Wallabies problems are structural, or a lack thereof

The problem with a second tier is it will never make anywhere near enough money to go close to covering its costs. A TV deal is obviously a must but that along with the dribs and drabs that come in from sponsors and the gate still won’t be enough to cover the costs of running such a competition and the ARC proved this. One positive that the ARC proved is that we have talent outside of the Super Rugby teams in this country. I don’t see that as the issue. What’s key moving forward here for Australian Rugby is that whatever’s next it has to have the full support of Australia’s sporting public. Second tiered competitions don’t traditionally receive much support simply because they don’t involve the best of the best. I believe that to fix the so called ‘structural issues’ of Australian Rugby we need a more domesticated professional league at the top tier that involve more teams from Australia. The way forward is disconnecting ourselves from the current elite domestic arrangement that we share with SA. I think our geographic and cultural proximity to NZ means there is value in going ahead with them, however trying to run a ‘domestic’ competition with a partner from halfway across the world has its issues and they almost came to a head at the last negotiations on the future running of Super Rugby. The time has come to let SA go it alone and for Australia and NZ to try and build a stronger domestic league that meets the needs of our national interests and the sporting publics in these places. Only having 10 teams’ means there is room for more. I think 3 more teams from each country is a fair divide that would create strong 16 team league. With the 3 Australian teams I’d place franchises on the Gold Coast, Newcastle and Western Sydney. Three more teams provides Australian Rugby with 8 fully professional teams with three extra squads of elite players competing for Wallaby caps. We also get three new fully professional teams that the public can truly get behind which in turn means gate dollars and more sponsorship money that a second tier competition could never provide. In the case of Newcastle and the Gold Coast the ARU gets a chance to place new teams in regional population centre’s (both have larger populations than Canberra) that provide the Rugby starved public in those traditional markets with elite Rugby in their backyard and not an hour or two away. The Shute Shield and Brisbane’s Premier Rugby meet all the criteria of what a strong second tier should consist of. They provide strong competition for those who don’t make the match day 22 in the Reds, Tahs and Brumbies squads to go back to on the weekends and they produce players who can step up to the ‘big stage’ when injuries require them to i.e. Liam Gill. You don’t select Wallabies from the second tier (not anymore I believe) so more players playing at the top level with a strong second tier (which I believe we have) to feed the top is what’s required. To me the way to go is more teams at the elite level that can actually generate money as opposed to suck it dry while also giving elite Rugby a presence in more traditional markets that could absolutely support and get behind a professional team.

Matt you hit the nail on the head. We just have to accept slow progress. If you go back to the 80's it was much worse. A couple of interstate games a year and maybe a few tests. If there were dominant incumbents in a position in NSW and Qld then there was a situation where there were only 2 players avaialble for selection with top level experience. It was not uncommon for players to be plucked from club rugby. Even a bit more recently, remember Pat Howard, from memory 4 club 1st grade games. I can't believe he ever fulfilled his potential after that start. It would have been better in Sydney if we had least revived the nth/Sth/east/west Harbour trials. So 5 Super Rugby teams is actually a long way forward. For these reasons I welcomed the ARC and we can see it did allow some players to take their first step up. Clearly it is not economically sustainable and we shall just have to tinker at the edges for a while. Until rugby truly goes global and become a more mainstream sport in bigger countries we shall probably have to put up with being a minor sport. However it then becomes an economic question. Remember the first RL clubs in the UK were the biggest rugby clubs. It maybe a pyrrhic victory though. In 2031 we might be a lot stronger in Australia but will we compete with Russia or the US if the sport really tales on there?

ITM Cup in NZ works well as it is held in All Black Tri Nation/International time. It means those teams are usually without their All Blacks and have to develop talent to replace them- for example see the record of Canterbury in NPC over last 10 years. The side benefit is ex international players such as Cruden and Donald are still playing in international season and are match fit if required for a call up.

But in the early eighties, they were all just amateurs on each side. The All Blacks are now the product of lot of amateur teams, picked over to select a number of semi-professional teams, picked over to identify the several dozen best professionals, trained up through three underlying professional teams,all to produce an All Blacks team. Randwick remains basically amateur, with the next level being one professional team, then the Wallabies. Therein lies the problem.

'Cos that approach has been an unqualified success for soccer in Australia...

The risk being that, once they develop all these open running skills, there are other codes that would nominally place greater value on those skills for kids that show aptitude. We could wind up using the AOC money and wind up with neither forwards or any of the best backs...

