ARU, NSWRU have no plan for Junior Rugby

Andrew Logan, I hate to say it but from my information this is simply not true. The local ARU development manager Mick Gray, was in constant contact with the Mudgee organisers leading up to the carnival and provided what support he could. In addition, Mick and John Searl from ARU ran a juniors clinic for over 150 kids at the carnival!! How this is nil support I have no idea. Your frequent disinformation about the activities of ARU and NSWRU (or lack thereof) is as unhelpful as it is often untrue.

Sheek, I'm sure Deans felt it was his responsibility. I'm sure he thought that this was as much his responsibility as it is to coach the Wallabies. Being national coach means helping the game up to, and including, the national level. This is something you see in New Zealand all the time -- the ABs coaching team farm out to the provinces (and even clubs) when they can to help develop the game. Deans is a product of that environment.

Andrew, That's a mighty effort by Deans. He could quite easily have said to himself, "this is not my responsibility". But he made his responsibility anyway.

allblacksfan The Brumbies I'm sure would say thanks but no thanks as there is a vibrant junior rugby nursery throughout Canberra's metropolitan clubs and schools that no longer have to move to Sydney to get noticed. Besides Canberra being based in the ACT and not NSW. Interestingly ANU who I played for some 9 years merged with the struggling Norths club in canberra (geographically next door) to consolidate a sustainable Seniors AND juniors...IMO both are necessary. Lest we forget the ongoing snubs from NSW (Sydney teams) prior to the brumbies - The Canberra Vikings were admitted to the Sydney Comp but after they won it convincingly then were never invited back. I think the article is fair enough I dont see much evidence of a concerted effort to win more hearts and minds of junior players in Western Sydney - or anywhere else. Thats the future

Ross - don't feel bad. The organisers of the recent Grassroots Rugby Festival at Mudgee, which ended up with over 1000 players taking part on the day, wrote to both NSWRU and the ARU for support and received nil from both. Through a third party channel, Robbie Deans was invited and turned up on the day to great acclaim - rightly so. He went on to Dubbo after spending the morning in Mudgee. He has been sighted at Penrith and other western suburbs recently as well. Someone at the ARU is doing kilometres in support of junior rugby - and it aint Nucifora or O'Neill.

I have been very interested to read the comments following the publication of this article last week. I have great respect for the Sydney University Rugby Club. Over the history of the club they have produced many wonderful people and great players and I acknowledge their contribution to Australian Rugby over the past 100 years. In no way would I like to see them out of the Shute Shield. I do have a problem with the current situation in that there is a very well organised wealth generation machine within the University apparently directing money predominately towards winning premierships as opposed to true development of Junior Rugby. Perhaps Sydney University could be allocated areas such as Campbelltown, MacQuarie Fields, Picton etc to work with local clubs on real development. The points Mr Ross make are well taken however, I think Blue Sue's note says it all. Regarding his comments on the support provided to Colts I think most district clubs in some way provide all these services and opportunities financed with some support from NSWRU/ ARU but the majority of funding comes from their own resources and the work of the many volunteers and sponsors. My main disappointment is with the ARU and NSWRU who appear to have no real strategy to develop, train and maintain young players through Colts, Grade and whatever higher honours they may aspire to. In September 2008 I wrote to John O'Neill with some suggestions for ongoing development of young Rugby players. I recieved no reply from him or the ARU, however, one suggestion I made was an Australia wide registration data base, administered by the Junior body and the local District Club transparent to the ARU. The comment from Fuchal regarding his son and the email from the ARU suggests someone may have read my letter.

I agree with Sheek when the papers are yelling about the death of Parramamtta rugby and then pictured is Berrick Barnes wearing a SU shirt and Sanisi wearing a Easts shirt it makes you wonder who is pulling the strings???? I know maybe these players dont know the history of the Sydney comp but some one could whisper in their ear cant they?

