Is it me or is there something fishy about the timing of the starting of the National Rugby Championship?
For the last 12 months SANZAR have been trying to come up with a solution for Super Rugby, all three countries have their own agendas, but it basically boils down to this:
South Africa has to include the Kings and will only stay if they are playing New Zealand teams as well.
Australia will not give up their home derbies.
New Zealand wants to expand into Asia and Argentina to increase revenue.
After about 10 months of going around in circles, they approached their broadcast partners with a couple of scenarios and a solution was almost reached.
I believe the NRC was the compromise for Australia to give up their home derbies and this is why ARU chief Bill Pulver can sit there in front of a camera and say the NRC won’t fail, because it’s guaranteed in the next broadcast deal.
So while the NRC may be a cog in the next broadcast deal, the ARU still has to get some things right to help rugby grow NRC in Australia.
They should stick to just seven teams in the first and second year, with a plan to expand to 10 or 12 teams with in the next five years.
The first two years should have one team in Western Australia, Victoria, ACT and two teams in each of NSW and Queensland.
These teams will be owned by the states and ARU, with the rest of the teams to go to the best bidder each year after that, with a look at private ownership for new or even exiting teams.
This way you can see where the support is and place new teams in the right places.
By 2019 you could end with one team from WA, one from Victoria, one from ACT, four from NSW, three from Queensland and even a South Australian team.
With only seven seven teams in the first two years you will basically have just Super Rugby and development players playing in the NRC (this still gives your best players the chance to play against top opposition).
As these players are already contracted to the ARU all that will need to be paid is a match fee.
Then after two years you will have a better idea on TV ratings, sponsorships and crowd figures to help make a salary cap.
To get one main jersey sponsor for all teams – like New Zealand’s Super Rugby sides. It would make it easier to get $1.4 million for a guaranteed TV slot each week for eight weeks from Steinlager or Heineken than it would be trying to get a local sponsor to fork out $200,000 with maybe only one TV match guaranteed.
All matches should be played at smaller club grounds like Princess Park or Footscray oval in Melbourne, Ballymore in Queensland, and North Sydney Oval and Campbelltown sports stadium in NSW.
Stay away from the bigger stadiums unless they are going to put up a guaranteed payment to play there
Each of the foundation teams (the first seven) should start with an area, but no nicknames, those will come in time.
So Perth, Melbourne, Canberra, Northern Sydney and Western Sydney. I’m not too sure about Queensland as I have known idea about the area but they need two teams.
All teams will play in the traditional hooped jerseys – you could have Northern Sydney playing in a black and red strip and Western Sydney playing in a black and white strip. Both those sets of colours scream tradition and weren’t North’s a union club before 1905 anyway?
If you have to have names you could have the very first match of the NRC between the Bears and Magpies – that would sell papers and bring a few disenfranchised league supporters two the match and would also mean rugby had gone full circle.
It’s time for all rugby supporters to get behind an NRC team – rugby’s on the ropes and needs everyone on board no matter what.
NQ Macca
Guest
There has been a lot of motherhood statements put out by the ARU about the proposed NRC, but not a lot of detail. In the promotional material they were talking about 8-10 teams competing in the post Premier Rugby Season. I'm curious about where all the players will be coming from? Looking at the Super Rugby teams listed on their websites, they're carrying squads of; Queensland-32, New South Wales-33, Canberra-34, Melbourne-34, W.A.-35 which is a total of 168 Professional players. From what I can see W.A. has 1 home grown player and Canberra has 5 home grown players. If we assume a 8 team competition completing in a 7 round premiership plus finals, how big a squad would each franchise actually need? If this competition is meant to be stepping stone into the Super Rugby & Wallaby teams, what will the player qualification requirements be? I would imagine that each franchise would probably require a 32 man squad, which equates to 256 players in total. So the very broad brush maths would mean that the NRC would still need another 88 to 118 players (subject to whether the 30 Wallaby Squad members are eligible to take place) to complete the squads. The existing Standard of the Perth, Melbourne & Canberra Premier Competition, would mean that these extra players would have be recruited from the Sydney and Brisbane Premierships. This in itself is an interesting since the Sydney and Brisbane Premierships are still having their funding reduced by the Governing Bodies. Should the Perth, Melbourne & Canberra NRC Franchises be expected pay the Sydney & Brisbane Premier Club's who develop these players a transfer fees? Is the ARU looking at Big Bash type franchise model, where the 256 player names are put into a pool and they draw out the 8 franchise teams and drop them in a location of the ARU's choosing? Historically the strength of the Australian game has been it's Clubs and the tribal nature of its supporters. Generally speaking manufactured teams just don't seam to work, just look at the Brisbane Cyclones, Brisbane Barbarians, Brisbane Tristars (East Coast Rugby Series 2001) and the Ballymore Tornadoes & East Coast Aces (ARC 2007).
