CAMPO: Where is Australian rugby heading?
By David Campese, 7 Sep 2012 David Campese is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- ARU, John ONeill, Rugby Union, wallabies
107 Have your say
Australian rugby union player Ben Robinson, ARU chief executive John O'Neill and SANZAR CEO, Greg Peters. AAP Image/Paul Miller
Related coverage
It’s concerning hearing all the talk about the ARU wanting to control the coaches in Australian rugby. Things haven’t gone their way, but they are still trying to exert their influence everywhere they can.
The latest innuendo about Deans coaching the Waratahs is alarming.
And has the ARU asked the Waratahs players or the Tahs board?
Do the Waratahs really need another coach who has been forced upon them by the ARU? Is that what the board wants? Is that what anyone wants?
And the fans, yes what about the fans who week in, week out support the team? I don’t think that they would be too happy.
So what happens if the team have a another bad year? Who takes responsibility? Are the ARU answerable for this?
As a matter of fact, who are they answerable to?
Let’s face it: the top brass is ruling with an iron fist but they are not using this totalitarian control to appoint the best available coaches.
And what about the Australian U20s and Sevens teams? Did you know we haven’t won the Hong Kong Sevens since 1988 and the last U20 championship in South Africa we came nowhere.
This is the future of Australian rugby.
Why is there no accountability for how poorly they’ve performed and why are the coaches still in business?
And then there’s the ex-Tahs coach who could’t have produced a worse term in office and yet he still gets a new job at the Force.
It reminds me of an old boys system: positions for mates and keeping everything within the network.
And the evidence of the disharmony off the field is now clear on the field. Players are disgruntled and unmotivated and rumours are that they are not a happy camp.
So I would like to see the Tahs get back on top and play the rugby we want them to play.
Rugby has become a political game; not just in Australia (though it’s perhaps more pronounced here), but wherever the great game is played.
People are in positions of influence for the wrong reasons – the money and the power, and most of all, EGOs – not because they genuinely love the game
Look at club rugby: the ARC was a much needed addition to the local rugby itinerary, but O’Neill canned it after just one year. The Currie Cup and the ITM Cup were not born overnight.
It takes time to build tradition and longevity. Not one year. And with this shortsighted approach, we have lost the tradition of local teams and heros, as well as a platform to breed new talent.
Now, apparently, we give Deans four games after five years of disappointment to see if he can show us he is up to the job. I wonder how many CEOs and board members would allow one of their top execs more chances after five years of losses?
I’d really like to know what their plan is.
Centralising rugby worked in New Zealand because it is a rugby mad country and because it’s been going for decades.
The sad reality is that in this professional era, winning to some sportsman isn’t everything. It’s just another day.
We want to see passion, pride, commitment and players who play for each other as a team – on and off the field.
Am I asking too much? Maybe.
I laughed to myself when I read Bob Dwyer say that the problem is that the basic skills are not great in Australia. Hmmm, sounds quite similar to something I have been saying for about ten years now.
We all deserve better.
Let’s hope that somebody is listening enough to start taking steps to get this once great sport back to were it should be.
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:
- ARU, John ONeill, Rugby Union, wallabies



September 7th 2012 @ 6:58am
mania said | September 7th 2012 @ 6:58am | Report comment
“It takes time to build tradition and longevity. Not one year. And with this shortsighted approach, we have lost the tradition of local teams and heros, as well as a platform to breed new talent. ” this is so true. aus rugby didnt self destruct over night and theres no quick fix. its going to take a lot of dedicated people who love the game to nurture it back to its golder era
September 7th 2012 @ 7:12am
Johnno said | September 7th 2012 @ 7:12am | Report comment
-Campo good article well said. JON in my view simply has to go. and take that Nucifora with you
JON 2nd term Failrues, i could write a whole audit on ohm so will try and keep it to 1 paragraph:
-Brand Awarness of wallabies awful. Would anyone in say penrith or west sydney or in george st sydney, recognise james horwill or dave pocock.Maybe 1 or 2 but almost no one. Only if they went to a GPS promotion day for the wallabies.
He has made the wallabies a minority sport the same awareness as say Field Hockey.
-No ARC or Under-20 comp
-Extending deans contract before the end of the world cup, no ther coutnry did that, totally incompetent design
-Bad marketing and rejecting of public schools, west sydney,and developing more rugby markets in OZ. Big markets too. Adelaide, Gold Coast, newcastle
-Shameful rejection of the western force to the point where the force have been totally undermined
-Haveing so much trust in david Nucifora, Wow incredible man worst ever under-20 world cup finish 8th lost to Argentina and france, was part of word cup disaster yet is part of the review of why it failed. That defies belief.
-Very tough on super rugby import rules. When every other code embraces imports like there is no tomorrow. Think the big A-league signing yesterday. How has that italian gut the A-league, or David buckram playing in Spain , or USA, or Messi playing in spain. Imports bring in crowds and tv ratings. Would you pay to watch Berrick Barnes, no. But you;d pay to watch Lomu,SBW,Nonu.
-Fans just want to see the set players nothing else give me a foreign import any day over daniel halengahu or barrack barnes. I can’t stad this Xenophibic protectionism attitude rugby has in OZ. South sydney rugby league club have 6 imports is that bad , not at all i love attaching Sam burgess play. Imports are good just as the A-lague is finding out, .