Andrew, I'm tiring of this discussion also. I certainly didn't expect it to take up so much of my time recently - silly me for continually jumping into the fire. Finding a cure for cancer is far more important. There are philosophical differences here so no further explanation can/will suffice. No, shifting SU to Subbies won't immediately solve the problem, not in 5 years anyway. Nor will it be resolved unless the appropriate unions invest millions where it's required. The flip side of your question is perhaps easier to answer - how can rugby progress while SU steams on triumphant while Parramatta, then maybe Penrith, then maybe West Harbour, then maybe Southern Districts all fall by the wayside? Seems a poor allocation of resources to me - like the battalion regimental-quartermaster ensuring HQ have plenty of ammunition, food & medicals, while sending only scant supplies to the frontline troops! For the time being, we will have to agree to disagree.

Sheek, Like many others, I am rapidly tiring of this argument, which is blatantly ignoring the real problem that exists about 60km west of Camperdown. However, I haven't given up my attempts to understand your side of the coin, so let me ask you a question. At the risk of sounding like a schoolmaster, could you give me 3-4 bullet points on what aspects of the Shute Shield, and more broadly rugby, would be different and better if University was relegated to Suburban Rugby? What exactly would happen in the 5 years after this relegation that would strengthen rugby across Sydney? It is a genuine question. I'm really trying to understand. I can't see it, and I think your argument so far is based on repeating the idea ad nauseum which is getting tedious. I know you want a district system, I get it. I know Uni isn't a district per se. I get it. How is banishing Uni to Subbies going to translate into a broader appeal for rugby across Sydney?

And how many of those players ever played for Sydney University or their junior clubs (hang on do they even have one?) before finishing their private school education and moving on to USYD?

Thanks Bruce, I'm obviously not convinved I have the full 'picture' in front of me, but I'll accpet it on face value for the moment. And yes, I can accept all premier rugby clubs receive players blooded by private or high schools. However, a Randwick graded player might also have cut his teeth at junior level playing for Clovelly, or Coogee, or South Coogee, or Randwick juniors, etc. And then attened a private or state school within the district. Where did SU juniors cut their teeth at primary & secondary level? I'm not suggesting Sydney University stop investing in rugby, I'm just not convinced premier rugby is their optimum place for developing rugby. SU is doing very well for themselves, but are they optimising the benefit of rugby for all? Let me explain my structure this way, via a top-down pyramid. At the apex sit the Wallabies. Below them are the provinces, states & territories/regions - NSW, Queensland, ACT, Victoria, WA, NSW Country, Qld Country, SA, Tasmaniai & NT. In the capital of each province/state is a premier rugby league that should be district based. Within each district club are suburban clubs & non-aligned clubs like Universities & Old Boys clubs. Below them are the secondary & primary schools plus junior clubs. To my mind, this is the simplest & most effective structure available. I understand SU fans might be tribal in their passion, but to what benefit of Australian rugby if they are small in numbers? Bruce, do we want rugby to be a game embraced by the masses, or do we wish to retain it as a niche sport? As for your quick question, I don't wish for SU to abandon rugby, which is not my intent. i just don't think premier rugby district comp is their rightful place, as explained briefly above.

