Why Australia are a consistent rugby powerhouse
Roar Guru By biltongbek, 30 Jun 2012 biltongbek is a Roar Guru & Live Blogger
- Tagged:
- AFL, NRL, Rugby League, Rugby Union
120 Have your say
4,033 readsRelated coverage
- Rugby Union news
- Rugby League news
- NRL news
- AFL news
- Toyota Premiership news
- 2013 Wallabies squad news
It is common knowledge that Australian rugby union has a rather tough challenge for popularity in a country widely acknowledged as a sporting mecca.
Failed attempts in the past to create their own professional domestic competition prove that rugby union struggles to be financially viable. This means that the professional development of Australian rugby union is highly dependent on Super Rugby.
Rugby union in Australia has significantly less depth than many of our rival nations.
Now you may ask, how is it, with all these challenges, that we manage to remain in the top three of the rankings and have won two World Cups and three Tri-Nations trophies?
I have a theory about that. I could be totally wrong, but here goes.
We all know that Australia seldom has a big pack of forwards, they rely on intelligence and guile to negate scrum dominance of their opponents. This is often not the most legal approach, but they have managed to master the art of pulling the wool over the eyes of referees over time. I don’t mean this as a slight on them or as criticism, but that is the reality.
From their back rowers, they rely on players with big upper body strength who are quick and versatile.
But this is all just to gain as much parity as they can muster against teams with dominant forwards. This however does fail them on the odd occasion, thinking back there have been a few games against England in 2010 and most recently Ireland in the World Cup.
Their strength however has always been their back line.
Rugby league and AFL are not only more popular among Australians, but also have more registered players.
In 2006, 615,549 registered participants played Australian football in Australia. Participation increased 7.84% between 2005–06. The Australian Sports Commission statistics show a 64% increase in the total number of participants over the 10 year period between 2001–2010.
The AFL consists of 18 professional teams competing for the title and had an average match attendance of 36,000 spectators.
The National Rugby League consists of 16 professional teams and has 466 000 registered players.
In contrast rugby union only has five professional teams and 87000 registered players.
This brings me to my point of why Australia still manages to remain competitive at international level.
Super Rugby is essentially the foundation that exposes around 150 Australian players to the most competitive club/franchise competition in the world. Disregarding their international standing for a mere moment, they compete with the two countries who has the most competitive provincial competition structure in world rugby.
Hence the experience gained from that is vital to their international survival.
Add to that the fact that the pace of play in the Super Rugby competition is second to none.
But surely that cannot be the only reasons.
Australian kids grow up with ball in hand, be it backyard rugby league, AFL or rugby union. Whatever they play, one thing remains constant, the shape of the ball.
From the little I know and have seen from AFL, it is very clear that ball skills and hand/eye coordination are a pre-requisite to play the game, as are athleticism and agility.
The same goes for rugby league.
So in my view although there may only be 80 000 + rugby union players in Australia, the skill base is acquired by a much bigger pool of athletes, whether they play AFL, rugby league or rugby union.
The only aspect in my opinion that limits Australian depth is the number of professional players in their system.
Might not be as simple as that, but just a thought.
Looking to join The Roar team? We're searching for an experienced Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. Yes, this does mean you get to work with the site all day long! If you're a digital media sales star, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
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:
- AFL, NRL, Rugby League, Rugby Union
June 30th 2012 @ 5:14am
The Werewolf said | June 30th 2012 @ 5:14am | Report comment
Bb i think this makes a lot of sense. Australia is extremely fortunate to be a part of the super rugby because it has maintained a degree of excellence in our national side when if left to our own domestic set up we would have faltered into oblivion once professionalism kicked in.
To be fair we must also remember that SA and NZ are also fortunate to have us because it makes the competition more meaningful.
In a similar way the tri-nations has helped perpetuate the three nations at staying, there or there abouts, on top of the world. The only time a NH nation was distinctly no 1 in the professional era was England in 2002/2003 although at times France have looked on paper like they could or should have been.
Justin Harrison the ex Wallaby lock always talks about how when he played the wallabies might not have been able to match other sides physically but they always had tactics to counter act any weakness or strength in the opposition. I think we lost that for awhile and now I’m seeing a few intelligent strategies taking shape which should counter act the physical presence of SA, NZ and Argentina this winter and next years series against the lions. we will not match them physically but we will better them by tactical nous! It makes me excited about this year and next with Deans still at the helm.
One thing you forgot to mention that football in australia has 700, 000 registered players as well.
June 30th 2012 @ 6:57am
biltongbek said | June 30th 2012 @ 6:57am | Report comment
Evening Wolf, yeah I think all three nations benefit from the agreement without doubt.
SA from the perspective of the pace at which OZ and NZ play the game, and I believe OZ and NZ benefit from us by opposing in my view anyway the most physical nation on earth.
But truth be told I enjoy the diversity of each of the three nations and to that extent I think me must also be thankful that we have not all morfed into hybrids of each other, in my view that would make our rugby stale and this biodiversity keeps us ahead of the game.
The fact is no other nation can bring anything into the game we do not already face by playing each other.
I was actually thinking about this the other day, trying to figure out why Australia with their “limited player pool” remian in the top three, and then it struck me, there isn’t only 80 000 people playing with the oval ball, but over a million and although it is not a daily occurrence cross code walk over do happen.
I don’t think the Australian forward pack are all that weak anymore either, they remain competitive on the whole, and when they struggle those Ozzie smarts come to the fore.
I myself am very much looking forward to the rugby Championship, hopefully we will bash you all to kingdom come.
June 30th 2012 @ 9:45am
Emric said | June 30th 2012 @ 9:45am | Report comment
SA have always been rugby innovators when they return to being inventive with their tactics and marketing NZ and Aus will benefit a lot more.
