The ARU has made moves towards club rugby becoming a wholly amateur competition again in order to pave the way for a strong third tier in Australian rugby.
While our knickers were in a knot over Will Genia being benched and lamenting the lack of depth in Australian rugby on Wednesday, Bill Pulver quietly detailed the reforms of club rugby through the Sydney Morning Herald’s rugby scoop, Georgina Robinson.
The key proposals are these:
– Ask clubs to stop paying players or the ARU will reduce funding to them – those player payments “can be up to $10,000 a season”.
– Super Rugby squad players will be required to turn out for club rugby in the city of their Super Rugby team.
– A national club competition could be formed using a number of elite premier rugby clubs and amalgamations of others to run between August and October.
Yes, the ARU finally has the bullet in its mouth and the jaw is tightening.
As you can imagine, this news is causing a bit of a ruckus in the world of conflicted interests and traditions dating back 100 years that is club rugby.
What the reform for clubs to stop paying players achieves is carving a proper niche in the rugby spectrum for a real deal third tier competition in Australia that is desperately needed.
Club rugby, as it stands, encroaches just enough on the territory of a third tier professional competition to cloud the waters but without actually being able to properly serve that purpose.
For that reason some of the upper reaches of club rugby must be trimmed to set a clear starting point for the third tier to build upon.
There will obviously be questions about how exactly this will work that can’t be answered in anything short of an operations meeting, like how the rest of the field will compete with Sydney University’s ability to offer scholarships instead of payment etc.
What I will say is this move is needed and worth pursuing to the point of putting a few people offside in order to secure rugby’s long term future in this country.
Clubs do have an important place in the context of rugby in this country. They are a social organisation, a place for home-made burgers, focus on the lower leagues and introducing youngsters to the game and its ethos.
Renewed focus on this type of rugby club will serve the grassroots of rugby well.
To put all this in context; this transformation is the next step in the excrutiatingly slow process of rugby turning into a modern, professional sport in Australia that started when the international level talent was deemed worth paying by Rupert Murdoch.
Recently that process was developed further with the governance review of the sport enabling a leadership structure that has some real power to guide the game and comply with modern conflict of interest standards.
Now that is beginning to trickle down. It’s like slogging through mud, but there’s progress.
Today, Pulver has emphatically endorsed my own favourite soapbox proposal (sarcasm font) rugby needs a stronger presence on free-to-air television and intimated the time for complete reliance on Fox Sport has come to an end.
Another schloppy foot pulled from the quagmire and placed in front of the other. Small steps.
Many Super Rugby traditionalists – if you can call early followers of such a young competition that – are loathe to leave the safety of pay-TV.
It may cost something up front but, again, this is about long-term security over the short term gain.
Governance structure in place, or not, the murky political waters of Australian rugby are a muddy marsh for Pulver to traverse.
We all need to hope some clear changes emerge from the swamp that enable rugby to properly leave behind the amateur era and plan for success in the 21st century.
Bill Pulver’s name might not be up in lights as much as his predecessor’s, but the quiet noises he is making indicates there’s a desire to enact real change.
This keyboard basher has lamented the state of rugby often enough but is willing to give his vision some time to be put in place.
People whose workmates always have the radio on at work, like myself, would already have heeded the words of dubstep-rockers Imagine Dragons in their latest single – “welcome to the new age”.
DaniE
Guest
I thought it was a photo of John O'Neill!!!!
Ian
Guest
It makes complete sense to put Eastern and Southern Sydney together, but my argument is that the a lot of people in the Eastern Suburbs will not be happy with this arrangement. I understand that you are trying the break up the clubs evenly, but West Harbour and Eastwood aren't really west anymore, Concord is just down the road from from Syd Uni and Eastwood (Marsfield) is in the Ryde area. Greater Western Sydney consists of the following areas: Auburn, Bankstown, Blacktown, Blue Mountains, Camden, Campbelltown, Fairfield, Hawkesbury, Hills, Holroyd, Liverpool, Parramatta, Penrith and Wollondilly. Only two Premier clubs reside in these areas, Parramatta and Penrith (two of the least successful and supported), but this area is in massive growth at present with development booming. The ARU cannot ignore these area anymore.
