RATHBONE: Why Australian rugby needs a third tier competition
Columnist 
Reds' Digby Ioane tries to bust through Waratahs defence (Steve Bell / White Devil Images)
Related coverage
When I was a teenager, I remember attending a Currie Cup final between Western Province and the Natal Sharks. The build up to the final was huge and the match itself was played with Test match intensity to a capacity crowd at Kings Park.
Despite an extended Super Rugby season and full Test match window, the Currie Cup in South Africa is serious business. Players get to compete for Springbok jerseys and crowds get to see additional local derbies.
The Currie Cup dates back to 1889 and since then has played a significant role in establishing South African rugby as an international powerhouse.
New Zealand has ensured that the National Provincial Championship fills the gap between Test rugby and club rugby once the Super season concludes.
Australian rugby introduced the Australian Rugby Championship back in 2007, only to scrap the competition that same year due to the financial loses the competition incurred.
In New Zealand and South Africa, rugby is a dominant sport. This means they’re able to generate enough interest in a third tier competition to make the format work for sponsors.
This is not to say that a local provincial competition is not viable in Australia, but it does mean that an introduction of such a competition poses more challenges in this country.
The ARC cost the ARU $4.7 million and was clearly unsustainable. It highlighted what does not work, and in that sense, it will inform decisions about future provincial competitions in Australia.
If you were hoping I was going to outline my thoughts on a viable solution to the third tier question, I’m going to disappoint. I don’t have those answers, but I can tell you why a solution must be found.
In 2008, I played a season of club rugby for Eastern Suburbs in Sydney. The matches tended to vary greatly in quality with the finals being a big step up from the regular season matches.
That said, even the toughest matches were a world away from Super Rugby in terms of quality and a bigger jump again from Test match rugby.
This leaves Australian players very thin on top-level competition for nearly six months of the year and does little to improve the standard of players filtering into our Super Rugby squads.
It also means that rugby fans are left to get their Saturday fix from other sports; sports that compete directly with rugby in an already convoluted bun fight for sponsorship dollars.
All Black and Springbok players returning from injury get to do so at a level of rugby that properly prepares them to return to the Test arena.
I recall playing a Sydney club rugby match in 2005, a week before the Bledisloe. The difference was so stark I may as well have been playing a different sport.
The future success of Australian rugby requires a third tier competition.
At the very least, the game’s stakeholders must begin a conversation that leads us down that path.
Former Wallaby Clyde Rathbone has returned to Super Rugby with the ACT Brumbies, following an injury-forced retirement from all forms in 2009. He writes guest columns for The Roar, and will blog his journey back to professional rugby in 2013.
Have you seen the new Wallabies jersey? Want one of your own? We're giving away a brand new 2013 Wallabies jersey to one lucky Roarer, click here to go in the running to win.
- Explore:
- Australian rugby, currie cup, Rugby Union, wallabies
August 16th 2012 @ 6:50am
Who Needs Melon said | August 16th 2012 @ 6:50am | Report comment
There was an article on here the other day where we discussed the breakup of the NSW rugby boards/committees. As I understand it there is a Waratahs Ltd and a separate NSWRU. This and looking at the stand-alone profitability of the ARC implies that we can continually carve up the different components of our rugby structure and expect each to be stand-alone viable. I realise there is a business to be run and this is often done in the business world where a non-performing company will be split into several constituents and those parts sold off, closed down, etc.
But if you look at a typical Super rugby squad of 30 or so players, would you pick the 8 or so who seldom make the match-day 22 and say they are non-profitable and can be dropped? Obviously not. Having those players there STRENGTHENS the main player group.
I don’t think we should be looking at rugby that way. After all, is schoolboy rugby ‘profitable’? We need to look at the whole and be thinking long term. Of course if a 3rd tier can be profitable, great – and they should strive for that of course – but the reason to put in this tier is not for it to make money as a stand-alone entity. The idea would be that it retains more players in the game at a higher level, provides a pathway to those players to super rugby, a better prepared player at super rugby level, better results at super rugby and national level and the revenue will flow from that. Furthermore it’s not just about the players but a pathway for coaches, refs, etc.