-No tv deal for rugby at schoolboy level, or no vision for making competitive rugby divisions. The sad decline of GPS rugby is so indicative of JON’s regime. SO yes JON has to go but alas he wont until after the lions series he wants one more shining moment..
-Already Gatland has said he wants fair refereeing if we get fair refereeing the wallabies will get smashed. If an elction were held in the rugby community to vote for the ARU cep, JON would lose in a record landslide, think QLD labor election defeat in QLD this year. Humaliting loss. JON i wonder if he realises how much dissaporval he has on the rugby community maybe he doesn’t as he knows he is leaving.
-Well JON you have brought rugby to it’s knees in Australia ,. Rugby in Australia now reminds me of the old NSL days when it was a ethnic minority sport until it reframed when frank low took over and created the A-league and marketed it to includes all aussies of all ethnic backgrounds.
your disapproval rating is at record levels aussy rugby fans can’t wait to you leave and we can rebuild the mess you created.
September 7th 2012 @ 12:06pm
JB said | September 7th 2012 @ 12:06pm | Report comment
All reasonable points except televising schoolboy rugby. The entitlement attitude you speak of would be fed from the word go and the elevation or the instruction to take games “seriously” would likely work to destroying any enjoyment in the game, something that already contributes to so few schoolboys going on to play footy after they leave school.
September 7th 2012 @ 12:54pm
Uncle Argyle said | September 7th 2012 @ 12:54pm | Report comment
John O’Neill the sequel is up there with Highlander II
September 7th 2012 @ 1:23pm
Marc Johno said | September 7th 2012 @ 1:23pm | Report comment
That’s a bit harsh on Highlander 2. Admittedly it was garbage, but nowhere near the Tahs or JON at ARU.
September 7th 2012 @ 1:27pm
Uncle Argyle said | September 7th 2012 @ 1:27pm | Report comment
Well it was far from good
September 8th 2012 @ 1:27am
Shop said | September 8th 2012 @ 1:27am | Report comment
Seems more like “Police Acadamy 6″.
September 7th 2012 @ 1:20pm
Sneaky Samurai said | September 7th 2012 @ 1:20pm | Report comment
Wow, Johnno that’s one helluva “a paragraph.”
September 7th 2012 @ 7:20am
flying hori said | September 7th 2012 @ 7:20am | Report comment
Campo its simple, go back to the basics, you need a grassroot comp, start developing players within and same with coaches, NZ has a very good development structure for players and coaches, this is what Aus needs
September 7th 2012 @ 7:36am
Badjack (the armchair critic) said | September 7th 2012 @ 7:36am | Report comment
Ok, lets look at a couple of Campese’s issues, He doesn’t like the idea of the ARU having control over the S15 coaches, he thinks the players should have a say in who should be coach. He is concerned about where rugby is going in Australia. He has been concerned about the skills level of Australian players for 10 years. Plus other concerns.
The most successful Super rugby country is NZ. What happens there? The NZRU control Super coaches. He thinks players should have a say in who is their coach. The NZRU backs the coach over whinging players not the other way around. He blames Deans for the Wallabies failures yet he tells anyone who will listen about the fact he has been saying players skills in Australia have been bad for 10 years yet Deans only been around for 5. David is either a confused man, allows his emotional dislike of O’Neill and Deans to override his rational thoughts or is just not a very smart thinker of the administration of the game.
Where is the proof that player power in admin brings success. State rivalry and bias’s have been a bug bear in Australian rugby in the past, why promote it as a way to success. If the skill level of the players has been poor for 10 years maybe some other coaches could shoulder at least some of the blame.
September 7th 2012 @ 8:47am
James said | September 7th 2012 @ 8:47am | Report comment
New Zealand would have probably achieved the same level of success in Super Rugby had the NZRU had no say in the appointment of coaches. They have made some appalling decisions in the last few years – the Chiefs had eight seasons of Ian Foster with whom they achieved almost nothing, and the Blues had four with Pat Lam – yet they were allowed to stay in their positions ‘for the greater good’. Why should fans turn up to support team’s who can’t even control their own affairs. The NZRUs central, dictatorial style is the fastest way to extinguish ‘tribalism’, which is what rugby lacks compared to the other codes in Australia.
September 7th 2012 @ 9:18am
Badjack (the armchair critic) said | September 7th 2012 @ 9:18am | Report comment
Yeah I know, but “probably achieve” is your argument, “has achieved” is mine.They keep winning the Super title on a regular basis so there is proof it works. Do you want your boss to turf you just because you don’t have all the tools to do your job in the first year. And how many NZ coaches are successful overseas after they have gone through their system.
September 7th 2012 @ 9:37am
James said | September 7th 2012 @ 9:37am | Report comment
Well, the Crusaders keep (or at least, kept) winning because the NZRU allowed them to amass far more talent than any other team in NZ (or the entire competition). For a while the Crusaders best XV was very close to the All Blacks best XV. And this only happened because the NZRU largely controlled which team each player signed with, to the detriment of the competition as a whole. NZ’s Super Rugby success is not so much the coaching system as the ridiculous stash of talent one team was allowed to hoard. Take away the Crusaders of 98 – 08 and the competition is quite even between NZ, AUS and SA.
Also, the presence of NZ coaches overseas partially acts as an argument against centrally appointed coaches – for instance Rob Penney won four ITM Cups in a row with Canterbury, was not considered by the NZRU for a Super Rugby role (apparently because of a personal grudge with Steve Tew) and is now with Munster – if NZ teams were able to appoint their own coaches, he would probably be in NZ.
