With all the enthusiasm about Harrison in a couple of cameo roles coming off he bench, perhaps Edmed who did all the hard yards in the starting side, comes from the wrong Shute Shield club, although he was a former Randwick Colt before moving to Eastwood.

I’d like to see how Harrison performs with a few games under his belt in the starting side before passing judgement on the relative merits of either player.

And pigs might fly. Harrison still has to prove himself as he’s had so little Super Rugby experience and that’s assuming that he can remain injury free.

Edmed was also a Randwick Colt, but was stuck behind the older Harrison and Donaldson, and made the move to Eastwood where he made his mark and captaining the First Grade side in the Finals series. Perhaps he joined the wrong club instead of staying with the entitled Randwick club.

Exactly. A fully professional NRC. Western Force, Melbourne Rebels, Canberra Brumbies, North Harbour Rays, South Harbour Fleet, Western Sydney Rams, North Brisbane/Sunshine Coast, South Brisbane/Gold Coast. Later Hunter Wildfires, Illawarra Steelers, North Queensland and Adelaide.

Agree piru. It would be short-sighted to cut any Super Rugby teams in its current format and that’s assuming Super Rugby itself even survives. Realistically, the only other option is for fully professional NRC and NPC competitions with more teams as mentioned previously.

The way the ARC and NRC teams were structured in NSW in particular, with the lack of local identity apart from the Western Sydney Rams, it was doomed to fail, which no doubt was intentional. You’re right, it was well supported in the other states, but the NSW mafia killed it. It was also tacked onto the end of Premier Club competitions, which hardly gave the club players who were selected enough time to improve their skill and fitness levels to the same standard of the Super Rugby players who weren’t selected in the Wallaby squad. I know that there were some club players in Sydney who didn’t want anything to do with it, as they thought it was a stitch-up. It would be a different scenario in a full season professional environment where some Wallaby squad players who didn’t go overseas would also be involved in the NRC.

Who knows, if the professional NRC and NPC are successful, it may over time attract more money and the ability to retain players at home with more lucrative contracts in competition with overseas clubs.

I also agree that an enhanced club competition isn’t the way to go, because all that would do would be to turn the focus back onto the Sydney and Brisbane clubs to the detriment of the other states, which is the last thing we need. The idea should be killed off ASAP as it’s just looking back to the past instead of the future and that’s coming from a long term Shute Shield club member.

It’s time the blinkers were thrown off and alternative options for a sustainable long term future were considered outside of the box. I’m almost 80 years of age BTW.

I’d go even further and replace Super Rugby altogether with separate fully professional NRC and NPC competitions using Soccer’s A-League as a model. There would be more teams with local identity offering more broadcast content and likely greater following. There would also be the option for a limited Champions League at the end of the respective competitions between say the top 2 teams from each country followed by the Southern Hemisphere Rugby Championship.

In Australia, the state based Premier Club competitions would remain as the third tier, played in tandem with the NRC as they do now with Super Rugby.

Like Soccer, there should be no restriction on Wallaby or All Black selection if some of the elite players choose to move overseas for more lucrative contracts. Some already do even with Super Rugby. The flip side of the coin is that with more domestic professional teams, there would be more opportunities available for talented players to remain at home rather than looking overseas.

I know I sound like a broken record, but the reality is that Super Rugby as it stands is no longer affordable for both AU and NZ. The alternative is professional domestic competitions, the NRC and NPC, with more teams in their respective competitions which has the potential to spread the tribal following.

It will mean that there will be less money available for player contracts and some of the elite players may choose to look overseas for more lucrative contracts, which is just a fact of life in the professional era. Soccer has managed this with the A-League in both the men’s and women’s competitions where the elite players are recruited overseas and are still eligible for selection for the national teams. Look at the Matildas for example. A similar thing has happened with the likes of Fiji and Argentina in Rugby and their national teams are still competitive.

The days when the elite players were expected to remain in AU to be eligible for Wallaby selection have long gone and there has to be a recognition that it is no longer sustainable in the professional era. National selection should be open to all where they qualify, regardless of where they play.

Of course critics of this strategy will say that it will dilute a domestic competition of the elite players, but what other alternative is there if Super Rugby is unaffordable? Reducing the number of Super Rugby teams isn’t the way to go as elite players will still drift overseas for more lucrative contracts and who can blame them. For better or for worse, the ideals of the amateur are long dead, as most professional sports have had to come to terms with.