Sheek, thank you for your comments on the "unjustified personal attack". I am old enough and ugly enough not to be bothered by these things, which often tell you more about the attacker than the attackee. This was certainly the case in the present instance, where the anonymous poster launched a nasty raced-based slur on someone who has absolutely nothing to do with discussions on this site. Fortunately in our present society, such outbursts happen so rarely as to occasion astonishment as well as disgust. Further up the page you asked: "Quick question, how much development input did SU have into those 24 players since most of them would have come to SU having been given the basics at some private or high school & before that, primary school?" Firstly, almost all players coming into any senior club will have learnt the basics of rugby at a school and/or a junior rugby club. In many cases district-based senior clubs claim the credit for developing particular players when the real work has been done by the largely unrecognised volunteer coaches and officials at a local junior club with minimal real input from their nominal parent body. Such is human nature. When we talk to potential players with their parents there are extremely few who mention any attachment to a district-based club. Those that have strong attachments quite often decide to remain there, which is fair enough. Secondly, the question of how much development input comes from Sydney University. A very talented young school leaver coming to the club is offered the following: 1. A full-time Colts Technical Director who coordinates the activities of the Colts' coaches in each of the three grades as well as being Head Coach of First Colts. He works in close liaison with the full-time coaches in Grade. 2. Players' weekly game involvements are extracted using state-of-the-art game-analysis software which is then used for personal video sessions with the CTD and follow-up personal review using the DVD which he is given. 3. A weekly written assessment of a player's strengths and weaknesses as displayed in the previous game. 4. Access to a serious grunt gymnasium which has considerably more equipment relevant to rugby strength training than any of the Australian Super franchises. 5. Strength and sprint training supervised by full-time strength and conditioning coaches. The head S & C is widely regarded as one of the top practitioners in Australia, irrespective of the sport. The S & C coaches do a lot of individual or small group sessions, particularly in rehab situations. 6. On-site access to sports medicine practitioners, physios, dietitians and sports psychologists. 7. Transfer from Colts to Grade determined by the player's stage of development and his own preferences, rather than by him being badgered to move up prematurely in order to fill a coach's desperate need to fill a gap. Most importantly, a culture has developed among the players themselves where they routinely train eleven months of the year, doing three to four heavy weights sessions per week in the off-season followed by two to three during the season, right up to the finals. In addition there are regular sprint sessions throughout the off-season which also continue through the playing season. How does that compare with most district-based clubs? Sheek, you are always banging on about there being no tribalism at Sydney Uni. Try telling that to the players who routinely knock back serious money from district-based clubs. Or why not go and ask those players who have left Uni whether the Club played any significant role in their development. And this is the system that you are continually demanding should be totally dismantled. "Quick question" It's for you this time - who do you see as being both willing and capable to fill the rugby development void left by Sydney University redirecting its resources into other sports?

Thanks Sean! And it also appears the 1863 will not disappear from the emblem on the rugby jersey in a hurry either .....!

Bruce, I see there was an unjustified personal attack on you which has thankfully been removed. There are those of us who might not agree with your position on SU, but we should respect your right to hold an alternative opinion, irrespective of how wrong we might think the other is. Usually, though not always, through debate, the best solution will emerge. I have no reason to believe you are other than a decent person. I hold to the Voltaire principle - "I might not agree with what you say, but I defend to the death your right to say it". Now Bruce, if only you could see the light.....

Bruce, I might be loopy, but not crazy. Or I might be crazy, but not loopy. Anyway, I'm invoking the catch-22 principle, which is, I might not be as crazy as I sound! Quick question, how much development input did SU have into those 24 players since most of them would have come to SU having been given the basics at some private or high school & before that, primary school? Also, more than100 years of amateur rugby was very different to 15 years of professional rugby, as we're all discovering.

Sheek - The Uni situation is interesting. On the shelf above my work desk sits a Sydney Uni commemorative coffee mug (a gift last Xmas) which includes on it "Sydney University Football Club 1863". The newspaper quotes from the mid 1860s all work against the 1863 or '64 date being correct [some are included here: http://www.colonialrugby.com.au/nsw-rugby.htm ] The conclusion that the Sydney University club was not formed until August 1865 (i.e. after the Sydney and Australian FCs) is also reached by Tom Hickie in "They Ran With the Ball" (page 43) and John Mulford "Guardians of the Game" (page 11). Both of those two gentlemen also make the salient point that the number of undergraduates enrolled at the Uni works against the earlier founding dates - even in 1865, the highest to that time, only reached 44. In 1860 it was 28. Still, I'm not throwing out the coffee mug.