Aus benefit from the fact that their top players face the best of the best week after week.
NZ benefit because we get to see what SA and Aus have to offer and thus design our teams around requirements of winning
SA benefit from seeing the speed of the game played down under
but in this professional world NZ benefits the most – SA top up the dollars earned by the NZRU from sky it’s kept our domestic competition going and our top players in NZ
Thanks SA
June 30th 2012 @ 1:10pm
p.Tah said | June 30th 2012 @ 1:10pm | Report comment
Super rugby also helps SA. Without the comp they wouldn’t have the money to keep their best players in SA. I guess SR helps all of us.
June 30th 2012 @ 4:05pm
biltongbek said | June 30th 2012 @ 4:05pm | Report comment
p.Tah, Yo are aware of the fact that finaincially SA brings in the biggest share of broadcasting revenue?
We are sharing that revenue evenly with NZ and Australia. Considering this there are currently more than 200 South Africans playing professional rugby outside of SA.
July 4th 2012 @ 1:40am
D Maaga said | July 4th 2012 @ 1:40am | Report comment
i think south africa take a bigger slice of the pie than nz and oz and they also sell their currie cup tv rights on their own.
July 4th 2012 @ 1:45am
biltongbek said | July 4th 2012 @ 1:45am | Report comment
We don’t D Maaga, the last contract negotiations SARU agree to split the revenue equally amongst all three Unions.
June 30th 2012 @ 4:30pm
The Werewolf said | June 30th 2012 @ 4:30pm | Report comment
Weak no, dominant also no.
We’ve got some tricks up our sleeves.
I too can’t wait. With he argies its gonna be a lot more interesting as well.
June 30th 2012 @ 5:53am
King of the Gorgonites said | June 30th 2012 @ 5:53am | Report comment
I thought you were a Saffa?
June 30th 2012 @ 6:49am
biltongbek said | June 30th 2012 @ 6:49am | Report comment
I am mate, don’t know where the “we” slipped in.
June 30th 2012 @ 7:30am
King of the Gorgonites said | June 30th 2012 @ 7:30am | Report comment
Ha. The wallabies could do with some more supporters though….
June 30th 2012 @ 5:22pm
Australian Rules said | June 30th 2012 @ 5:22pm | Report comment
I thought the same thing KOG! Haha…always welcome to jump ship biltong…
I think Australian rugby does incredibly well to remain competitive with SA and NZ considering it’s participation rates are so diluted by the competition that Australian footy and League create. In those countries, rugby is unquestionably the dominant sport and enjoys “clear air” in terms of being the number one sport – if not in strictly in participation, certainly in each nation’s psyche.
Interesting theory about the oval-ball factor…
July 1st 2012 @ 2:37pm
Ideas Man said | July 1st 2012 @ 2:37pm | Report comment
In South Africa, Football is the most popular sport, not rugby.
July 2nd 2012 @ 2:07pm
Nathan of Perth said | July 2nd 2012 @ 2:07pm | Report comment
But from the sounds of it, for the moneyed classes, rugby rules, which gives it considerable potency. Popularity and resources are not necessarily always in lockstep.
July 4th 2012 @ 1:48am
biltongbek said | July 4th 2012 @ 1:48am | Report comment
Nathan, Supersport signed a contrat for 1.6 Billion Rand with the PSL for the next five years, Vodacom signed a sponsorship deal of R 1 billion with Kaiser Chiefs and another club (escapes me who) for the next five years.
July 4th 2012 @ 1:03am
D Maaga said | July 4th 2012 @ 1:03am | Report comment
that’s like saying soccer is the most popular sport in australia because more people play it but we all know its not the case.
July 4th 2012 @ 1:51am
D Maaga said | July 4th 2012 @ 1:51am | Report comment
there are two way to be competitive at international stage. 1. you take the top down approach where you invest most of your money or reserves on your few professional players and international team and this is where the wallabies have been great. this same approach is very similar to the kiwis doing well than england in rugby league even with england having 14 professional rugby league clubs to nz one.
2. with south africa and nz having rugby as a major sport both nations rugby national body often have to spread their money and resourse not only for the springboks, all blacks and super teams but also their domestic comp the npc and currie cup.
having said that this two ways of development and approach often yield the same results for the all blacks, springboks and wallabies.
June 30th 2012 @ 7:12am
Seriously, Who says Oi? said | June 30th 2012 @ 7:12am | Report comment
Some of those in Australia make it look like Rugby Union is a locally obscure sport that most people haven’t heard of.
Rugby Union is one of the biggest sports in Australia and it has a greater national reach than both NRL and AFL.
It’s more popular in Australia than all but a few countries on the planet. If you dispute this, you need to do some serious travelling.
Also, according to the IRB, Australia has 295,964 male players. It’s important to note that there’s more to player numbers than Australians are willing to consider. On a per capita basis, Australia’s male player numbers are much higher than a huge majority of countries in the IRB.
Don’t be foolish by selling the game’s status short.
June 30th 2012 @ 7:21am
biltongbek said | June 30th 2012 @ 7:21am | Report comment
Oi mate, I go on what I am being told by Australians I speak to, I also remember that in 2003 there was a report that said Rugby union has reached the 4th place in most popular sport in Australia.
If you dispute my point of view, that’s OK, I am speaking from an outsiders perspective.