But hey, it’s not all doom and gloom. The upside is that a broadened professional domestic competition in place of Super Rugby, similar to Soccer’s A-League and even the original short lived ARC, will create more opportunities for talented players to advance from club level to a fully professional environment, particularly with more teams in Sydney and Brisbane.

I can’t speak for Brisbane, but in Sydney for example, there is a regional divide between the North, South and West, where regional teams would engender a tribal following aligned with their respective Shute Shield clubs. Despite its limited format at the end of the season and its premature demise, the ARC demonstrated the potential for a season long professional competition in place of Super Rugby if there had been a more sensible alignment of the teams representing their regions. Even though it excluded players selected in the Wallaby squad, it was still very popular.

With more teams in a professional domestic competition, and I’m suggesting an 8 team competition to start with, including 3 in Sydney and 2 in Brisbane, it would offer more local content for a broadcaster if played on a home and away basis and finals over 16 weeks, which is roughly equivalent to the Super Rugby season before the inbound July international tours. More teams representing NSW and QLD regional cities could be added later, including Adelaide.

It wouldn’t preclude a Champions’ League at the end of the respective AU and NZ domestic competitions, followed by the Southern Hemisphere Rugby Championship, where overseas based players would be eligible for selection.

As I mentioned in a previous post, Super Rugby is no longer affordable and should be ditched altogether. Aus and NZ operate in different sporting markets and it’s up to each country to determine what domestic structure suits them best.

From my observation of Kiwi commentators here, I get the impression that a fully professional NPC would be more popular than Super Rugby as it would recognise that there are distinct tribal loyalties and therefore greater interest in a more widely dispersed provincial competition.

Australian Rugby operates in a different environment, where it has to compete with three other football codes when it is currently at the bottom of the pile. It has traditionally relied upon club rugby, limited to NSW and QLD, and with annual interstate representative matches as the tier below the Wallabies. However, since professionalism, that structure is no longer relevant. The early formats of Super Rugby went some way to addressing this, but then it got out of hand when it wanted to expand across the globe.

It was unfortunate that Aus didn’t have an equivalent domestic competition like NZ’s NPC and SA’s Currie Cup, which is a step above club level, and could have potentially provided local professional competitions with a Champions’ League at the end of their respective competitions, followed by what is now known as the Rugby Championship.

The original ARC was a tentative step to establish such a local domestic competition, but it was semi-professional tacked onto the end of the Premier Rugby competitions which took precedence. It was also sabotaged by NSW with the basing of its teams outside of their traditional regional Shute Shield club alliances, except for the Western Sydney Rams, which actually reached the semi-finals and was coached by Billy Melrose and his assistant John Manenti, the current Men’s AU SVNS coach. It was a premature decision at the time under John O’Neill’s leadership to cancel the ARC after only one year.

In the absence of Super Rugby, a fully professional ARC/NRC could replace it and become the second tier, which would offer more opportunities for local players to play at a higher level rather than looking overseas. It wouldn’t be able to offer the same remuneration for elite players as Super Rugby currently does, but for how much longer is that sustainable? It would also be more relevant in competing with the other football codes in the domestic market where the focus is on local tribalism.

We have to accept the fact that the more elite players will look overseas for more lucrative contracts, just like soccer, which isn’t an issue with the AFL and NRL. It’s the nature of the beast with professionalism when you have an international footprint. Anyone who thinks we can go back to the ideals of the amateur era are kidding themselves. It’s time to move on. I’m almost 80 years of age and have been a lifelong supporter of club rugby, which I still am, but even at my age I can see the writing on the wall.

There’s a misconception that fully professional domestic competitions with more teams will diminish the standard compared with Super Rugby, but I disagree. The fact that more players would be exposed to a professional environment over a full season would lift their skill and fitness levels to almost the same as Super Rugby.

The Premier Rugby competitions would remain as the third tier.

Yes, I agree. I have been advocating for years now that we should ditch Super Rugby altogether as our second tier competition and replace it with a fully professional NRC, played over two rounds on a home and away basis in the same time frame as Super Rugby before the July inbound international tours.

Super Rugby in its current format is no longer affordable and cutting the number of Australian teams for the sake of reducing costs would be a backward step with little long term benefit in spreading its footprint across the country. A national premier club competition would be even worse as it would be too unwieldly, however you structure it, with so many teams. It would be a throwback to the old boys traditionalists who can’t move on.