September 7th 2012 @ 9:45am
peterlala said | September 7th 2012 @ 9:45am | Report comment
“…so there is proof it works…”
Not true, Badjack. The teams are filled with New Zealanders, but that doesn’t mean you have to come from New Zealand to win. There is no value in taking one point and using that point as an overall agrument.
September 7th 2012 @ 9:42am
sheek said | September 7th 2012 @ 9:42am | Report comment
Badjack,
I think most rugby fans can see the sense of centralising the coaching appointments.
But the problem, the big problem here, is O’Neill & Nucifora, both of whom appear to be hugely ego-driven, politically-motivated, power-hungry, divisive beasts.
Consequently, the suggestion isn’t as straight-forward as it might otherwise seem. While players ought to be asked their thoughts on any new coach, at the end of the day I agree this decision must be made by the administrators.
Players play, coaches coach, managers manage & administrators administer.
At least that is my understanding of how it is supposed to work……….
September 7th 2012 @ 10:04am
Brett McKay said | September 7th 2012 @ 10:04am | Report comment
Sheek, my biggest problem on this particular issue is not so much O’Neill, but Nucifora. The astounding hypocrissy of him suggesting there needs to be more accountability from top level coaches is deadset making my head spin…
FWIW, I think it should happen, but not just the SR sides, it should also encompass the Sevens sides, the academies, and all the underage rep sides – particularly the U20s…
September 7th 2012 @ 10:30am
sheek said | September 7th 2012 @ 10:30am | Report comment
Hi Brett,
It’s the benevolent dictator vs ruthless despot argument. I agree with everything you say….. in the right hands.
I could imagine someone like Gary Flowers making decisions in the best interests of all (well, at least trying to
).
Perhaps these decisions shouldn’t be made by either just the ARU boss or HP boss (or both), but a 3-4 person panel incorporating one or the other. That way, you have some kind of “checks & balances” in the decision-making process.
September 7th 2012 @ 10:42am
Justin2 said | September 7th 2012 @ 10:42am | Report comment
Sheek – you have hit the nail on the head around the “selection panel” idea.
Administrators should be nowhere near any panel employing coaches, its not their role nor is it their expertise.
Ideally you would want the head of your HPU (currently Nucifora, not a fan of his either) and then trusted advisors who have the knowledge of the game and man management principles to employ the right people. These could be ex players, ex coaches, a board member or an outside agency.
An example of these types of people in the AFL is David Parkin, who is often hired as a consultant when clubs are looking ofr new coaches.
Someone like Rod Kafer who is a clear thinker would be high on my list of panelists. These panelists would be charged with getting the best people and their choice is set in stone, not to be interfered with by pencil pushers who have no idea.
September 7th 2012 @ 11:12am
Badjack (the armchair critic) said | September 7th 2012 @ 11:12am | Report comment
I agree he a very fine analyst of the game but Rod Kafer was a leader in the player power movement when he was playing and still believes in it today so it may end up Rod and the players picking the coach.
September 7th 2012 @ 3:26pm
Justin2 said | September 7th 2012 @ 3:26pm | Report comment
That may be the case BJ but he would be appointed to the panel not decides who is. Either way I think you get my point.
September 7th 2012 @ 10:45am
Johnno said | September 7th 2012 @ 10:45am | Report comment
Sheek have to disagree with you. Can you imagine Randwick accepting technical advice by the ARU , and having a we know what’s best for you attitude. Ahh NO cough cough. And who is to say the ARU know what’s best for aussy rugby. Wow I am going to place 100% trust in Nucifora’s technical judgements based on recent repeated failures.
-And it ha sheen a failure i believe in NZ. Auckland blues have won nothing since henry left in 2003. When the NZRU policy came in in 2004. Blues 2004-12. 0-9 seasons hardly a cause to have belief when the largest player pool in NZ has been a total mess under Pat lam .
-Also Highlanders and hurricanes have been rubbish most of the time too, some even say the highlanders will get the chop there ITM cup team had to be baile dout by the taxpayersof NZ. And the hurricanes with the talent they have had it appalling since day 1 most of the time, before and after the NZRU took over.
-I’ll give the NZRU the chiefs title this year yes. But in the last 8 years most of the time but 1 exceptional runner up in 2009 where they got smashed in the grand final too, the Cheifs have been 1 mess after another there future as club was placed in doubt.
-The only successful franchise since 2004 consistently in NZ has been the crusaders and surprise surpsirse, they have been able to keep there culture and style of play Sader technical style not the NZRU .
September 7th 2012 @ 10:51am
sheek said | September 7th 2012 @ 10:51am | Report comment
Johnno,
It’s perfectly alright for you to disagree with me, because you do so in such a nice way…..
September 7th 2012 @ 11:04am
Johnno said | September 7th 2012 @ 11:04am | Report comment
Yes I do sheek I am a nice guy, nice guys like me usually finish last lol, .laugh as i write that but yes i do disagree in a nice way i am a nice polite guy can’t do those damn smileys though. Anyways , coaching set up has to be sorted out who ever fixes it up oh well , done.
September 7th 2012 @ 4:36pm
jeznez said | September 7th 2012 @ 4:36pm | Report comment
Sheek, if McQueen had his links to the Rebels severed would you trust him to chair that panel? I struggle to think who else in Aussie rugby would have the skills to run it.
