ARU must help Rebels for Aussie rugby’s sake
By sheek, 27 Feb 2010 The Crowd is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- Australian rugby, John ONeill, Rugby Union
106 Have your say
Here’s a novel thought: ARU supremo John O’Neill calls the five Australian provinces together for a high level summit meeting. Each province arrives with their CEO, head coach, operations officer and financial officer, to be joined by the ARU’s CEO, high performance manager, rugby operations manager, financial manager and national coach.
That’s 25 people to nut out the future direction of professional Australian rugby.
O’Neill tells the assembled head-honchos that they must co-operate for the benefit of Australian rugby, and put the interests of the game above any self-interests.
O’Neill further tells the gathering the fiasco of 2005-06 when the WA Force entered the super rugby comp, must be avoided, never to be repeated.
Back then the Queensland Reds suffered disproportionately to the other Aussie franchises, losing more players to the Force than anyone else. With disastrous consequences to their immediate and short-term well-being.
The ARU then under the stewardship of Gary Flowers did little to nothing to prevent the blood-letting suffered by the Reds.
O’Neill tells the gathering the existing 4 provinces must all give a little, more or less in proportion with their respective strength, to help the Rebels in the short-term.
For example, the ACT Brumbies have 3 top quality flyhalfs. Only one can be in the run-on XV at any one time. While a second might come off the bench. Which means the third cools his heels in the stands.
This third player could be lent to the Rebels for two seasons, where presumedly he would benefit enormously with plenty of on-field time. He would then return to the Brumbies a much better player.
Already in both New Zealand and South Africa we see this kind of co-operation that is non-existent in Australia. NZ provinces regularly loan players from a position where they might be strong to another province that has a paucity in a particular position.
In SA this year, Northern Transvaal lent a lock to Natal to help through a critical injury crisis in this position.
Obviously, transfers/loans would have to be on a volunteer basis. No-one can be forced to relocate against their wishes. But surely, there must be young Australians with a thirst for adventure, and a desire to be part of something new, a frontier spirit.
Furthermore, the gathering itself would need to work through the details of how they would manage this situation.
Unfortunately in Australia, the provinces behave like scorched outback farmers and their water – it’s a precious commodity, and there’s too little of it, so they horde it for themselves.
There’s a saying that the secret to a winning team is when the sum of the whole is greater than its individual parts. This means everyone working together for the greater good of the whole rather than focusing on themselves.
Now that’s a novel thought: putting country before self!
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.
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? (201)
- Will South African rugby force a Super 21 by 2018? (173)
- The real story of how John O’Neill turned Manchester City down (70)
- Dan Parks and the unsolved questions of expat rugby (65)
- Australian teams at Super disadvantage (58)
- Pocock set to be named new Force skipper (56)
- Can the ‘Tahs win the battle after losing the Waugh? (51)
- Wales show Southern Hemisphere how to play running rugby (29)
- What opening matches of Six Nations taught us (19)
- 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:
- Australian rugby, John ONeill, Rugby Union


Sharminator said | February 27th 2010 @ 3:12am | Report comment
I agree completely.
Australia actually needs to implement a transfer system similar to New Zealand with a draft or transfer system … the situation you mentioned is absurd with ACT having 3 quality fly halves … while the force have none and had to sign a Saffer in pretorius to cover that gap. This is particularly galling considering that no one has really stood up to claim the fly half spot since Larkham left (Gitaeu, Barnes, Cooper … none have made the spot their own).
The same goes with props … last year NSW had Robinson, Baxter, Kepoku, and Dunning, I realise the latter two were injured for part of the season … but still 4 wallaby props .. when other teams were lacking in those positions .. the Force signed an NZer to cover prop. It seems a little silly.
NSW also had the 2 incumbant Wallaby halfbacks last season (by the way Im not anti-NSW … Im a NSW supporter! they are just the examples that first come to mind)
I dont think the provinces will ever “agree” to let their players go .. instead as in NZ, provinces should come up with a list of their signed players each season and the positions they play, with the ARU in consultation with the national coach and high performance manager, having the right to draft players to another province if they think it is better for the game.
Perhaps there should also be a clause allowing players to submit for the draft, if they believe they are being underutilised or not getting the game time they wish.
It would be complicated .. and the teams would not like it .. and for it to work maybe all Aussie Super 12 players would need to be centrally contracted ….
But … I think Australian rugby would benefit from this. We dont gain anything with 1 or 2 very strong stacked teams .. and then poor teams like Qld have been the last few years.
