ARU must help Rebels for Aussie rugby's sake

Davo No mate. First Aid is for the weak. :D

Wow what was the article about? In the midst of this Irish-Australian civil war (and it seems to be mostly Catholic) I've forgotten what the original article was. Great stuff! I wish I could contribute but it looks like a bloke could get hurt in there! Is there a first -aid tent?

Just like the Brumbies re-location you had been touting through 'discussions' with supposed ACT insider's. Where's there is Republican there is BS. Oh, and you're a Irish Australian. Well, being one myself what is this supposed prejudice to speak of?

Sharminator. Yes I know all that. I have definately been exposed to conversations that suggest both WA and Vic will soon be afforded stand alone status in Div One rather that Div Two. This would leave Div Two with only N.T., S.A., Tassie and Lloyd Mc D. The ACT being demoted has been lossley bandied around but where ther is smoke there is fire?

abfall That's a rather emotively charged retort on your part. What a huge chip of anti, Aust Footy, Melbourne, Irish Australian, Canberra sentiment you harbour. Why the bloody hell would you even give a toss about what actually was happening on the ground here given that chunderous tirade. Like many of your persuasion, you resent and covet the very strong Irish influence on this countries cultural institutions, which includes our national game and try to down play this by pretending that it is only a Melbourne supported code. Of course nothing could be further from the truth. Thanks for the heads up re 'current academy' players, however can I say, I actaully had a conversation with a Brumby Rugby power broker late last year, who disclosed this lack of local content to me, but maybe this situation has changed for the better since then? The irish did influence Australian culture significantly whether you like it or not, and this reached far beyond the realms of Melbourne town as Australian Footy did and does, I assure you. Your vitriol smacks of ignorance and fear abfall because the fact's are Aust Footy has a bigger profile in SEC now, than ever before. Canberra has never been any more a Union town than it has been an Aust Footy one and I can state quite confidently that Union does not hold the status it once did at SEC, with those Union scholorships that Pappahatsas instigated in the good old days, all but ancient history. I actually have regular conatct with the school through students and mates, so this is not something I have pulled out of thin air. When I attended SEC it was only just embarking on the formation of a Aust Footy club in the 70's and was the first school in Canberra to do so. In those days half the 1st XV were made up of Aust Footy players and tother half League lads from Quenbeyan, who were forced to play ra ra over their respective code of choice, two Aust Footy lads going onto to play for the ACT Schools I recall at one time. This begs the question as to your historical link in attending this institution, perhaps a year or two on a Union scholarship from some far flung outpost in country NSW, P.I or NZ in more contemporary days? This would help explain your disdain and double standard now would it not. Your sweeping staements regarding history and any ability to remotely deconstruct, tells me you have spent way too much time in the front row. You are a mere juvenile if this latest dummy spit is anything to go by. Yes the Irish are ambivalent about Aust Footy simply because of the compatibility with their game, which sees some of their players crossing over. A similar analogy could be made between Union and League here and make no mistake about it, there is money in Gaelic Footy despite it's 'amateur' status. I know more about Ireland and have strong surviving family links to that country than you perahps care to acknowledge and your presumption and ignorance in questioning my cred in this mannert is unessesarily insulting and offensive. I have no intention on buying into your bigot induced bating in substantiating any of this further, since you are clearly a lost cause. I will say however, there have been a significant number of ACT players over time, join the elite ranks of the AFL and this continues today. During my era there were half a doz to come out of the ACT G.R's, three from SEC in fact and no doubt more would have been forthcoming if not for the Colleges obsession with Union at that time. The GWS will use this demo as a nursery, surpassing anything Union will be able to extract from the GR's here in future, to be sure. The ACT won the Aust country champs v Vic Country this year, finishing runners up the year before, which is no mean feat. The game is much stronger than you would like to admit in these parts and this without the bling of an elite generic franchise i.e the Brumbies. There are ACTAFL honor lists you are able to access that have been presented here by various contributors on Roar, esp on the Aust footy threads, so be my guest in, you can always go through archival material here or have a look at the ACTAFL site as well. That anyone really cares about Union or the Brumbies above and beyond that of Aust Footy these days is a moot point. The gate at Canberra Stadium last weekend is hardly anything to get excited about, esp since the Swans, which are a Sydney based side attract an av of 11k to Manuka Oval so in that respect 15k is more than achievable I assure you, if the Brumbies could pull an av 22K in the good old days. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black or even grasping at straws, your 5k v 300 is hardly compelling evidence in trying to play down Aust Footy's status in this region, you are simply a desperate and delusional individual with some serious baggage. Good day and good luck.