And a fair bit of public opinion would be swayed by what they think of Damien Hill.
September 7th 2012 @ 4:39pm
sheek said | September 7th 2012 @ 4:39pm | Report comment
Hi Jeznez – yeah, MacQueen is one guy I would trust implicitly.
September 7th 2012 @ 11:29am
BoundaryRider said | September 7th 2012 @ 11:29am | Report comment
The lack of accountability in rugby be it the ARU and in some States is not a new issue, for instance the poor performance of the U20′s recenlty, Waratahs etc? I understood there is a governance review under way, headed by Mark Arbib, which may see a more independent commision style arrangement put in place for the ARU, (something to do wiith Fed Govt sport funding) does anyone know when this will be completed? I assume this would have to be a good thing?
September 7th 2012 @ 11:35am
Johnno said | September 7th 2012 @ 11:35am | Report comment
I hope it works out the ARU are a mess i don’t understand this review nor do i understand how governance works in Australia so don’t know boundary rider.
September 7th 2012 @ 1:30pm
redsnut said | September 7th 2012 @ 1:30pm | Report comment
Johnno, there’s no “Reply” thingy on your post about smileys.
If you put a : with a ) immediately after it you get a
.
Change the ) for a ( and you get a
lol
September 7th 2012 @ 11:07am
Badjack (the armchair critic) said | September 7th 2012 @ 11:07am | Report comment
Sheek…..I take your point and I am in agreement with all your points. I did not address the ‘people’ factor rather ‘what system will benefit Australian rugby and in particular the Wallabies. It is like most things in life, if a group of like minded souls are not singing off the same hymn sheet you lessen your chances of success.
If only we could get players to play, coaches to coach and administrators to administer. There is a path for all of them. When they meet their use by date the administrator goes off to other pastures, coaches can go into administration if they are so inclined and players can go to coach or administrate. Simple really. If an organisation has problems it usually takes a benevolent dictator (strong leader) at the head along with a couple of henchmen ( lieutenants) to make it successful.Having the right ones is important. I don’t mind O’Neill but Nucifora ??? Management by committee is for charity organisations or CWA’s
September 7th 2012 @ 9:00pm
liam said | September 7th 2012 @ 9:00pm | Report comment
badjack, campo does state that he thinks rugby is centralised and works in nz as its a rugbymad place, in his opinion. he suggest australia needs a different model, i think
September 7th 2012 @ 7:56am
Allanthus said | September 7th 2012 @ 7:56am | Report comment
Both the bigger problem and the solution lie with money. Lots of money, spent even half wisely, will ensure wider development at lower levels, i.e. more than one ball for a team of school kids so they can actively develop skills instead of too much standing around, development of a provincial tier to match ITM Cup/Currie Cup so that fringe and developing players have an environment where they can compete at higher than club level. But…
Money in this scale can only come from TV rights. Both the AFL and NRL are now in positions where it is almost impossible for them to fail because they are so cashed up from their latest deals. Many rugby people are dismissive of this for all sorts of reasons, but a fairer view would say that these codes deserve everything they get because… they have a product that is of high value!
I’m a rugby guy through and through. But I can see, and even my missus and cat can see, that AFL (mostly) provides fast, exciting action, close finishes, superstar players with fantastic skills that are worth huge $$ to TV networks. And frankly, the NRL isn’t that far behind. Forget stale old league v Union arguments, for the most part their game is healthy, fast, exciting, full of superstar players that people like to watch, and thus worth similar huge $$ to TV networks.
Why would any TV network stump up any of their loose change for the stodge that passes for Australian rugby? Particularly interstate clashes – there was one exception this year when Shipperley scored after the siren for QLD v NSW, but for the most part these matches are horrible, lifeless, slugfests.
Rugby leadership has to take a lead on developing a product by demanding that rugby is played with positive intent. That everyone, no matter what level of the game, has a responsibility to play positively, and reap enjoyment from doing so. Ultimately this will feed through into the wider community, and the product will be worth enough for TV to pay enough to feed the rugby beast, which in turn feeds into more ability to attract more people into the game and so on.
NZ rugby isn’t the answer to everything but every kid playing the game there, every ITM cup player, every All Black, inherently wants to put a step on an opponent, throw a flick pass etc… wants to win by scoring tries. This outlook on the game is consistent and driven from the top down.
It was not always like this, NZ for many years had a forwards based game and players who expressed themselves or tried something new on the field were frowned upon. From the AB’s down to school level. That didn’t change by accident. It was a massive culture change led from the top and now, win lose or draw, Rugby has entrenched itself as the dominant sport in NZ. Not because it has a birthright to do so, but because they have a product which is exciting to watch and people want to watch it.
This is the challenge for the ARU, but only if they indeed identify that there is a challenge. And that, it seems, is the first and biggest hurdle to overcome.
September 7th 2012 @ 8:08am
Johnno said | September 7th 2012 @ 8:08am | Report comment
The word excitement is a funny one. I like set pieces, i like the unpredictable nature of rugby with unlimited tackle count. I like the new 5 second rule form the back. I don’t want to watch touch footy, and i find league to predictable and meaningless. 5 hit ups and kick, too many tries are boring if you ask me. I actually enjoy 10 man rugby but maybe i am the minority of fan, i like the arm wrestle and chess battle that rugby provides.
