- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
The Waratahs' Timana Tahu runs in to score as he's tackled by the Reds' Mark McLinden during their Super 14 match at the Sydney Football Stadium, Sydney, Friday, March 6, 2009. AAP Image/Dean Lewins
It’s that time of year again and the media is awash with rumours that two of rugby league’s ‘stars’ may be moving to union. This time the main candidates are Israel Folau and Johnathan Thurston.
Between them, they exemplify the issues surrounding the wisdom of converting league players and the ARU’s policy towards them.
The ARU used to fund league conversions partly to promote its own game at the expense of the rival NRL, and partly to try and strengthen the Wallabies.
A number of problems arose, however, and the final straw was reached when Timana Tahu returned to league prematurely after a vast amount of money had been sunk converting him.
The ARU justifiably reasoned that it’s not worth shelling out huge sums when a player may simply run away the moment the going gets a little tough, as Tahu did.
So we now hear of the incentive-based contract, with the idea that large quantities of money will only be paid out to such players when they have proved they can convert successfully and improve the Wallabies.
There is undoubtedly a point here, but is the main purpose of league conversion to improve the Wallabies?
Isn’t it far more to strike a blow at the NRL, and bring new fans and interest to union?
Shouldn’t the ARU worry less about the impact these players have on international rugby and more what they can do to sell the code?
So wouldn’t it be wiser, rather than abandoning conversion altogther, to manage the conversion of league players better so that they could provide this useful promotion function?
The main problem with league conversions has simply been how they were managed, and if this were resolved, there would be no reason for failure.
The ARU’s policy is nonetheless wise in avoiding spending money on players who may waltz off when things are a little rough, but if these three principles are followed, too, then players could still be brought over without risk and with far less chance of failure:
1. To get players young. They adapt far better and are more committed, as the example of Lote Tuqiri shows. He converted in his early twenties, while Wendell Sailor and Mat Rogers moved over in their late twenties, and was far more successful than them.
2. To insist that the Super teams play them. The only way for league converts to learn the game is to be thrust repeatedly into match situations. Naturally this means the team will have an ineffective player for a while, even a liability, but it’s the only way for them to learn.
The case of the ARU pouring thousands into Tahu while the Waratahs kept him on the bench is absurd. There are numerous examples in England of players returning to league simply because they were not given a chance to play and learn the game (Chev Walker, Karl Pryce).
Any ARU-funded contract should come with a clause insisting the Super teams use the player in every match. If the franchise in question doesn’t like it, then the ARU can choose a franchise which does.
3. Don’t let them waltz off.
Many league players, more in England than Australia, have simply backed out the moment the conversion became challenging or even before and have been allowed to do so (Chev Walker, Karl Pryce again).
In the recent case of Lee Smith in England he had only been around for four months. The answer is that league converts should be forced to see out their contracts.
The deal is that a large amount of money is spent converting them, which means the team has to put up with a mediocre player for half a season, and so when they have learnt the game they have a duty to do some playing.
There are further points to consider at the stage of player acquisition, as the converts come in different types.
To look at the cases in hand: in Folau and Thurston we have an example of a player who should be lured and one who apparently shouldn’t, or at least not directly.
Folau is 20, Thurston is 26.
In addition, Folau is a wing, a position where Australian rugby has almost no quality aside from Digby Ioane. Thurston would be a fly-half, where Australian rugby has no end of quality: Giteau, Barnes, Cooper, and Beale.
So Folau is an ideal candidate to be pursued now, but does this mean Thurston should simply be ignored, told to stay in the NRL?
Not at all.
There is an alternative route for a player like Thurston to move to rugby, and rather than childishly abusing him for trying to convert, the ARU should advise him to move abroad and smooth his path to doing so.
He should go to France, learn the game at the level of pay he desires, and can then return in two years as an experienced union player to convince them of his value. The ARU should do as much as possible to help these players get abroad and might usefully try to persuade the French clubs of their value.
There’s no reason not to pursue Folau directly at the moment though, and in the future league players should be divided into these two categories:
1. Young players (Inglis, Hayne, Folau) who can be brought directly over to the Super 15.
2. Older players (Slater, Thurston, Marshall) who should be advised to go to France, learn the game, and then come back when they have proved they can convert. They are too much of a risk to justify the cost of bringing them to the Super 15 directly.
In this way the ARU can have all the players it wants, some directly, some through France.
If the players are divided in these ways, while the conditions are met whereby Super teams are forced to play ARU-funded converts and the converts in turn are not allowed to run away, then there’s no reason why league conversion could not be a success. The ARU must simply manage them better than it has done in the past.
The idea that league conversion is to strengthen the Wallabies should be forgotten however. It is to attract interest to the game, and to a lesser extent to improve the quality of Super teams.
There is no reason not to convert them, so long as their purpose is clear. League players should not be considered the ‘answer’ to the Wallabies but as a useful card to play in promoting union.
In this sense, if enough league players convert they can provide a significant boost to the strength of rugby union in the competitive sporting marketplace of Australia.
Join The Roar rugby editor Christy Doran, former Wallaby Matt Toomua and a cast of regular and special guests as they look at the biggest issues in the game on The Roar Rugby Podcast. If you’re looking for great odds on the next game check out Aussie bookmaker PlayUp. Chances are you’re about to lose. Set a deposit limit.