Republican Can't you read? I know you went to St Edmund's, as I did, but you musn't have passed basic comprehension (I presume you only passed Irish history - which wasn't on the syllabus). You might not know, however, that Brian O'Driscoll is the most popular sportsman in Ireland - the most hated sport in Ireland is AFL because it tries to recruit Gaelic footballers. All your blarney about you and your father and grandfather means nothing in Ireland today - there is no link at all - you are living in a make believe world all of your own. As I said before Robbie Coleman, Tyler Stephens, Colby Faiinga (all under 20 and ex St Edmund's) are part of the Brumbies Academy, as is Jacob Taylor (Canberra Grammar). Tell how many many ex ACT Aussie Rules players are currently listed in AFL teams. The less than 300 people that saw last year's ACT AFL premiership final at Manuka Oval as against the 5000 people that saw Tuggeranong vs Queanbeyan at Vikings Park (RU) make your prediction that an AFL team in Canberra would average 15,000 look ridiculous. Let's face the facts - your faux Irishness masks a Melburnian who has never got over the fact that your family had to uproot yourselves from 'Marvellous Melbourne' to 'Boring Canberra' - and found that nobody cared about 'Up there Cazaly'.

As I said above an ACT player was selected in Aus Schools team after the Carnival, the number 8. And longer term, the has been no real downward spiral in ACT representation in Aussie Schools. In 2008 the entire Aussie Schools starting front row was from the ACT. Maybe 2009 was simply a weak year for ACT, or a good year for talent in other states, but dont let reality get in the way of your incoherant and baseless ramblings ..

oh dear, republican again showing his ignorance. "I have heard rumblings for a couple of seasons now, re. WA and VIc deriving stand alone sides in the Oz Schools Nationals" The good old republican rumblings hearsay., like the rumlings about the Brumbies moving to Melbourne and rugby dying in the ACT, with absolutely no evidence to back up what he says. WA and Vic have stand alone sides in the Oz Schools Nationals, but in div II. The point of the recently introduced Combined States Side is to give players from these and other states additional exposure. I havnt heard anyone credible talk about either state having their own team in Div I as the current system is working, and standalone im Div I neither is currently strong enough to compete. In a few years, with further development, maybe this will happen, but at the moment no one is talking about it.

Republican, I've been waiting to get the 2010 info to pass on to you.. The Brumbies Academy for 2010 has at least three ACT Tier 1 players (as is locally-developed), and it might actually be four, the season guide profile isn't clear for the fourth. That's four of 13 in total. In Tiers 2 & 3, of the 23 players listed, upwards of 9 look to be home-grown.

Brett Well said. Babyg While that does sound like a reasonable idea. However, you must take into account this. Rugby isc actually developing markets such as WA and SA rapidly without any such partnership. I'm not ruling out the possiblity but it's not likely in the near future considering the current growth rates for Rugby in the 'minor' states. As for Vic while there has been development previuosly this will accelerate in future with the introduction of the Rebels. The major issue with many Australian Rugby people is their parochial perspective on things. More often or not we focus on the issues within a narrow spectrum forgetting Rugby presence not only internationally but on our shores.

I've asked this question before, but here it is again: is it entirely possible that the non-representation of ACT in the Aust Schoolboys side is more an indication of a lean couple of years talent-wise, and that maybe the next ACT schoolboy "star" is only 15? (As an example, there's currently no South Australian reps in the Austrlian cricket team - is cricket dead in South Australia, or is it just in the middle of an off period?) If NSW went from say, ten Schoolboy reps to four or five, would that also be indicative of a heartland in decline, or would it just be one of those curiosities of selections based on a carnival? My point being, is the rise of Victoria and WA at the schoolboy level really at the expense of the ACT, or is it more indicative of how well rugby development is going in these new markets? And further, if a new market suddenly gets more reps, doesn't it have to be that the existing states' rep numbers will decrease?

Speeking of co-operation. I'd love to see union and league do some joint work in junior development in VIC, WA, and SA. I think this approach would see great benefit in developing the core skills required to progress through the ranks and get sufficient playing numbers to make a difference. Even a school touch football program would do wonders to get people understanding the finer points of rugby.

The ACT is NOT in danger of relegation to Div 2. Yes, both WA and VIC are likely to enter stand alone teams in the near future but not at the expensive of the existing teams. Put simply the 1st Div will have NSW I &II, QLD I&II, ACT, VIC,WA and Combined States while Div 2 will have TAS,SA,NT and the Lloyd McDermott XV.