September 7th 2012 @ 8:46am
Allanthus said | September 7th 2012 @ 8:46am | Report comment
Don’t confuse playing with a positive mindset and wanting to score tries as endorsing “touch footy” or 47 to 42 scorelines. This is the mistake UK critics make when criticising Super Rugby. It is shallow and misses the point.
NRL has plenty of try scoring action but people still love the arm wrestle and brutal defence. The AB’s consistently score more tries than the Wallabies but their dominance in recent years has been built on winning the forward battle. Brad Thorn, Jerry Collins, Buck Shelford etc… were/are cult heroes in NZ not because they endorse touch footy, but because of their grunt and aggression up front.
It’s all about being positive, in every dimension. And sure, that sometimes involves kicking or keeping it in close to exploit a weakness or the conditions. But please, don’t use terms like “enjoying 10 man rugby”. FFS there is no surer way to kill off all wider interest in the game and with it, kill off all revenue streams to the point where you and your like and any remaining Waratah tragics can sulk over a final G and T over the ashes of Australian rugby.
September 7th 2012 @ 8:58am
Johnno said | September 7th 2012 @ 8:58am | Report comment
Allanthus i am hardly a old boys club at the tahs 1950′s style. I push the import rules begin flexible htan just about any other rugby fan on this website. I want 5-10 import per team, i want the best players. But yes i like arm wrestles and 10 man rugby doesn’t mean i am old fashioned i just like grinding stuff, but maybe the majority of new rugby fans do not. I ams ice of the bubble gum of T20, i don’t like test crick tbut i love 7evens and the ashes. I want rugby to flow in to the public schools and not depend on the private schools so much. But ailanthus and jdubya many fans new fans don’t like 10 man rugby or chess matches clearly.
September 7th 2012 @ 9:07am
Bakkies said | September 7th 2012 @ 9:07am | Report comment
How about we stop dictating how teams play. It only happens in Australia and it’s doing every bit of harm. In John O’Neill’s terms it’s all about the Waratahs and as a result Qld Rugby nearly went broke and the Brumbies were paid lip service when they were the only Australian team worth writing about. Rod Macqueen would tell the ARU to …. off if they tried to tell his Wallabies how to play the game. They didn’t play helter skelter headless choke so called entertaining ”Aussie way” style rugby to please the negative media. They got results by playing to their strength, concise and accurate play and players wanted to win. This kept the turnstiles ticking.
We don’t need an under 20s competition. Australian rugby needs a proper third tier competition not the Shute Shield. Shute Shield is a grassroots comp run by people of their own self importance. Clubs are hemorrhaging money and the clown Nucifora wants this to be our third level competition. A high profile under 20s competition does little for the players over 20 who need higher level competition. Players are already bypassing colts club Rugby so why do we need a specific under 20s comp.
AFL has a lot of awful blow out scores and the NRL a fair amount of turgid matches why aren’t the media launching a big negative campaign. The naive negative Rugby ”journalism” in Australia is doing the game a lot of damage. We all should be celebrating the fact that Greg Growden has lost his job at the SMH but who is going to replace him? A league journalist with no clue about Rugby?
”no ther coutnry did that”
Wales, Ireland, Scotland renewed their coaches contracts before the RWC. Gatland signed a new 4 year deal with the WRU.
September 7th 2012 @ 9:30am
peterlala said | September 7th 2012 @ 9:30am | Report comment
Oh dear, no more hubris riven in-jokes or pathetic, baseless rumours.
September 7th 2012 @ 9:48am
sheek said | September 7th 2012 @ 9:48am | Report comment
Bakkies,
The question of how Aussie rugby teams should play will never go away as long as we share the same environment as AFL, NRL & A-League.
We’re in competition for players, fans, sponsorship & media exposure. And of course, revenue streams. That’s our reality. We can’t escape it.
I sincerely believe that when rugby union is played at its best, it’s the best of the football codes. Unfortunately, great rugby matches are a little like waiting for Haley’s comet.
We rugby fans here in Australia are let down badly by our players, coaches, managers & administrators. They are all failing us fans , & failing the game itself.
September 7th 2012 @ 10:03am
joeb said | September 7th 2012 @ 10:03am | Report comment
“…Australia are let down badly by our players, coaches, managers & administrators. They are all failing us fans , & failing the game itself.”
Let’s hope this failing comes to a grinding halt tomorrow, that said, is it time then to recall Gary Flowers?
Serious. Or when JON goes at the end of 2013, would R Macqueen be interested in the post? He would have the temperament for it. Connolly made some very valid points in his chat to FoxSports a few days ago, but alas they’ve taken it down.
September 7th 2012 @ 10:05am
Bakkies said | September 7th 2012 @ 10:05am | Report comment
We have been sharing that environment for over 100 years. The attitude of Australians towards Rugby (that it is a ”posh” sport) goes back to the IRB remaining amateur till 1995. We didn’t look after the players and make it inclusive back in the 1800s and we are still paying for it now.
We have our players, sponsors, media exposure and fans. We have increased our fan base by playing tests across the nation rather than in Sydney and Brisbane which happened in the amateur days, put pro sides in Melbourne and WA which never would have occurred before 1995, the Wallabies have loyal sponsors in Qantas etc. When the Wallabies won the RWC in ’91 and ’99 the media coverage was positive. Now it’s constantly negative from Rugby journalists and the media coverage is global not just restricted to Australia and the odd news agency that cuts and pastes articles to send to the Times in London.
