ARU boss O’Neill defends Aussie conference
By Adrian Warren, 23 May 2012
- Tagged:
- Australian Rugby Union, John ONeill, Rugby Union, Super Rugby, Waratahs
Related coverage
Australian Rugby Union boss John O’Neill says recent results scupper the suggestion that Super Rugby’s Australian conference is weak and insists it wouldn’t be a big blow if only one local team make the finals.
With five rounds remaining, the third-placed Brumbies are the only Australian side presently stationed in the top six.
Successive bonus-point wins have lifted defending champions Queensland up to eighth, five points off sixth spot and eight behind the Brumbies.
A Reds’ loss to the Brumbies in Canberra on Saturday would almost certainly seal the conference title for the ACT-based franchise and condemn Australia to just one finalist.
“It (just one Australian finalist) is not a big blow, it’s a tough competition,” O’Neill told reporters on Tuesday.
“I’d always prefer to see two Australian teams in the finals. Certainly the winner of the conference goes through automatically. It will be quite a tight finish, I think.”
O’Neill dubbed the previously unfancied Brumbies as the surprise packet.
“You look at what their odds were at the start of the season, you wouldn’t have necessarily picked them to be heading the conference, ” O’Neill said.
“But they have played a very good style of rugby and they have done the simple things really well.
“All credit to both (head coach) Jake White and (forwards coach) Laurie Fisher and the players.
“The Reds are coming home with a wet sail and it’s great to see Quade Cooper back and Will Genia is playing superbly and some new talent like (Brumbies openside flanker) Michael Hooper has emerged.
“The people who have been arguing or saying that the Australian conference is weak, I don’t think recent results, with Australian teams beating New Zealand and South African teams, really supports that notion.”
The Rebels, Waratahs and Force all appear to be out of the finals running.
O’Neill was reluctant to be drawn on the fortunes of the underachieving Waratahs, who have won just four out of 12 games and languish in 11th spot, one place below the Rebels and two above the Force.
“The Waratahs have had a lot of injuries, that’s disrupted their campaign,” O’Neill said.
© AAP 2013
Passionate about your union? Then sign up to The Roar's brand new daily union email, delivering Roaring articles directly to you day-in, day-out. You'll love it!
Click here to join now!
- Explore:
- Australian Rugby Union, John ONeill, Rugby Union, Super Rugby, Waratahs
May 23rd 2012 @ 7:09am
Emric said | May 23rd 2012 @ 7:09am | Report comment
Speaking from the point of view of a rugby loving Kiwi.
Rugby in Australia is going from strength to strength the more teams Australia has in super Rugby the more top players its had the ability to find.
It has been proved time and time again beyond a doubt that any team can be any other on the day. This is rugby.
May 23rd 2012 @ 9:24am
kingplaymaker said | May 23rd 2012 @ 9:24am | Report comment
Emric it’s interesting how rarely in any country a player gets into Super rugby before the age of 20 and many significant talents only appear at 21 and above. This in my opinion is because they face a logjam of more established players ahead of them and have to wait, essentially because there aren’t enough teams for the talent available.
The interesting theoretical question is how many teams each country could have, if the talent was evenly distributed, every talented player given an opportunity because of more places, fewer lost abroad and to league, and so forth.
May 24th 2012 @ 10:14am
Thurl said | May 24th 2012 @ 10:14am | Report comment
KPM, I think your opinion is a bit general and it would be interesting to put some analysis around it. You say there aren’t enough teams for the talent available, yet look at the Blues. Where are talented 20 year olds that should step into the injury dissapaited logjam there? There aren’t any. For all the outstanding talent that you tell us resides in South Auckland, how many of the Blues players would command a place in any other NZ franchaise.
These logjam players as you call them are more experienced and better players, so filling up extra teams with 20 year olds only lowers the standard of the competition . Who wants to watch a comp where only 50 or 60% of the players are any good.