June 30th 2012 @ 8:23am
Kasey said | June 30th 2012 @ 8:23am | Report comment
From an outsiders point of view, I think hosting the 2003 RWC heralded the high water mark of the Rugby game in the Australian sporting psyche. The ARU was very lucky to have John O’Neill in charge and he set the ARU up to take advantage of that windfall, that seems to have sustained the Rugby game through this current barren patch, under fire from the three other football codes. Each of the other 3 appears to have stepped up a level since 2003. the AFL has gone on in leaps and bounds, the advent of the IC hand RL the same opportunity. In a non-RL state, my take is that RL certainly hasn’t gone backwards, if anything they’ve shored up their heartland. Football is almost unrecognizable if viewed next to 2003. Soccer was in serious danger if irrelevancy at that time, but the Socceroos finally making the World Cup in 2006 and the advent of the A-L has the round-ballers on the up in the last 10 years. Of course Soccer has the highest participation rate of any sport in Australia, the trick for FFA is converting that advantage into some $$ for the FFA. I came to rugby late in life and still enjoy watching the Wallabies. I can’t stand the over-reliance on penalty kicking though. I like to see tries scored. How much thought has been given to altering the points balance in Rugby so that tries are valued much more than just going for the three every 5 minutes?
June 30th 2012 @ 10:00am
Emric said | June 30th 2012 @ 10:00am | Report comment
Kasey.
Soccer has the no.1 participation rate in the USA, and NZ as well. The problem for soccer is that while it might be great for mum/mom to get little johnny into a sport where the big Samoan guy isn’t going to steam roll over top of him on the way to the try line by the time little Johnny has made it to the ripe old age of 14 soccer participation rates start to slump. Why? Because he wants to follow his heroes and play with his mates in the same sport they are playing.
you see while mum/mom wants little johnny to play a sport she really doesn’t know anything about soccer herself to her its just a fun safe way for little johnny to get some exercise but she won’t sit down and watch a game with him, and its more then likely that dad would be watching NRL,AFL, NFL, RU, on TV and that’s what little johnny is going to end up watching and that’s where his boyhood hero’s are going to come from.
June 30th 2012 @ 11:20am
Kasey said | June 30th 2012 @ 11:20am | Report comment
Emric, you are so far beyond rational thought if you think the sole reason kids leave sport at 14(and again at 18 – check the football participation stats) is because of peer pressure regarding where their heroes play. If you have 100 kids playing sport at 8 years old, only an imbecile would expect those same 100 kids to be playing the same sport at 18 years old(or even still playing competitive sport!). Kids at 14 are discovering girls, being put under pressure at High School for the first time. Talent ID squads begin about then – meaning some kids will get their first taste of disappointment sorry son, you haven’t been selected.
For non football fans its all too easy to imagine some junior soccer players are quitting to take up a sport like Rugby, but why would any kid try to start playing a highly technical sport(the commentators half the time have to wait for the ref to signal what type of penalty is being whistled before they embarrass themselves by getting it wrong – surely this is the reason the IRB mikes up the ref? To be pummeled by a kid who has spent the last 6 years learning exactly where to be to lay a textbook Maori side-step? What you are parroting is a convenient little lie repeated as gospel by the lamestream media to make itself feel better that it is getting pantsed by football in the junior ranks.
The benefit of having such a large pool of juniors probably won’t be felt for decades yet, now that the fully professional A-League is putting local heroes on TV and in local grounds for training sessions at a respectable timezone providing a verifiable and identifiable path from the local game onwards and in to the riches of the international juggernaut. I see way more local club kits at training these days than I ever did in the 80s and 90s. That in itself is telling. Sadly when kids quit sport, I feel that they are moving to less time intensive rec league after-work/school events and away from competitive club sports all together rather than changing sports. Or just playing games on the console.
July 2nd 2012 @ 7:29am
WayneO said | July 2nd 2012 @ 7:29am | Report comment
Funnily enough, as a coach in junior rugby over the last 10 years, we have noted the following pattern. I say we, being the club I have coached at on Sydney’s northern beaches.
Up until U8′s we have one group of kids. But we introduce tackling at U8 level, so at this time we lose a bunch of kids to soccer, because mum does not like little Johnny getting hurt. at the same time we get a bunch of leagueys coming over, as we are finally tackling. The league kids are tackling from day dot. we also get some soccer boys coming over, as they did not want to play touch, they wanted to play proper rugby.
our club peaks in numbers at around U10/11. then the boys start playing for their schools, and decide that they can’t commit to club rugby, or their school won’t let them play for clubs. so we lose some players to that, although not lost to rugby.
finally from about U13/14, surfing kicks in, girls, hanging out at shopping malls and the general teenage lathargy sets in. From about 5 teams in U10, we start to struggle to get 1 together by u14.
In Sydney , the other problem introduced about 3 years ago, was that the Metropolitan comps were all combined. We used to only play as far as Hunters Hill., but mostly around the beaches. Then we (metropolitan northern zone), were combined with greater Sydney. Suddenly we found ourselves playing 9 am games in the Blue Mountains, and caringbah. When that happened we found a lot of kids leaving for League, because most parents told us they did not sign up for that sort of commitment. We had to leave home at 5 am to make some games, which is just not on for kids sport, when we were playing in the C comp. Maybe if you are in the top tier it would have been ok.
Anyway those were some of the factors and patterns we observed.
June 30th 2012 @ 1:16pm
p.Tah said | June 30th 2012 @ 1:16pm | Report comment
And often mum has done little Johnny a disservice by not allowing him to grow up learning the skills of the oval ball games. You can pick them up when your 14, but it’s easier if you start at 5 or 6.
July 2nd 2012 @ 9:25am
B-Rock said | July 2nd 2012 @ 9:25am | Report comment
This is a really interesting dynamic – its not as simple as the media and us posters would like to think it is.
Rugby is different to most sports in Aust at a junior level due to the importance of school sport, mainly at private schools. This increases particpation in rugby – kids are more or less forced to play – but takes away from the clubs, as WayneO mentioned above. Im not sure but I would think that the clubs are more of a central component (vs schools) of junior league/AFL/soccer than rugby.