A model for a fully professional NRC is the original ARC with 8 teams and some tweaks to the NSW and QLD teams (3 in Sydney and 2 in Brisbane) to more align with their respective Premier Club districts, which would act as feeders. In the case of NSW, that was sabotaged by the then administration by basing the Central Coast Rays at Gosford, supposedly representing North Harbour Shute Shield clubs and the Sydney Fleet at North Sydney, supposedly representing South Harbour Shute Shield clubs. At least they got the Western Sydney Rams right by basing it at the then Parramatta Stadium, representing West Harbour, Eastwood, Parramatta and Penrith.

Even so, a packed out North Sydney Oval with some 17,000 spectators at a match between the Sydney Fleet and Western Sydney Rams showed the potential for the competition if there had been a sensible realignment of the Sydney based teams in particular to reflect their regional tribal following. Not sure about Brisbane, but that might have been the same.

It was a major mistake in prematurely abandoning the ARC after only one year, when its viability could have been sustained with some changes to the structure of the teams, particularly in Sydney. The later NRC was equally a dog’s breakfast with the NSW and QLD teams being split between City and Country, when the so called “Country” teams were almost, if not entirely, composed of City based players, without even any recognition of their origan. It was farcical and little wonder it didn’t attract tribal support.

A revamped NRC could potentially be expanded as the competition matures to 12 teams, including Newcastle. Illawarra, North Queensland and Adelaide, but let’s not bite off more than we can chew to start with. State based teams such as NSW and QLD are no longer relevant in a national competition, which I acknowledge will upset the traditionalists. None of the other codes have them, apart from the NRL’s State of Origin, which is restricted to just two states and doesn’t necessarily mean that all players are eligible for selection in either team.

The Premier Rugby competitions in each state and territory would remain as the third tier, with a fully professional ARC/NRC played concurrently as they do now with Super Rugby. It would mean that there would be more Premier Club players in Sydney and Brisbane being recruited to the NRC teams, but the upside is that it could reduce the outflow of players to overseas clubs when there would be more fully professional opportunities available locally. It also would provide more opportunities for aspiring junior talent to progress through the club ranks to a higher level. It goes without saying that a more aggressive approach in improving pathways and retention of talent from schoolboy and schoolgirl level in competition with the other football codes is an essential prerequisite.

Because of RA’s restricted finances, we may have to accept a fully professional domestic competition along the lines of Soccer’s A-League, where elite players may choose to move to Japan or Europe for more lucrative contracts, but would still be eligible for Wallaby selection. I suspect that NZ may well be facing the same prospect by establishing a fully professional NPC, with the elite All Blacks playing overseas.

That wouldn’t preclude a short end of season Champion’s League between say the top two teams in the NRC and NPC domestic competitions, as well as continuation of the Rugby Championship between Aus, NZ, SA, Arg with the possible inclusion of Fiji and Japan and later Tonga and Samoa, where all players are eligible for selection regardless of their overseas club alliances. This is how soccer works and is irrelevant to the likes of the AFL and NRL which don’t have a significant international footprint.

