Rebels should look for diversity with signings
Roar Guru By rugbyfuture, 8 Jan 2010 rugbyfuture is a Roar Guru
139 Have your say
Related coverage
Many have stirred over the potential signings of the Victorian Rebels rugby team. This is not a danger, nor is it to the detriment of youth within Australia. This could be, with careful balance, a great marketing opportunity.
An opening to international players could mean that the Rebels become the diversity team. Rather than simply look at saffas, kiwis and islanders, look beyond the Tri-Nation’s borders to Japan, greater Africa and the rest of the developing rugby world.
Surely, some of those who play international for a mid-ranked team will be at some sort of level close to Super 15. Ensuring that some of these players make it into the team could mean a knock on effect to attract those of different cultural and racial backgrounds into the game in Australia.
After all, Australia is the nation of nations.
Look at a school rugby game in Australia and you are only likely to see whites, islanders and maybe the occasional Aboriginal. I’m part Chinese myself, but didn’t see any other Asians playing rugby in my schooling career.
This may spell that rugby may have itself a part in racial stereotyping it needs to defeat. The Rebels can spell an end to this.
Some here will argue that the incentives offered in some Asian countries and African nations and developing European nations may have already been tagged by the more professional and higher earning rugby places.
Some, though, pass through the filter and others may be attracted to the lifestyle opportunities within Australia, the great and lucky country.
Recommend this story.
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
- Explore:
- Melbourne Rebels, Rugby Union, Super 15, Super Rugby 2011, Victorian Rebels
January 8th 2010 @ 9:49pm
Foxy Loxy said | January 8th 2010 @ 9:49pm | Report comment
The posts herein provide sufficient evidence of your bona fides.
January 9th 2010 @ 6:55am
Lordrahrah said | January 9th 2010 @ 6:55am | Report comment
Excellent post Barry Q, now run along to the Telegraph Blogs where your intellect and wit will be clearly matched.
I agree in that the Rebels will not affect the depth of Australian Rugby in any way as close as the Force. We have learnt some lessons from that debacle ( I like the Force though) and I believe that we are just recovering.
RF / Foxy – if you read Harold Mitchell’s latest article, he talks about social responsibility as an aim of the team – so diversity is not such a silly idea.
January 9th 2010 @ 7:08am
Jets said | January 9th 2010 @ 7:08am | Report comment
I think that it is crazy to assume that the Rebels will be chasing only 1 or 2 fringe players from the other Australian Super teams. Established Wallabies is what they will be after. Any Wallaby that is off contract with his Super team this year will be targeted. In terms of European based players the money may be less in Melbourne but it is a big lifestyle change and also is a pathway to the Wallabies.
Also in an article on Rugby Heaven Harold Mitchell has inferred that they already have a coach who will be announced in the coming weeks.
Over the next few months it will be very interesting to see how this is handled by all of the parties involved.
January 9th 2010 @ 9:23pm
The way it is! said | January 9th 2010 @ 9:23pm | Report comment
Rod Macqueen?
January 9th 2010 @ 11:52am
ROY said | January 9th 2010 @ 11:52am | Report comment
Love Mitchell’s article in Rugby Heaven.. where he talks about how he was inspired by a gardiner in GEELONG to have a team in Melbourne.. and how Rebels is such a good name because it traces back to the Eureka/Goldfield days in BALLARAT. Yet he insists on it being called the MELBOURNE REBELS.
It’s a provincial competition, they should be the VICTORIAN Rebels.
January 9th 2010 @ 12:52pm
rugbyfuture said | January 9th 2010 @ 12:52pm | Report comment
i agree, hence why i said it, it is provincial and nothing more than provinces should apply.
January 9th 2010 @ 2:38pm
Barry Q. said | January 9th 2010 @ 2:38pm | Report comment
In Australia we don’t have provinces. We call them states or territories.
January 9th 2010 @ 3:05pm
rugbyfuture said | January 9th 2010 @ 3:05pm | Report comment
its called a thesaurus and synonyms, when we are normal we tend to understand abstract thought, i mustn’t say anything else, otherwise one might report me for responding to unbankable stupidity
January 10th 2010 @ 3:08pm
sheek said | January 10th 2010 @ 3:08pm | Report comment
Barry Q,
The principle behind the description province, is that if rugby were to ever really take off, you can create several pronvinces out of one state. For example, ACT has already annexed southern & inland NSW.
