It’s been an interesting exercise, The Roar’s rugby ‘Solutions Series’, and the points and arguments made by Lordy and Campo this week have all been valid and worthy. Spiro’s next week will be equally so.
If you or I were in charge of Australian rugby, the simple thing would be to just adopt all the recommendations as made, but then you would face the double-edged sword of trying to prioritise legitimate plans for change and coming up with the funding to implement these required changes.
Bledisloe drought must end: O’Neill
But then, no one said solutions are supposed to be easy.
Recently, I chatted with Brumbies CEO, Andrew Fagan, on an unrelated topic, and he again made the point about the motivation for changes made their rugby program and facilities, as driven by Jake White on arrival.
Fagan’s point was and is that the Brumbies simply had to make the changes at HQ that they did – new Athletic Director, a full time chef and set meals, among many others – in order to develop the best rugby program in Australia. They made the changes they did because they simply couldn’t compete with the obvious climate and financial advantages the four other Super Rugby franchises enjoy.
So their rugby program has to be their point of difference; it has to be the reason for players to want to move to Canberra and play for the Brumbies. On current evidence, it’s certainly made a difference on the scoreboard.
Australian rugby in general faces a similar situation. The need for change is evident in numerous directions, particularly in terms of governance and especially the grassroots, as has been outlined by my esteemed colleagues this week.
Another big problem we face currently is that the pathways in Australian rugby aren’t nearly clear enough anymore, and arguably don’t seem to be serving the purpose for their existence: to improve Australia’s playing depth.
It’s now almost five years since the ARU took the bold move to implement that missing step between club and Super Rugby, and though the Australian Rugby Championship produced some fantastic rugby – and indeed, a good number of current Wallaby stars – in its only season of 2007, there’s still been nothing developed in its place since.
And it’s not just the ARC pathway that was erased from the map. In the same cost-cutting measures that claimed Australia’s first attempt at creating an equivalent of South Africa’s Currie Cup and New Zealand’s National Provincial Championship, Australia A was also removed from the Pacific Nations Cup and the entire ‘A’ program scrapped.
In recent years professional squad sizes have been slashed while other countries look to expand theirs; a salary cap has been introduced in isolation from the SANZAR partners, and state-run academies have been abolished in preference to a supposedly centralised structure run by the national body.
Certainly, there’s a common theme in these moves: money. Or more specifically, a lack thereof. It’s very simple to just come out and say, “All of those things should be reinstated NOW” but the fact remains that someone has to pay for them.
So while I’d love to see back it on the agenda, it’s clear the ARC is as far away from a reintroduction as ever. But that’s not to say something can’t be done in its place. Clearly, something is still required to bridge the gap that’s long been recognised.
And this particular solution might address both the ‘next step’ and the academy issues in one go, simply by returning the academies to the states, and have them play accompanying fixtures on any local derby undercard. Proper second XV fixtures.
This would give the states the opportunity to develop their extended squads further – using their own methods and programs – while also providing game time for fringe, rookie, and injury-returning players at a meaningful level above club ranks.
The recent fortunes of the Australia Under-20s should be proof enough that we can’t just develop these young kids in age groups. The state of first class cricket in Australia currently is another perfect example of what happens when you restrict development teams to a certain age (the old second XI comp was revamped several years ago and restricted to Under-23 – with three over-age players – up until the start of last season).
With each second XV playing eight derby games per year, there is ample opportunity to build match fitness, combinations, and experience on the paddock, rather than in the gym or within their age groups.
Make it a proper competition, too, played for points, with a trophy of some sort to the winning state. It could even be a corporate thing if it helps get the program up and running. I’d have no problem with a QANTAS Cup being minted, if that’s what it took.
In the June international window, I’d be talking long and hard to the IRB about the virtues and benefits to be had by extending the Pacific Nations Cup funding to include Australia A again. If the Junior All Blacks want in again, that’s fine too.
It’s long been said that Japan and the Pacific Island teams need more exposure to the likes of Australia and New Zealand, and this move would achieve that. Plus, it would’ve been the ideal intro to Wallaby methods for the likes of Jesse Mogg, Bernard Foley, Caderyn Neville and others named in the initial training squad but saw no game time.
And surely Australia A is a better pathway to the Wallabies than a month of training and a free tracksuit?
It’s important that our talented youngsters emerge from the schoolboys and age representative programs with a clear directional view of what is required to make it. It should be simple: club rugby into a state academy into a second XV into Super Rugby into Australia A into a Wallabies jersey.
Instead, what they currently see is a mixture of club level and supposedly high performance programs which could see them sent off to plug a Super Rugby hole at late notice with almost no introduction. If they’re lucky (or unlucky, depending on your perspective) they may be involved in the Under-20s along the way, but essentially we expect them to develop on a Super Rugby training paddock.