August 16th 2012 @ 7:04am
Rough Conduct said | August 16th 2012 @ 7:04am | Report comment
Brisbane City
Queensland Country (Sunshine Coast/Townsville)
Sydney (Sydney’s East/South)
NSW Metropolitan (Sydney’s West/North)
NSW Country (Newcastle)
ACT
VIC
WA
Wow, really not that hard. No idiotic names or abstract ‘regions’ required, 8 semi-pro teams to fill the Rugby void post SR and provide a true development platform. Club rugby is not an option, provincial is the way to go, just get it done ARU!
August 16th 2012 @ 9:11am
Happy Hooker said | August 16th 2012 @ 9:11am | Report comment
And the money comes from where exactly?
August 16th 2012 @ 9:23am
Bakkies said | August 16th 2012 @ 9:23am | Report comment
Sponsors, Pay TV the same thing that is propping up Super Rugby and the like.
August 16th 2012 @ 9:59am
Happy Hooker said | August 16th 2012 @ 9:59am | Report comment
Yeah right.
August 16th 2012 @ 12:03pm
AndyS said | August 16th 2012 @ 12:03pm | Report comment
The Spirit and Vikings broke even last time and neither were given big loans by the ARU. Maybe look at what they did, rather than assume the mistakes of the others must be repeated…?
August 16th 2012 @ 12:16pm
mania said | August 16th 2012 @ 12:16pm | Report comment
its do-able AndyS – NZ ITM teams are only just finidng out the the hard way to live within their means. just because its a professional era doesnt mean everyone and their dog is to get paid. players need to realise that they arent in super or test rugby and that the ITM/ARC (or whatever an aussie tier 2 comp gets called) is a stepping stone to show your wares before gaining higher honours.
i’m a fan of the players doing some amatuer time. it’ll teach them life skills and they’ll appreciate being paid to play rugby more.
August 16th 2012 @ 12:17pm
Atawhai Drive said | August 16th 2012 @ 12:17pm | Report comment
The Vikings came from Canberra, didn’t they? Not sure about the Spirit in a rugby setting, although there was a team of that name in the NSL during the 1990s. How quickly we forget.
Good luck with finding sponsors and getting the games on pay-TV. Last time around, the ABC had to be paid for broadcasting the ARC.
August 16th 2012 @ 1:00pm
AndyS said | August 16th 2012 @ 1:00pm | Report comment
Although it is worth remembering that last time ’round FTA was 5 channels. Now everyone has digital. This Saturday afternoon One HD – a channel originally set up to much fanfare as a sports channel – is reduced to showing M.A.S.H. Despite the millionth re-run they must be paying for that too, so even if you made the content free it would be a saving on last time.
August 16th 2012 @ 7:51am
sheek said | August 16th 2012 @ 7:51am | Report comment
Clyde,
At least you have satisfied one fact – the Sydney Shute Shield & Brisbane Hospitals Cup is no longer the answer it was back in the 90s, 80s, 70s, 60s, etc.
Another competition needs to be found that concentrates the talent further & provides a higher level of competition.
I’m glad Rough Conduct is one of the early respondents, because I don’t think he fully understood the suggestion I was making elsewhere in the week.
Whether you call a team in the 3rd tier NSW Waratahs, or Sydney Waratahs, or Queensland Reds, or Brisbane Reds, the important thing is to retain the history & tradition of the Waratahs & Reds.
The NSW Waratahs have always played in Sydney, & the Queenlsand Reds have always played in Brisbane, so the name change is barely relevant as an issue.
Of course, the whole premise of my argument is that eventually Super Rugby will have to become a Heineken Cup style format in order to allow growth in each southern hemisphere country.