In the future, you could have new provinces based around Western Sydney or Newcastle for example in NSW, & Gold Coast & North Qld in Queensland.
The term province actually gives a ruling authority (e.g., ARU) plenty of flexibility. Yes, Australia has states & territories. These are political divisions, & we shouldn’t ever feel we can’t expand on these.
January 10th 2010 @ 3:45pm
Bay35Pablo said | January 10th 2010 @ 3:45pm | Report comment
Interesting sheek, I always assumed it was just another way of saying state, given the use of provinces as the equivalent in other countires like Europe and Canada.
January 10th 2010 @ 4:12pm
sheek said | January 10th 2010 @ 4:12pm | Report comment
Bay,
I should say it’s my take on the meaning of the word province, I find it very flexible.
As someone who has dabbled ad infinitum with various national comp models, I love the provincial context, whose wording flexibilty means it can represent a state (say NSW), territory (say ACT), part of a state (say North Qld), broad region (say Newcastle-Central Coast), combined metro/rural (say Gold Coast) or perhaps even part of a city (say Western Sydney).
January 10th 2010 @ 4:20pm
Bay35Pablo said | January 10th 2010 @ 4:20pm | Report comment
It is more regional than state then, which I agree is very flexible. Makes sense when you look at how the Kiwis use it in the NPC. Very flexibly from the look of it!
January 10th 2010 @ 6:09pm
sheek said | January 10th 2010 @ 6:09pm | Report comment
Bay,
Re your reply further below, allow me to give you two examples.
1. In the old Auckland province, it covered the whole north half of north island. The following current day rugby provinces would have come under Auckland’s umbrella – Northland, North Harbour, Auckland, Counties-Manakau, Waikato, Thames Valley, Bay Of Plenty, East Coast, Poverty Bay, Hawke’s Bay & King Country.
2. In the old Transvaal province, the following rugby provinces were spawned (before the current day changes) – Transvaal, Northern Transvaal, Western Transvaal, Eastern Transvaal, Far North Transvaal & Vaal Triangle.
Drawing comparisons with Australia, WA, Sa & Victoria remain as state/provinces. ACT (Canberra) would include southern NSW; NSW (Sydney) itself would include central NSW & Eastern Australia (Newcastle) would include northern NSW. You could also have a separate Western Sydney.
Up north, Queensland could be subdivided into Gold Coast; Queensland (south) & North Qld. All for discussion’s sake, of course!
January 10th 2010 @ 2:17am
westy said | January 10th 2010 @ 2:17am | Report comment
As Harold is so overwhelmed by social responsibility he can contract some local Melbourne Indian lads.. The franchise wanted more than ten foreign players. The only reason the ARU gave them ten until 2015 was in an effort to make them competitive. There are some who forsee this exemption being extended beyond 2015. If it does this will only confirm the SA RU preident’s declared view that it is an international franchise based in melbourne.
There is nothing wrong with this but the rose coloured glasses in which some view the team is unrealistic. Mitchell knows in Melbourne the team has to be relatively successful and quickly. It will receive the lowest ARU grant and is privately owned .
January 10th 2010 @ 2:29am
rugbyfuture said | January 10th 2010 @ 2:29am | Report comment
we arent talking about resisting good players though, im simply saying that if they were to choose between 2 players of equal standing they should go for the one who would help the game appeal to a broader audience.
The team won’t get an extension, im pretty sure of that. it will however develop a broader player base for the australian franchises, also we don’t know whther the much debated third tier will be in place by then, in which case it is most likely there will be some good players from australia, or rather enough. I wouldn’t listen to hoskins or whatever his name is, from what i understand he is as hated by the south africa Rugby community as our own JON, if not worse.
Mitchell is a smart man with media and big business links (as well as money), he will find a way to grow this team to be as competitive as possible within the limitations of australian rugby
January 10th 2010 @ 2:30am
rugbyfuture said | January 10th 2010 @ 2:30am | Report comment
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/rebels-looking-at-nrl-figure-for-top-job-20100109-lzus.html
Rebels looking at NRL figure for top job
JOSH RAKIC
January 10, 2010
A HIGH-PROFILE NRL figure and a renowned Sydney businessman are the frontrunners to head the new Melbourne Rebels Super 15 franchise.