Bay35Pablo said | February 27th 2010 @ 8:34am | Report comment
In NSW we also have 2 top hookers and a gun junior hooker – TPN, Freier & Fitzpatrick
Rob said | February 27th 2010 @ 7:17am | Report comment
Probably not relevant and I can’t vouch for the accuracy of this but about 7 years ago I was told by a former Wallaby who was in the role of assistant coach to a Syd. club that of the 4 grade and 4 colts sides at Syd. Uni, 7 of the 8 half backs had played Aust. Schoolboys. Bit of a waste.
I think McQueen is astute enough to assemble a sound squad given his history with the Brumbies and their recruitment of discards. His problem will be in getting high profile players .
From the left field, while also looking at established players McQueen should look at his recruitment as if he were head coach of a club.To avoid costs to individuals the Rebels run training nights and then trials in each of the main rugby cities.Run it as if he were coaching Warringah for example. Players could turn up looking for a game. Sounds different but it wouldn’t be long before any quality that had been missed by existing structures was discovered. If the Brumbies hadn’t been around with McQueen in charge I wonder where the likes of George Smith would be today?
Pete said | February 27th 2010 @ 7:29am | Report comment
Something like this needs to be implemented. Its incredibly short sighted if its not. Putting aside the warm fuzzy feeling of doing it for the good of the country there may be some personal benefits for memebers in the other teams do help the Rebels. Who would have though 4 years ago that Link, the then Tahs coach, would now be at the Reds or that Greg Harris (former Western Force CEO) would be the general manager at the Rebels? As professionalism develops further there will be a greater amount of transfer between clubs at a player, coaching and even administration level. By denying the the Rebels the change to do well now, they may in fact be hamstringing themselves for their future job…
But ultimately, if the Rebels do well, the Wallabies will do well. If the Wallabies do well then more people watch Rugby and this can only be good for all the Australian teams.
Red Rooster said | February 27th 2010 @ 8:51am | Report comment
Pete – not sure of your logic about the Wallabies doing well. They won a world Cup when there was only two provinces, another when the Brumbies came on board and came close in 03 – been all downhill since then for the Wallabies as the talent has been disipated with the intor of the Force and will be the same with the Rebels
Pete said | February 27th 2010 @ 10:24am | Report comment
Red, I understand your argument that spreading the talent will lead to mediocre results for Australia, but to date we have concentrated talent at the Tahs and they are yet to win. I think there will be some pain with the addition of the Rebels, but it doesn’t have to be as painful as when the Force came on board, but we need to broaden the talent pool for the good of the Wallabies. We need to look beyond the the next few years for the Australian Super Rugby teams. Victoria is an important market and I subscribe to the Allan Jones ‘Gucci factor’ when it comes to Rugby… “Long after the price has been paid, the quality remains” and that is what Australian Rugby needs… more quality.
Red Rooster said | February 27th 2010 @ 2:17pm | Report comment
Thats OK but we should’nt criticise the teams if they dont win as they are being regulated away from being the best the can for the good of the Rebels. If all the talent lives in NSW and QLD then why should they have to hand it over. A squad wins a title and your depth and bench is critical. The AFL deliberatlely use the draft to give all the clubs a chance over time. Everyone understands this and they still support their clubs no matter what the ladder position- the s14 teams dont get the same latitude as the posts on this site clearly indicate.
Ora said | February 27th 2010 @ 7:48am | Report comment
It’s surprising that there is not some formal agreement between the cklubs or even informal. Thankfully in New Zealand we have the draft system which is also backed by the provinces that make up the Super 14 Franchises, If it wasn’t for the provinces offering their support some of the drafting in NZ wouldn’t be taking place. Also in that same vein it goes both ways with the S14 teams allowing players to stay with their home unions which a few years ago was unheard of.
Zac Guildford a proud Hawkes Bay lad has signed on with the Crusaders on the condition he be able to stay with his Provincial union Hawke bay who are part of the Hurricanes franchise, Craig Clarke a Taranaki Stalwart playing for the Chiefs under similar circumstances that he continue to be allowed to play for Taranaki another Hurricanes home union instead of moving to one of the Chiefs home unions, Counties Manukau, Waikato or the Bay of Plenty
In New Zealand all the provinces are aligned with a Super team and this helps greatly when teams are selected as the franchise generally has first pick of any talent in their region, those that aren’t selected go into the draft. Obviously at times deals like that with Zac Guildford are penned in the transfer window. So its a win win situation for New Zealand where the cornerstone of NZ rugby the provinces are no longer raped and pillaged of their talent and loyalty to the provinces is once again a key element in the revival of what was a stagnant rugby culture in New Zealand
BigAl said | February 27th 2010 @ 8:12am | Report comment
Digesting this article and the responses so far, as a Victorian & a rugby neophyte I would have a question for those in the know.