Also, the derisive tone used by many that “we dont want little johnny to get hurt” understates the importance of safety in kids sport. A lot of research is being done on concussions in young kids (and adults) playing contact sport – the early results are really concerning. This will be a much bigger issue for all football codes ex scoccer in the future.
I dont think swapping between codes is a major driver of participation. Definitely happens at the margin but it flows both ways. Much bigger issue is the broader society pressures of girls/school/friends/etc. which tends to see participation rates drop off in the teenage years
July 4th 2012 @ 1:56am
D Maaga said | July 4th 2012 @ 1:56am | Report comment
kasey, that is exactly what is happening to soccer kids in nz and there have been many articles in nz about this over years. i rather have players been penalise for mistakes and infrigement than a watching guys falling over in thin air and see who has the best holywood acting award.
June 30th 2012 @ 3:13pm
Aussie Fan Club said | June 30th 2012 @ 3:13pm | Report comment
what rubbish, it would be nice to say we are a powerhouse rugby nation and it’s a huge sport here, saffas and kiwis love to throw it at us about being minnows and importing players and they are half right, fact is fact we dont have the numbers or supporters
June 30th 2012 @ 4:52pm
The Werewolf said | June 30th 2012 @ 4:52pm | Report comment
That no of almost 300,000 is BS. How can you count unregisteerd players? How could we possibly have over 200,000 unregistered players and only 87000 registered? Its nonsense, a PR number so that we can try and have more sway with the IRB and Home unions.
NZ for comparison only claim to have around 10,000 unregistered players along with their 137000 registered. That’s a more believable no now isn’t it.
June 30th 2012 @ 8:13am
Aaron said | June 30th 2012 @ 8:13am | Report comment
Australia has more registered players than NZ, and does as well as it should be expected of them, so there’s nothing to get too proud about. It’s the AB’s dominance that is truly staggering, considering they have such a small number of registered players and they also lose a lot of their players and coaches to richer nations up north (more than any other country). One country that under performs relatively speaking considering its large talent base is SA imo.
Re the Aussie pack being small- complete rubbish. Over the last 15 years, the Aussie pack has been one of the largest in world rugby. Most of the top packs are about same size, with the exception of the French who have always been about 40-50 kgs lighter than their opposition. Please show me some stats to back up your statement.
June 30th 2012 @ 9:53am
Emric said | June 30th 2012 @ 9:53am | Report comment
The All Black Jumper is not just another piece of clothing it is a legacy handed from one generation to the next.
June 30th 2012 @ 4:02pm
biltongbek said | June 30th 2012 @ 4:02pm | Report comment
Aaron, in SA only 20% of the population actively support rugby, that means out of a population of roughly 50 million only 10 million are even remoetely interested in rugby.
As far as underperforming, I whole heartedly agree with you, and the reason for this can be directly blamed at the feet of SARU.
I had a look at our history of appointing coached over the professional era, and it looks dimsal to say the least. The other problem we have is our seemingly unwillingness to play expansive rugby. Pieter de Villiers had a meeting where he had to report the the Sporting committee in SA last year prior to the RWC, and in this meeting he admitted the then Springbok senior leaerds had a fear of failure and it limited their willingness to play expansive or fully enjoy the game they were playing.
June 30th 2012 @ 11:41pm
Aussie Fan Club said | June 30th 2012 @ 11:41pm | Report comment
the All Black jersey should be prized! considering it pretty much defines the country, there really is more reason to go there other than rugby
June 30th 2012 @ 4:48pm
The Werewolf said | June 30th 2012 @ 4:48pm | Report comment
NZ has more registered players than aus i’m afraid. They have 137000 Australia has 87000.
the ausie pack may weigh as much as others but that doesn’t change their lack of physicality. Apart from Pocck they are not physically dominant over most opposite no’s in most top tier nations.
June 30th 2012 @ 10:11pm
mace 22 said | June 30th 2012 @ 10:11pm | Report comment
Where do you get your stats from, are you picking and choosing the numbers that make you feel better about consistantly being beaten by the all blacks. I’d rather believe the irb stats because what reason do they have to make up player numbers for eack country. Australia has 87,000 players alright but these are just senior players and new zealand has over 137,000 players but these are all players ( women children and men ) and of this number only 27,000 are senior players. Australia has almost 300,000 players, why is this number so hard for people like you to comprehend. If you go to percentages of the population that play rugby for each country then new zealand will probably have a higher number
July 1st 2012 @ 12:58am
The Werewolf said | July 1st 2012 @ 12:58am | Report comment
mace 22 the IRB released figures of all the RWC 2011 teams of their registered no’s.
here is a link to a page that has this document.
http://www.rugbydump.com/2011/09/2103/rugby-world-cup-daily-player-numbers-around-the-world
Can you please try and understand the simple concept that there are two sets of figures one which the unions themselves state a total of unregistered and registered no’s. This is unreliable because of course some unions like the ARU will inflate their no’s for political reasons. This year the ARU made a huge press release stating that this no was the 200,000 odd thousand more than what the set of figures the IRB released last year which was 86,952 REGISTERED PLAYERS. The IRB only counts registered players and that is the only reliable source of data.
The last thing pal, I don’t think you can make claims that I’ve cherry picked data or whatever and then make a ridiculous claim that the 87000 mentioned is senior males. if you go to the link you will see the 87000 is registered players with senior players 39,380.
July 1st 2012 @ 6:36am
Jerry said | July 1st 2012 @ 6:36am | Report comment
You might want to take a look at the ARU annual report for 2011. Page 69, in particular.
The total figure (including golden oldies & women) is 261,431. Now, obviously golden oldies & women should be subtracted which accounts for about 19,500 players. And there is a ‘schools 2″ figure which includes schools who only competed in one off knockout tournaments or gala days. This accounts for 111,063 players.
But that still leaves 39,948 senior players, 47,430 junior players and 43,435 school players (this category is for schools that played regularly). Which is a figure of 130,813.
