I apologise. Indeed I apologise most humbly.
In several recent articles on the upcoming likely makeup of the teams in the proposed NRC, I have been deeply passionate, perhaps too passionate, about maintaining some kind of history, some kind of tradition, some kind of tribalism.
Huh! What an idiot. Little do I appreciate this is the instant gratification society.
Computer doesn’t work? Get another one. TV on the blink? Buy a new one. Mobile phone busted? Upgrade to the new model. New car? Easy. New washing machine? Easy. New this? Easy. New that? Easy. Disposable income society. Check!
Twelve months ago – January 2013 – you would have struggled to get a majority support for a national comp in rugby union.
We’re doing okay just as we are. We punch above our weight. Too expensive. Not enough players. Why copy New Zealand or South Africa? And on it goes.
Then a new CEO of the ARU arrives – Bill Pulver – who announces a reprisal of the old ARC, now to be called the NRC. The bandwagon couldn’t fill quickly enough.
Now, 12 months on, there is a bandwagon of millions of rugby fans declaring a national comp “must happen”, as if they’ve all believed it themselves for years and years.
The killer reason why we shouldn’t have a national comp was that manufactured teams don’t work.
Really? R-E-A-L-L-Y?
Anyone looked at BBL lately?
Eight manufactured teams. Eight totally manufactured teams.
Eight teams that have no relationship whatsoever with their place of origin apart from the city name. The nicknames are meaningless and the colours have no relationship whatsoever historically, traditionally or otherwise, with their franchises.
But it is apparently going gangbusters. It’s rating itself silly on TV. It’s entertainment, and that’s all that counts.
It’s helping to fill the otherwise material rich, but soul poor world in which we presently inhabit.
Here’s silly old me lecturing the ARU that the 8-10 teams they select for the NRC should have some meaning. That they should have some connection with the past, i.e., history, tradition, tribalism.
Silly, silly me.
The NRC will probably be a mish-mash of joint ventures and stand alone EOIs and guess what, it won’t matter one iota.
As long as they throw the ball around and send the ratings skyward, they can call themselves whatever they want.
And play in hot pink and gerkin for all the world cares.
Fox Sports is only interested in getting a return on their investment and filling their programming quota.
I reckon even Sydney Convicts could get a run, if they show the money up front. Who cares?
I reckon even the Alexandria Dukes, Dundas Valley, Manly Savers or Sydney Grammar Old Boys can get a gig in the NRC providing they have the appropriate wealthy benefactor/s.
Who are they, you ask? Oh, just the sixth division of Sydney Suburban Rugby, the Meldrum Cup.
I apologise most, most humbly for having the temerity to think people even cared about the history and tradition of their past.
Eagle roarer
Guest
Agreed. I was not thinking sevens i was thinking more along the lines of what you have suggested.
RobC
Guest
EagleR: Agree to the principle of short-form Rugby. Sevens is not an appropriate short-version. BBL has the same fundamentals gameplay as cricket - faster. Sevens vs Rugby is akin to baseball vs cricket as it focuses only one dimension. An alternative is shorter version of 15 a side Rugby: eg 20x2 + 5 minute half-time. instead of 80 + 10. max two scrum resets before freekick, add referees, penalty infringement is automatic 2 point to opposition plus normal kick/goal/restart option. The specifics aren't important at this stage. The idea is its 15a side, and has the same gameplay as full Rugby.
Scrumpoacher
Guest
Thanks dude.
Charcoal
Guest
I'd like to know why my comments have been ignored.
Charcoal
Guest
The official crowd numbers were grossly understated. I WAS THERE. I have attended many matches at North Sydney Oval over the last 4 decades and I can assure you that nothing approached the match attendance at the Sydney Fleet v Western Sydney Rams, perhaps with the exception of a Wallabies v Possibles match in the 1990's. You can speculate about conspiracy theories, but it may be just an inadequate response to the overwhelming attendance numbers which were not anticipated. There were lengthy queues to get into the ground and that suggests that there was underlining support to witness a local derby between two of the Sydney regions.
Charcoal
Guest
Empathise with you entirely Scrumpoacher. NRC has to be a winner. I am a regular Shute Shield spectator, both home and away games, and I would definitely attend NRC games knowing that the best players from my club team would be represented in the NRC.