People tend to forget that we have historically been behind SA and NZ plus we lost a number of tests against the home nations and France. Now we treat these defeats like a shock to the Australian Rugby system.
September 7th 2012 @ 11:39am
clipper said | September 7th 2012 @ 11:39am | Report comment
Bakkies, it’s true that Rugby is viewed as a ‘posh’ sport, but maybe that view isn’t as widespread outside of NSW and QLD, where Rugby is more followed than league. It is also hard to erase the view of Rugby as being a ‘posh’ sport when it can’t gain traction outside of the more affluent suburbs due to league having a firm grip on all the ‘unposh’ areas – with the extra money they have, it will be even harder to penetrate these areas and it might mean Rugby will concentrate even more on their strongholds to the detriment of our international capacity.
September 7th 2012 @ 3:59pm
RickG said | September 7th 2012 @ 3:59pm | Report comment
Growden’s been given the punt? As of when?
September 7th 2012 @ 6:34pm
Bakkies said | September 7th 2012 @ 6:34pm | Report comment
end of the 4 nations according to Crikey
September 8th 2012 @ 3:34am
AndyS said | September 8th 2012 @ 3:34am | Report comment
Give Amanda Shalala the job. I really enjoyed her reporting during the ARC, not least because she seemed to genuinely like Rugby.
September 7th 2012 @ 8:49am
jdubya said | September 7th 2012 @ 8:49am | Report comment
If you want kids watching and playing then you are going to need a bigger drawcard than “contestable possession” and “chess matches”, especially when Rugby is being smashed on every other level. I don’t see where the next generation of rugby players is going to come from – outside of the private school system of course.
September 7th 2012 @ 8:13am
patonga said | September 7th 2012 @ 8:13am | Report comment
Great article Campo, I feel Rugby has lost its way, Club Rugby is almost dead the crowds can show you that,, As for the ARU…
HOW DOES JON KEEP HIS JOB< HE IS A HAS BEEN… As for Deans…. well how many coaches in the past would have lasted this long… We keep getting told we are number two in the world but i do not see it that way at all….we actually haven't won anything big for so long…except for the Tri Series but then again SA didn't field a full side and The All Blacks seem more interested in the World Cup.
Bring back the ARC so the Rays can defend there shield,,, were ever that is now ????
September 7th 2012 @ 8:59am
joeb said | September 7th 2012 @ 8:59am | Report comment
Patonga: “Bring back the ARC so the Rays can defend their shield,,, wherever that is now ????”
Thanks to Ms Pearce (see article: “Is private ownership coming to Aussie rugby?” 07 Sep 2012), quote: “…the previous ARU-funded Australian Rugby Championship [ARC] … posted a $4.7 million loss in ‘year one’ and subsequently folded.”
Yeah, we couldn’t sustain those sorts of losses for too long.
In a sense having FoxSports hold the exclusive rights to Super Rugby hurts the game as not every rugby aficionado has ‘Pay TV’.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/rugby-gold/rugby-may-see-packer-style-revolution/story-fn8ouw0e-1226466829374
September 7th 2012 @ 9:13am
Bakkies said | September 7th 2012 @ 9:13am | Report comment
Foxsports is the only network that is willing to stump up multi millions to bankroll Australian rugby so they deserve exclusive rights. If it wasn’t for this money we will still be amateur.
September 7th 2012 @ 9:39am
joeb said | September 7th 2012 @ 9:39am | Report comment
True Bakkies. Everyone’s talking about this vital need to resurrect the ARC, but funding it and TV rights are the issue. Well, why doesn’t the ARU get an accounting firm to accurately cost a resurrected ARC comp, and also get some people working on sponsorship deals, for instance our large shopping centres Westfield & Stockland could come to the party as major sponsors plus our big supermarkets Coles & Woolworths, plus Big W, K-mart, Target, Bob Jane T-mart, Beaurepaires, for starters.
September 7th 2012 @ 10:06am
Brett McKay said | September 7th 2012 @ 10:06am | Report comment
Joeb, you’re not the first to make this mistake, but ‘Ms Pearce’ is actually Mr Pearce…
September 7th 2012 @ 10:19am
joeb said | September 7th 2012 @ 10:19am | Report comment
How odd, Brett. You mean to say he’s a cross-dresser?
And yet that article ‘one is for this, two for that, three’ for something else etc had all the hallmarks of classic feminism…
Very confusing.
Btw, did you hear the interview “John Connolly calls for review of Australian rugby (29/8)” with FoxSports? He made some very good valid points, but they’ve taken it down. Wish they’d put it back up.
September 7th 2012 @ 11:07am
Brett McKay said | September 7th 2012 @ 11:07am | Report comment
no, he’s just a regular guy who happens to have a name that fits either gender, like Evelyn, or Cameron, or Kelly…
September 7th 2012 @ 11:20am
sheek said | September 7th 2012 @ 11:20am | Report comment
Not to mention Marion Morrison, better known as John Wayne…..
Knew a family where the boy was called Kim & his sister was called Peta. Knowing his excellent sense of humour, I guess their parents had a good sense of humour also…..
September 7th 2012 @ 12:41pm
joeb said | September 7th 2012 @ 12:41pm | Report comment
Uh-ha! I see, gender-neutral name. There certainly are quite a few. Sincere apologies to Mr Elisha Pearce!