So even with removing the schools 2 category, Aus still has comparable numbers to NZ.
July 1st 2012 @ 6:50am
Jerry said | July 1st 2012 @ 6:50am | Report comment
Just to clarify, the above post isn’t really aimed at Werewolf in particular, just trying to shed a bit of light on the subject.
July 1st 2012 @ 10:32am
jeznez said | July 1st 2012 @ 10:32am | Report comment
Jerry – good post. I think that one clears up the mystery. Your senior numbers are basically the same as WW’s and the combination of senior and juniors is the number he has been quoting. School players in Oz are not counted in the registered number and your total throws up to the big numbers that get bandied about.
Appreciate the clarity you are bringing to what is pretty murky with different numbers quoted all the time.
July 1st 2012 @ 7:08pm
The Werewolf said | July 1st 2012 @ 7:08pm | Report comment
Exactly it s BS.
We have 87000 registered rugby players. End of discussion.
July 2nd 2012 @ 7:32am
Jerry said | July 2nd 2012 @ 7:32am | Report comment
Except if you’re gonna compare that number to NZ’s when the NZRU does include school players in their figure, you’re simply being disingenuous Werewolf.
July 2nd 2012 @ 5:08pm
The Werewolf said | July 2nd 2012 @ 5:08pm | Report comment
If the IRB has not counted the amount of players that play in rugby competitions at school, (not the one off gala day nonsense suggested) we must consider that school players also play for clubs. I know all my school team-mates were registered with clubs.
July 2nd 2012 @ 5:47pm
Jerry said | July 2nd 2012 @ 5:47pm | Report comment
IRB doesn’t count at all, they rely on data provided to them. It does seem that there are different standards applied when collating this data.
Out of interest, why would school players be registered with clubs? In NZ you wouldn’t find very many secondary school players who were registered with a club as the clubs don’t provide any teams for that age group. Basically the clubs have teams up to 6th grade (eg, 12 year olds) then U-19 U-21 and open grades.
July 4th 2012 @ 1:19am
D Maaga said | July 4th 2012 @ 1:19am | Report comment
there is no way a player can play for school and club in nz because all are played on saturdays.
July 4th 2012 @ 1:40am
The Werewolf said | July 4th 2012 @ 1:40am | Report comment
schoolboys are often registered with clubs for times when the are available. i know all my school’s first xv were registered with clubs for when we were available.
All this doesn’t matter. The only way to accurately gauge player no strength is through the IRB’s count of registered players.
July 4th 2012 @ 1:59am
D Maaga said | July 4th 2012 @ 1:59am | Report comment
which school team and what school comp is that the werewolf?
July 4th 2012 @ 2:01am
The Werewolf said | July 4th 2012 @ 2:01am | Report comment
i like my annonymity.
July 4th 2012 @ 9:14am
D Maaga said | July 4th 2012 @ 9:14am | Report comment
i was talking about school rugby in nz.
July 4th 2012 @ 1:48pm
Jerry said | July 4th 2012 @ 1:48pm | Report comment
“All this doesn’t matter. The only way to accurately gauge player no strength is through the IRB’s count of registered players.”
Why’s that? Cause it suits your argument? It took me about 2 minutes to find the ARU’s numbers online which shows that the IRB’s numbers aren’t necessarily accurate or consistent.
June 30th 2012 @ 9:56am
sixo_clock said | June 30th 2012 @ 9:56am | Report comment
Sport is rightly or wrongly how Aussie kids define themselves, I think rightly because it requires both peer and elders approval and gives a basis on which to base self-respect. Any child who can be taught the basics of athleticism (core strength and turning that core on when needed) and the benefits are for all facets of health.
We do well despite the fact our kids have four winter codes from which to choose, some even play Rugby on saturday and league on sunday, as my nephew used to do. Also our climate allows this.
The biggest threat to Australian Rugby is in the development of the Rugby Brain. This is loosely described as the warrior mindset, accept no failure etc. That we tend to rely on our backs is indicative of this failure. Our packs are as big as required but only in patches have we seen them dominant in scrums, fast, quick and threatening in the loose which is the very essence of Rugby. This simplistically is the fault of our coaching system but more accurately a lack of imagination in the various ‘RUs. All those school and club coaches who deal with the youngsters need constant visits by contracted players and coaches to inspire, teach, encourage and monitor the development of the mental aspects of Rugby, ie the Rugby brain. Played well, coached well our code actually increases IQ in those youngsters as they learn to apply our complicated Laws in a torrid environment.
We have seen many times the Wallabies lose early tests because they did not stick to the basics, tackling high, not going low into tackles, getting isolated, not watching those deviates in opposition for signs of counter-attacks building and paying the price. If they had had the Rugby brain they would have adjusted quickly, but they don’t, haven’t and sometimes an entire test season is squandered.
Our game is played between the ears mostly, and though it is possible that going pro has also allowed the big but dumb element to increase particularly in our representative ranks that change has been facilitated more by a failure by those with executive responsibility.
June 30th 2012 @ 10:32pm
mace 22 said | June 30th 2012 @ 10:32pm | Report comment
I agree with your comments about australian kids defining themselves through sports. Having lived in both countries and having worked in both australian and new zealand schools ( mainly in western australia ) the biggest difference I’ve found is during lunchtimes in new zealand at lunch the kid’s will be running around with a rugby ball ( in summer softball or cricket ) playing house competition games or just playing scrag. In western australia because of the two lunch times of half hour each they eat then have only ten to fifteen minutes to play, which most don’t they just walk around until the bell goes. Where as in nz they have hour lunches, which leaves at least 45 minutes for play.