Large centres like Sydney, Auckland, Beunos Aires & perhaps Jo’burg & Cape Town can accommodate more than one major national club in each of these cities. This would necessitate a move away from provincially named teams to national club teams.
I love provincial rugby.
But in a changing world, it might be necessary to move to national clubs. The Super Rugby then would become a qualification via the national domestic comps of Australia, New Zealand, South Africa & Argentina.
The way I see it, at some point in the not too distant future, the top 4 teams from each of the ARC (Australia), Currie Cup (South Africa), NPC (New Zealand & Cameonato Argentino) Argentina would qualify annually for the Heineken Cup style Super rugby.
You still have Super Rugby, but more importantly the fans in each country will also have a strong, viable national domestic comp to enjoy.
In Australia, an ARC is critical not only for providing strong competition for the next generation of Wallabies, but also having something to put up in the sporting landscape against the AFL, NRL & A-League.
Initially, I would offer the following 8 ARC teams:
Sydney (north harbour), say Waratahs.
Sydney (east & south), say Fleet.
Sydney (greater west), say Rams.
Brisbane (north & west of Brisbane river), say Reds.
Brisbane (south & east of Brisbane river), say (whatever)?!
Canberra, say Brumbies.
Perth, say Force.
Melbourne, say Rebels.
If this goes well, then you can consider adding teams from Gold Coast (say Breakers), Newcastle (say Wildfires), Adelaide (say Falcons), North Qld (say Brolgas or whatever) & so on. Start small & build slowly.
August 16th 2012 @ 8:27am
Rickety Knees said | August 16th 2012 @ 8:27am | Report comment
Sheek – let’s hope that this finally gets some traction …..
August 16th 2012 @ 10:42am
Coxinator said | August 16th 2012 @ 10:42am | Report comment
One of the major issues here is who will support them? NSW/QLD country teams can do the rounds of rural centres and get crowds but one o the fundamental flaws of the ARC was that there’re no fans of the Rams/Fleet/whatever.
I think you would find the club supporters either leave in droves thus killing off club rugby or staying put like they did for the ARC (ie. no crowds).
Not sure who mentioned it but maybe a national sevens league is the place to start due to the festival atmosphere and reduced setup costs.
August 16th 2012 @ 3:10pm
sheek said | August 16th 2012 @ 3:10pm | Report comment
Coxinator,
Gee whiz, have you been hiding under a rock? We’ve discussed ad infinitum why the ARC failed last time, & how we can learn from it, & be better next time.
A 7s league is a ridiculous option for a national comp, or more precisely, a stand-alone national comp. It has no long-term benefit whatsoever if you’re proposing it as a stand-alone national comp, without a XVs comp to go with it.
August 16th 2012 @ 7:07pm
Coxinator said | August 16th 2012 @ 7:07pm | Report comment
Hiding under a rock is better than being stuck in the desert.
You may have discussed why it didn’t work but your teams still have to represent a community to get fans. That’s why neither Randwick fans or Easts fans will feel attached to a team called “The Fleet” or “City” or whatever. Look also at how poor the response of Rugby League communities has been when they are told to go to support a team that may not be called their original name or play at a ground that is nowhere near their home fan base.
If you had a solution I didn’t read it above as this a massive restructure that requires unrealistic cooperation from NZ and SA and about 15-20 years development in Argentinian rugby.
The 7s suggestion wasn’t originally made by me but this is possibly a way of INITIALLY generating sponsorship, keeping players in the game after school, getting FTA exposure while trying to plan for the next National Club/ARC comp. Even if it was only semi-pro it would still be better than paying to play like most of us do in Premier Grade rugby. That’s the reason so many of my mates played Jim Beam or Qld cup League instead.
The natural progression appears to be maybe a two-tiered Super comp which I’ve suggested previously.
Having done the rounds of Sevens tournaments in the UK it’s an easy way to get decent crowds and expose the game across the landscape. Given it’s an Olympic sport now, this is far from ridiculous.