Yes Marion, the famous Duke, named after his trusty Airedale, Duke, who accompanied him on his morning newspaper delivery rounds. Apparently the local firemen called them “Big Duke” and “Little Duke”. Named after a hound, how ’bout that. While we’re at it, a top Duke movie is Rio Grande from 1950. Bill Collins used to screen it quite regularly on Fox.
September 7th 2012 @ 1:11pm
patonga said | September 7th 2012 @ 1:11pm | Report comment
Yes i can see what you mean… if only one super rugby game was on free to air… people would be more interested..
September 7th 2012 @ 4:54pm
jeznez said | September 7th 2012 @ 4:54pm | Report comment
.
September 7th 2012 @ 8:44am
Sailosi said | September 7th 2012 @ 8:44am | Report comment
Quite simply with no third tier young Australian players don’t get the development required between the ages of 18 and 22, unless they are a regular member of a super rugby starting 15.
September 7th 2012 @ 12:39pm
Allanthus said | September 7th 2012 @ 12:39pm | Report comment
Sheek, I once had a flatmate whose dad’s name was Percy and her mum Fannie… no kidding!
September 7th 2012 @ 8:54am
Dudfarmer said | September 7th 2012 @ 8:54am | Report comment
Where is rugby heading? My seven year old son wanted to play rugby up here in FNQ but had to choose between cricket or rugby cos rugby can’t compete with AFL or League so it has become a summer sport for kids. My son chose cricket. A bit more free to air TV coverage would help a great deal. As a previous poster said maybe schoolboy or even club rugby televised on the weekend like the ABC used to do. Oh. that’s right, there’s no money in having the ABC do it is there JON?!!!
September 7th 2012 @ 9:09am
Johnno said | September 7th 2012 @ 9:09am | Report comment
dudfarmer wake up this is pro sport you have to make money, how do you play for players and stadium rents etc.. But JON’s business models are losing money anyway, JON is useless.
September 7th 2012 @ 9:16am
Bakkies said | September 7th 2012 @ 9:16am | Report comment
The problem is the ABC have no money and no public licencing model so they are just randomly funded by taxpayers. They are broke yet they are setting up digital channels that a lot of people aren’t interested in. Their radio network and internet services will need addressing in the future too.
September 7th 2012 @ 9:05am
Steve said | September 7th 2012 @ 9:05am | Report comment
I’m the exact opposite, my kid wanted to play AFL but the 3 clubs have folded and 3 of the 4 rugby league clubs that existed in the town 10 years ago no longer exist so my son is now enjoying rugby union.
September 7th 2012 @ 10:41am
MAJB said | September 7th 2012 @ 10:41am | Report comment
Where is this place? I will get my daughter and her family to move there as soon as possible. The opposite is happening here in the Hills.
September 7th 2012 @ 9:07am
Gordo said | September 7th 2012 @ 9:07am | Report comment
Am I the only one that has noticed that this article is disjointed and some of the statements made are completely unsupported and nonsensical?
The ‘Deans coaching the Waratahs’ innuendo is just that, innuendo and rumour. At present the Waratahs are still independent of the ARU, so for Deans to coach the Waratahs he would need to be sacked from the Wallabies, then hired by the Waratahs. From everything I’ve heard the ARU and Waratahs boards aren’t best mates so it is unlikely they are working together on this, and I would doubt Deans would want to take the huge step down from the Wallabies to the Waratahs.
Campo asks ‘who takes responsibility if the Waratahs continue to perform poorly’. The ARU do, at least in part, take responsibility for each of the provinces. As happened at the Reds, where the ARU was forced to step in. The Reds are now the best team in the country, and last year were the best team in the whole competition.
Campo seems to be arguing against centralising rugby in Australia by saying “Centralising rugby worked in New Zealand because it is a rugby mad country and because it’s been going for decades.” Therefore we shouldn’t do it here because:
a) It works there.
b) They love rugby in NZ and are happy with the system.
c) They’ve been using the system for a long time and are still happy with the system.
Campo makes the argument that CEOs and board members would not allow a top exec more chances are five years of losses. The Wallabies coach would surely be judged on the team’s ranking, which has steadily improved over the past five years, so using this logic, it’s unlikely Deans would be sacked, however, if a top exec showcased the lack of logic Campo has used in his argument against centralising rugby in Australia, most boards CEOs would shuffle the exec out with as quickly and quietly as possible.
September 7th 2012 @ 9:17am
Johnno said | September 7th 2012 @ 9:17am | Report comment
Auckland blues are a perfect example of why the NZRU central system is a failure, th blues have done nothing in 10 years. since henry left. And i’l mention the otago highlanders too. there ITM cup team went bankrupt, and needed to be bailed out. There super rugby team have won nothing ever, been hopeless to be honest should of had the 5th super rugby team in south auckland or counties or taranaki.
-Wellingotn hurricanes have never won a title been massive underachievers in there super history some of the most talented rugby players ever , and have been a massive failure too. And the chiefs they have been as someone else pointed out done nothing for 8 years until now. And the crusaders in reality have been independent form the NZRU basically the NZRU know they have ot pick sadder men only to breed success in cantebury.
-So on that note none of the super rugby teams have benighted form the NZRU coaching selection policies. And don’t get me started on the NZRU 2007 world cup rotation disaster that brought NZ rugby too it’s knees.