Charcoal
Guest
Putting your sarcasm aside, I am fully aware of what Sheek has proposed in the past and for the most part I agree with the general thrust of his opinions on the establishment of a 3rd tier competition for Australian Rugby. My comments to which you refer were only specifically related to the composition of the Sydney based teams and not to the broader national makeup of teams. If you are really interested in what my opinions are for the proposed NRC competition, then I suggest that it should be initially restricted to 8 teams, broadly based on the original ARC concept, with 3 teams in Sydney, 2 in Brisbane and one city teams in Canberra, Melbourne and Perth. However, the Sydney and Brisbane team's composition and location, which was the major failing of the ARC, should be re-assessed. Again, restricting my comments to the composition of the Sydney based teams with which I am most familiar, the logical division is between North, South and West. Whilst traditional rivalry has been between North and South (North Harbour v South Harbour), the growth of Sydney has introduced an additional untapped resource in Western Sydney which has to be embraced, particularly when there is a strong Pacific Islander representation.
Scrumpoacher
Guest
Who was decrying a national comp 12 months ago??? Only Sydney siders dude. I can't believe the negativity here! What's in a name? So what if it's plastic and manufactured? We have a national rugby competition that will grow our game...personally i'd like to see Wagga warriors or the dubbo dudes take to the field in pink and gherkin hoops
Kasey
Guest
I’m a cricket fan (SACA Member) and I resisted going to a Strikers game for so long because I didn’t want to give CA further reason to ignore the long and in my mind ‘real’ form of the game further. Well my SACA membership gets me into the BBL with a scan of the card so when a mate messaged me asking if I wanted to join him as he took his kid to the Strikers game last week I thought why not, what harm can it be? Almost against my will, I found myself actually enjoying the crass American-ness of the experience (but then I do like American Sports in general) The canned music, the Basketball-like DJ-ing of ‘crowd involvement sounds’ and yes, even the game itself. The home team lost, but it was still an enjoyable night out. I can see why there were a lot of families (even more than I see at A-League games) in attendance. With CAs money behind it and ch10 onboard, I have changed my mind and now can see the BBL not only surviving but thriving in the short and medium term. Will it be a danger to football’s A-League?? I don’t think so, while both are enjoyable nights out, the ‘feeling’ in the stadium is very different for football than it is for BBL. People will gravitate towards the sport that scratches the itch they have at the time. Want a more adversarial antagonistic footy-like crowd? The A-League for you…want a more carnival-like night out?? BBL is your pony.
Slane
Guest
Hatred comes into it when you call something an abomination. I'd suggest checking the definition of abomination if you don't think it means hating something. Abomination: noun a thing that causes disgust or loathing a feeling of hatred
sheek
Roar Guru
Rob9, Broadly speaking, I'm in agreement with you. But I'm kinda tired at midnight to elaborate anymore for the moment.
In Brief
Guest
If you look at the official crowd for that match I believe it was just over 3000. I went to a couple of matches at North Sydney Oval which seemed sold out, but the crowds were given as low 3000 (example was first match between Fleet and Rays). So something fishy was going on - not sure who benefitted from fudging the numbers down.
Rob9
Guest
What I'm suggesting here Sheek is that plopping a team into a market which on mass has next to no knowledge or interest in rugby is as plastic a move you could make. There are small but dedicated rugby fraternities in all states around the country but that's no justification for such a level of representation. Adelaide may be the 5th largest city in Australia but it's rugby following is well below that of the Gold Coast, Townsville, Wollongong and probably many other (even) smaller places like Toowoomba. Bill Pulver's endorsement is worth peanuts to me. As far as I'm concerned, this whole idea of a national third tier that he's now perusing lacks deep and analytical thought.
Stray Gator
Roar Rookie
Thanks for that. And beyond the 'Sydney context'? What are your thoughts there? Perhaps you might want to read some of Sheek's previous articles to get a bit of the perspective the rest of us bring to the table.