Bruce You are yet to convince anyone that Sydney Uni does anything to develop players in the Junior ranks. As I have said before ...... just look at the figures from last years 2009 Junior State Championships. Under 10s Development -- 18 teams -- NO UNI. 8 Sydney Clubs had 2 squads each with Norths and Illawarra having 1 each Under 11s -- 11 teams -- NO UNI. All of Sydney clubs with West Harbour and Illawarra Under 12s -- 16 teams -- NO UNI. Sydney clubs plus Hunter, Brumbies, Central Coast and ACTJRU Under 13s -- 16 teams -- YES UNI 1 team Under 14s -- 13 teams -- NO UNI. 7 Sydney teams plus Central Coast, Central West, Brumbies, ACTJRU, Hunter and Illawarra. Under 15s -- 12 teams -- YES UNI 1 team Under 16s -- 12 teams -- YES UNI 1 team Under 17s -- 8 teams -- NO UNI. So, this great Club that has structures and coaches and pathways ( according to the wonderful piece of propaganda you quote) and develops so many Juniors, can only manage to muster up 3 teams across the 8 Junior age groups. Let's compare that to say Gordon with 10, Eastwood 10, Parramatta 10 and Warringah 9 to name a couple. One would think that IF Sydney Uni was doing such a wonderful job, it would be able to supply the same number of teams as the other Districts. Then to top it off Sydney Uni were awarded the hosting rights to not 1 but 2 age groups for the weekend, giving them the opportunity to host thousands of people at their ground and make more money to use on "Development". For you to then say that the "Sydney Uni system " supplies an amazing number of players for this weekends Super 14 and Shute Shield rugby is a jaw dropper! Perhaps I could give you the list to tell you which School and which Village club and then Junior District all of those players played for, BEFORE they came to Sydney Uni as 18+ year olds ,and then you would have a good idea of where all of the hard, dirty work was done to develop these players. If Sydney Uni can field a full 10 teams across 8 age groups in the 2010 Junior State Champs , then you can believe the gospel printed in the club report.

I was referring, of course, to 24 First Grade starting players in the Shute Shield.

The Fruit Loop Proposal gets yet another run! "Sydney University has its place, but in suburban rugby, not premier rugby." Why? Apparently because of one decision taken 110 years ago! "In 1900, the then Metropolitan Rugby Union introduced the district system, exempting Sydney University to majority approval ..." So a Club whose world class development system has produced 12 of the Australian Super 14 players this weekend plus 24 of the starting players in today's round of the Shute Shield is to be demoted to Subbies. I know it seems that Australian rugby often seems to have a collective death wish, but if you really want to make a laughing stock of the code you have the template in front of you.

Bay, NSW Uni wasn't opened for business until about mid-1960s. They had a very short time in (first division) premier rugby. Exactly how long I don't know off the top of my head. And yes, I recall playing against Macquarie Uni in the mid 1970s when I was at Easts colts. There were 16 clubs in the premier rugby comp then - 4 senior grades & two colts grades. We would play everyone once, & the other three teams in our pool a second time, for 18 home & away matches. I think Randwick, Sydney Uni & NSW Uni were the other three in our pool. From memory, the 16 clubs in mid 1970s were - Easts, Randwick, NSW Uni, Sydney Uni; Port Hacking, St.George, Wests, Parramatta; Drummoyne, Macquarie Uni, Eastwood, Hornsby; Gordon, Norths, Manly, Warringah. I have some brutal suggestions. 1. Showing no favouritism, I would pack off my old club Easts, along with West Harbour & Sydney Uni to a second division, or first division of Subbies. Individually, these 3 "districts" have the least youth catchment. Collectively, as one entity, they can be very competitive. In their place I would bring back the generic Sydney club to cover the area from eastern suburbs to inner west. 2. I would ressurrect St.George to cover the considerable youth catchment area of Hurstville, Rockdale, etc. Souths Rebels could remain as such or revert to their original name of Port Hacking. 3. I would bring Campbelltown Harlequins into the premier rugby, since they cover the massive youth catchment area of south-west Sydney. 4. Parramatta & Penrith, covering the massive youth catchment area of the greater west & north-west, must be retained at all costs. The 12 clubs of the Sydney Shute Shield would then be thus: Campbelltown Harlequins Eastwood Woodies Gordon Highlanders Manly Marlins Norths Shoremen Parramatta Two Blues Penrith Emus Randwick Galloping Greens St.George Saints (or Knights) Souths (or Port Hacking) Rebels Sydney Mariners (or Fleet) Warringah Rats I just think that putting the district clubs where they can most effectively tap into the massive youth catchmwent areas while retaining some history & tradition, is the best way to go. However, if I'm wrong, then I'm wrong.....