This new Rebels team, is it something that us locals should get passionate about or is it just another team in a feeder competion ?
Bay35Pablo said | February 27th 2010 @ 8:37am | Report comment
BigAl, the Rebels will be competing in the Super 14 which is regarded as the best provincial rugby competition in the world (province being a region or state, so above clubs in the hierachy). To the extent it is a “feeder” competition, it is feeding players into the Wallabies, the national team. So as much a feeder as the AFL is for international rules!
BigAl said | February 27th 2010 @ 8:54am | Report comment
So . . . I should care far more about the Rebels fortunes than the Wallabies !
Bay35Pablo said | February 27th 2010 @ 9:04am | Report comment
Both Big Al, both!! Just like a Melbourne Victory fan cares about both his club and the Socceroos. Or a Brisbane Broncos fan cares about the Broncos, the Maroons and the Kangaroos.
With no disrespect to AFL, it just doesn’t have that extra provincial/international level above the AFL clubs. This is probably why there is such passion for their clubs, as it really is everything in the sport.
As a rugby fan, at least I have some solace when Eastwood or the Waratahs do poorly – “We can still smash the All Blacks in the Bledisloe, or the Poms on tour!!!”
Ora said | February 27th 2010 @ 9:11am | Report comment
Been a while since you guys smashed the All Blacks Bay but I fully understand your sentiment and I agree with you completely.
As for theose Poms who doesn’t love touching them up and giving them something else to whige about
Ora said | February 27th 2010 @ 8:22am | Report comment
It’s surprising that there is not some formal agreement between the clubs or even informal. Thankfully in New Zealand we have the draft system which is also backed by the provinces that make up the Super 14 Franchises, If it wasn’t for the provinces offering their support some of the drafting in NZ wouldn’t be taking place. Also in that same vein it goes both ways with the S14 teams allowing players to stay with their home unions which a few years ago was unheard of.
Zac Guildford a proud Hawkes Bay lad has signed on with the Crusaders on the condition he be able to stay with his Provincial union Hawke bay who are part of the Hurricanes franchise, Craig Clarke a Taranaki Stalwart playing for the Chiefs under similar circumstances that he continue to be allowed to play for Taranaki another Hurricanes home union instead of moving to one of the Chiefs home unions, Counties Manukau, Waikato or the Bay of Plenty
In New Zealand all the provinces are aligned with a Super team and this helps greatly when teams are selected as the franchise generally has first pick of any talent in their region, those that aren’t selected go into the draft. Obviously at times deals like that with Zac Guildford are penned in the transfer window. So its a win win situation for New Zealand where the cornerstone of NZ rugby the provinces are no longer raped and pillaged of their talent and loyalty to the provinces is once again a key element in the revival of what was a stagnant rugby culture in New Zealand
Bay35Pablo said | February 27th 2010 @ 8:41am | Report comment
Sheek, this would involve forethought and compromise, which the Australia rugby adminsitrators seem to lack.
Even if we didn’t follow your system, I don’t know why they didn’t bring in a system along the following lines:
1. Rebels only allowed to take at most 3 players from a full squad, and perhaps another 3 from the academy for each other team. Only players coming off contract. However, this might be seen as a restraint of trade of more than that were off contract (although then the Rebels just have to pick carefully and the players know someone else might get it if they don’t sign quickly).
2. Existing sides to get a right of last offer. If the Rebel’s threw cash at the player to get them, their existing team might offer them a longer contract or more cash to resign them. However, if the player really wanted to move to the Rebels, it won’t matter what they offer.
Red Rooster said | February 27th 2010 @ 8:56am | Report comment
While people are looking for a more eqitable distribution of talent which logically will lead to mediocrity (another arguement). Why have there not been greater calls for the same distribution process at the club levels. Syd Uni dominates with s 14 players sitting on their bench and now Barnes joining their ranks. Explain to me why we have to have a socialist system at s14 and a capitalist approach at the club level. If the third tier is meant to feed in the second then someone please explain this dysfunction!
Ora said | February 27th 2010 @ 12:38pm | Report comment
I don’t agree that the spread of talent will lead to mediocrity.