June 30th 2012 @ 11:49pm
Aussie Fan Club said | June 30th 2012 @ 11:49pm | Report comment
great insight, however very little to do with the problem
July 1st 2012 @ 9:26am
mace 22 said | July 1st 2012 @ 9:26am | Report comment
What i was trying to say ( Which I admit after reading my comments I didn’t really put across ) is that a lot of the skills that nz players and kids attain is at these lunch time activities. Not having visits by contracted players or good coaches. At school nobody want’s to be a forward unless it’s a loosie, everkid wants to be a back and do the things cooper, beal, williams or dagg do. For the full contact part we play bullrush which I haven’t seen being played in australia at all. What I’m mostly talking about is primary schools. So when kids get to high school most of the basic skills have been learnt again I say by just playing with each other during those hour lunch’s. Australian kid’s define themselves by sport but this not done through schools but by outside clubs, but this is my observations of just western australia. As I don’t know how the other states operate.
July 2nd 2012 @ 8:10am
sixo_clock said | July 2nd 2012 @ 8:10am | Report comment
Appreciate your thoughts mace XXII,
What I am suggesting is that on top of the natural play instinct of kids our Unions need to take on a more dynamic pastoral role with those who show interest in Rugby by reciprocating their enthusiasm with clinics, chats, ‘casual’ drop ins and encouragement with particular emphasis on the mental demands of playing well. In an unsupported environment they will be guided mostly by the various media who are not always truthful. By reinforcing the coaches’ message we will help to define our sport as a valuable tool in their own development, worthy of study and in the process expose players to the thought processes which work on a Rugby pitch, ie the Rugby Brain.
The Rebels are doing something allong these lines, as probably both the Brumbies and Force, but are the recalcitrants, NSW and Qld, on board, do they place any emphasis on long-term, do they do nearly enough? Effectively, apparently not.
July 2nd 2012 @ 2:43pm
Nathan of Perth said | July 2nd 2012 @ 2:43pm | Report comment
“For the full contact part we play bullrush which I haven’t seen being played in australia at all”
You mean old British Bulldog? Used to play that in primary school here, actually
with all these new policies and studies though, it wouldn’t surprise me to hear it had been taken out entirely.
July 4th 2012 @ 2:03am
D Maaga said | July 4th 2012 @ 2:03am | Report comment
totally agree with mace 22 here. kids in nz live and breathe rugby and when the rugby season is over they still play rugby at school at the local park or even touch rugby. it was like playing with a footy ball 12 months a year.
June 30th 2012 @ 10:55am
Recalcitrant said | June 30th 2012 @ 10:55am | Report comment
As opposed to rugby league, union has always had clubs in southern Australia and particularly in Bledisloe and World Cups there is some interest in the southern states. NRL can only dream of getting that.
Rugby union needs to get onto free to air tv week in week out if it is ever to get a bigger interest. At the moment it is too much of a cult sport.
A weekly highlights show needs to be on Sunday evenings or Monday evenings at a reasonable time and maybe the home teams away games on FTA tv live and highlights of home games. Surely there is a way.
June 30th 2012 @ 4:23pm
Atawhai Drive said | June 30th 2012 @ 4:23pm | Report comment
Well, I’m watching the Shute Shield rugby on ABC-TV as I write this, on Saturday afternoon.
Wallaby Tests are live on Channel 9. The ARU decided to get into bed with that particular devil.
Super Rugby goes largely unwatched, sadly. Channel 9 has a highlights package shown at some ungodly hour.
After, what, 17 years, about seven out of every 10 Australian homes do not have Foxtel.
I have Foxtel, reluctantly, because the sports I follow most closely don’t have much of a FTA presence. I’d love to flick Foxtel, which is a dreadful rip-off, but what can you do?
June 30th 2012 @ 6:21pm
Old Rugby Boy said | June 30th 2012 @ 6:21pm | Report comment
Can you define Southern States? Because RL seems to have a strong following in Melbourne and northern Victoria and over 12000 turned up for a trial NRL in Tasmania, Do you mean the small number of students, who occasionaly play RU, in private Victorian and Taasmanian schools.
June 30th 2012 @ 6:32pm
Recalcitrant said | June 30th 2012 @ 6:32pm | Report comment
The ‘rugby’ interest in Victoria is for union. There was always a union competition here, they used to play the touring teams like the All Blacks. RL has popped up with all the immigrants that have come here the past decade or so. The expat islanders seem to go to the NRL games, so they are not exactly born Victorians. A bit like the soccer brigade comes from the southern European set.
June 30th 2012 @ 7:01pm
Matt_S said | June 30th 2012 @ 7:01pm | Report comment
Bordering on delusional there. There is a big percentage of Victorian born Storm supporters who go to games. I am very pleased when I visit Melbourne for the odd Storm game and see Indian students, Asians, Islanders, and Anglo’s, not that the cultural mix is important, but I can see why this is for some union supporters….elitism perhaps?
Also, RL have a growing number of junior clubs in Melbourne, and the ARL development program hits about 25,000 Victorian kids per year in development clinics.
Also, I would question your comments on FTA and league in Victoria. Origin & Tests are still played live in Victoria but I hear Wallaby games are shunted to a later time slot or on a minor digital channel. How is this possible if union is so much more popular? How can a little state game between two non Victorian sides get 56,000? How many did the Wallabies last attract in Melbourne?
Soon we will have the Pirates in WA, and the way the Force compete, should take us long to regain lost ground, especially with a billion plus TV contract.
July 4th 2012 @ 2:11am
D Maaga said | July 4th 2012 @ 2:11am | Report comment
first of all you claim the majority of the qld reds 30,000+ membership are juniors who got them for free and then you claim the warriors are the biggest footy club in nz. how does anyone on here take you seriously with BS trolling like that?
there are more rugby union players, clubs and schools playing rugby in victoria than rugby league. the question you should asking is how can two little state game between two non victorian sides get 56,000? how many did the kangaroos league side last attract in melbourne. sydney or brisbane?
