- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Ex-Wallaby flyhalf Mark Ella is fondly remembered by many, this writer included, as the greatest player to have worn the gold number ten jersey.
Ella is a now a instructive and insightful contributor in the media, via a column in The Weekend Australian, usually demonstrating with the pen the same balance between sound and capable, and an eye for instinctive attacking flair, that he did as a player.
Like many, Ella is frustrated by the Wallabies’ slide down the international rankings ladder, and the inability of the Australian Super Rugby sides to build on last year’s’ success of the Waratahs.
This frustration will only be heightened by a weekend where all four Australian sides in action were beaten – two of them at home to travelling South African sides.
Writing in Saturday’s edition, Ella proposed a solution to Australia’s rugby woes which, if implemented, I believe would thrust Australia further down into a pit which it seems to be digging into.
The thrust of Ella’s argument is that, when NSW and Queensland rugby is strong, then Australian rugby is strong. That is certainly true in a historical sense and, taken in isolation, not an unreasonable comment.
However, in extrapolating this, Ella proposes that the provincial or franchise set-up in Australia should thus be altered to ensure that NSW and Queensland rugby are given priority to ensure their continued strength. Such a view is more problematic.
Ella believes that Australia’s best players must be concentrated into one or two Super Rugby teams to provide more cohesion in the Wallabies, and arrest Australia’s slide down the rankings. And, setting aside the validity of the premise, just who would those teams happen to be? NSW and Queensland of course.
Ella cites the strength of the Waratahs in 1991 and the Reds in 1999 as key reasons for the World Cup victories. This conveniently ignores a number of points.
Firstly, there is ample evidence throughout the years of Super Rugby that provincial standings does not correlate with the respective countries Test match performance.
Secondly, the Waratahs are already strong. They are the incumbent Super Rugby champions. Is Ella saying that they aren’t strong any more? Or they were, but that was 2014 and this Rugby World Cup year is 2015, and so their timing is askew?
The most successful nation by number of Super Rugby wins is New Zealand. The most consistently successful international team of the same era is also New Zealand, admittedly with only one World Cup to show for it.
If Ella’s argument is to be supported, one would expect New Zealand’s Test players to be concentrated into one or two teams, yet this is patently not the case. In fact all five franchises contribute significantly to the current All Blacks starting team.
The point being missed is that cohesion in the national squad is not achieved simply by lumping players in together at Super Rugby level. It can also be achieved by a sensibly balanced approach which retains the integrity and independence of each franchise, under the umbrella of a cohesive framework and style of play which is understood and agreed to by mature stakeholders.
Ella conveniently suggests that the Western Force and Melbourne Rebels can best serve Australian rugby by acting as feeder teams, promoting new talent into the almighty Tahs and Reds as and when required.
This is simply a nonsense. For one, it immediately destroys the integrity of the Super Rugby championship. Would Australia’s SANZAR partners agree to such a proposal, where Australia would field two highly competitive sides, a third in the Brumbies which can swing either way, and two demonstrably uncompetitive sides who are given no chance to become competitive?
Hardly. Good luck selling tickets to some of those matches, let alone Rebels and Force memberships and trying to negotiate favourable TV rights.
Nobody should deny the importance of NSW and Queensland rugby to Australian rugby. One should also not assume that pumping resources into manufacturing sides in other regions is a guaranteed winning strategy. On it’s own, it isn’t.
But nobody, except North Shore and Eastern Suburbs tailors who stitch elbow patches for Tweed jackets, and Caxton Street pubs, benefits from this proposed journey back into the dark ages.
By contrast, an article by Roy Ward, in The Age on the same day, highlighted the many Melbourne Rebels players who, on their bye weekend, were playing Dewar Shield club rugby.
Undoubtedly, the standard of this competition has improved markedly since the introduction of the Rebels into Super Rugby, and the exposure of many more players to the NRC, via the Melbourne Rising. Rebels winger Sefanaia Naivalu is one who has utilised this pathway into a professional rugby contract and there will be many others who follow.
In the future, some of these players will go on to be Wallabies.
Clearly none of this will help Australia win the 2015 Rugby World Cup. To a large extent the Wallabies’ die has already been cast – which may be the only point on which Ella and I agree.
The NSW rugby union was incorporated in 1874, and the Queensland union dates back to 1883. Given their combined 273 year history, I suggest that, by comparison, the Force and Rebels are already delivering good value and, in conjunction with the NRC, will go on to provide a stronger and broader base for Australian rugby in coming years.
Like most things in life worth fighting for, there are no quick or easy fixes. However “broken” Australian rugby is – whatever the debate about that – it can surely be fixed without resorting to arrogant and parochial imperialism on behalf of NSW and Queensland.