I would even go further Jacko and as I have also said many times before, we should ditch Super Rugby altogether and make a fully professional NRC our premium domestic competition with more teams. As others have pointed out, Rugby in Australia operates in a completely different environment to NZ or SA, where there are only a limited number of Super Rugby teams competing with multiple teams in the other codes.
I have previously suggested an initial 8 team competition, considering RA’s current financial circumstances, and basically following the original ARC format, with 3 teams from Sydney, 2 from Brisbane and 1 each from Canberra, Melbourne and Perth. The Sydney and Brisbane teams should be based on the regional grouping of Shute Shield and Hospital Cup clubs which would act as feeders and engender some tribal following. For Sydney, it would be North, South and West and I’m not as familiar with Brisbane, but either North and South or East and West.
As RA’s finances improve, further teams could be added, such as Newcastle, Illawarra, North Queensland and Adelaide. For example, the Hunter Wildfires in the Shute Shield could become the basis for a future NRC team and Penrith could be reinstated in the Sydney Premier Rugby competition. We need to look outside of the box, rather than a suggested National Premier Club Rugby competition, which is only pandering to the amateur era traditionalists.
Soccer’s A-League is the model to follow, rather than the AFL or NRL which have an over representation of traditional club teams in Melbourne and Sydney respectively, in what are supposedly national competitions. Both codes are eventually going to have to come to terms with the fact that it’s not sustainable in the long term and reduce the number of traditional teams with regional amalgamations, which is what a national competition should be all about. It doesn’t mean that the traditional teams couldn’t participate in a lower level tier, such as what would be applicable for the Shield Shield and Hospital Cup, which would remain as the 3rd tier in Rugby along with the Premier Rugby competitions in the other states.
As a staunch Shute Shield club member for many decades, I’m not opposed to this concept, as it would create more opportunities for aspiring talent to come through the grades from colts to achieve higher honours. Of course this would be contingent upon RA committing further resources to expanding its catchment potential to beyond the private school system in competition with the other codes. Are they up to it?
I don’t subscribe to the view that we have to consistently play NZ Super Rugby teams to remain competitive. With improved governance, the expansion of teams in a professional domestic competition and a broader base to draw from, with five times the population of NZ, notwithstanding competition from the other football codes, there is no reason why we need them. They can adopt their own domestic model which suits their circumstances, which are different to ours. There will still be interface at the international level in the Southern Hemisphere Rugby Championship.

Totally agree. I don’t subscribe to the view that Rugby should meekly accept its relevance as a third or fourth tier football code in the Australian context.

Despite its downward spiral over the past couple of decades, mainly due to incompetent governance in the transition from amateurism to professionalism, we have a good story to tell as an international code, and I can’t see why we can’t make some inroads into the dominance of our main competitor which is Rugby League.

With the refocus of RA on the importance of nurturing the development pathways at a broader school and club level, in competition with RL, I think there is much to look forward to. Adding to that is the financial windfall from the upcoming British & Irish Lions Tour and the Men’s and Women’s Rugby World Cups. Let’s hope that that windfall is not squandered like the last time after the 2003 Rugby World Cup.

Stan does a great job for Rugby and is far superior to the previous Foxtel coverage. We now get live broadcasts of all Shute Shield and Hospital Cup matches as well, rather than just the match of the day. The subscription cost is also much cheaper and you get more bang for your buck.

The downside to the Nine/Stan broadcast deal is that there is only limited FTA coverage, compared with the NRL Here’s hoping that when a new broadcasting deal is negotiated, whether or not it’s with Nine/Stan, that there will be an expanded FTA coverage. It doesn’t really matter whether it’s on the main FTA channel or one of the FTA subsidiary channels, one of which could be the dedicated Rugby channel, as long as it’s promoted on all channels.

Because of their limited resources, I doubt if a broadcast package with SBS would be anywhere near competitive with the likes of Nine/Stan or Foxtel.

Sorry, I disagree. If Super Rugby does continue, then there is no reason why we couldn’t support 5 teams, or even more, if RA made a greater effort to retain more of the elite schoolboys (and girls) already playing in the code, many of whom are picked off by the NRL Where do you think the NRL gets its talent from? It’s the broader school system and junior clubs. The talent is already there for the taking.
The problem with rugby relying on the private school system is that they play their competitions on the weekends and many schools won’t allow their players to participate in junior club football, which is also played on the weekends. They also don’t play enough games in their constricted competitions.
I can’t see the point in having a 5-8 team domestic 3rd tier and 2-3 team 2nd tier. The Premier Club competitions in each state and territory are now effectively the 3rd tier and that’s how it should remain. I doubt if they would look kindly upon being pushed down to a meaningless 4th tier. If Super Rugby persists, then a semi-professional ARC/NRC model with some tweaks should be revived at the conclusion of the Premier Rugby competitions.
To be frank, I don’t give a stuff what NZ wants and its up to them to chart their own way forward. We have to structure our game within the competitive football environment in which we participate. That means a meaningful domestic competition.
I have suggested an 8 team fully professional domestic competition as a starting point in place of Super Rugby, which could be expanded in future years to include NSW and QLD regional teams, such as Newcastle, Illawarra and North Queensland. Add to that Adelaide.
This is how soccer’s A-League started off.
Unlike the NRL and A-League, there is no obligation to include NZ teams, as they would have their own domestic competition. In your final comment suggesting that an 8 team domestic 2nd tier is a commitment to mediocrity, you’re again like many others, assuming that pathways will continue as they are, when they could be greatly enhanced by attracting more elite athletes who might otherwise go to the other codes.
Australia has five times the population of NZ and notwithstanding the competitive sporting environment in the football codes, there is a vast reservoir of potential talent to choose from.