As for
August 16th 2012 @ 7:23pm
sheek said | August 16th 2012 @ 7:23pm | Report comment
Alright Coxinator,
We’ll have to agree to disagree on some things.
7s is fine, but it’s like T20 to cricket, it’s the entree, or perhaps the dessert, but it’s not the main course.
For long term survival, I think you would need XVs rugby.
But of course, with current generations having shorter & shorter attention spans, 7s rugby & T20 cricket might well be the future…..!!!
With respect to names like Fleet & Rams, while they don’t have a rugby history, they have a cultural history stretching back to the first fleet & our first export industry. In that respect, they are wonderful icons.
I don’t know that getting SA & NZ support would be so difficult. From Roarers responses from those countries, many would like to see their national comps reclaim lost ground, while acknowledging the role of super rugby as a cash-cow.
Nor would I get too excited (just yet) about 7s rugby being an Olympic sport. Hockey (an excellent game) has been an Olympic sport for most of its history, but has failed to penetrate mainstream Australian sport.
The danger of rugby organisations is to assume that being an Olympic sport will immediately be manna leading to the promised land. It won’t. Such a benefit should not be taken for granted.
Meanwhile, the AFL & NRL will continue to do what they’re been doing for a century – ensuring that their week-in/week-out product is the very best they can make it to be.
August 17th 2012 @ 2:04am
abnutta said | August 17th 2012 @ 2:04am | Report comment
SA has already made the move. They’ve been quite ruthless actually, culling the CC Premier Div to 8 and this year only 6, yes six teams!
NZ is half way there with 7 in the Premiership. They are too sentimental however by playing crossover matches with the Championship (what you could call the 2nd Div).
There is a concern that only having 5 teams playing SR will result in a kind of urban drift of players away from provinces outside of the major centres, namely Auckland, Wellington, Hamilton, Christchurch and Dunedin.
I feel the thinking is that by keeping the likes of Manawatu, Bay of Plenty, Hawkes Bay and Southland etc in the ITM cup and having regular contact with the Canterbury’s and Waikato’s etc players like Guildfrod, Dagg, Hika Elliot (all Hawkes Bay ITM players) will remain in the provinces thus keeping them strong.
With an 8 team NZ SR Div that plays no matches with the 6 ITM bases that are unlucky enough to miss out – there will be a clearly defined set of Haves and Have Nots. The feared Urban drift would be inevitable and thus opposition to setting up an 8 team comp would be immense….
But I have an idea which might placate the naysayers. Reverse the loan system that’s been in the ITM Cup for years.
Strong provinces, currently loan surplus players/fringe squad members to weaker teams to give them game time eg. a Canterbury player will be loaned to Southland even though these teams play against each other. That player remains a Canterbury player.
Tony Woodcock could be loaned to the Auckland Blues in the SR and remain a North Harbour player. Tanerau Latimer can be loaned to the Waikato Chiefs and remain a Bay of Plenty player. Israel Dagg could be loaned to the Canterbury Crusaders and remain a Hawkes Bay player (although in my view of SR expansion the Hawkes Bay Magpies would be one of the 8 teams and I think he’ll be needed).
August 16th 2012 @ 12:57pm
Blinky Bill of Bellingen said | August 16th 2012 @ 12:57pm | Report comment
Wasn’t there mention during the week of the ABC having a rethink of televising the Shute Shield?
Maybe now is an appropriate time for the ARC (or what ever it’s to be called) to be thought through and offered to the ABC, who have done a wonderful job supporting Rugby for ages.
August 17th 2012 @ 1:32am
abnutta said | August 17th 2012 @ 1:32am | Report comment
sheek,
Excellent work. Sorting out Australia’s end of the bargain re: Super Rugby expansion was always going to be the hardest part.
South Africa has already taken care of their end. The Currie Cup 1st Div has been running at 8 teams for the last few seasons and this year will be run with 6 (6 teams per conference will be the first phase of SR expansion followed by 8).
