RATHBONE: Why Australian rugby needs a third tier competition

Don't create new clubs for the 3rd tier comp. Use the existing infrastructures. The two clubs that finish at the top of the Brisbane competition + the four clubs that finish at the top of the Sydney competition + a Canberra team and a Melbourne team would form an eight team comp to take place at the end of the Super season. I realise I have left out Perth for now, but an eastern seaboard third tier comp would be a start. Bring Adelaide and Perth on in the future. e.g. For 2012 it might be Eastwood, Eastern Suburbs, Sydney Uni, Southern Districts, Sunnybank, GPS, Melbourne Unicorns and Tuggeranong. Each of the clubs would be allowed invitational players from other clubs in their respective competitions. It would do wonders for the unique brands of each club and the competitions they are involved in. Play the games at club venues where possible, and make admission reasonable. Give the sponsors of the grassroots clubs and their respective unions the first opportunity to invest. Don't reinvent the wheel, just keep it turning.

Spot on tarpo.

The club competitions (particularly Sydney & Brisbane) need to run under the super competition. I.E. they start a little earlier & finish when super rugby finishes. The ARC starts at the same time as the Rugby Championship & runs at the same time (but not played at the same time). This is what happens in the NZ NPC & the Currie Cup. 8 teams playing each other once, 7 games, with semi finals & a final. It is akin to being selected in a rep team for a club player to play ARC. For a super rugby player that is not involved with the Wallabies, it is playing the highest level available. Both players, cream of club & super rugby players should be paid no more than they are paid now, I. E. club rugby payments Same goes for coaching staff, ARC is an opportunity to showcase you rugby wares, not an avenue to cash in your talent. (that will come if you make it to the higher levels). Games between interstate teams (with the exception of WA) can be scheduled for Saturday or Sunday afternoons so they can fly in fly out the same day. (no accomodation costs) Local games can be scheduled for Friday or Saturday night. Training can be held in the evenings, so that players can continue with their study or vocation. The games (at least most of them) must be telecast on FTA TV. However this does not mean it has to be the main chanels, it can be on digital minor chanels, GEM etc... It does not need 11 camera angels to view each game, 2-4 cameras would be fine. (keeps the costs down). Promotioncan be driven by low cost but effective social media within the rugby community. To get this thing off the ground we need to engage the rugby community, not try to enrol every man & his dog. As the competition grows & matures we can start to engage the wider community. This is about establishing a level of competiton that will engage & enhance the rugby players & rugby public in Australia. . The result is a semi professional rugby competition, available to nearly everyone via FTA, even if not quite a spectatular as 11 camera angles, that is not necessarily profitable, but is sustainable & will grow our great game. It is far better to have the something plan than the nothing plan.

With all due respect Mr Rathbone ; unless you have been rendered temporarily blind, and deaf the last few years , everyone on The Roar has been calling for a truly national competition. It is clear however that Mr O'Neill is not the catalyst agent that will trigger that process so he must be replaced with someone who will put the interests of rugby and the nation at large ahead of his own to move us all forward to where we will be true champions :-)

Salary cap spending is one thing, over-all profit/loss accounting is another. My understanding is that almost all the NZ provinces made substantial losses last year. Otago were so broke that they were in real danger of having to drop down to the Heartland Championship. Not sure how they were bailed out, although I believe the ersatz interisland match this year was staged largely for Otago's benefit. I also believe that the days of generous ITM Cup contracts are over, and that it has become a de facto semi-pro competition. Likewise, any revived ARC or ARC-equivalent comp will have to be run to strict financial guidelines.

My understanding is that the cap is NZ$1.6m (absolute maximum). I seems to be less then that, however. A NZRU document on player payments for 2011 reveals that ALL 14 ITM provinces came in under the cap. Some details: six unions (Auckland, Hawkes Bay, Otago, Canterbury, Wellington, Waikato) had the biggest cap, at $1.35m each, but underspent on player payments anywhere between $112,000 and $373,000. Surprisingly, or maybe not, of these six unions, Otago underspent the most, paying $976,644 with $373,356 in reserve. Northland had the lowest cap of $818,194 but still spent only $705,030, a saving of $113,164. Southland were the biggest spenders with a cap of $1.255m and spent $1.203m (all aprrox), with a savings of just $52,072

AB's fan does the ITM cup have a salary cap if so how much do you know.

worth noting the extreme that NZRU has taken its ITM Cup competition to. Live games on Fox (in Australia) Tuesday to Sundays (2-3 games on the weekends) with 5.30pm (AEST) kickoff. For example, on Wednesday Aug 29, Auckland play Canterbury 5.30pm (NZ's answer to State of Origin). It's early days but given these kickoff times and the natures of the rugby played, even Aussie RL fans are starting to watch the games. I know guys who are club RL players through and through but can now identify teams like Otago, Manawatu and Bay of Plenty by their jersey colours!