And then if they do get a game and play better than expected, we rush them into Australian calculations quicker than we can utter the words “next Wallaby great”.
We owe it to these talented kids – and even the late-bloomers – to have the right structures in place and the pathways clear and defined, so that they can take their rugby gifts as far as they can, and not just as far as they might.
It’s true that the longest journey begins with the first step, but Australian rugby doesn’t need to make that journey overly complicated for our kids with illogical detours and no signage.
Making logical change requires courage. But the benefits could last for generations. Australian rugby needs that courage.
Clear the pathways. Let the talent flow through. Reap the rewards.
tonysalerno
Roar Guru
I love this rugby series of articles. It is funny how if we mould a couple of ideas brought up by these pieces, the ARU landscape would change significantly. Keep up the good work Roarers
p.Tah
Guest
I had no idea how perceptive you are. How on earth did you know I'm 20 years old, I've never been near a game of League and my name is Janet? You've stated you enjoy League. I would have thought you'd be posting in the League articles on the Roar? I'd say you definitely are. So why haven't I seen the user name 'Old Rugby Boy' in those articles? What other names are you posting under?
Crockycrocky
Guest
Just glad that 2012 we're looking good. Bring on the finals!
Old Rugby Boy
Guest
jeznez, would you agree to keeping both the team in possession and the team in defence each 5 metres apart at the set piece and the breakdown. Something has to be done to stop the defensive team breaking down the attack at the halves. Can’t agree to cutting out two men. What would an old breakaway like me do then?
Old Rugby Boy
Guest
I wasnt going to reply but I thought damn it Janet. p.Tah I dont believe in all your 20 odd years you have been near a game of League and I have played more games of Rugby than you have had breakfasts. You are full of BS. Yes, I did miss the Crusaders/Chiefs game but as I have IQed it I will watch later this evening and I will tell you what I think.
jeznez
Roar Guru
Steve, doesn't that game already exist? I already prefer Union so why would changing the rules of my game to make it more like a game I already like less be an improvement?
p.Tah
Guest
I'm not calling you a troll because you're criticising rugby's direction. If that was the case I'd be calling everyone on this rugby forum and myself a troll. I'm not calling you a troll because you like League. I followed League long before I started following rugby, I'm calling you a troll because you post pretending to be a rugby fan when you don't actually like the game. You attempt to give your stories credibility by mentioning that you hang out signs for players to play rugby... BS. “why can’t Rugby be like this [SOO]”. Guess you missed the Crusaders vs. the Chiefs last night.
Steve
Guest
Have you thought of maybe cutting two men out of the team, streamlining the rules, and introducing a more free-flowing, spectator friendly style of play? If professionalism is the order of the day, it might just work!
Working Class Rugger
Guest
I'm going to put forth a suggestion for the next CEO of the ARU or at the very least the Waratahs. And that is, Tatafu Polota Nau. Watch the interview and you'll soon see that regardless of your opinion as to his right to start for the Wallabies, that he's a genuine sort of bloke, one with the games best interest at heart. Good man. We need more like him. Especially like his point of the players being the frontline in the development of the game. http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/hookers-humility-keeps-him-in-touch-with-roots-20120706-21mdx.html
Johnno
Guest
Thelma write yes i do have some views on a Division 2 world cup. -The IRB now do that in reality with the JWRTrophy. -The USA gained promotion to the top division under-20 world cup by narrowly beating Japan last week in Salt lake city Utah. -Italy got relegated to div 2 losing in a play off to Fiji -I think the exchange program is such good idea i don't know where to start. -Kazakhstan yes why not, they Are playing in Asian 6 nations. And if you give 1 kid a shot like the best kid he goes back a better player. -The gap in the Asian 6 nations is big but that will come down. -I think Japan like south africa don't compete in Bamburi african cup should leave the Asian 6 nations for now and come back when the teams get better -Maybe comeback in say 2020 or even re-try in 2016 -With the exchange Hong Kong have just sent and completed 1 week 3 of there players trained with the waratahs. It was great for them as some of there elite players got to be in a superior level environment and they said it really has benifitted there out look on rugby. -When i was at school a Danish exchange student who was very good at cricket and was in the Denmark youth team came out to OZ for a season and was very good in the 1XI. It helped his cricket no question. -Other nations have the talant they just need the right exposure and training. -Spain and Portugal and Belguim are really developing nicely in rugby now too, and have exciting times ahead.
Bakkies
Guest
White's four year plan was more about overhauling the team structure, how it operates (the leadership group has been restructured too) in terms of player input, training facilities being upgraded, producing results, building up a game plan that will get a title with a group of young players. It's debatable on whether Friend would have got results with those players. I don't believe he had an adequate enough support group in the coaching staff in terms of experience and coaching knowledge. Laurie Fisher has been a huge asset to have back as he would know ACT Rugby inside out and has been coaching in a place that has a similar Rugby outlook (Munster).
