Australia’s Next Top Rugby Team
Roar Guru Related coverage
With today’s TV dominated by reality rubbish looking to find the next top chef/singer/model etc, I have a wacky suggestion for all of those who have become sick of suffering while watching the same sub-standard Australia rugby players who are constantly selected from the same predictable gene pools.
My proposal is that we create a reality TV show to create a new Australian rugby team. The chosen side should then be given a trial match against the current Wallabies.
I had this thought some years ago when I decided that I had played against better props that Matt Dunning and Al Baxter in local comps on the Gold Coast.
Unfortunately for regional players though, representative opportunities are few and far between as selectors appear to be focused solely on certain big-named clubs.
This favouritism in selection extends all the way to the top as the most current Wallabies team beaten by the All Blacks on the weekend contained no fewer than eight Waratahs in the starting line-up.
NSW under-performed this year to the extreme, yet the more successful Brumbies and Reds franchises were ignored. This tells me that form is not the deciding factor in selection, and in my world this is absolutely incorrect in selecting any representative side.
I would propose that a reality TV competition be created to publicly identify players from all over Australia. Each week a new position could be filled, starting with tight-head prop and ending with a full-back.
All would-be players in Australia who fancy themselves with a shot at the title in their respective positions can come and chance their arm by undergoing physical examinations, tests of speed, strength and rugby prowess with the best judged being assembled into a team.
Could you just imagine a six foot four miner from Cloncurry propping against Benn Robinson, or a whippet-fast, tough stock-rider from the Territory going against Digby on the wing?
This would be awesome for many reasons but at the very least for the following two. First, it might identify a new, unknown and better Wallabies team and provide currently unknown players with an avenue to better their chances of representative selection. It might prove to the Australian sporting public just how good the current team and players are.
This seems like win-win either way.
So much is said about the “lack of cattle” that Australia has with regard to rugby players and how rival codes steal away the best and brightest. I suspect that this is not true, but due to the vast size of this country, there are hidden gems waiting to be found.
Unfortunately, the only ones looking (read “Wallaby selectors”) keep searching in the same over-mined places (read “Sydney club-rugby”).
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:
- All Blacks, Rugby Union, wallabies
August 21st 2012 @ 2:04am
bolt1493 said | August 21st 2012 @ 2:04am | Report comment
It is not that wacky an idea. It has been done before in other team sports. I know an Irish TV station (I think it was TV4) did with Gaelic Football a couple of years ago.
August 21st 2012 @ 2:21am
Johnno said | August 21st 2012 @ 2:21am | Report comment
Viv richards was doing something like this for west indies cricket. Cricket has done a show on foxtel with alan border and graham manou and lee furlong wife of shane watson all contributing to the show. Boxing has done these type of shows, would be good for profile of rugby if they did a show like this.
August 21st 2012 @ 2:45am
mickybly said | August 21st 2012 @ 2:45am | Report comment
Merging my most hated (reality TV) and most loved (rugby!) things… interesting.
I think my love of rugby would win out and I’d have to cave in and watch. Even if we got one good (S15 standard) player, that’d be considered a success I reckon. Not a bad idea really.
August 21st 2012 @ 4:21am
fin said | August 21st 2012 @ 4:21am | Report comment
You might unearth a few rough diamonds and at the very leasty find some players with a bit of mongrel about them.
August 21st 2012 @ 5:55am
kingplaymaker said | August 21st 2012 @ 5:55am | Report comment
‘So much is said about the “lack of cattle” that Australia has with regard to rugby players and how rival codes steal away the best and brightest. I suspect that this is not true, but due to the vast size of this country, there are hidden gems waiting to be found. ‘
23 million isn’t so vast when you consider France, Italy, the UK are all over 60, Germany 80, even Spain 50, Argentina 40. In fact you’d have to say Australia is a small population to produce enough sportsman for endless similar codes.
August 21st 2012 @ 6:28am
M.O.C. said | August 21st 2012 @ 6:28am | Report comment
“Endless codes”? 23 million not enough? – there are only 15 on the field at a time KPM. World Rugby has been dominated by countries with comparatively small populations, including pacific islands – you don’t need to be China to produce good sports people, you just need to be looking in the right areas, which includes selectors to take of the tweed jacket (with leather patched elbows!), put down the latte and look outside their favourite clubs for players to choose.
August 21st 2012 @ 6:52am
kingplaymaker said | August 21st 2012 @ 6:52am | Report comment
M.O.C. my point is that once a code expands more and more as the NRL and AFL are doing now, and takes all the talent, then in a fairly small country there isn’t enough left for the others. One of the Olympic athletes said that all the talent was being swallowed up by more and more dominant football codes. That means the NRL and AFL.