Don’t forget, in other countries there is a pathway forward for these talented young players. Its called the ITM cup in NZ and in Sth Africa its the Curry Cup. If you want to see the standard of Australian rugby improve, perhaps this is the model. Remember, Aust only makes up a third of the Super 15. No one outside Australia wants to watch a “Not So Super 20″
May 24th 2012 @ 10:29am
kingplaymaker said | May 24th 2012 @ 10:29am | Report comment
Thurl the reason there aren’t impressive young players to step in to a jammed up team is that they have already gone to the NRL, abroad or given up long ago. By they time a freak run of injuries occurs the young players have already gone somewhere they can get a career. Jarrod Saffy for example said he left the Waratahs academy because it was too full and an NRL team offered him a contract and indeed the number of current NRL players who were in the Waratahs academy is apparently considerable.
The logjam players are no better than the 20 year-olds, just older. Both logjammers and 20 year olds should be playing in different franchises, as you’re beginning to see in Australia with the new franchises. Young players such as Kuridrani, Carter, Fardy, Hooper, Neville are playing because they now have the opportunities they didn’t before.
The same could doubtless be said in New Zealand. Probably it is only using some of its playing talent, the older ones and the ones who didn’t go to the NRL and abroad because they couldn’t get past the logjam.
So more teams would lead to a considerable unearthing of talent in all countries.
May 24th 2012 @ 12:38pm
Thurl said | May 24th 2012 @ 12:38pm | Report comment
“…The same could doubtless be said in New Zealand. Probably it is only using some of its playing talent, the older ones and the ones who didn’t go to the NRL and abroad because they couldn’t get past the logjam.
So more teams would lead to a considerable unearthing of talent in all countries….”
Couldn’t disagree more. Unless you can name the players who have gone to the NRL or at least put a number on it, I think you’re making it up.
I have no idea of what happens at the Warratahs academy but when you continue to use words like apparently, I’m not so sure you have an accurate idea either.
The situation in Auckland may be much different. Granted the area is donkey deep in AFL and NRL scouts with even a report recently of the AFL signing a pair of 14 year old twins out of a South Auckland secondary school. However, that’s not to say that the Blues franchise is leeching players thick and fast. There are 8 development areas in the Blues franchise area with each area having an under 18 team. The aim is to now have an under 16 development team in each area
Breaking the franchise into 8 development areas aims to increase the numbers and broaden the base of youngsters who can continue to pursue their aim of a professional rugby career. I think that you will agree that the traditional selection model only squeezes a small number of players out at the end. Many youngsters fall away if they don’t get through the rep selection choke points in their teenage years. Then what do they do. This is probably where many turn to league.
Compounding this problem is that junior rep selection is for the now, not necessarily for the future. Lots of players get overlooked, but they might be the ones wanted later on at a Super Rugby level.
The pathway to developing these players is not to thrown them into an increased number of franchises. To date Liaki Moli, Gareth Anscombe, Angus Ta’avao and Steven Luatua have come through this academy process, hardly players who have set the competition alight. More players will follow, but at 20 or 21, most will not be mature enough cut it at S15 level. Remember the academy doesn’t necessarily want the dominant midfield back who bashes his way past smaller rivals or the whizzbang flanker of the day. They were looking for players with broad skill levels, strong training and work ethic principles.
To me the pathway to develop and retain more promising players is to push them into club and ITM competitions, not S15 teams
May 24th 2012 @ 1:05pm
kingplaymaker said | May 24th 2012 @ 1:05pm | Report comment
But in the NRL they are able to field 18 year olds who do very well, so why shouldn’t a player be mature enough at 20 or 21?
It is true that some players are late developers, but most of these will just go to league. Think of the number of players who won’t make it.
Jordan Rapana in Australia was from a rugby background but went to league because the Reds didn’t move him fast enough. Kuridrani hung around in the Reds academy for two years before being picked up by White. Waerea-Hargeaves got nowhere in the Waratahs academy. I can’t remember the details, but someone on here recently named 5 kiwi internationals who played for the team in the NRL only two years after they had left the Waratahs academy.
Many players are ready at 18 to play elite rugby. The fact that so few are seen means there is a logjam ahead and that means these players get lost. Put your two Auckland teams there are fewer will. Add even more, then nationwide the talent pool will be maximised. Obviously it’s good to have a national competition but more teams are good too.
May 24th 2012 @ 2:44pm
Thurl said | May 24th 2012 @ 2:44pm | Report comment
I think you may want to qualify you statements about 18 year olds in the NRL. In the meantime I’ll ignore it until you can name or number them and qualify what “doing very well” actually is.