New Zealand has run the Premiership Div with 7 teams (although they persist with cross-over matches with the Championship Div)
Being from Hawkes Bay originally, I also understand where Coxinator is coming from re: fan identification with their respective teams. Our union was founded in 1884, Taranaki in 1885, Wellington in 1875 and Manawatu in 1886. That’s a lot of history and parochialism right there, I think you’ll agree. Yet, in SR all of us apart from Wellington have had to sacrifice our provincial identity to some extent in forming the Hurricanes.
Same goes for almost all the NZ SR teams.
I think it wouldn’t be too much to ask, for the sacrifice/adaptation/evolution/re-distribution of the Reds and Waratahs “brands” to new teams in an 8 team competition that will ultimately benefit all the countries in SR.
August 16th 2012 @ 7:51am
mania said | August 16th 2012 @ 7:51am | Report comment
“The future success of Australian rugby requires a third tier competition” … eventually but desperately needs grass roots now.
August 16th 2012 @ 7:59am
sheek said | August 16th 2012 @ 7:59am | Report comment
Mania,
I’ve also said elsewhere the quickest way to get more players into the game, & more fans to follow rugby, is for the Wallabies, Waratahs, Reds, Rebels, Brumbies & Force to play a more compelling & entertaining brand of rugby.
These 6 major entities can achieve the growth spurt so much quicker than the cash-strapped ARU.
But if only they would……….
August 16th 2012 @ 8:14am
mania said | August 16th 2012 @ 8:14am | Report comment
sheek – that would definately make a difference. but if they did (aus players put on a great performance) and a young kid is inspired to play, who isnt at a private school, what options would that kid have? they’d just get lost in the half ars rugby system and then end up going to another sport, most likely league. i say this as i have cousins who live in NSW (penrith and mt druitt) who when they come over to NZ i make them play for my gridiron team (they’re mainly running backs, but one thats 6’2″ plays strong side linebacker). i asked them why they dont play rugby and they replied “its for the rich kids” meaning they percieve it still as a private school game.
so yeah a great wallabies, reds, brumbies etc performance would inspire the next gen to play but where would they get all the support and nurturing thats needed to learn rugby?
August 16th 2012 @ 9:03am
sheek said | August 16th 2012 @ 9:03am | Report comment
Mania,
First we have to have the kids knocking down the doors of district clubs wanting to play. Then hopefully, they’ll have the sense to provide more junior clubs in their districts to cater for these kids.
But first, we need the lure to hook them in, & that I reckon, is the role of the Wallabies, Waratahs, Reds, Rebels, Brumbies & Force.
And if anyone enquires as to what I mean by a “more compelling & entertaining brand of rugby”, then I saw it most weekends from NZ franchises in the Super Rugby.
Right now, the Kiwis might be the only country that understands how to play rugby “properly”!!!
August 16th 2012 @ 9:41am
mania said | August 16th 2012 @ 9:41am | Report comment
sheek – these things need to happen hand in hand. top end attracts the bottom end. a direct relationship.
August 16th 2012 @ 3:11pm
sheek said | August 16th 2012 @ 3:11pm | Report comment
Mania – true.
August 16th 2012 @ 7:11pm
Coxinator said | August 16th 2012 @ 7:11pm | Report comment
Those kids won’t see it on FTA TV so they’ll still be mimicking Benji/ Barba/ Natanui instead.
so really your best chance would be to have the Wallabies playing amazing, entertaining, winning rugby (The JON approach that is failing).
August 16th 2012 @ 7:56am
HayloHaylz said | August 16th 2012 @ 7:56am | Report comment
Go the Fleet! Really enjoyed the ARC comp, regular Wallabies up against Club youngsters, coming from NZ and the NPC, I loved the introduction of the Aussie version, shame it folded so soon!