I would agree with you though that the ARU are not interested in talent from outside their traditional sources.
August 21st 2012 @ 7:39am
M.O.C. said | August 21st 2012 @ 7:39am | Report comment
I suppose that my point is, KPM, that it does not matter how many cattle you have if they only select from the same pool every time – how else can the selectors explain the presence of 8 Waratahs in the starting 15 of the WB after the atrocious season they had.
August 21st 2012 @ 7:47am
kingplaymaker said | August 21st 2012 @ 7:47am | Report comment
M.O.C. critics of rugby in Australia say that they could easily have expanded the game from the private to the public schools but that they don’t want to, in order to keep a certain type of person playing it instead off other types.
It’s quite hard to find an answer to that criticism.
August 21st 2012 @ 8:11am
M.O.C. said | August 21st 2012 @ 8:11am | Report comment
I agree. The whole closed-ranks of the Australian rugby power-brokers seems to be the biggest problem in this country. How many very average players have we seen have long club, state and WB careers because daddy was a selector.
August 21st 2012 @ 8:14am
formeropenside said | August 21st 2012 @ 8:14am | Report comment
Well, its hard if you dont actually look for it.
Until 1995 Rugby was amateur. Even since then, domestic cash is tight. For all of that time, without the “private schools” rugby would have died in Australia.
The ARU are fighting to keep what they have. Expansion is tough and expensive – refer Force, Western for an example of money largely flushed away.
Yeah, I’d like to see rugby played in all schools – in fact, I’d like AFL and NRL to die. But just because I want something does not mean it is realistic.
August 21st 2012 @ 9:16am
kingplaymaker said | August 21st 2012 @ 9:16am | Report comment
fos cash is tight, but is there really a drive from the ARU to bring rugby to the other schools?
August 21st 2012 @ 12:30pm
GWS Rugby said | August 21st 2012 @ 12:30pm | Report comment
cannot hope to compete when we utilise maybe 10% of schoolboys. don’t think aru want change either
August 21st 2012 @ 6:45am
sixo_clock said | August 21st 2012 @ 6:45am | Report comment
We have the men to do the job, we are second in the world rankings and despite the loss and no bonus point we were in that game all the way. Our shortcomings are a product of inferior junior coaching, the fallacy of the ‘Wallaby Rugby’ concept, and the competition for athletes in a sports mad nation.
When we see Wallabies fight for and earn consistent counter ruck ball, when we understand the necessity for fast ball from our rucks then we will be playing winning Rugby. This lack of emphasis on the ruck as the centrepiece of Rugby is where we are exposed. Pressure and Composure are what break down an opposition and we do not have that mindset.
I understand the tongue-in-cheek aspect of this article but we need to send a positive message because “Sport is not a matter of life-and-death, it is much more important than that”. (various)
August 21st 2012 @ 6:46am
Uncle Argyle said | August 21st 2012 @ 6:46am | Report comment
I had this thought some years ago when I decided that I had played against better props that Matt Dunning and Al Baxter in local comps on the Gold Coast – You did, don’t doubt yourself.
August 21st 2012 @ 7:02am
Tah In The Wilderness said | August 21st 2012 @ 7:02am | Report comment
Did any Australian Boxing Champions get a start in Jimmy Sharman Boxing Tents on the show circuit.
I do recall on a few visits I made to them how the Aboriginal boxers, working for Sharman, would play with the crowd-boxer for a few minutes. Then just as the crowd thought ‘ours boys a real goer’ the ‘reality’ part took over.
With a quick one-two he’d be looking at the ceiling and dragged off the canvas by the ankles.
Next?
But don’t worry – there was always another punter ready to step into the ring. And I reckon there was a lot more ‘reality’ to it than ‘The Shire’. Should be a screaming success!
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download The Roar’s iPhone App in the App Store here.
August 21st 2012 @ 8:28am
Fetus said | August 21st 2012 @ 8:28am | Report comment
I think the whole aru is flawed when was the last proper commission like the nrl and afl have to health check the code. Australian school boys is full of celebrity selections. Every year there is someone’s son playing who isn’t very good. Excluding Clarkys son who seems like he could be a great talent. Blocker roach’s son was a celebrity pick who then fronted the papers saying he was going back to league because he couldn’t get a fair go in union. Point been he turned up to play club rugby and they told him he wasn’t very good and didn’t deserve the wraps he had been given. The aru needs a clean out right down to school boy level. There is plenty of talent and I agree you only need to find 15 blokes who are of high class level. The rest should follow and aspire.
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download The Roar’s iPhone App in the App Store here.