I have read through all of the comments and what’ s striking, is that very few refer to the real problem with AU Rugby, which is the failure to invest in the development pathways from schoolboy level over the past couple of decades. Those who think the problem can be fixed by reducing the number of AU Super Rugby teams are misguided and completely ignore the bleedingly obvious problem, to some at least, which is the shrinking of the talent pool to the private school lobby.

For those wet behind the ears johnny-come-latelies, AU Rugby was at its strongest in the 1980s and 90s when it had strong representation in the public school system, as well as the private schools. We won a Grand Slam in the UK for the first time, won 2 World Cups and regularly beat the All Blacks, retaining the Bledisloe Cup for an extended period. Doesn’t that tell you something?

Assuming the current Super Rugby format continues, it would be a backward step to cull any of the AU teams, regardless of what the NZRU may want. It’s not up to them to dictate how AU Rugby structures itself. AU Rugby operates in a completely different competitive sporting environment compared with NZ, particularly with the football codes, and it hardly enhances the footprint of the code by shrinking the number of teams on a national level. If NZ isn’t prepared to acknowledge that fact, then they can bugger off and we should set up our own fully professional domestic competition as I have mentioned previously, starting with 8 teams, playing on a home and away basis. I make no apologies for suggesting that should be our way forward anyway.

Until such time as RA, hopefully, now re-engages with the broader public and catholic systemic school systems as development pathways, then nothing will change, regardless of how many AU Super Rugby teams there are.

Couldn’t agree with you more ECA. Those who promote the expansion of Super Rugby to all corners of the globe, including the Northern Hemisphere, are deluded. The current format for Super Rugby within watchable time zones is the way to go. The Southern Hemisphere Rugby Championship is a different matter, but I would prefer that it only involved SH national teams.

— COMMENT DELETED —

This is basically what the original ARC/NRC was meant to do, but it included the other Super Rugby states and ACT, which should be a given. It would be a backward step to just focus on NSW and Qld again. From memory, I think that Perth Spirit won the last or second last iterations of the NRC.

There were 8 teams initially in the ARC, which only lasted a year, but IMO it was prematurely cut short, when some realignment of the 3 NSW teams and possibly the 2 Brisbane teams as well, could have made it a viable competition. It was doomed to fail the way it was set up.

For example, in respect of the NSW teams, there was the Central Coast Rays based in Gosford, supposedly representing the Northern Sydney Shute Shield clubs; the Sydney Fleet based in North Sydney, representing the Southern Sydney Clubs and the only one they got right was the Western Sydney Rams based in Parramatta representing the Western Sydney clubs, which also included Penrith at the time. It’s no wonder that there was minimal tribal following, although there was one game I attended at a packed out North Sydney Oval between the Sydney Fleet and the Western Sydney Rams. That demonstrated how successful the competition could have been if the Sydney teams had been properly aligned with their respective Shute Shield clubs which would engender a greater tribal following.

The later NRC was even worse, with Sydney and NSW Country teams made up exclusively of city based players, with no meaningful connection to Shute Shield clubs, let alone country clubs. Most, if not all of country talent is now recruited by the NSW Academy and Shute Shield clubs and I suspect the same thing happens in Qld.

It is still not too late to reinstate the ARC/NRC concept at the conclusion of the Premier Rugby competitions, but with more logical alignment with the respective Premier clubs in Sydney and Brisbane to foster a tribal following. Those players selected in the Wallaby squad would be excluded and that would create more opportunities for talented club players coming through the ranks to show their wares. I would add one further proviso, that there should be a meaningful break between the respective grand finals and the start of the ARC/NRC competition to allow for those players selected from the grand final teams to train with their respective ARC/NRC teams. We’ve had the ridiculous situation in the past where the NRC started a week after the last grand final, when selected players from the respective finals’ series had no training with their NRC teams, which placed them at a disadvantage. There should be a 2/3 week break at a minimum and the competition including finals, assuming 8 teams, could still finish by mid-November.