The Rebels board will meet for the second time this week since winning approval for the 15th franchise licence, and will move to appoint a chief executive officer almost immediately with a view to announcing its decision within a fortnight. The Sun–Herald understands of the four candidates, those with the inside running are a well-known Sydney personality and a public face for the NRL.
Rebels officials are keeping tight-lipped about the appointment but are also said to have officially offered World Cup-winning Wallabies coach Rod Macqueen the head coaching role.
“The job’s his if he wants it,” a source told The Sun–Herald.
Macqueen has been heavily involved with the Victorian Rugby Union’s bid and was always certain to retain a role with the fledgling franchise. He’s said to be mulling over the option of returning to full-time coaching after ending his highly successful stint with the Wallabies nine years ago.
The Rebels hope to have both positions secured by week’s end to begin a recruitment drive, which The Sun-Herald understands will feature attempts to lure several NRL international back-line stars to Melbourne.
The ARU’s decision to prevent the franchise from officially signing any Australian Super 14 players before the end of the 2010 Super 14 season will significantly hamper its recruiting ability for 2011.The decision has also frustrated other Australian Super 14 franchises, who believe it will affect them having a secure roster beyond the current season because off-contract players will wait to see if they can secure a better deal with Melbourne.
Australian captain Rocky Elsom and vice-captain Berrick Barnes are two players off-contract at the end of the season, meaning the Brumbies and Waratahs won’t be able to negotiate new deals officially until June should the pair wish to consider the move to Melbourne.
Meanwhile, Lote Tuqiri hasn’t ruled out a move to French rugby after admitting to England’s Guardian newspaper that he might not return to play NRL with the Wests Tigers this year.
Tuqiri, who is playing for English rugby side Leicester, admitted his interest in French rugby remains. ” It’s probably a bit warmer down there. More so Toulon,” Tuqiri said.
——————————————————————————————————————————————————
looks like theyd rather import leagueys and then possibly add o/s players and a forward pack of local boys, so beyond anything it might be a decent and more australian team than most seem to think, it was never going to be a fully representative side as this is proffesional tier, not rep state, but is importing from codes rather than countries the answer?
I know i posted this in two spots by the way
January 10th 2010 @ 1:48pm
Bay35Pablo said | January 10th 2010 @ 1:48pm | Report comment
Mitchell’s article in the SMH indicates they are announcing the coach this coming week, and he has clearly been locked in. Word is it is MacQueen, but we’ll see whether the usual rumour mill can be relied on or not. Interesting talk of Cheika has died so quickly with Evans walking away.
January 10th 2010 @ 1:57pm
rugbyfuture said | January 10th 2010 @ 1:57pm | Report comment
cheika was always a possibility and not a definite, Macqueen was put forward as an administrator at first because he came out and said he’d help, although no one was sure whether that meant coaching or not. Evans was probably talking crap up like he supposedly does. I’m more interested in what high profile “face of the NRL” figure they’re trying to poach to administrate. and whether he’d be able to suitably spot people who can cross codes and who cant, especially if they are targeting a bunch of backline leagueys.
January 10th 2010 @ 2:00pm
Bay35Pablo said | January 10th 2010 @ 2:00pm | Report comment
RF, depends what role. An AFL admin bloke wouldbe better in some respects for Melbourne. For recruitment a mungo might help.
If you believe the media up to a few weeks ago, they had just about put the sign on Cheika’s office. But that just goes to show the quality of the media at times.
January 10th 2010 @ 2:07pm
rugbyfuture said | January 10th 2010 @ 2:07pm | Report comment
they already have a stakeholder from the AFL harold said in his article about a guy called ross oakley from the AFL who supposedly turned the VFL into the AFL (thats a big thing then) you’re right about the coach because he also said in his article
“The people around the team are hungry for success. It’s been their way of life. The new coach, to be announced during the coming week, asked me as chairman, “Any instructions?”
“Yes,” I said. “Just make sure we win more often than not. This city is used to winning – everything.”"
so its definitely coming and they are obviously moving extremely fast.
yes to the media statement, i always find it fun to follow the SMH, news ltd and a tertiary, web based party to try and extract the facts from fiction.
January 10th 2010 @ 2:11pm
Bay35Pablo said | January 10th 2010 @ 2:11pm | Report comment
If it is MacQueen, that will get through to even some Melbournites, and be as much good free publicity as GWS signing Sheedy. Anyone with even half an idea abut rugby should know he has been Australia’s best coach of the professional era and led them to the RWC, and if they don’t it will get their attention when they are told this.