August 16th 2012 @ 8:14am
Rob9 said | August 16th 2012 @ 8:14am | Report comment
Hi Rath! Long time reader, first time commenter on one of your articles on the roar. Firstly, I’m a big fan of contributions here and the one’s you’ve made on the rugby field (as a reds fan, more so of the one’s you’ve made in gold). I was at Suncorp the night that you went to town on the Poms in 04. I sat in awe as you powered down the sideline I was sitting on and swan dived over in the corner, I think that was the one brought up your hatrick. The life and the rugby experiences you’ve had at the elite level have been a pleasure to read about and I thank you for sharing your valuable insights.
On this particular topic I’m not sure I agree with your assessment of Australia ‘needing’ a third tier. Firstly, we already have a third tier, it’s just not set up in the same way as our SANZAR partners, and I’ll concede it’s nowhere near as strong as the competitions in those countries. What we don’t have is a national third tier that provides a step between club and Super Rugby, and I argue that we don’t need one.
As is widely recognised, the ARC was a financial black hole and the sums will continue to not add up. It would be nice to have something like the ITM or Currie Cups but it will be impossible to set up something like these competitions in Australia that’s sustainable. But this isn’t the end of the world and the answer isn’t always following what others around us are doing.
This sort of tiered system isn’t in the DNA of our sporting landscape at the elite level. The masses will only engage with the competition at the top of the tree that the best athletes are a part of. For this reason, any funds used for the establishment of a national third tier will be funds that are poured down a black hole. Sydney’s Shute Shield and SE Queensland’s Premier Rugby should continue to operate under the elite professional tier. It’s always going to be the case that there are gaps in the standards between the 3 tiers but I don’t believe we need to throw money at including another tier in the chain. I believe the answer is ‘fixing’ the tiers that we have to ensure we’re getting the most out of them. In particular, making some adjustments to the second tier.
If you look at the NRL, they have a number of state/region based competitions that operate as their ‘third tier’. The result for the NRL is one of the toughest and most evenly contested professional competitions in the world. Of course there are other factors that contribute to this but Rugby League in Australia doesn’t suffer from having a similar set up to the one that exists in Rugby Union.
What I do agree with is exposing more Australian Rugby Players to the elite level of rugby and putting more emphasis on the second tier. In short, this would mean more professional teams and a longer season/more competitions for our professional clubs. We need to move towards a system like the NRL where the domestic competition is the central focus and the primary generator of the games revenue. International rugby should become more prestigious and the cherry on top of the rugby sundae. More professional teams, in more local markets, playing more games should be the ice cream and bananas. Such a structure has the potential to bring in more revenue while carrying the game forward by exposing more Australians (players and fans) to the elite level of rugby.
Thanks again for your articles Rath and keep up the good work!
August 16th 2012 @ 8:34am
Bakkies said | August 16th 2012 @ 8:34am | Report comment
Rob what Clyde is saying is that club Rugby shouldn’t be the third tier and he is right. Even the Irish aren’t giving their pro provincial players as much club Rugby then they used to. The standard has dropped over the years and it’s good that a player who has experienced it has come out to back up the points people are making. Club rugby is a vital grassroots level but will never be a breeding and dumping ground for pro players. A lot of young players bypass club Rugby these days in to pro Rugby. Deans has changed that from Macqueen’s and Eddie Jones’ philosophy of having long camps (Coffs, Caloundra, etc) by getting players to play as many club games as they can but that wouldn’t occur if there was a higher standard 3rd tier.
August 16th 2012 @ 8:49am
Rob9 said | August 16th 2012 @ 8:49am | Report comment
Bakkies, what I’m suggesting is making adjustments to the second tier so no professional player (let alone a test standard player) has to be ’dumped’ back to club rugby. Include more professional teams and construct a new domestic competition along with a regional Heineken Cup/Champions League style competition so there are more than enough games for our elite players to be involved in at the highest domestic level without having to play club rugby or even make the drop back to a new national third tier. The ideas that I have would involve players playing in anywhere between 23 and 30 (non-test but still professional standard) games a year depending on how well their team does in the season. More than enough games to be playing in during the year before tests are included on top of that amount. We seem to be doing just fine in most other sports we take seriously without having a recognised national third tier, so I don’t believe rugby is an exception. We’ve won a RWC without a national third tier before in the professional era, my guess is that at some point in the future we’ll do the same.