The ARC was doomed from the start, with Northern Sydney represented by the Central Coast Rays playing at Gosford, and Eastern/Southern Sydney represented by Sydney Fleet playing at North Sydney, totally alienating their respective supporter bases. It's little wonder that neither team got the supporter attendance at their home matches. It was a dumb, dumb decision to structure the Sydney teams in this way. At least the Western Sydney Rams got it right. Similarly in Brisbane, the structure of the teams was flawed. If a second tier competition ever gets off the ground, then the ARC is still the best model, but with modification to align the teams with their supporter bases. In Sydney, Northern Sydney should play home games at North Sydney Oval, Sydney Fleet at SFS or Coogee Oval and Western Sydney Rams at Concord Oval or Parramatta Stadium. It deserves another chance.

So we would watch who exactly in Super rugby with all our stars in Europe?

Aust has a two tier competition and the second level is club rugby. Your in la la land if you think there is a possiblity of resurrecting an ARC style comp. There is no money for it and no appetite from the ARU and let's face it they are the only ones with any cash. All state unions are tits up. Best way forward in the short term is to make Wallabies and Super 15 players play more club rugby. No extra money needed and no schedule problems. It may not be the ideal solution but probably the only realistic one that can be implemented in a quick time frame and without too many obstacles. Hopefully the result will be a better quality club scene and with any luck more grass roots players getting a leg up to higher levels. That in itself is part of the problem in that because the ARU pays the profile players they feel unless they keep selecting them then they will look foolish. Hence uncontracted players have a hard time getting a gig.

Agree that the ARU must find a way to do more with less. The playing pool for Australian rugby has never been as broad or deep as NZ or SA's but that shouldn't preclude success with the right administration, coaching and grassroots football culture. Take inspiration from Uruguay. They've won two World Cups, 15 Copa Americas (South American championships) and two Gold medals at the Olympics. They're currently the South American champions and came 3rd at South Africa 2010. The country has a population of 3.5m people. A minnow on the world stage but of all the countries in the world only Brazil has had more consistent success.

i can't see where I said scrap Super Rugby........

Rickety, Thanks for helping keep the fires burning - but I'm running out of ideas of different ways to express what I truly believe to be the bleeding obvious.....

Soory ,Dubbo!

There needs to be a second tier comp and it should be played in the provincial centres. Places like Rockhampton,Bunderburg Mackay,Dobbo,Wagga Wagga,etc are crying out for quality sport.A second tier comp with S15 and Wallabies coming back from injury,loss of form, etc ,playing with the emerging stars will fill the smaller grounds of these centres and stengthen the code in the bush.

Rough Conduct,/Rickety, This has been a constant argument of mine against super rugby all along. When we had 3 teams out of 12 in SANZAR, we "owned" only 25% of super rugby. Now with 5 teams out of 15, "ownership" has creeped up to 33%. But it's still not our comp. It's difficult to feel you own a comp when you only have 33% representation. It might be pseudo-domestic, but it's still not domestic. Rickety, Sorry, there's a simialr post to yours above, which I've contributed to, & I would simply add many of the same things here. But yes, we must have a national comp. While my preference now is APC, or whether it's ARC, I don't care, as long as we have something!

I'm a huge fan of the idea of a 2nd tier comp. Looking at our SANZAR rivals, I just don't see how we can do it otherwise. Brett, how do NZ and SAF manage to schedule an NPC and Currie Cup respectively, and still make the S15? After all, you could run an Aussie 2nd-tier comp from April - June to give three months of quality footy. And, picking up Rickery Knees' idea, you could base that comp around the top Sydney and Brisbane clubs, add in Melbourne and Perth and NSW and Qld County. 8 teams easy! There's be a more enticing professional pathway for the fringe players, and more hours of viewing for the fans. As for money, that's obviously a big problem, since rugby isn't deemed sufficiently popular to warrant the big bucks available on FTA (note the Nine Network's apparently - I haven't watched it - risible coverage of the RWC). But Foxtel would surely want something for the pre-S15 period, and no doubt overseas TV rights sales would also provide some level of income. Then there are national and regional sponsors who might be interested in those regional markets. In my view, a 2nd tier comp is essential to both developing players and increasing public interest. But this has to be combined with basic marketing like appealing to the schoolkids. Here, my kid played both league and union and all the money and support from juniors came from the local leagues club/polies palace and we never saw union players turn up to support like the leaguies did. Then there were the free and discounted tickets to league games, free gear etc etc. Can we hope that Wilkies' pokie reforms wil have the unforeseen benefit of limiting league's capacity to reach out / pay for the interest of school kids? That could only be good for the game.

It won't work. It is not financial. The NZ and SA rugby public have a strong historically affinity to their respective NPC and Currie Cup tournaments. Australia has never had an equivilant. Reverse engineering another tier of rugby in Australia's already crowded sporting market is not going to work - though I agree it would be great for expanding Australia's talent pool. There is simply not enough time in the season or money the ARU coffers. We have the expanded super rugby season. We have WA and Victoria. Australia's talent pool will get better but it will take time.