January 10th 2010 @ 2:13pm
rugbyfuture said | January 10th 2010 @ 2:13pm | Report comment
true. and you would think Harold mitchell would know publicity
January 10th 2010 @ 2:10pm
rugbyfuture said | January 10th 2010 @ 2:10pm | Report comment
also just looked at the other names and found it tom hafey and mike brady were both big AFL associated names
January 10th 2010 @ 2:16pm
Sam el Perro said | January 10th 2010 @ 2:16pm | Report comment
If the Rebels hope to attract some of the Storm’s supporters, and despite what might be considered modest numbers in AFL mad Victoria, there is a loyal base perhaps worth tapping, they will not get very far if they refer to them as “Mungos”. If we are going to be serious about Melbourne succeeding with a Super Rugby team it is time to let go of the old animosities (right down to the name calling, which is quite infantile). If we deride League players, on one hand, it looks pretty silly when later we sign them for the Rebels.
Just saying.
January 10th 2010 @ 4:19pm
Bay35Pablo said | January 10th 2010 @ 4:19pm | Report comment
Sam, I use the term with the affection of a died in the wool Balmain Tigers fan. I was going to say Leaguey, but mungo sounded better.
January 10th 2010 @ 10:49pm
Sam el Perro said | January 10th 2010 @ 10:49pm | Report comment
Point taken.
January 10th 2010 @ 2:13pm
Sam el Perro said | January 10th 2010 @ 2:13pm | Report comment
“Look at a school rugby game in Australia and you are only likely to see whites, islanders and maybe the occasional Aboriginal.”
Aboriginal is an adjective. The noun is “aborigine”.
January 10th 2010 @ 2:15pm
rugbyfuture said | January 10th 2010 @ 2:15pm | Report comment
i’ll have to talk to the editors about this! haha
January 10th 2010 @ 2:23pm
Bay35Pablo said | January 10th 2010 @ 2:23pm | Report comment
I think that is a bit of a sweeping statement, although it touches on some issues in rugby and its base. Which schools is he talking about firstly?
There are plenty of Greeks, Italians, and wastern European background people that play rugby. And we hardly have that many Hispanics or Africans in Australia. Having aid that, with the Sudanese refugees we can’t let AFL steal all of them!!!!
Yes you don’t see many Asians playing rugby, but as a sweeping statement they don’t play much team sport. Other sports like cricket and football have queried why they don’t seemt o have more players from those backgrounds, especially given cricket’s prominence in India.
January 10th 2010 @ 2:35pm
rugbyfuture said | January 10th 2010 @ 2:35pm | Report comment
CAS specifically, Greeks and italians are so assimilated that i didn’t really consider them a seperate culture. the sudanese body type doesnt quite go with Rugby, Nigerian, southern africa and ghanain immigrants would maybe be suited better, and the are coming more.
we had compulsory co curricula at my school and no other asians played rugby, which at the more academic school of the CAS is a large proportion of the grade, you’d have to start looking at third or fourth generation chinese, japanese and korean soon though. My family for instance have been in australia for four gens.
January 10th 2010 @ 3:47pm
Bay35Pablo said | January 10th 2010 @ 3:47pm | Report comment
RF, I don’t know. Some of those Sudanese boys get pretty tall. If they can play ruckman in AFL, I say get some head gear on them and introduce them to the distinctive experience of sticking their head into a scrum between a prop and a hooker’s hips!!!
January 14th 2010 @ 11:06pm
Working Class Rugger said | January 14th 2010 @ 11:06pm | Report comment
I’ve played Rugby with a couple of Indians and against several Asians. They are out there but not in great number’s.
January 10th 2010 @ 3:16pm
sheek said | January 10th 2010 @ 3:16pm | Report comment
Or should that be original, or first Australians….. ?
January 10th 2010 @ 2:25pm
ROY said | January 10th 2010 @ 2:25pm | Report comment
Barry
Do they have states and territories in NZ and South Africa? Never heard the comp referred to as the “toughest states and territoris competition in the world” either.. great input champ!
January 10th 2010 @ 2:33pm
Barry Q. said | January 10th 2010 @ 2:33pm | Report comment
We live in Australia not NZ or SA. What makes it more valid to use a NZ or SA phrase than the Australian one? The obvious reason is that by using “province” RU supporters can feel a bit smugger by thinking it shows their wider education and loftier position.