Good point abnutta It will probably get back to 8.

Good point biltongbek, extending the currie cup would really stuff up pre-season training for the teams. But even if you went to 8 just you don't have ot play every team twice or even at all once. But you make a good point mate. A tough one. Do you think Biltongbek the vodacom cup has been money well spent . And biltongbek what is the hype around Argentina is there much excitement in bok land about the Argies mate this weekend. Im glad that young lock has been cleared to play with Beeker , he is a big man that young lock. A good replacement for bakes, who i hear may still be asked to come back.

Johnno, they had little choice mate, the calendar is too full. As it stands the Currie Cup will finish end October, if they had two more teams it would take the Currie Cup to end of November.

Don't worry Johnno, The Currie Cup Premier Division will be back to 8 teams when it becomes their qualification Divison for the finals of Super Rugby.

-I think south africa should of kept currie cup 1st division to 8. Winning a 6 team rugby comp feels a bit small. You'd think south africa's population could do 8 teams too but obviously the people in sty africa know there sums better. Maybe have 8 currie cup teams and scrap the vodacom cup who knows. -Vodacom cup has been a good comp too, . -What the ARU should of done like a tax they should give a percentage to grass roots rugby and have it fixed. like 5% of all profits go to grass roots rugby.

SA has already made the move. They've been quite ruthless actually, culling the CC Premier Div to 8 and this year only 6, yes six teams! NZ is half way there with 7 in the Premiership. They are too sentimental however by playing crossover matches with the Championship (what you could call the 2nd Div). There is a concern that only having 5 teams playing SR will result in a kind of urban drift of players away from provinces outside of the major centres, namely Auckland, Wellington, Hamilton, Christchurch and Dunedin. I feel the thinking is that by keeping the likes of Manawatu, Bay of Plenty, Hawkes Bay and Southland etc in the ITM cup and having regular contact with the Canterbury's and Waikato's etc players like Guildfrod, Dagg, Hika Elliot (all Hawkes Bay ITM players) will remain in the provinces thus keeping them strong. With an 8 team NZ SR Div that plays no matches with the 6 ITM bases that are unlucky enough to miss out - there will be a clearly defined set of Haves and Have Nots. The feared Urban drift would be inevitable and thus opposition to setting up an 8 team comp would be immense.... But I have an idea which might placate the naysayers. Reverse the loan system that's been in the ITM Cup for years. Strong provinces, currently loan surplus players/fringe squad members to weaker teams to give them game time eg. a Canterbury player will be loaned to Southland even though these teams play against each other. That player remains a Canterbury player. Tony Woodcock could be loaned to the Auckland Blues in the SR and remain a North Harbour player. Tanerau Latimer can be loaned to the Waikato Chiefs and remain a Bay of Plenty player. Israel Dagg could be loaned to the Canterbury Crusaders and remain a Hawkes Bay player (although in my view of SR expansion the Hawkes Bay Magpies would be one of the 8 teams and I think he'll be needed).

sheek, Excellent work. Sorting out Australia's end of the bargain re: Super Rugby expansion was always going to be the hardest part. South Africa has already taken care of their end. The Currie Cup 1st Div has been running at 8 teams for the last few seasons and this year will be run with 6 (6 teams per conference will be the first phase of SR expansion followed by 8). New Zealand has run the Premiership Div with 7 teams (although they persist with cross-over matches with the Championship Div) Being from Hawkes Bay originally, I also understand where Coxinator is coming from re: fan identification with their respective teams. Our union was founded in 1884, Taranaki in 1885, Wellington in 1875 and Manawatu in 1886. That's a lot of history and parochialism right there, I think you'll agree. Yet, in SR all of us apart from Wellington have had to sacrifice our provincial identity to some extent in forming the Hurricanes. Same goes for almost all the NZ SR teams. I think it wouldn't be too much to ask, for the sacrifice/adaptation/evolution/re-distribution of the Reds and Waratahs "brands" to new teams in an 8 team competition that will ultimately benefit all the countries in SR.