Go_the_Wannabe's
Guest
We played leauge and Ozzie Rules at school because that's all there was. I wasn't exposed to union until Uni. Most of my school friends were never exposed to union.
Go_the_Wannabe's
Guest
Well, if you build up the rugby grassroots by getting into the public schools, then it becomes more popular, then it gets on tv, then the ARU get the revenue they'd like. Starting with the grass roots is a simple plan, but effective. It's worked for NRL and AFL.
Crockycrocky
Guest
Not really relevant to this thread but a reply to your '4yr plan' comment - I do think Friend would be happy to see a lot of the young boys that he brought to the club now getting a chance to show their talent that the older players are gone. Hooper, Smith, White, Carter, Speight and I think the list is possibly longer were all brought to the program by him for the future of the Brumbies. 4 yr plan ??
Crockycrocky
Guest
Looks like the kind of guy ARU needs then! Isn't JON moving on soon?
Bakkies
Guest
I was surprised that Mowen went ahead and put an offer on a house given how short his contract was. I say he would have of had a lot of talks with players at the Brumbies that have moved down (such as Stephen Moore and Mark Chisholm. Chisholm himself moved down, had a house and started a family). I say that was a big plus mark for him in regards to the captaincy. Brumbies are still hamstrung by poor training facilities but it is close to where the players are based and the AIS is not far away. The Canberra Times posters were a joke last year in regards to their anti Fagan tirades. It's a shame that they have reduced the comments section this year as there would be a huge swing in support of the good work that Fagan is doing in 2012. I reckon overall he has been a good CEO. There is a lot of long term planning going on at the Brumbies this year. Not just Jake White's four year plan for success on the field (he is already well ahead in that regard). Just a few things that he hasn't been done well and without tact (such as the Friend sacking but I reckon he was on borrowed time anyway as the team wasn't progressing considering the personnel they had). Some had accused of him of making the same mistake with regards to sacking the coach and other far fetched rumours in regards to the team without checking the facts. Rob Clarke (from memory was the CEO at the time) didn't renew Nucifora's contract as it had expired. It had nothing to do with Fagan. There aren't a lot of rugby CEOs in Australia that would have pulled off the signing of Jake White as head coach and backed it up with hiring over a dozen new players.
Old Rugby Boy
Guest
Well done, it seems as though you criticise, you are a troll. Yes, I am angry about AFL. I am also angry at the ARU. The funding that goes into the local AFL club is extraordinary compared to what we receive from NSWRU. How much time do you spend on the phone trying to talk player into returning each season. How much time do you spend putting up signs in your area wanting players? And when you get four responses, knowing full well that the AFL club down the road cant place all its senior players in a team, of course you get angry. How much time do you spend working on district Rugby, or are you one of those who think all is wonderful in the Rugby world. You seem to believe that I am troll because I can see the virtues in League. Do what I did. Sit in a corporate box at the last SOO, in Sydney, with a group of mainly Rugby guys and listen to the comments such “why can’t Rugby be like this”. Get real p.Tah. Rugby has to find a way to compete and at present it is not.
Bakkies
Guest
If you are good enough to make the Wallabies you will bypass club Rugby so that's the big incentive.
Bakkies
Guest
I don't think that is necessarily true. Christchurch and Pretoria aren't big cities either and their teams have won multiple titles. What attracts players to the Brumbies, Bulls and Crusaders is the Rugby program and a better pathway to a test jumper. Rugby is a lot different to the NRL only a minority in Rugby will have this mindset of looking for the bright lights. To me the Force haven't developed a good Rugby program and still have a poor management structure. Throwing big money at certain players isn't a long term strategy and hasn't worked for the Force. The Rebels have gone down this path too. Buying big name backs to go with their dwindling Dad's Army. Dad's Army are retiring or leaving at a fast so they need to build properly now. It's easier to gel a team in a smaller city compared to a place like Johannesburg and/or Sydney where players are scattered around the place and live miles from each other. The Force have got certain players and fans who are very loyal to the city and the team. They just need a structure around the them to work. What has worked well for the Brumbies is that they have brought young players in the past who were disillusioned or weren't rated by the Tahs and/or Reds. They have come to Canberra with points to prove and back that up on the field. The Force need players who want to play for the team and don't take the place for granted.
Bakkies
Guest
While we can't afford the hosting fee there won't be. O'Neill pulled our bid for the 2015 and 2019 RWCs due to this reason. South Africa is well due to host another one. There are strong cases for a future solo Ireland bid, Argentina, Italy to host it down the line.