change now that the northy’s have woken up to themselves. The only question there will be whether it’s for the better and when it will happen. This is, however, out of the hands of any Rugby enthusiast or administrator in Australia.
A new decade and lease on life is what lies ahead. But one should be wary of what will happen in Rugby with even the coming year shrouded by more optimism than in the past.
Enjoy 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 (32) | 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)
- Wales show Southern Hemisphere how to play running rugby (27)
- 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:
- ARU, Melbourne Rebels, Olympics, Rugby Union
klestical said | January 3rd 2010 @ 1:11am | Report comment
Apparently there is rumour of a Justin Marshall law where the tackler at the breakdown has absolutely no rights to the ball whatsoever…could be good.. would open up a bit of space to the ruck as he would have to roll away and it would commit more defenders to the breakdown…
but then again..i have a feeling the IRB won’t revisit this subject until at least after 2011.
rugbyfuture said | January 3rd 2010 @ 1:46am | Report comment
so same sorta rules applied to the ball carrier apply to the tackler? isn’t that what it used to be? sortof. would be interesting to experiment with, you’re right though, the IRB arent moving
sheek said | January 3rd 2010 @ 7:59am | Report comment
RF,
The good news is that when you’re at the bottom of the trough, usually the only way out is up.
The bad news is that the administrative bodies – IRB, ARU, NSWRU & QRU all especially, have let the game down in different ways. And continue to do so. They remain roadblocks to positive progress.
You said “every mistake is a lesson learned”. Well, rugby union had the opportunity, when it went professional in 1995-96, to learn from the mistakes of the other professional sports. Unfortunately, it was determined not only to repeat those mistakes, but make its own whoppers along the way!
You would think having the 7s at the Olympics will be a positive. But there’s that gnawing feeling in the gut that rugby will find a way to stuff that up as well…..
Life is a funny old thing. It’s a mixture of the good & bad in human nature. But like Forrest Gump’s box of chocolates, you’re never quite sure what you’re going to get – the good, the bad, or the just indifferent.
rugbyfuture said | January 3rd 2010 @ 10:51am | Report comment
well now they’ve learned that themselves, and in coming years, possibly not immediately, will be better for it.
Street Cred said | January 3rd 2010 @ 8:29am | Report comment
A new ARC in the works! Keep dreaming.
rugbyfuture said | January 3rd 2010 @ 10:54am | Report comment
hence the grain of salt, however it is quite possible, and eventually will be probable, the question will be whether its developed to be sustainable or if it’s financially supported through establishment costs
Street Cred said | January 3rd 2010 @ 11:26am | Report comment
You do know that you wrote “from the promises of John O’Neill (which should be taken with a grain of salt) a new marketing campaign, a new ARC in the works and from some perspectives” – you made the “grain of salt” in reference to O’Neill, not the ARC. You made no such qualification regarding “a new ARC in the works”. Sloppy writing.
rugbyfuture said | January 3rd 2010 @ 11:35am | Report comment
i made the grain of salt comment about john o’niells promises, which have a direct correlation to the ARC and the new marketing campaign
im by all means not a professional writer and would like to see one of your articles
Cattledog said | January 3rd 2010 @ 5:20pm | Report comment
I think most would get the gist of what you meant, RF…I’ve observed those with nothing worthwhile to contribute will often turn on the writer and find fault…nothing better to do…oh well.
Joh4Canberra said | January 5th 2010 @ 8:04am | Report comment
Parsed down to its relevant parts the WHOLE sentence reads as follows: “There is … from the promises of John O’Neill (which should be taken with a grain of salt) … a new ARC in the works”.
In other words RF said: (1) JON has said there is a new ARC in the works and (2) What JON says should be taken with a grain of salt. The logical connexion between the “grain of salt” and “new ARC” is clearly there for anyone with half a brain to see. There’s nothing wrong with what RF said at all.
Paul said | January 3rd 2010 @ 9:46am | Report comment
I think rugby is got to work with the nrl to help them and in return you may give generous financial quantity to rugby league
Street Cred said | January 3rd 2010 @ 11:27am | Report comment
It’s certainly the season to be jolly.
chief said | January 3rd 2010 @ 1:19pm | Report comment
I can assure each and everyone of you, that law changes will be significant in Rugby after 2011. I assure you all.
International coaches, even the IRB have expressed concern. They will change, but not within the next two years unfortunately.