A can’t see how a flat structure such as you are promoting does Aust rugby any good. If the entire range of talent is playing at the one level, then the standard at that level is diluted. If you want to maximise your talent, you have to maximise the opportunity below the elite level. Acadamys by themselves don’t do it as you elude to in your examples, but meaningful competitions below the elite level will. As with the Curry and ITM cups
And what a competition like this will do for you will be to raise the standard of the existing Aust S15 teams as substanard players get flushed out and replaced by better players pushing from below.
This is the step you need to take before dreaming of expansion. Expanding by promoting more for the sake of more will weaken Aust rugby, rather than strengthen it
May 25th 2012 @ 2:44am
kingplaymaker said | May 25th 2012 @ 2:44am | Report comment
Thurl you seem to suggest everywhere that I am against national competitions and a tier below but I’m not and you can’t continually imply I am and get away with it. Great give Australia a national competition and it will help things but can you see the ARU doing it?
Whether you care to believe there are a lot of 18 year olds in the NRL is your own business. I’m not going to waste time telling something you are already know but peversely deny.
A flat structure maximises the amount of talent used: isn’t that blindingly obvious? Nor does it have anything to do with lower tiers which simply mean the talent is better prepared when it is used and as I said it’s good to have those lower tiers. Perobably in NZ now you only see 1/2 or 2/3 of the possible talent including all that lost to league.
May 23rd 2012 @ 11:40am
Bob said | May 23rd 2012 @ 11:40am | Report comment
Was out watching the SoO blokes training yesterday thinking to myself, ‘what a waste of talent.’ They should be playing for the Wallabies so we deal with the the hated Blacks and the underhand Boks!
When you travel abroad all you get is abuse at how bad our rugby teams are, it is hard to explain they are being wasted in the chopped down version of rugby football.
May 23rd 2012 @ 12:01pm
warren said | May 23rd 2012 @ 12:01pm | Report comment
Bob – give it a rest mate rugby league is not a chopped down version of rugby union no more than american football. The sports have simply evolved differently and maybe to some extent this is the fault of the rules of rugby union.
For example what the use of having Billy Slater in RU when all he would be told to do is kick the ball away if it landed in his quarter of the field. He is a great league player because of his brilliant return of the ball from down field kicks and this does not happen in RU. Same with Greg Inglis in the centres. The ball really gets out past the flyhalf in RU with set plays so why bother having him there.
Enjoy the SOO tonight Bob. Better still tell your mates overseas if they want to see a real brutual contest (which what either rugby is about) to tune in.
May 23rd 2012 @ 1:20pm
Sledgeandhammer said | May 23rd 2012 @ 1:20pm | Report comment
Warren, why criticis Bob’s comments, then go one step further yourself? Slater would probably get even more opportunites in rugby as there is more open field play, more unstructured moments. The idea the ball doesn’t get past the fly half in rugby is BS, when did you last watch a game, in 1880?
May 23rd 2012 @ 4:46pm
Bongo Fury said | May 23rd 2012 @ 4:46pm | Report comment
Sorry Warren, to me RL barely rates above aerial pingpong, it’s like basketball with tackles. And before you ask do you watch any league, yes I have particularly in the past three weeks and it hasn’t done anything to change my opinion. To me it’s a one dimensional, tactically deficient game, very reliant on a limited skill set.
May 23rd 2012 @ 4:55pm
NF said | May 23rd 2012 @ 4:55pm | Report comment
Let me guess Bongo rugby union is the be to end all. Different strokes for different folks and another man’s trash is another man’s treasure remember that Bongo. I could say Bongo that rugby union is a penalty driven goal-kicker’s paradise but I wont’.
May 24th 2012 @ 9:13am
Donkey said | May 24th 2012 @ 9:13am | Report comment
“I could say Bongo that rugby union is a penalty driven goal-kicker’s paradise but I wont”
That is still saying it.
May 23rd 2012 @ 7:18am
Short-Blind said | May 23rd 2012 @ 7:18am | Report comment
The key area where the OZ conference is weak JON is administration -particularly at board level. In response to KPM”s insights & Wilson’s complaints on another thread about the inept board performance at the Tahs & Force i wrote: Unfortunately even with the current ARU governance review underway, rooting out the cancer of old school tie & the mentality that goes with it from rugby boards in Austalia is an uphill battle. Count the number of ex private school boys on the ARU board. Not saying there all no gooders but the paradigm shift in thinking required will be difficult with their ethos rooted in the GPS type mentality. jON you are on the way out so why don’t you leave a great legacy for change by ensuring a governance model that presents business best practice and is accountable to it’s shareholders (us). The Tahs shareholders are screaming but Allen & Foley blunder on in denial! Surprise me JON.