January 10th 2010 @ 2:43pm
rugbyfuture said | January 10th 2010 @ 2:43pm | Report comment
if you think the word province being used is a sign of showing off higher education, you have a real problem. The super rugby competition is classified as a provincial competition and the merits of using the word provincial as the saying is that it is all encompassing to the south african, new zealand and australian teams playing in the whole competition. the adjective doesnt fit in with the definition either.
also the Brumbies (and waratahs because of them) represent rugby provinces because the brumbies cover southern NSW rather than the states.
January 10th 2010 @ 3:19pm
sheek said | January 10th 2010 @ 3:19pm | Report comment
Calling our teams provinces has nothing to do with smugness or feelings of intellectual superiority.
Please read an earlier reply of mine to your comments about the use of the name province.
January 11th 2010 @ 1:58pm
Dogs Of War said | January 11th 2010 @ 1:58pm | Report comment
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/nrl/brian-waldron-defects-to-super-15-franchise-melbourne-rebels/story-e6frexnr-1225818097796
MELBOURNE Storm NRL chief executive Brian Waldron has defected to the new Super 15 rugby union franchise Melbourne Rebels.
The Rebels, who are set to join an expanded competition in 2011, lured Waldron across after five years in his position with the NRL champions.
The Storm staff, coaches and players were told of his departure today.
Waldron’s position at the Storm is to be filled by the club’s former chief operating officer Matt Hanson, who takes over the position, effective immediately.
Hanson was a former chief financial officer of the St Kilda Football Club, and general manager finance and administration at Etihad Stadium.
__________________
Bit of a shock. He does know the market though. Storm still in good hands with Matt Hanson.
January 11th 2010 @ 2:03pm
Foxy Loxy said | January 11th 2010 @ 2:03pm | Report comment
Funny using the words “has defected” given he had previously “defected” from AFL to the NRL. I guess it shows how myopic the Telegraph is when it comes to rugby league.
January 11th 2010 @ 2:06pm
Brett McKay said | January 11th 2010 @ 2:06pm | Report comment
Foxy, I think the words have actually come from the AAP wire story. I’ve just seen the artcile on the ABC News site, and even they ran with “defected” and “poached”…
January 11th 2010 @ 2:14pm
Foxy Loxy said | January 11th 2010 @ 2:14pm | Report comment
They are all doing it. Adds to the percetion that the NRL’s top stars & admin are jumping ship and/or being picked off. But when you are just office staff, big deal. Waldron was in the AFL. Ian Robson is in AFL but once was CEO of the NZ Warriors and I think even Super League for a while. Buckly runs FFA but was in the AFL. JON went from ARU to FFA and back. Todd Greenberg ran ANZ Stadium before the Bulldogs.
I don’t see Waldron as some sort of a pied piper that will lead to Inglis and other Storm players crossing to the Rebels. A coach could do it, but not a CEO. Maybe corporates will follow, but then the same could have been said when Waldron went from his AFL club to the Storm.
All it shows is that footballers and administrators in all codes have little or no loyalty to any club or code.
January 11th 2010 @ 2:17pm
rugbyfuture said | January 11th 2010 @ 2:17pm | Report comment
it’s all money, they probably poached him for his set up of the club over the last few years, and think he can emulate it with the rebels.
January 11th 2010 @ 2:19pm
Dogs Of War said | January 11th 2010 @ 2:19pm | Report comment
He never setup the club. He has been in charge for the last 5 years, to try and get a different approach in workign in the locals. Really it was always a new stadium that was needed.
January 11th 2010 @ 2:22pm
rugbyfuture said | January 11th 2010 @ 2:22pm | Report comment
but he’s done a good job at managing the club over the past five years, i meant more, the way he ran things in terms of setup, if he specialised at working in the locals he’d be a good addition to the rebels. the new stadium will do wonders for all three codes
January 11th 2010 @ 2:22pm
Jay said | January 11th 2010 @ 2:22pm | Report comment
his comments when the melbourne franchise won entry to the expanded s.15′s seemed a little odd looking back at it now. He said it was great for melbourne to have another non-afl winter code… maybe he all ready had a vested interest in the rebels then.
but no biggie, im sure the storm will move on from this.. their major hurdle is trying to get regular FTA coverage.