August 21st 2012 @ 8:58am
Hoy said | August 21st 2012 @ 8:58am | Report comment
If you aren’t in the First XV, selected through school boy ranks, under 19s, under 20s etc, you are virtually discarded.
I was a late bloomer, if you could call it that. I was in the fifths at school, the lowest we had, and then when I left, within two years, I was playing Colts 2 in a winning GF against the first XV players I knew from school.
As a generalisation, the pretty blokes get the easy pathways.
But it is more than that. The centralisation of the acadamies is a brainless idea, that isn’t helping anyone I don’t think. League teams have scouts out everywhere at carnivals etc. Does Rugby? Is someone out in the Central West (of any state) checking out the young blokes playing? Is someone up at Rocky, or in Singleton, or Wherever seeing the country blokes run around, and seeing talent, or at the very least, potential?
One more thing: potential needs good coaching to develop. I have said about a million times, Australia seems to reward mediocrity. Both players and coaches. Mediocrity should never be enough to be selected or hired.
As a player, if you are mediocre, the coach should select the next bloke to see if he is better. Horne? 13 starts for what? What has he done? Might as well see what Taps can do. I can’t pick the difference between Horne and Faingaa. So what splits them? Faingaa has more power in contact that much is for sure. But Taps has more skill, and you don’t lose anything in defense.
Onto coaching; Why would the Force hire Foley after the season he has had? What the hell are they thinking over there? Why is Nucifora still in charge of our Under 20s? How did he retain his job there after the worst finish? Now don’t get me wrong, in the quarters, good teams are going out. But he has been sacked from two high profile coaching roles. Why is he still around? Eddie Jones? Why would the Reds hire Jones immediately after he was sacked as national coach? He was sacked for a reason. Don’t be the damn rebound team.
I am starting to lose it with Rugby in this country. I can’t understand peoples thought process with selections, hiring, etc. Frustrating.
August 21st 2012 @ 9:39am
M.O.C. said | August 21st 2012 @ 9:39am | Report comment
I agree with all you have said Hoy. I am still flummoxed by the idea of the Force wanting Foley after his season with the Tahs. It seems that the administrators have so little imagination that it looks like they are all given the same list of 10 coaches and 150 players to fill every team in the country, heaven forbid they think outside the square and identify and coach someone who is not already on “the list”.
August 21st 2012 @ 11:01am
Jiggles said | August 21st 2012 @ 11:01am | Report comment
I think your experience is pretty common, hoy. I know you’re not suggesting you’re wallaby material, but if you don’t get spotted in school you’re lost to the system.
I played 4th XV at a well known Brisbane School, and within 4 years of graduation I was playing Brisbane 1st grade. I didn’t want to play pro rugby and nor was I good enough, but I think a number of blokes who weren’t school boy stars could become very competent players, maybe even super rugby standard, if they were afforded the same development structures as those identified as 15 year olds.
The private schools are the only reason why rugby is still alive in this country, that is a fact. But it doesn’t mean we shouldnt move with the times and place more importance on junior club rugby as the path way. With the influx of kiwis and islander people into Australia, focusing on club rugby would widen the player catchment outside of traditional schools. It seems as if boys from this demographic aren’t offered scholarships, then they won’t make it as a rugby player in this country.
August 21st 2012 @ 11:27am
Funk said | August 21st 2012 @ 11:27am | Report comment
Add into the mix (of the kiwis and P/islanders) the the amount of Saffas and english who are moving to Aus as well.
August 21st 2012 @ 1:48pm
Jiggles said | August 21st 2012 @ 1:48pm | Report comment
The African and English kids usually have the means to go to one of the private rugby schools, so players like Pocock, Goodwin etc. get caught by the system. Its the Kiwi and Islander kids that we should really be looking at through club rugby.
August 21st 2012 @ 2:44pm
Markus said | August 21st 2012 @ 2:44pm | Report comment
I like the way the Canberra competition operates in this regard.
All of the senior rugby clubs also have junior teams competing in the same competition as the private schools, with teams from surrounding country NSW incorporated as well (Yass, Cooma, Wagga etc).
It opens the potential player base up to a lot of players who would have otherwise just been picked up by/stuck with league, especially among the pacific islander juniors and in traditional league feeder areas like Queanbeyan and Wagga.
August 21st 2012 @ 12:59pm
Markus said | August 21st 2012 @ 12:59pm | Report comment
Great summary, Hoy.
It gets more frustrating when even 12yr old kids have been fast-tracked into the crucial First XV and schoolboy rep pathways, based on ‘potential’. Potential of course being a synonym for size.
Kids who have their growth spurt young get a leg-up that can be almost impossible for late bloomers to make up in later years, even if the late bloomers are now twice their size.