May 23rd 2012 @ 8:23am
Blue Blood said | May 23rd 2012 @ 8:23am | Report comment
Hear, hear. This article smacks of a man in denial who hopes we will believe his BS. Sir we are unhappy that only one team made the finals. We are unhappy that you are doing nothing to stop the rapid decline of the Force. We are unhappy with the administration at all levels. Do something; because doing nothing strangely enough isn’t working.
May 23rd 2012 @ 9:20am
kingplaymaker said | May 23rd 2012 @ 9:20am | Report comment
BB that’s absurd. The Brumbies have manifestly shown there is more talent. Nor have you provided a single argument that meaningfully criticises JON’s statement.
May 24th 2012 @ 11:27pm
stillmatic1 said | May 24th 2012 @ 11:27pm | Report comment
and yet you often say that australia lacks top level talent!! are you sure your not a politican KPM? you seem to do a lot of flip flopping.
May 23rd 2012 @ 11:31am
Wilson said | May 23rd 2012 @ 11:31am | Report comment
Even old Coach of the Force John Mitchell thinks that the Force need urgent help to be competitive:
http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sport/a/-/basketball/13756773/relax-rules-to-aid-force-says-mitchell/
You have less than 6 months to get this change done ARU. Are you capable of getting it fixed before another season is a write off for the Force?
May 24th 2012 @ 9:55am
formeropenside said | May 24th 2012 @ 9:55am | Report comment
and whats the downside for Australian rugby?
May 23rd 2012 @ 9:25am
kingplaymaker said | May 23rd 2012 @ 9:25am | Report comment
Short-Blind the board members are moreover not businessmen at all but just old ex-players who do it for fun, and so think the game is just some fun too and doesn’t need to compete in a sporting marketplace or provide entertainment.
May 23rd 2012 @ 2:07pm
Justin2 said | May 23rd 2012 @ 2:07pm | Report comment
I asked you some time ago to prove this and you didnt bother. Again do you know the business back grounds of these guys?
I’d say you are making up sh,,,it as it suits your position.
May 23rd 2012 @ 8:44am
chuck said | May 23rd 2012 @ 8:44am | Report comment
The spin doctor at his best !!!trust me!!!
May 23rd 2012 @ 9:05am
Wilson said | May 23rd 2012 @ 9:05am | Report comment
ARU boss O’Neill defends (Aussie conference) HIMSELF. The boys club put him there and has kept him there. Mismanagement of rugby in Australia starts from the top down mate and the blame lies squarely at your pedicured feet.
May 23rd 2012 @ 9:20am
kingplaymaker said | May 23rd 2012 @ 9:20am | Report comment
BB, chuck and Wilson have provided perhaps the least engagement with the points JON made imaginable.
I’m not an absolute JON supporter at all, but none of you have provided a word of reasoned criticism, just name-calling and ranting.
May 23rd 2012 @ 10:09am
Danny said | May 23rd 2012 @ 10:09am | Report comment
No-one I know is actually saying all Australian teams are rubbish, or incapable of winning on their day.
What’s merely being pointed out is that in 2012 Australia has teams at 8th, 10th, 11th and 13th on the ladder and the leading team would be at 4th were the bs conference rules not in place. Compare this with NZ and SA teams at 2, 5, 7, 9 and 14 and 1, 3, 6, 12 and 15 respectively. On unsophisticated simple averages Australia is at 9.2 vs NZ and SA 7.4 each. This may change by season end of course, but for now the Aus conference is weakest if being statistically lower in the ladder is the measure.
In 2011 using the same simple average Australian teams ended up on average at 9.2 NZ 6.8 and 8.0. Australia has had the weakest conference for the past 2 years.