August 16th 2012 @ 9:17am
Bakkies said | August 16th 2012 @ 9:17am | Report comment
The Irish sides use the British and Irish Cup for their second stringers. It’s played in a pool format over the full season. Scotland, England and Wales field second tier club sides. They get to play as a squad and competitive fixtures. One of the bigger problems we have in Australia is that injured players are brought back too early (see Drew Mitchell) in to Super Rugby then they pull up injured again. We lose a lot of players through injury. That’s why we need a proper third tier so we don’t have to delve in to the Dave Harveys of club Rugby and throw them in to Super Rugby. Players are playing a good intense standard of Rugby (which Clyde is calling for) and players are more ready for Super Rugby. Rather than going in to the bowels of club Rugby or rushing back an injured player earlier in their recovery.
State cricket makes a loss for Cricket Australia but they know they are screwed without it.
August 16th 2012 @ 9:54am
Rob9 said | August 16th 2012 @ 9:54am | Report comment
State cricket is also the second tier of cricket Bakkies. Of course CA is going to prop that competition up. An expanded second tier with more games and more opportunities for the best rugby players in the country to be involved in elite rugby is the way to go. There’s always going to be examples of the fish out of water stepping up. And on the whole, I think that the players that have been plucked from club rugby this year have done a solid job. You can’t expect them to be superstars, they’re playing club rugby for a reason.
At the end of the day a national third tier competition is going to run at a loss. A pretty substantial one if the ARC is anything to go by. The ARU is hardly swimming in it so I think their best off investing in system that they can realistically get an ROI (or at least break even) while still realising all of the goals that the establishment of a national third tier is supposed to achieve. The financial state of rugby in this country and the sums alone are enough to put this idea to bed.
August 16th 2012 @ 7:27pm
Bakkies said | August 16th 2012 @ 7:27pm | Report comment
Rob we have explained several reasons why the ARC ran at a loss. We have learnt from last time. Things are different now.
The reasons once again were
- Paying for tv rights doesn’t work. Get Foxsports on board and we will better for it. FTA is nearly dead in Australia in a sporting sense. Heck even Foxsports ramped up it’s NPC coverage so they are obviously need to more Rugby fixtures at that time of year.
- Ground hire costs. Renting out Parra Stadium, Carrara, etc cost far too much money. The games should have been at smaller grounds like Concord, etc.
- The majority of teams were poorly named and the team locations didn’t work. Put in teams that have a historical context. It’s a third tier comp you don’t need a team on the Gold Coast for instance.
- The relocation of Melbourne players cost $1 million. Now with the Rebels there the sponsorship base is bigger, players are already living in Melbourne and local development has been ramped up so Vic players can get in to the squad.
August 16th 2012 @ 9:08pm
Rob9 said | August 16th 2012 @ 9:08pm | Report comment
Have to agree to disagree on this one Bakkies. No doubt such a competition can be run more efficiently but over $4 million is a lot of ground to make up. I don’t think you can deny that if the ARU were to establish a national third tier competition, they would be losing money on such a concept. There are still significant costs involved like player payments and travel. And I just don’t see the money coming in to suggest breaking even let alone making a profit is achievable. This is due to the fact that on mass, Australians don’t endear themselves to competitions that aren’t recognised as being the highest domestic standard. Don’t get me wrong, I loved the ARC! I think everyone commenting on this article did and if the ARU decided to go back down this path I would give it and whoever my local team ended up being my full support. But unfortunately in this already cluttered sporting landscape we live in, folks like yourself and I Bakkies are rare specimens. Low levels of interest means the corporate, TV and fan money would be nonexistent. Just money going out and next to none coming in and right now that’s the last thing the ARU needs. There’s still issues on the second tier that need addressing and that’s going to involve funding. The QRU received a handout a couple of years ago as the failing Reds led that union into debt. The NSWRU haven’t cracked a profit since 06’ and now the Force are in some serious strife. The ARU made a commitment to Western Australia and they should move heaven and earth to ensure the Force don’t become extinct. It would be a huge step backwards for the game in this country if they did. The ARU’s investment priority needs to be this second tier as it’s this level of the game that is going to drive Australian rugby further. It’s this level that engages fans and it’s at this level where we select our national team.