-So who says the ARU or NZRU know best, no one but clowns like JON, Nucifora, and Steve Tew. Who would all get sacked by now if there tougher KPI’S put on them . I would have no confidence in steve toe running anything outside of rugby in NZ with such a massive amount of talant the best talent in his hands . Give steve toe the welsh or scotish job and then you’d see he is no better than JON.
September 7th 2012 @ 9:29am
Allanthus said | September 7th 2012 @ 9:29am | Report comment
There are always going to be successful teams and losing teams, that isn’t the point. It’s not about which team wins the S15, it’s the overall culture and system that is working. Call the Highlanders a failure all you like, but where do you think international level players like Aaron Smith, Ben Smith, Thompson etc… are coming from?? Not out of stodgy outfits like the Waratahs that’s for sure…
And the very fact that they were able to be bailed out, because there is enough money in the game overall to do it, and a enough commitment to do it, says truckloads compared to JON shutting down the Australian provincial comp.
September 7th 2012 @ 9:31am
Johnno said | September 7th 2012 @ 9:31am | Report comment
Oh and i will point out a the blues ittiles under Henry came all before the NZRU had control off the franchises. The blue last tile was in 2003 under henry. In 2004 the NZRU control over super rugby franchises started. Since then the Auckland blues have been a failure.
September 7th 2012 @ 9:52am
Johnno said | September 7th 2012 @ 9:52am | Report comment
the bailout coaused massive controversy coz guess who had to foot the bill the taxpayers of NZ. And most were unhappy that there tax dollars had to be bail them out, so they didn’t have the money to bail them out the NZ government bailed them out thanks to the helpless taxpayer who had no say on the matter. And the indoor stadium in dunedien has been a total failure to a white elephant that cost a fortune on the good old taxpayer to fork out and pay for and now is not getting enough business to justify it existence.
September 10th 2012 @ 1:58pm
Leo said | September 10th 2012 @ 1:58pm | Report comment
when did the blues almost go under and the new dunedin stadium has been great for their super rugby and their fans.
September 7th 2012 @ 9:32am
Gordo said | September 7th 2012 @ 9:32am | Report comment
Yeah, the Blues have done nothing in 10 years… except win the title once and make the semi finals twice, including in 2011, which is more than many of the teams in the competition have ever done…
The NZRU’s recent appointment of the Hurricanes coach has been labelled by many as a master stroke. As has their appointment at the Chiefs. The Crusaders seem to be working out. The All Blacks seem to be going alright as well, as do their under 20 and sevens teams… which Campo has put forward as important measures of success.
Unless I was more intimately involved, I wouldn’t be able to say if the ARU or NZRU know best on every issue, but I think there is certainly a strong argument for them knowing better than you…
September 7th 2012 @ 9:50am
Johnno said | September 7th 2012 @ 9:50am | Report comment
Yes like i said the las ttitle was under surprise surprise Graham Henry Gordo in 2003., and surprise surprise it was before the NZRU central coaching rule came in. The NZRU came in in 2004 since then the blues have been an embarrassment to NZ rugby and a total mess most of the time.
September 7th 2012 @ 10:15am
Gordo said | September 7th 2012 @ 10:15am | Report comment
In 2011 the Blues finished second in the NZ conference on 60 points, 15, 18 and 20 points ahead of three other NZ franchises. If the Blues are an embarrassment, how would those three franchises have been described? Keep in mind, if you can Johnno, that the team that was 20 points behind the embarrassing Blues won the whole tournament this year…
September 7th 2012 @ 10:25am
Johnno said | September 7th 2012 @ 10:25am | Report comment
Gordo the embarrsiing blues ” lol. yes i maintain that they have massively underachieved in last 9 years.
-I gave the NZRU 1 tick with the chiefs since 2004 when this system came in,. 1 grand final runner up they got smashed at loftus vs the bulls. But overall the chiefs 7 out of 9 seasons have been hopeless since the NZRU took over. and the blues should of won at least 1 title by now with there talant pool. The chiefs there was talk of them folding in 2011 it had got so bad after 8 seasons under Ian foster.
Blues have been a mess and lost team under pat lam overall, never been the same since Henry left them. Blues 0-9 since the NZRU took over the coaching set up of the blues Gordo.
September 7th 2012 @ 11:00am
mania said | September 7th 2012 @ 11:00am | Report comment
johnno – yeah the blues suk and are a total embarrassment to super rugby….still they’re better than the most of the aus franchises and easily have a better history.
you can sledge the nz system all you want but fact remains that nz rugby and teams are better and stronger than the aus equivalents and we do it with a sht load less moeny than what your proposing.
i’m all for aus allowing private owners. i reckon its a mistake but one that aus need to make themselves. wont happen in nz as we’ve had to learn how to do more for less money.
the answer to a problem is not always to throw more money at it. grassroots in nz is priceless and it would take all the money in the world to try replicate it.
September 8th 2012 @ 6:43am
Billy Bob said | September 8th 2012 @ 6:43am | Report comment
Campo logic is Italian logic. It does not actually make sense but it sure gets the party started. Which it has and we have seen some fantastic well reasoned arguments stemming from his passionate article.
I am with a couple of others in longing for visionary leadership
And Macqueen may fit the bill.
OZ rugby needs to be redesigned culturally and structurally.
Yesterday.
A panel of four could easily share JON’s 960K (plus whatever Nucifora is on) and start turning this huge ship around.