As I have suggested previously, the ARC/NRC should initially start with 8 teams identified with their regions as follows-

– Northern Brisbane
– Southern Brisbane
– Northern Sydney
– Southern Sydney
– Western Sydney
– Canberra
– Melbourne
– Perth

I have also previously suggested that if the current Super Rugby format doesn’t continue, then the above ARC/NRC format should be the basis of a fully professional domestic competition, played home and away over the same time-frame as Super Rugby, i.e. 16 weeks including finals, from March to June, before the inbound July international tours. Those players not selected in the Wallaby squad would then return to their respective Premier clubs as they do now.

Agree. The SMH wouldn’t publish such a damning condemnation of Jones as its main editorial unless they were confident that Tom Decent’s expose was on solid ground. I don’t believe a word Jones says and I suspect he is throwing the onus back on RA to sack him so he can get a payout rather than walking away with nothing. Either way, he will no doubt turn up as Japan’s coach within a matter of days.

Frankly, if he doesn’t resign then RA should sack him anyway regardless of the payout as it would be worth it. We can’t afford to keep him.

Exactly sheek. You and I are of a similar generation and you will no doubt recall that Wallaby teams in the amateur era had a high representation of players from state high schools, including country schools, when the Waratah Shield was prominent. In NSW in the 1980/90s, CHS regularly flogged Combined GPS to the point where GPS called it off. Obviously, something must have been working for Rugby in the public school system. Where do you think the NRL gets the bulk of its talent from? It’s just not private schools.
When you go through the team lists today for junior representative teams, there’s bugger all representation from public schools, which carries through to the higher levels including the Wallabies.
The rot started when Rugby went professional, not that I was against it, but then the monied suits took over control and the true believers, including the likes of Dick Marks, were cast aside. The dawning of the professional era certainly required a more business like approach to administration, but the mistake they made was to put all the focus on the Wallaby brand, while neglecting to nurture the amateur grass roots and provide adequate pathways for talented players. Without the latter, the Wallaby brand ultimately suffers, which is what has now come to pass. It’s got nothing to do with the number of AU Super Rugby teams and which is suggested by some ill-informed commentators as the problem. In fact I would prefer instead a fully professional purely domestic competition as the 2nd tier replacing Super Rugby, which I have alluded to on other threads.
In the immortal words of Paul Keating in the early 1990s when the economy was going pear shaped, “this is the recession we had to have”. That analogy could be equally applied to the current predicament that Australian Rugby finds itself in. Let’s hope that the wiser heads will prevail in a root and branch review of the code, particularly having regard to the competitive domestic environment in which it seeks to function.

I’ll keep banging on about this until someone with some influence takes notice. Ditch Super Rugby and replace it in the same time-frame with a fully professional national domestic competition. We don’t need NZ, as they have their own NPC and can develop a fully professional competition to suit their domestic market.

The original ARC, which was a semi-professional competition tacked onto the end of the Premier Rugby competitions sowed the seeds for a fully fledged national competition, but it was never given a chance to grow, being cancelled after its first year. The branding and location of the three teams in Sydney and two in Brisbane also didn’t help, but that could have been easily rectified. Its following iteration, the NRC, wasn’t much better.

Under my proposal, the national domestic competition would become the 2nd tier and the Premier Rugby competitions in each state would remain as the 3rd tier. Rugby should follow Soccer’s A-League model with multiple teams in Sydney and Brisbane, which is where the bulk of elite players come from. I don’t agree with the promotion of individual clubs from the respective Premier Rugby competitions to the national level, such as in the case of the AFL and NRL That creates too much of an imbalance in a national competition. I think that eventually the AFL and NRL are going to have to face the prospect of culling the number of teams in Melbourne and Sydney respectively. It’s not sustainable in a national competition.

An ARC/NRC or whatever you want to call it, should start initially with 8 teams, played on a home and away basis over 2 rounds. The top 4 teams would play in a finals series over 2 weeks before the July inbound international tests. It would be played in tandem with the existing Premier Rugby competitions as they do now with Super Rugby. Those players not rostered for the match day national competition would return to their respective Premier clubs, as would all players not selected in the Wallabies’ squad at the end of the national competition.

I have previously nominated the initial 8 teams as, Sydney North Harbour, Sydney South Harbour, Western Sydney, North Brisbane, South Brisbane, Brumbies, Rebels and Western Force. The Premier Rugby clubs in Sydney and Brisbane would align with their respective national regional teams. Further teams could be added in the future, such as Newcastle, Townsville and Adelaide, but let’s not bite off more than we can chew to start with.