Dogs Of War said | January 3rd 2010 @ 1:42pm | Report comment
I can’t see how they can hurt things by trialling some of these proposed law changes at lower levels where International players are unlikely to be playing. This would at least allow for some feedback and review before any changes are implemented on a larger scale where any poor decision could have a adverse affect on the game.
rugbyfuture said | January 3rd 2010 @ 1:50pm | Report comment
they did that with the ELV’s slowly going up, but that was at a time the northern hemi was 5 years behind
Dogs Of War said | January 3rd 2010 @ 1:53pm | Report comment
Yeah, but they must have learnt plenty of lesson’s in how NOT to implement rule changes via the ELV’s. A review process is a must.
rugbyfuture said | January 3rd 2010 @ 2:09pm | Report comment
yes, and international cooperation too
Bay35Pablo said | January 3rd 2010 @ 6:08pm | Report comment
“a new marketing campaign, a new ARC in the works “?
I haven’t heard about either, and JON earlier this year said the ARC wasn’t on the ARU’s radar. Any links or rumours you need to tell us about RF?
And a new marketing campaign? Many would say you can change the lipstick on the pig but it’s still the same pig. If the ARU seriously thinks marketing will dig them out of this whole they are kidding themselves. Put that money into grassroots!!! As has been done to death elsewhere on the Roar, the ARU’s over attention on the professional level is leaving the grassroots to wither!!!
rugbyfuture said | January 3rd 2010 @ 6:18pm | Report comment
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/sports/2009/12/22/all-that-glistens-is-not-gold-in-new-sanzar-deal/ (there are other more subtle sources but i cant be bothered finding them right now)
there was always a plan to recreate the ARC once the ARU were once again financially secure
i disagree with you on marketing, marketing is an important part of any business and especially in sport, it can directly impact Grassroots growth. the i wanna be a wallaby, game played in heaven and other campaigns at the beginning of the proffesional era are what swayed me towards rugby from soccer (plus i was continually chased by my local club for my size). Marketing can be an integrated part in any grassroots development plan, ala auskick
Dogs Of War said | January 3rd 2010 @ 7:10pm | Report comment
How could they possibly support a 3rd level ARC setup given the ARU’s money has only increased by approx 7% on the last deal. Given that they also need to support an extra team, as well as the players having more matches to play (and I suspect would require an upgrade in their contracts, no one works more with no increase in pay).
As well the gamble of their big ticket tests going against the semis of the AFL and NRL, and this timeframe locked in while the contract exists, may really cause the ARU some serious cashflow issues.
I didn’t realise how poor a position the ARU was actually in until you showed me that article.
rugbyfuture said | January 3rd 2010 @ 7:19pm | Report comment
the ARU have been in a crap position since Gary Flowers. when John o’niell came back he managed to save 9 million by cutting back (unknown whether it was a detrement to the game in low level states or not) he also managed to rejig the auxillary money accounts back to 15 million dollars. It also won’t happen until the Rebels are firmly established as put forward within his statement, so he might be hoping for a number of different streams and possibly PE based teams in the ARC (although he will need to loosen his ideas up a bit, unlikely)
Dogs Of War said | January 3rd 2010 @ 7:23pm | Report comment
Given that the Rebels if they go the private equity route, won’t cost the ARU anything extra over whatever they provide the club as it’s share of the TV revenue, means they can easily implement an ARC type comp. They should at least look at planning it like 3 Sydney teams, 3 Queensland teams etc, and look at selling the licences which may be snapped up by existing clubs looking to take the step up to what would be a 3rd level comp.
rugbyfuture said | January 3rd 2010 @ 7:32pm | Report comment
good idea, but i think that the need to stick with the superclub route, ala A league, otherwise you’d get clubs which arent included in proper levels, they just need to make it exciting, marketable and sustain it past conception, those are the real challenges
Bay35Pablo said | January 3rd 2010 @ 7:51pm | Report comment
HAL model doesn’t work in RU, given Sydney & Brisbane are so much stronger. They need to provide more than one club or you end up with the Tahs problems – half the city feels cut out.
The ARC model was generally decent. Just the names for some were crap, the bidget unrealistic, and some teams spent too much.