''There’s a longstanding history of the clubs when they were at their zenith before Super Rugby in merging for the annual North Harbour v South Harbour representative matches and I don’t recall there being any problem then'' That sounds good in retrospect but in reality we had three anti ARC clubs Sydney Uni, Randwick and Easts merging to form the Fleet and they played their home matches in North Sydney which was in the Rays catchment. The other consequence was that Norths fans had to travel up to Gosford to watch their team play.

Charcoal, I agree with what you have said. The premier rugby clubs would still be relevant. For example, you can't progress to the next tier - national comp/super rugby - without coming through a premier rugby club. But the Shute Shield, which someone mentioned above, can no longer be seen as the starting point for a national comp. Firstly, there are too many clubs in Sydney for ALL of them to be in the national comp, & the talent is unevenly divided, with far too many weak teams. Secondly, the game is moving beyond the NSW/Qld borders, & this must be seen as a positive for Australian rugby. The whole point of a national comp, is to tighten the talent & the competition, & provide final development of players for the Wallabies.

Bakkies, I agree with you that the Rams would have worked better playing out of Concord. However, I don't agree with your comment that merging clubs to form an ARC would never work. There's a longstanding history of the clubs when they were at their zenith before Super Rugby in merging for the annual North Harbour v South Harbour representative matches and I don't recall there being any problem then. I can't see that it would be any different today. The clubs would still have their own competition, albeit on a different tier and it could be played over one round or start earlier in the season before the ARC commences. It's a compromise, but I believe one that would work. It's not a question of the ARC replacing the club competitions, but being complementary to them. As for the Sydney Fleet and Central Coast Rays (representing Northern Sydney) they would have equally worked better if played out of SFS and North Sydney Oval respectively instead of alienating their supporter base by playing their home games outside of their area.

Have to agree to disagree on this one Bakkies. No doubt such a competition can be run more efficiently but over $4 million is a lot of ground to make up. I don’t think you can deny that if the ARU were to establish a national third tier competition, they would be losing money on such a concept. There are still significant costs involved like player payments and travel. And I just don’t see the money coming in to suggest breaking even let alone making a profit is achievable. This is due to the fact that on mass, Australians don’t endear themselves to competitions that aren’t recognised as being the highest domestic standard. Don’t get me wrong, I loved the ARC! I think everyone commenting on this article did and if the ARU decided to go back down this path I would give it and whoever my local team ended up being my full support. But unfortunately in this already cluttered sporting landscape we live in, folks like yourself and I Bakkies are rare specimens. Low levels of interest means the corporate, TV and fan money would be nonexistent. Just money going out and next to none coming in and right now that’s the last thing the ARU needs. There’s still issues on the second tier that need addressing and that’s going to involve funding. The QRU received a handout a couple of years ago as the failing Reds led that union into debt. The NSWRU haven’t cracked a profit since 06’ and now the Force are in some serious strife. The ARU made a commitment to Western Australia and they should move heaven and earth to ensure the Force don’t become extinct. It would be a huge step backwards for the game in this country if they did. The ARU’s investment priority needs to be this second tier as it’s this level of the game that is going to drive Australian rugby further. It’s this level that engages fans and it’s at this level where we select our national team. PS. Another kettle of fish altogether but the Gold Coast should be recognised as a key growth area moving forward. Yes it’s a graveyard for sport franchises, but next to Newcastle it’s as promising an area for professional rugby to move into as any you will find in Australia. A big and growing population including a large expat Kiwi population and a rugby heartland with some great rugby schools and as strong a local competition (outside of Sydney and Brisbane) as any in the country. With the GC7’s now on the calendar and the city hosting its first test match this year, it looks as though the powers that be recognise the Gold Coasts’ importance as well.

That's exactly how it is done for the Currie Cup in SA. EG. This weekend. Friday 17 August 14h45 - 17h00 Currie Cup 1st division Griffons vs Falcons 17h00 - 19h00 Currie Cup U21 Cheetahs vs Western Province 19h00 - 21h00 Currie Cup Premier division Cheetahs vs Bulls Saturday 18 August 11h45- 14h20 OZ vs NZ 14h20 - 16h30 Currie Cup Premier division Griquas vs Western Province 16h30 - 19h05 SA vs Argentina 19h05 - 21h15 Currie Cup Premier division Sharks vs Lions So our whole schedule is geared to watch as many games live as possible.