The New Zealand teams have a talent distribution and last year while they may not have won the tournament we still had three teams qualify for the finals. Of course if we just stacked teams full of talent we could have NZA and the All Blacks pretty much playing under the guise of either the Crusaders or Chiefs and what good is that of r the competition when you know every year that there is only three or four teasms with a realistic chance of winning the whole thing. Do we want to go down the same path is the EPL???
I believe the distribution of talent will only help Australian rugby improve especially if you have the best in each position playing against each other. It demands that they all lift their game and keep each other on their toes. Eventually Australian rugby will be better for it. If you continue to stack teams it takes away from the other franchises and there really is no point being awarded that extra team.
Red Rooster said | February 27th 2010 @ 2:20pm | Report comment
If it is going to be so effective then why dont we make club rugby do the same – ie spread the professional players around. Do this and you watch the establishment scream – please explain the difference in outcome if the objective is to improve Australian rugby
sheek said | February 27th 2010 @ 9:08am | Report comment
Bay,
As mentioned by others, & myself on previous occasions, we ought to have both a draft/transfer & salary cap. I know when we discussed this privately, you argued it would be contested in court.
Yet some sports have the draft & salary cap (in good ol’ USA of all places) & it seems to work. They key in any system must be for the benefit of the majority.
One idea I had, along your point one, is that each of the 4 provinces give up a squad (top 22) forward & back, plus another roster (top 30) forward & back. That’s 16 players (8 forwards & 8 backs) that the other 4 provinces would concede.
Each of those provinces loses 4 players, while the Rebels gain 16 players. Surely, that is fair & reasonable???
It makes no sense to me whatsoever that the ARU would introudce a 5th super rugby province without a business working plan to make sure that new province succeeded. Obviously, the Rebels will need quality players to be competitive in their earlier years.
They won’t be plucking these players out of thin air…..
Why would you want to introduce a new team without a working plan to help them in their early years….. ???
Onceinawhile said | February 27th 2010 @ 10:11am | Report comment
How competitive do they want to be? would they be happy if they finish 10th, but QLD and Force finish 11th and 12th, look at the Force, that’s exactly why they need to contract the best they can, you could lose 6-8 top line players to injury. I can’t see how weakening the other teams to enhance the Rebels is good for OZ rugby. From what I have seen over the years is the country that has the top 1-4 S14 teams has translated that into Tri nations sucess, Bulls had the majority of the test team, Crusaders/Blues have at times been pretty much the All Blacks same goes for the Brumbies and Wallabies, I think spreading the talent is ideal for a domestic comp, but the reality is the top teams are top because they have the best players or bring out the best in what they have, this won’t change.
Five even teams filling up the middle of the table does’nt do much for me.
sheek said | February 27th 2010 @ 10:34am | Report comment
Onceinawhile,
It’s not a numbers game, & if you think like that, then you’re always asking for trouble. It’s about spreading already thin resources even more thinly, but evenly.
It’s crazy to say for example, we want the Rebels to finish 10th, or whatever. Firstly, we want them to be competitive. It’s also about perception. A team finishing 14th can be happy with that, providing it was the best anyone thoght they could do. Another team might finish 4th, but the perception could be they had a team good enough to win.
Introducing the Rebels is good for Australia. And very necessay. We need to experience the immediate to short-term pain, in order to enjoy the long-term benefits of having 5 fully professional provinces.
I don’t agree that super rugby finishing places is directly linked to national team success. There are many factors involved here. Sometimes most of the talent is with one or two provinces, at other times it might be spread between 3 or 4 provinces. It varies over time.
Five even teams filling up the middle of the (SR) table mightn’t do much for you – but it could do the world of good for the Wallabies….. !
Onceinawhile said | February 27th 2010 @ 11:34am | Report comment
Fair enough, I’m not against the Rebels by the way, I’m excited, in my ideal world they unveil 30 previously untested at S14,talented rugby players to our landscape, either way it’s still 28-30 new professional spots in Oz
Red Rooster said | February 27th 2010 @ 2:25pm | Report comment
If you dont have a problem with the Super finishing places then why does everyone spend so much time writing about it. If we are only trying to create warm-up games and selection trials for the Wallabies then we should stress a little less. If we are really getting into the spirit of egality then the ARU should spread its topped up contracted players evenly amongst the teams. They sit heavily in the Tahs and Brumbies squads at the moment – this would also be in the spirit of fairness
sheek said | February 27th 2010 @ 5:20pm | Report comment
Red Rooster,
Developing more players capable of playing & winning for the Wallabies is the priority. Of course, where our provincial teams finish is important.
But in the scheme of things, right now, it’s not the pressing priority……….