July 1st 2012 @ 1:41pm
Kasey said | July 1st 2012 @ 1:41pm | Report comment
Not all Soccer fans are southern European or descended from same. I was born here. I am 100% Aussie, I love football and the Socceroos, where do I fit into your narrow minded view of the world?
June 30th 2012 @ 10:41pm
p.Tah said | June 30th 2012 @ 10:41pm | Report comment
Old Rugby Boy, you’re really showing your true colours now, why do you bother chopping and changing names?
July 1st 2012 @ 3:06am
Damo said | July 1st 2012 @ 3:06am | Report comment
Yes, Ptah – league is a good game but one of its main detriments is the fact that it is ‘championed’ by ignorant xenophobes like Old RL Boy.
If you think you are doing your code a service ORB with this trolling you are mistaken. League is a good game that would be better served by conversations that excluded bigotry. Your ‘opinions’ are as elitist as a private school selection policy.
July 1st 2012 @ 2:13pm
Old Rugby Boy said | July 1st 2012 @ 2:13pm | Report comment
P.Tah,
I’m a realist. I have played RL and I go to SOO. However, I played RU from U7s up to my late 40′s. I went to an, in those days, an all RU school. I am still actively involved in the Subies. Having seen the amount of RL played in Tassie in summer and the number of RL park games played around Melbourne, I thought my question was quite legitimate. I ask how many of you RU champions actually spent your own time trying working to keep RU alive in Sydney or are you arm chair experts. RU is starting to struggle under the weight of AFL in NSW. The NRL is offering better career opportunities for young footballers and the RU administration, in this country, has had only one good idea in that last 10 years and that was to have a Saturday afternoon Test. If more RU supporter were realistic about the current situation and stopped making snide remarks about those, who do question the games direction, then perhaps action to keep RU alive would take place.
July 4th 2012 @ 2:18am
D Maaga said | July 4th 2012 @ 2:18am | Report comment
i been involve with rugby union in australia and i don’t agree with you old league boy. afl and rugby league can have their domestic battle because rugby will just roll along as its an international sport. it doesn’t need to overtake league or afl all they have to do is to stay competitive at super rugby and international level.
June 30th 2012 @ 12:12pm
the older said | June 30th 2012 @ 12:12pm | Report comment
Our largest problem is not player rates, it is who those players are. SA and NZ get the cream of the crop where as the majority of our best young athletes end up at aussie rules or league.We do pretty well with leftovers.
June 30th 2012 @ 2:33pm
tonysalerno said | June 30th 2012 @ 2:33pm | Report comment
Fair call by the older.
Rugby is the premier sport in both SA and NZ; so the ARU is doing well to develop a very strong system which hard been filtered and streamlined by the premier sporting codes of NRL, AFL and to a lesser extent soccer.
June 30th 2012 @ 2:47pm
Recalcitrant said | June 30th 2012 @ 2:47pm | Report comment
Rugby is most definately not anywhere near the premier sport in South Africa. Ever heard of soccer?
Rugby is a white man’s game, with a few Africans here and there. Been to RSA a bunch of times, rugby is only for the European whites. The only blacks you get are working in the concession stands.
Australia does well in rugby because of the Sydney schools competitions, and we are located near New Zealand we get to play the best regularly.
Obviously the NSW rugby union club competition is doing something right over the years. What’s Sydney population, a bit more than the total of all of New Zealand. So there is plenty of players concentrated in one region of Australia.
June 30th 2012 @ 4:59pm
Tigranes said | June 30th 2012 @ 4:59pm | Report comment
Plenty of coloured plays rugby in South Africa. Ever heard of Bryan Habana, JP Pieterson, Gio Aplon, Juan de Dongh, Elton Jantjies, Tendai Mtawirra, Lvovi Mvovo?
Supersport actually provide rugby commentary in Xhosa, which is a Black African language.
June 30th 2012 @ 5:12pm
biltongbek said | June 30th 2012 @ 5:12pm | Report comment
The reason for that is a marketing ploy, Supersport is doing their bit, to encourage more veiwership amongst the traditional Soccer fans.
July 1st 2012 @ 1:31pm
Tigranes said | July 1st 2012 @ 1:31pm | Report comment
If the crowds the Premier Soccer League gets are enough to make it a “premier sport” than it makes the HAL look like the EPL by comparison.
July 4th 2012 @ 2:26am
D Maaga said | July 4th 2012 @ 2:26am | Report comment
rugby is a premier sport in south africa along with football and cricket everyone knows that unless your a rugby league fan living in australia with a bit of chip of his shoulder. there are more black rugby players in south africa than all the rugby league players in france, nz and united kingdom put together.
i’ve been to south africa many times and very impress at the numbers of non white players, fans, volunteers and those in charge of the game.
when you have time recalcitrant sit down and watch some of the under 20 rugby world cup matches or super rugby and see many black fans of rugby because you would have already knew this if you travel to south africa like you said.
June 30th 2012 @ 4:27pm
The Werewolf said | June 30th 2012 @ 4:27pm | Report comment
More people play football in Australia than the AFL, RL or RU
June 30th 2012 @ 6:35pm
Recalcitrant said | June 30th 2012 @ 6:35pm | Report comment
That is including women of course. But I believe basketball is big too. Maybe that should get all the government funding that soccer gets.
July 1st 2012 @ 1:30pm
Tigranes said | July 1st 2012 @ 1:30pm | Report comment
Never going to happen – basketball doesnt have anything to compare to soccer world cup
July 1st 2012 @ 2:40pm
Ideas Man said | July 1st 2012 @ 2:40pm | Report comment
In South Africa Football is the most popular sport not rugby.