The Waratahs and Reds would no longer be relevant in a national competition. None of the other football codes have state based teams, aside from the NRL’s State of Origin, which will become increasingly irrelevant if the NRL ever establishes a truly national footprint with local talent being recruited.

There is already the emergence of local talent coming through the Brumbies, Rebels and Western Force and that needs to be fostered rather than relying on NSW and Qld. Having more teams in the 2nd tier creates more opportunities for local players looking for a professional career to stay in Australia, rather than going overseas, which many currently do. An increase in the talent pool though expansion into the public and catholic school systems and retention of talented players in competition with the other codes will enable a professional national competition to be sustainable. Shrinking the number of teams at the elite level isn’t the way to go.

It doesn’t preclude continuation of the Southern Hemisphere Rugby Championship, which could be expanded to include Fiji in the short term and other South Pacific and South American nations in the future. I’m not in favour of including Northern Hemisphere nations such as Japan as they are out of season. Each hemisphere should go it alone. They all meet up in the Rugby World Cup every 4 years.

I say, ditch Super Rugby altogether and replace it with our own fully professional domestic competition, starting initially with 8 teams. Sydney North Harbour, Sydney South Harbour, Western Sydney, North Brisbane, South Brisbane, Brumbies, Rebels, Western Force. Premier clubs in Sydney and Brisbane align with their respective regional teams which maintains that tribal following.

I’m a great believer in the KISS principle. While I agree with your general concept of representative teams in Sydney and Brisbane in particular in an expanded National domestic competition (call it NRC/ARC or whatever), I think you’re being overly ambitious with your suggested number of teams to start with.
I have for a long time now advocated a fully professional National domestic competition replacing Super Rugby altogether in the same time-frame, i.e. March to June. It would run in tandem with the Premier Rugby competitions as it does now with Super Rugby and the status of the former wouldn’t change as it would remain as the 3rd tier.
Having regard to the limited resources of RA, I propose that such a competition should start initially with 8 teams consisting of the current Brumbies, Rebels and Western Force, and with the addition of 3 Sydney based Shute Shield representative teams and 2 Brisbane based Hospital Cup representative teams. The NSW Waratahs and Queensland Reds are no longer relevant in a national competition. None of the other national football codes in Australia have state based teams, or even “Country” teams for that matter.
We have to focus on our own very competitive domestic market if we want to lift the profile of our code. NZ can do whatever suits its own domestic agenda. Pacific Island Rugby is the responsibility of World Rugby, which has far more resources, and not AU or NZ.
My proposal for an initial 8 team NRC/ARC would be played on a home and away basis over 2 rounds with the top 4 teams playing in a finals series. That would be over 16 weeks which would fit within the March to June time-frame prior to the in-bound July international window. Adjustments could be made to the match schedule as more teams are added to the domestic competition in the future.
I basically agree with your concept of the Premier Club teams in Sydney and Brisbane forming representative regional teams in the national competition, with the club teams acting as feeders into their respective regions. That’s how you maintain connectivity between the Premier clubs and the national teams. It’s not that it hasn’t been done previously, when North Harbour v South Harbour representative teams from the Shute Shield were enthusiastically supported in their annual clashes at a fully packed North Sydney Oval. I can’t see why it would be any different today.
The original ARC tacked onto the end of the Premier club competitions almost got it right, despite its axing after only one year. Its failing was to base the Northern and Southern Sydney teams outside of their respective tribal following. The North team was based in Gosford and the South team at North Sydney. WTF? At least they got the Western Sydney Rams right based at the former Parramatta Stadium. Not sure about Brisbane’s 2 teams.
In spite of that, I recall attending a fully sold out North Sydney Oval between the Sydney Fleet, representing South Harbour, and the Western Sydney Rams. That demonstrates that there is the potential to create representative teams with a tribal following. They don’t have to be artificially contrived teams.
My suggestion for the Sydney based teams is North Harbour, represented by Northern Suburbs, Gordon, Manly and Waringah as feeders; South Harbour, represented by Eastern Suburbs, Randwick, Sydney University and Southern Districts and Western Sydney, represented by West Harbour, Eastwood, Parramatta and the reintroduction of Penrith. With Penrith being on the ascendancy in the NRL with a third straight premiership, then there’s the potential for recruiting players from the region in an expanded national competition.
Sorry, but I don’t support the Hunter Wildfires continuing to participate in the Shute Shield as they are unable to supply a full complement of teams, but they would still have a place in an expanded National competition in the future. I can’t speak for Brisbane, but I’m sure that a tribal following would be possible for its 2 teams with a similar representative geographic divide in the Hospital Cup.
Future representative regional teams like Newcastle and Townsville, or even Adelaide, could be included once the national competition becomes sustainable and finances allow it. You have to learn to crawl before you can walk when starting with a clean sheet, so let’s not try to bite off more than we can chew to start with.
It goes without saying that other underlying problems like governance and restructuring of pathways starting at schoolboy/girl level also have to be addressed for higher level competitions to become sustainable. Shrinking the number of teams to irrelevance isn’t the way to go.