Bay35Pablo said | January 3rd 2010 @ 8:22pm | Report comment
RF, I’ll give you the marketing has in past has been better. But I can’t see the current lot suddenly pulling a slam dunk campaign out of their rear. Further, they face a harder sell with the current state of the game, and competition.
rugbyfuture said | January 3rd 2010 @ 8:24pm | Report comment
possibly, but marketing is a magical thing, especially if done right
BTW, the power of twitter, i sent out a message to a bunch of RU people on twitter about GRA and Adam Frier has messaged back asking how he can help
chief said | January 4th 2010 @ 12:08pm | Report comment
RF, I disagree with that it is failing recruitment wise. Look who we have got, Will Genia and David Pocock who only left school a few years ago. Same for Cooper and Beale.
Rugby has a very strong schoolboy practice, it is hard and almost impossible to steer away from Rugby League schools to get them attracted to Union. They are trying their best particularly in QLD where the likes of the Ballymore Cup exists for schools, which gives them opportunities for the strong League schools to give their chance in Rugby.
We do need an ARC, but how do we fund it? How do we make it successful? The only real option is having New Zealand intergrated with us. 2 pools, both with say 8 teams each. Finals series. Goes for about 12 odd weeks.
Forget all these people who are in fantasy land saying Club rugby needs to be made professional blah blah blah. No chance in hell are we going to get anywhere close to that especially within the next 2 years.
RWC in NZ is a big concern. So many people are going to miss out on tickets including myself due to a ballot system and the shitty sized stadiums over there. I will struggle to secure tickets to Australia verses Ireland at Eden Park. It really is outrageous that they were selected as a sole RWC selection.
Yes some areas are of concern, some are not. No doubt it needs to be fixed up.
rugbyfuture said | January 4th 2010 @ 4:31pm | Report comment
as i previously said, private equity models throughout the new ARC would be a way, details scurried out to avoid conflicts of interest, but eventually i tcould be quite viable
Who Needs Melon said | January 4th 2010 @ 12:23pm | Report comment
Nice article RF.
Watching and reading all the ‘those were the noughties’ stories in the media makes you realise that truth is stranger than fiction and you can never predict what is going to happen. In rugby, who’d have predicted the roller coaster ride that all the major teams – national and international – have been on since 1999?
It’s not inconceivable that the Wallabies could end coming decade on top of the world. It’s equally conceivable that they may slip WAY down in the rankings and rugby as a sport end up the way basketball has in this country.
I have to take take you up on this sentence: “It has only been 15 years since Rugby Union went legally professional, and Rugby can only be considered a child in business”. 15 years is a long time in business. Maybe – MAYBE – in the first few years of professionalism the excuse ‘we’re still learning the ropes as far as being a business goes’ might have washed. We are LONG past that stage now though. If we are “only now learning to respond” and if the ARU is only “now learning about self-identity and the direction it should lead” then… well… there’s a word for people that learn that slowly: Idiots.
I DON’T think the ARU and the various other administrative bodies around are made up entirely of idiots. Rather I think that the governance model itself is flawed, promoting division and the formation of factions which continually work against one another. I’m still trying to get my head around the latest NSWRU/Waratahs governance reformation but gee I hope it pays dividends because the previous model sure wasn’t working.
rugbyfuture said | January 4th 2010 @ 4:34pm | Report comment
i agree with alot of what you said, however the 15 years, especially and more specifically is quite small in this business. you have to remember that its now that the flow from the amateur days actually starts drying up, its not like a business from scratch, more like a charitable enterprise going forth into commercial entity. my mistake. the governing bodies will reform once this generation passes
Fly on the Wall said | January 6th 2010 @ 10:57am | Report comment
Have a look at this article. Very revealing and very depressing at the same time.
Seems the way to be the best team in world rugby is to make sure you are hardly ever in possession.
What a disgraceful state the game is in.
Wonder what William Webb Ellis would make of it?
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/sports/2010/01/04/2010-resolution-beat-the-saffa-gameplan/
Roar fans should generate plenty of comment after reading it.
Cattledog said | January 6th 2010 @ 12:22pm | Report comment
Very interesting article and if the stats are correct (assuming they are) we need to quickly and efficiently get back to making it more viable for ball in hand rugby and scoring tries.
As I have rambled on about on numerous occasions, the simple fix is to once again change the scoring to make scoring tries the issue. A conversion 3 points (converted try eight points) and reduce FG and Pen to 2. Some propose 1 point for FG but I’m happy with 2.
All those that say infringing will increase exponentially need to consider that a 10 min sin bin MUST be used to a much greater degree and the increased infringing will soon stop. The outcome will be the opposite of what the article FOTW has highlighted, which in itself is quite disturbing if something isn’t done.