May 23rd 2012 @ 10:28am
Diz said | May 23rd 2012 @ 10:28am | Report comment
The Boys Club, let O’Neill go in the first place. After the RWC in Aus he had grand plans for Rugby but the board didn’t want change and suprise suprise Football Australia picked him up. An organisation that needed to re invent itself from the days of flare throwing and racial fights at games. As much as the A League is not that much of a force in the sporting Landscape and the Soceroos still struggle for support in non World Cup years, John O’Neill did wonders in his helm there.
After years of inept administration under Gary Flowers, the ARU came groveling back to JON to help get the game back from the wilderness as he did previously. But is seems that they are still trying to stifle him in his plans for growing the game. I really hope that this review of the ARU Governance clears out the old boy mentality and brings in some fresh thinking. Just look at the Reds bringing in Jim Carmichael and AFL administrator and look at the growth of the Reds. As much I am cricitcal still of some of there practices, they are fairly prominent within the landscape of sports fans, but not still to the extent they should be.
If the ARU really want to sustain 5 teams they will keep the Force in Perth but sell 50% to the UAR (Argentinian Union) as they are now in the Rugby Championship and should be get Southern Hemsiphere Rugyb under their belt. The 30 man squad would be spilt in half between Australian and Argentinian players. And the feeder teams for the Force would still be the Froce A and also the Pampas XV Argentina’s development side in the Vodacom cup. The time matches would be shown in Argentina would be at reasonable viewing times and add value to the TV rights. For instance an 8pm on Saturday in Perth would be 9am Saturday morning in Argentina. Even a East Coast game in Aus and a Kiwi game would still be reasonable viewing time and better then what we get when Aus or Kiwi teams play in SA.
As well as this venture the ARU needs to be seen. They need to get the Wallabies semi-trailer out there. need to get injured players going to shopping malls and CBD locations to drum up support and get a presence. They need to be in state schools and go to NT, South Australia and Tasmania to drum up support. Then and only then can we consider ourselves a fully national sport and one that wants to grow and incaptulate the whole population.
May 23rd 2012 @ 1:37pm
JAJI said | May 23rd 2012 @ 1:37pm | Report comment
Just how do the Socceroos struggle? We are bigger than the Wallabies these days – and much more loved as well. I swear half the country were cheering when the Wallabies were knocked out last year of the Cup
May 23rd 2012 @ 1:46pm
Diz said | May 23rd 2012 @ 1:46pm | Report comment
If you look at most Socceroo Test matches that are not in a WC year or not an elimination WC qualifier then they struggle to sell them out and this is also the case in the ALeague where unless it is a final then there are poor crowds. They are truly the only national sporting team I am not denying that, but they are only supported by the mass population every 3-4 years when the WC is on and the WC qualifiers are nearing the end.
May 23rd 2012 @ 2:09pm
Justin2 said | May 23rd 2012 @ 2:09pm | Report comment
More BS
May 23rd 2012 @ 2:13pm
p.Tah said | May 23rd 2012 @ 2:13pm | Report comment
“I swear half the country were cheering when the Wallabies were knocked out last year of the Cup” thats only because half of the country are kiwis and poms
May 23rd 2012 @ 12:22pm
Rusty said | May 23rd 2012 @ 12:22pm | Report comment
He can say this now the Rebs have rolled a few teams, plus with new whipping boys the Kings coming in next year everyone knows focus will shift to the SA conference for having its own 5 point bye
May 24th 2012 @ 10:26am
Loftus said | May 24th 2012 @ 10:26am | Report comment
Make that 10 points thanks to the stupid conference system!
May 23rd 2012 @ 1:21pm
levelheaded said | May 23rd 2012 @ 1:21pm | Report comment
Short-blinded, you are short sighted. Blaming the CEO, what a joke! Sick and tired of inane comments like this. Playing the man shows a weak individual and I am happy to play the man to you! When you lose 6 games by 7 points or under, it doesn’t say it is all stuffed… it speaks of a requirement to address either a mixture of skill set and execution. Your negativity and personal attacks stink of a grumpy, ill informed, biased agenda. Surprise me Short-blinded, got a solution or something really deep to offer?????
May 23rd 2012 @ 1:27pm
levelheaded said | May 23rd 2012 @ 1:27pm | Report comment
Found this on another website, very interesting, well researched article. may help some of the negative, playing the man shadow type out there!
http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/waratah-finances-the-toughest-market-of-them-all/