I can’t see that having two additional teams in a professional national domestic competition in Sydney and one in Brisbane would cannibalise support of local clubs. Such a competition would just be replacing Super Rugby in the same time frame and the Premier Club competitions would remain the 3rd tier, so it shouldn’t make any difference in terms of local club support. It’s a different scenario to the examples you referred to in Perth and Adelaide.

The main difference would be that more players would be drawn from the Sydney and Brisbane club competitions to train and play professionally at a higher level and those not required on the match day would return to their respective clubs in the region as they do now. Likewise, at the conclusion of the national domestic competition, those not selected in the Wallabies’ squad would also return to their local clubs as they do now.

Some will no doubt argue that it would be draining the local clubs of players, but I see it as creating the opportunity for the more talented club players to play professionally in Australia rather than going overseas, which many do. It also opens up opportunities for aspiring club players further down the chain to play first grade. It certainly wouldn’t dampen my support for my local club.

I agree that we should ditch Super Rugby and establish a fully professional domestic competition in its place. We are in a different market to many other unions where we have to compete with three other football codes and if we want to maintain any relevance then we have to focus on the domestic market. NZ can do whatever suits its own domestic market.

Your suggested format of 8 teams initially is exactly what I proposed on another thread, although the Waratahs and Reds as state based teams are no longer relevant in a national competition if RU wants to expand its base. None of the other codes have state based teams or even nomadic “Country” teams, which don’t have a defined home base. Regionally based teams in NSW and Qld, such as Newcastle and Townsville, could be added in the future once the domestic competition becomes sustainable. The “State” mentality in terms of a national domestic competition has to be cast aside, although in saying that, each state and territory union should continue to have responsibility for local competitions within its own borders, with financial support from a reconstituted RA Board.

A fully professional domestic competition, call it NRC or whatever, wouldn’t necessarily downgrade the relevance of the existing Premier Rugby competitions in each state or territory, as they would continue to remain the 3rd tier as they currently do under the Super Rugby format. The difference would be that there would be an additional 3 national domestic teams initially, and possibly more in the future, which would expand the potential for aspiring talent to play at a higher level domestically rather than going overseas. I can’t see that it would necessarily downgrade the relevance of the Premier Rugby competitions. It certainly wouldn’t from my perspective.

The only problem is whether RA and the potential additional franchises would have the financial capacity to make a fully professional domestic competition viable.

But Pietsch is another Randwick player, so that says it all doesn’t it.

Yes, I noted it also. There were only a few picked from the Junior Rugby Clubs outside of the private school system. I also remember when CHS regularly flogged Combined GPS in their annual clashes and as you mentioned GPS called it off. Miserable toffs. Coincidentally, this was when Australian Rugby was at its strongest, winning 2 World Cups and regularly beating the All Blacks and holding on to the Bledisloe Cup for an extended period. What does that tell you?

The problem is that the elite schools play too few matches to hone their skills and they’re left wanting when coming up against more skilled contemporaries at the higher level who play far more matches. Although the Aus U20s and Aus Schoolboys & U18s beat their NZ counterparts in 2019, many of the players in those teams went to the NRL. In the meantime, the much larger Public and Catholic school systems are ignored. It’s little wonder that we’re in the current predicament.

From what I’ve heard, the private school lobby isn’t interested in participating in a broader schools competition and won’t allow their students to play in the Junior Club Rugby competitions on the weekend. Why can’t the private schools play during the school week like most other schools.

Under a centralised model, RA should set up its own broader schools competition in consultation with each state and invite the private schools to participate. If they refuse, then so be it, but they will be the loser in the long run.