Charcoal
Guest
In response to Ian regarding the split for Sydney based teams in a 3rd tier competition, I was suggesting that a Sydney South team include the Eastern Suburbs and Southern Sydney. Loosely based, although not necessarily restricted to the existing club structure, my suggested partition was along the same lines of the ARC, although not at the same venues, ie, Northern Sydney (Warringah, Manly, Northern Suburbs, Gordon) based at North Sydney, Western Sydney (Eastwood, West Harbour, Parramatta, Penrith) based at Concord or Parramatta and Southern Sydney (Sydney University, Eastern Suburbs, Randwick, Southern Districts) based at SFS.
Ian
Guest
sheek, good to see a sense of humour around here. True, Australian Rugby players are generally pretty soft, minus players like Pocock, TPN and Cummins, McCabe (last two aren't too smart though :) ). I think the problem with most Australian Rugby fans are that they are spoilt for choice with other sports like Football, Aussie Rules and Rugby League. And they are always trying to change the way Rugby should be played and forget that Rugby is a forward orientated game. Most Australian sport fans are nomads, supporting there respective teams only when they are winning. A perfect example of this is the Socceroos bandwagon that happens every 4 years. NRL and Rugby fans are only support their club teams when they are doing well, not sure about AFL fans, but I know plenty of Swans bandwagon supporters who only come out during the finals. Australian EPL and NBA supporters are an odd bunch too, they pretty much choose a team with the prettiest jersey or the best players, I understand that these are the best competitions in the world for these sports but where is the tribalism, how many of them have even been to Chicago or Manchester? Unfortunately I am an all or nothing sort of person (only support Rugby), so I am unhappy that fans & players of other Australian sports are plentiful & tough (minus football players, lets be honest the way they carry on milking penalties is embarrassing, but the Australians are a bit tougher than other nations in this area).
sheek
Roar Guru
Ian, Australian rugby players are too soft & not enough of them (not the soft ones - plenty of those). Australian rugby fans are too soft & not enough of them (not the soft ones - plenty of those). Australian rugby ideas are too soft & not enough of them ( not the soft ones - plenty of those). Perhaps we should be thankful that fans of other Australian sports & are plentiful & tough - like their players. ;-) And have smarter ideas. :-)
Ian
Guest
Charcoal. I like the North, South, West split too but... I personally think that East Sydney is too small of an area to have it's own ARC team, I would have liked to group them with South but could you see the people of Eastern Suburbs banding together with the Inner West and Southern areas, not going to happen.
Charcoal
Guest
Whatever 3rd tier competition may develop, the most logical split for Sydney is North, West and South, based in their respective supporter bases, eg, North Sydney, Concord/Parramatta and Moore Park. I might add that the problem with Pulver's plan to restrict Super Rugby players returning to club Rugby in their franchise domestic competitions, is that in NSW, the overwhelming bulk of the Waratah's squad is made up of Sydney University based players and this would have a disproportionate strengthening of the Sydney University club with the few representatives from the remaining clubs thinly spread throughout the rest of the competition. Super Rugby players from other franchises would be denied availability to their club of origin. This would only skew the Shute Shield competition even more to Sydney University and they might as well just hand the shield to them before the season even starts. This is an unhealthy development for club rugby in Sydney. Having just witnessed Sydney University's demolition of Eastwood in the Shute Shield Grand Final, where you virtually had a team of professionals up against a team of amateurs, there was really no contest and the whole competition has just become farcical. When you consider that Sydney University won 5 of the 7 grade and colts grand finals, and has done so consistently over the last decade, it must start ringing alarm bells about the equity of the competition. But has the ARU and NSWRU got the balls to address this imbalance? I'm not too optimistic.
Ian
Guest
In Sydney I see 4 distinct areas: North - to the eastern border of Parramatta and north. South - from west of the city to the eastern border of Parramatta and south. East - the city and eastern suburbs. West - from Parramatta to the Blue Mountains north and south. My favorite is North vs South, or anyone vs Easts. This is my opinion of the different areas of Sydney, I'm sure everyone's opinion would differ on this, which creates the dilemma of who is most accurate. Would love to hear others break up of Sydney and other cities.
Ian
Guest
I think the way to structure Australian Rugby is: Tier 1: Wallabies (Professional) Broadcast on FTA and FOX Tier 2: Trans-Tasman Super Rugby (Professional) Broadcast on FOX with one game per week on FTA Tier 3: ARC (Semi Professional) Broadcast on FOX Tier 4: Club Rugby in each state (Amateur) The Trans-Tasman Super Rugby comp I am proposing consists on both Australian and New Zealand Super Rugby teams with room for more, eventually it will get to big and the ARC will have to become the tier 2. My reason for not having South African Super Rugby teams in there is due to the timezone differences.