Thank's for that Andy. Vic did well then, compared to WA and especially the ACT who both have elite teams. I reckon if Union does manage to stay afloat at the elite level in Melbourne, they will one day be up there with Qld and NSW, as far as nursery cred goes Yes, I have heard rumblings for a couple of seasons now, re. WA and VIc deriving stand alone sides in the Oz Schools Nationals, while the ACT is relegated to Div Two possibly. Whatever the cause/s, this particularly small heartland is destined to become an insignificant Union player in this respect, which is quite sad really. Cheers

As you say, only time will tell. But being a "heartland" should not be characterised by guaranteed selections in rep teams or similar. At the end of the day it would hardly be unexpected that, if WA and Vic have actually started to get their player development in one sock (as opposed to getting a fortuitous draw or upset results), demographics alone would start to swing against locations such as the ACT. So while a total lack of representation may be unprecedented, it may also just be that they had a pretty ordinary tournament. Still, I suspect that if the CS team starts challenging regularly there will be mutterings about how it is unfair that they get to have a "best of" team and that they should have to compete separately to put things back to normal. For the record, the CS squad had 11 WA players, 9 from Vic.

What exactly was the ratio of Vics to WA in the last CS side? Interesting that only one WA player was selected in the Oz Schools side to tour the UK and Ireland while six were chosen from Vic out of that C.S. selection. I have been monitoring the slow decline of GR Rugby in the ACT over about six or so years now and it is quite clear that while Vic have gone from strength to strength in a very short time, the ACT have regressed. Not a solitary player was selected from the ACT squad Andy, which is unprecedented. You can draw your own conclusions as to how and why, but the long and the short of it is that the ACT is no longer a Union heartland and that is unlikely to change despite quite a historical pedigree in this respect, certainly surpassing that of Vic or WA's by along way. If you care to watch this space for any future ACT representation at all levels, I expect that the evolving sample may well prove more compelling to a sceptic, i.e. yourself. Cheers

Hmmm, I suspect some of this gets distorted a little at the amateur level though. Your example of Vic leapfrogging the ACT and WA - I don't have any real visibility on the ACT, but the fact was that WA contributed more players to the CS team that contested the final than Vic did. That more players subsequently got selected from the CS team than the ACT squad reflects the results - not everyone can win and pool selection (luck) would have a big part to play in a six team competition. But that more players got selected from Vic that WA may well have more to do with the logistics of travel, training etc for amateur players (and school attendees, at that). It is some pretty big conclusions to be drawing though, on the basis of a pretty small, possibly warped, sample.

Yes, you are correct AndyS, of course the calibre must improve especially given input from unions i.e the ACT and that's not a negative thing in itself. What I am attempting to suggest is firstly, having an elite presence does not necessarily guarantee a healthy grass roots of any given code. Secondly, a correlation seems to exist between the ACT having the very corporate Brumbies at their disposal and a regression in status in them producing very good Union players historically. The Brumbies have also focused quite robustly on Vic development in the past 5 to 6 years. Is this coincidental? I say not. So in that respect this shift could be interpreted as beng at the 'expense' of what was once a powerful force in Union nationally. I see the whole top down growth approach as robbing Peter to pay Paul and that is really what I feel compelled to expose. This ACT Union regression is also evidenced by the change in focus of the ACT's main nursery St Edmunds College, which has been quite dramatic and has spilt over into the poor results at Schools level Rugby by the ACT no doubt, over the past 5 or so years. Vic, who have not benefited from direct elite presence in this code have suddenly leap frogged both the ACT and new kids on the block, WA at the Grass roots, as to the reasons for this they are probably broad and varied but a small demographic i.e ours will always expose the rot long before it does in a larger ones i.e. NSW, who will absorb the damage more effectively. Cheers

Brock James grew up in Adelaide before moving to Sydney to go to Scots ... and he played for the Force for a few years. Does that mean the force are relocating to Adelaide. Dont even bother trying to understand republican´s lop sided logic, he hates rugby, is bitter that Rugby Union and League are more popular than AFL in Canberra, and is now even more bitter that Melbourne will also have a team in AFL´s heartland. It is funny though .. he has been bleating about relocating the Brumbies to Melbourne for ages .. but now that Melbourne have their own franchise he is also saying that that will be a disaster.

When you say expense, what do you mean? No-one ever says they have enough money, but it can't be that as funding hasn't changed. Players from Melbourne may be filling spots in rep teams that used to be filled by ACT players, but that indicates nothing more than a limited number of spots. It is called competition, and only means that players from Melbourne have improved relative to ACT. It doesn't mean that, by being better, the Victorian players have somehow made the ACT players worse, so how is their selection at the "expense" of the traditional demographics?