July 4th 2012 @ 2:30am
D Maaga said | July 4th 2012 @ 2:30am | Report comment
In Japan Sumo is the most popular sport not football. In India hockey is the national sport not cricket.
June 30th 2012 @ 1:31pm
Red Block said | June 30th 2012 @ 1:31pm | Report comment
Here we go again! Banging my head against a wall.
The problem is that we pick our elite players from a handful of schools. It is their role, in the production chain that is Australian rugby. Have a look at any state or national rep team. Player after player from only a few schools because they select coaches from within these schools to select the teams, with one token player from outside thrown in.
This is how it is and this is how it will stay. The schools get kudos for producing players and just in case any of you other schools are thinking of challenging them. Don’t! They created a comp that is only for them because they don’t like to look bad if they lose.
When a player is induced to go these schools, they are given up to 20 hours coaching a week, first class facilities and access to high quality coaches.
Compare this to the local club player who gets a volunteer dad as coach for two hours a week.
I’m not saying the school system is irrelevant. But if the net were cast wider and greater access was given to development and coaching of players outside this system. Australia could more than just match any nation.
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download The Roar’s iPhone App in the App Store here.
July 2nd 2012 @ 12:38am
Sluggy said | July 2nd 2012 @ 12:38am | Report comment
RB, this is a theory I’ve heard before…. but a lot of kids with rugby potential are talented spotted and recruited into those rugby schools. E.G Kurtley Beale at St Josephs Collage. Not sure if he was on a scholarship or if the fees were paid by some benefactor in the rugby community but it seems to be working out.
The other anecdote I’ve heard is that clubs such as Randwick will invite talented lads they (or their district juniors) come across in junior games to play in the district juniors on the basis it gives them a better chance at eventual selection in the colts down the track.
The level of coaching at some juniors is probably better than others, but it really is a labour of love and in any event a lot of schools coaching is done by teachers with little specific expertise, until you get near the 16As or the 1st XV.
The worry however, is the talented ones who aren’t spotted and are lost, or worse lost to AFL or rugbylite. This is why the junior state carnival days are so important – a talented kid in the 11s who has not had the benefit of any specialist coaching or much exposure might just be spotted because of the interest those days generate in the rugby community.
July 2nd 2012 @ 9:23pm
Ideas Man said | July 2nd 2012 @ 9:23pm | Report comment
Re the Randwick anecdote, it’s either untrue or Randwick haven’t been very successful at it…..they have one U17 team in the district, that’s all.
The issue is that most rugby kids at this age have school rugby as their priority and have trouble fitting in weekend rugby or rugby league.
June 30th 2012 @ 3:33pm
Bearfax said | June 30th 2012 @ 3:33pm | Report comment
I am speaking anecdotally here as I am not aware of the socio-economic breakdown of other major cities in Oz, but I think Union in Sydney in particular, has much of the economic class distinctions carried over from England, in respect of Union and League.
Union has tended to be a game played by the wealthier in England, and League by the poorer classes and mainly confined to the north. In Sydney you can see that same tendency in the break down of teams especially in the major comps. People in business even come to refer to the ‘Old Boys School Tie’ network that operates in Union circles.
In Rugby League for example out of the nine Sydney suburban sides playing in the major Rugby League comp, only one can be considered a Northern suburbs side (Manly Warringah) and only one Eastern Suburbs side (Sydney City). These tend to be recognised as the affluent areas of Sydney.
Now if we look at the Sydney metropolitan ‘Shute Shield’ the major Union comp in that city, There are thirteen sides playing and five come from the north shore (Manly, Warringah, Northern Suburbs, Gordon and Eastwood). Add to that two eastern suburb sides (Eastern Suburbs and Randwick) and then add Sydney University and you find 8 of the 13 Union sides come from the more affluent or potentially affluent areas of Sydney.
Though this is gradually changing, this structure for a long time was re-inforced by public schools that tended to play the code that was better represented in their area. Further many of the major private schools are Union based.
I remember as a school kid attending Manly Boys High, that Union was the major code played in local schools in that area. No doubt in the west it was League.
As the majority of people tend to live outside of those more affluent areas in Sydney, League has tended to take a strangle hold except in the north and east fringes. To a great degree that situation still exists and therefore makes it hard to maintain a sufficently healthy number of players to fill the higher ranks in Union.
June 30th 2012 @ 4:17pm
Atawhai Drive said | June 30th 2012 @ 4:17pm | Report comment
Just for the record, there are 12 Shute Shield clubs, not 13. The other four are West Harbour, Parramatta, Penrith and Southern Districts. There’s plenty of so-called “new money” in the Shire, not so much elsewhere.
History and culture join forces to ensure that club rugby at the top level remains largely confined to the well-off demographic. Subbies is a different story.
June 30th 2012 @ 10:56pm
Bearfax said | June 30th 2012 @ 10:56pm | Report comment
A slip of the computer key and brain. Of course there are 12 teams. Thanks for the reminder. But my statement remains. yes new money in the Shire and in fact other places in Sydney, but the establshed predominance of wealth is in the East and North
June 30th 2012 @ 5:03pm
Tigranes said | June 30th 2012 @ 5:03pm | Report comment
The real reason for Australia’s success is our proximity to NZ and competing in Super Rugby.
Australian rugby gets far more out of the current SANZAR deal than SA or NZ, who could each maintain their own professional domestic competition.
June 30th 2012 @ 6:37pm
Recalcitrant said | June 30th 2012 @ 6:37pm | Report comment
I guess it helps to have Australia in their rugby competition to make it easy for all their people when they migrate over here.
July 4th 2012 @ 2:33am
D Maaga said | July 4th 2012 @ 2:33am | Report comment
just as the nrl are very lucky they can signed any kiwis and overseas players. imagine if the aru open the door and let all their super teams sign kiwis and pacific islanders.