sheek
Roar Guru
Bakkies, In the early days of my national comp modeling (going back 30-40 years), I was very much in favour of a provincial comp, just like NPC or Currie Cup. or even our own Sheffield Shield. It seamlessly added to the provincial tradition we already had dating back to the first-ever NSW-Qld match in 1882. We have five provincial teams now in fact - NSW Waraths, Queensland Reds, ACT Brumbies, Victoria Rebels & Western Australia Force. South Australia Falcons can be reinforced to become a sixth province. A lot of fans probably still don't realise that Southern NSW, now Southern Inland, have aligned themselves with ACT. A similar argument could be made for incorporating Northern NSW into Eastern Australia based out of Newcastle. An eighth province could be either North Queensland or a second Sydney based province. For example, for two Sydney teams, divide along old north-south harbour divisions. Both would incorporate elements of the greater West. Hence you would have North Harbour/Northern Beaches/North-West & South Harbour/Eastern Beaches/South-West. With rugby being the only other sport besides cricket to retain provinces is a good selling point, I would have thought. However, the ARU seems enamored with the national club model so loved by most other sports. There is indeed a place for NSW Country, Qld Country, Tasmania, NT, etc, but that should be in a revived ARS. One last thing, many people (including myself) will often mention the one-off ARC in 2007. But there was also a one-off APC (provincial comp) in 2006. How quickly that is forgotten. i've also tired of arguing that a national comp would in fact be second tier - provincial - not third tier, if the ARU went down that path. But then you have whole new arguments of how to tie that in with super rugby.
Bakkies
Guest
There are traditional teams in Australian Rugby that could be used and it makes absolute sense. They used to play matches against each other (Sydney vs NSW Country) or touring teams. That's the history of Australian Rugby and it should be brought back. I have already mentioned this before and it's staring the ARU in the face. NSW Country, Qld Country, ACT Kookaburras/Griffins, Sydney, Vic state team (which should have been used as the Vic Super Rugby side rather then calling them Melbourne) were written off just after Rugby turned off pro. Hunter and Western Sydney are natural geographical areas which can be used rather then pushing fans to travel well over an hour to watch a home match (see the Rays).
AndyS
Guest
Which would seem to put you in good company based on the last time. It is why I think it is presumptuous to assume Sydney deserves more than one team, regardless of where the players originate. The teams need to be where people will watch them and that certainly wasn't Sydney last time around. They should prove there is support for one team first, then think about expanding later.
sheek
Roar Guru
Hi Rob9, No-one's perfect. ;-) My models evolve & change back & forth depending on my mood at the time. Sometimes I prefer national clubs, other times I prefer provinces. And so on. The whole point of incorporating Adelaide has nothing to do with manufactured teams. There is a very small, but highly dedicated rugby community in SA. Embracing them within the rugby family is a noble & worthwhile gesture. Adelaide is the fifth largest city in the country. Anyway, Bill Pulver seems keen on the idea as well, even if they don't make the initial cut.
Magic Sponge
Guest
I'll just watch the tests matches and club games for the easts beasts and the mighty roosters, none of this meaningless third tiered crap . More power to the clubs and less to Pulver and the growing admin team. What a waste of resources.
Rob9
Guest
Sheek, after taking another look at your previous NRC related article I noticed you're putting forward an Adelaide club as part of your proposed league structure. I can't fathom how someone can have such a deep-seeded hatred for what they deem to be 'manufactured' sporting clubs, yet suggest an Adelaide rugby team be entered into a national competition? There's nothing to suggest that Adelaide needs or wants to follow a rugby team in a national competition. In my experience, most South Australians (living in SA) don't know the difference between what the Wallabies and Broncos play. Plop a team operating from such a level in Adelaide and it would be decades before even half the team roster developed through the SA system. Until then, they'd be pulling players from the east coast. At least there was some level of interest in Melbourne and Perth before they received SR representation. Adelaide's starting from 100 paces behind those markets. I'd love to get to a point where the 5th largest market in the land justifies it's inclusion in a national competition but we're a long way and a whole lot of grassroots development from being at that point. As far as 'manufactured' and 'plastic' sporting teams go, an NRC team in Adelaide would be the Pamela Anderson of Australian national league clubs. Meanwhile, you've included the Gold Coast in the South Brisbane catchment. I'm assuming that team would be playing in Brisbane? As a Gold Coaster myself, you'd have no chance of getting me or my neighbors to support our big brothers up the road in a national rugby comp while a city with next to no rugby knowledge gets it's own team. So the 6th largest rugby market and a rugby heartland with a strong local comp and many nurseries dotted around school scene goes unrepresented. Not that I think North Queensland or the South Coast are particularly ready for representation at such a level, they're also a much more natural fit than Adelaide is and will be for the foreseeable future. Names and colours are trivial matters, locations are not.