Mike
Guest
Why would a national competition compare with Qld Cup? A national competition equates to NRL premier division.
Mike
Guest
"Those nations all have a third tier, but only NZ has been a more successful nation in the professional era. The statistics show this" They do? More successful than whom? In any case, statistics are a window onto the past, but this debate is about our future. It makes sense to me that Australia is trending further behind the other top nations, and it is pretty obvious that our lack of a national competition is affecting that. "Plonking in an artificial third tier" Every tier is artificial, so what? "a proper cost-benefit analysis, however quantitative it may be, must be conducted to in order to direct out limited funds to the best places." Of course. That is the job of people like the ARU. This is an opinion forum and those of us expressing our opinions are entitled to move on the information that we have. In politics, calling for a cost-benefit analysis is a well attested means of stifling debate, of which Sir Humphrey Appleby could be proud but its of no relevance here unless conducted by us on the information that we all have available. And why are you talking about "limiited funds": without also talking about revenue?
Mike
Guest
You misunderstand me Sheek. I want multiple teams in Sydney. I understood that you don't want this. Apologies if I have misunderstood anyone. I am rapidly losing track of who wants what however... :|
sheek
Roar Guru
Geez Mike, Whenever have I said that any national comp must have multiple teams in Sydney??? And I can vouch that Jiggles doesn't think that either because THAT is what he usually accuses me of! How does proposing to split NSW into three provinces equate to multiple teams in Sydney????? I usually run two models at different times. A provincial model (APC) has Sydney represented by one province - NSW. A national club model (ARC) has only three teams out of Sydney - Sydney, East Sydney & West sydney. I'm greatly amused that some people are so quick to have a crack at me, they can't even get my argument right that they want to shoot down!!!!!
Go the Wannabe's
Guest
Three point plan to get rugby going in Oz: 1. Copy the NZ system 2. Copy the NZ system 3. See points 1 and 2.
Go the Wannabe's
Guest
And what about the schools where isn't even played and NRL, AFl and soccer are all over them like white onto rice?
Go the Wannabe's
Guest
except for the crowds.....
Glenn Innis
Guest
A third tier National Rugby comp will simply bleed money no one other than the most hardcore of Rugby people will take the slightest interest in it. I mean QLD cup Rugby League attracts a man and his dog to most games and League is a hell of alot more popular in QLD than Rugby Analogies with the A league don't stand up as the A league is where the best domestic football talent plays week in week out it is not sitting beneath a transnational provincial League followed by a four nation international tournament.
Working Class Rugger
Roar Guru
That's the thing people overlook with the efforts to get more Rugby on FTA. At the moment the performances of the Wallabies aren't exactly showing off what's great about the game. if you look at the top two sporting codes in Australia, what do they possess that we don't. A heavy presence on FTA TV. That's what. This has allowed them to build a strong market presence and acquire large TV deals. The other things is a strong domestic league. We need Super Rugby on FTA TV. It's the vessel that would show off just how great the game is. The split from 3 to 2 conferences as far as I am concerned could be a godsend for Rugby's case to gain access to FTA TV in Australia. South Africa lament the fact that they have the bigger market only to have to share the proceeds evenly. But if we could get onto the FTA platform, we would access a TV market that they could only dream of. If we could get SR, National Club Championship and Test Match Rugby onto the FTA platform the benefits of that will filter down throughout the tiers. If we could guarantee 5 or 6 games a week over 18 rounds (90 before finals) of SR, 6-8 tests and 40 to 50 NCC games that would expose many, many more people to the game and drive revenue well beyond current levels. It's the domestic and SR that will drive the games growth. Pulver and the ARU should be set the mission of getting not only a NCC up and running with FTA exposure but also to get SR on FTA as well. Do this and finally the funds may become available to fund the junior game. It would certainly be easier to attract players. At the moment being confined to Pay TV, a platform with a penetration of roughly only 1 in 10 households is killing the game while our competitors are going from strength to strength.
Mike
Guest
I would be careful about accusing others of being "pie in the sky". Unless your proposal can harness BROAD community support, it will just waste time and resources, and it will fail. The existing Sydney club comp could only be used with radical surgery so as to harness the major demographics of Sydney. Revenue flows from broad community appeal, and without revenue any idea is doomed.
Mike
Guest
Fans will watch less than stellar rugby, so long as it is *their* team that is playing it, or at least a comp of which their team is part. Obviously you have to reach a certain minimum standard or you will turn fans off, but beyond that, it is team identity and loyalties that are more important.