PS. Another kettle of fish altogether but the Gold Coast should be recognised as a key growth area moving forward. Yes it’s a graveyard for sport franchises, but next to Newcastle it’s as promising an area for professional rugby to move into as any you will find in Australia. A big and growing population including a large expat Kiwi population and a rugby heartland with some great rugby schools and as strong a local competition (outside of Sydney and Brisbane) as any in the country. With the GC7’s now on the calendar and the city hosting its first test match this year, it looks as though the powers that be recognise the Gold Coasts’ importance as well.
August 16th 2012 @ 8:41am
onside said | August 16th 2012 @ 8:41am | Report comment
No FTA TV,no nothin’.Father Christmas ,Easter Bunny,Tooth Fairy.
Clydes ideas, compounded by thousands of sensible well structured
rugby posts over many years are all moot without FTA TV exposure.
August 16th 2012 @ 10:48am
Coxinator said | August 16th 2012 @ 10:48am | Report comment
So true. The only reason I wanted to play was watching Sunday Rugby on the ABC with Gordon Bray. Had I never seen it I would be a leaguie or AFL man for sure.
Let’s face it the NRL survives a lot by having Channel 9 and the Telegraph almost entirely dedicated to it.
August 16th 2012 @ 4:13pm
onside said | August 16th 2012 @ 4:13pm | Report comment
Coxinator,FTA TV is the huge bull elephant in the room.I would like to see one of the writers
dedicate an article to this issue. Until the Rugby solves this particular problem,it is impossible
to grow and develop the game.
I think the other subjects that are pivotal to FTA TV, is some sort of private ownership ,plusthe
removal of the salary cap.
FTA TV,private ownership and no salary cap are all one of a piece.
August 16th 2012 @ 7:13pm
Coxinator said | August 16th 2012 @ 7:13pm | Report comment
Am I holding your pen Onside?
Jokes aside I’d love to see someone explore the options here.
August 16th 2012 @ 7:26pm
sheek said | August 16th 2012 @ 7:26pm | Report comment
Gee, there have been so many elephants in the room this week on The Roar – is this the 6th or 7th elephant in the room?
Must be one heck of a huge room…..???
August 16th 2012 @ 8:56am
Elisha Pearce said | August 16th 2012 @ 8:56am | Report comment
I’ll comment on the article soon.
But I just had to say this: I read the caption underneath the photo at the top of the piece, “Reds’ Digby Ioane tries to bust through Waratahs defence”. My first thought, ” And he probably did dammit.” I think I need to stop grieving about the Waratahs season now.
August 16th 2012 @ 9:12am
Stiffarm said | August 16th 2012 @ 9:12am | Report comment
The Australian Conference of Super Rugby not third tier enough for you?
August 16th 2012 @ 9:59am
Happy Hooker said | August 16th 2012 @ 9:59am | Report comment
Ouch! Sad, but true
August 16th 2012 @ 9:31am
Worlds Biggest said | August 16th 2012 @ 9:31am | Report comment
The geneal consensus is Australian Rugby needs the third tier competition. However the two main issues are obviously funding and leadership. JON has clearly checked out and no longer gives a monkeys about Australian Rugby.