HarryT
Guest
If a combined Randwick, Usyd, Souths and Easts team operated out of Sydney Uni, they would have every possible facility, multiple grounds and accommodation for opposing teams. Plus the support of the Uni in terms of coaching and scholarships, something they do very well. And 30,000 students to market the game to. Since 1975, from nothing, USA Rugby has promoted the game (men's and women's rugby) through high schools and colleges and now have 900 college teams, and a total of 115,000 participants, which is 30% greater than here in Oz. The ARU should capitalise on the interest that unis are showing towards rugby with this 3rd tier comp.
Hopperdoggy
Guest
Whattya mean as a young fella. At 40 I still enjoy a perve when we occasionally play a Uni club. Only difference is 15 years ago I had a remote chance of more than a perve ;-)
Garth
Guest
And why haven't the unversities started an inter-university competition on their own hook? Why do they have to be part of the NRC? Surely the universities compete against each other in other sports?
Garth
Guest
So one team has a red jersey with black highlights, the other a black jersey with red highlights. 2nd option: a jersey that incorporates the colours of the joint venture member clubs, as the Highlanders in Super rugby did.
Westie
Guest
Concord isn't western Sydney. Parramatta is our eastern border. Games at Penrith and campbelltown are important too. As is the style of play.
Dilzfromhtown
Guest
Well if you see a lot of the itm cup games some of those games are played in paddocks and 2 thousand seat parks. That's how the NRC should be. It should be almost amateur with a few wallabies here and there. Need to think long term, and the less money spent on it the better. So long as its getting played on tv and people are supporting where they come from it can't go wrong
Nabley
Guest
The last time they tried it they went broke because players and their accommodation away from main centres of rugby, cost too much and too little control was exercised over it. Let it be a show case for new talent. If they want to be seen and be contracted into a Super franchise, then they have to have played NRC. The players could largely self fund themselves like the old amateur days. They will travel to where they can be seen. Remember how the Brumbies started all that time ago with the leftovers. We could see the same thing happen as players shift to places like say Adelaide for a chance. Perhaps get out of pocket expenses to a limit but not much else. I can hear you saying existing players wont move without cash. Ever heard an actor say to a fellow actor "brake a leg". Meaning leave me an opportunity and I will take it at your expense. The players would be investing in their own future and we are seeing new talent. Need for some tough love amongst the prima donnas.
Hopperdoggy
Guest
How about novelty names: Northern la-di-das Eastern Beach Bums Western Take Aways Shire Rioters
onetruegame
Guest
Agreed Charcoal. Fo mine simplie is best. Sydney Fleet Western Rams Northern Rays We don't need league names.
onetruegame
Guest
Other things have also stopped, Temba
onetruegame
Guest
Football United
Guest
The problem here is there is no stadium suitable for this tournament. The Rebels don't even fill AAMI Park, so it's going to be a morgue if the team plays there. The VRU are in serious need of their own facilities for things like this as well as community rugby finals and their various rep teams.
Bakkies
Guest
Ingoals are too small for a higher level of Rugby. It's alright for local Melbourne Rugby but not this.
Bakkies
Guest
The problem with red and black is if the Canberra Vikings are the Canberra team in the same colours. Other clubs in a joint venture with Norths Rugby might not like red and black either.
Charcoal
Guest
Well said Westie. However, I disagree in part with Brady-AJ's proposal for an initial start-up competition with 7 teams. Why not have 8? NSW has near double the population of Queensland and Sydney near triple the population of Brisbane, so I think a more equitable apportionment between NSW and Queensland would be 3 teams for Sydney and 2 for Brisbane (even that's being generous). That's an 8 team comp, including Canberra, Melbourne and Perth. Further teams from NSW and Queensland Country, Adelaide or whatever could be considered down the track once the competition becomes established. Let's not get too ambitious to start with and concentrate on getting the basic structure right first. As far as Sydney goes, I don't subscribe to the view that we should be recycling team names from another code, ie, North Sydney Bears. For my part I would stick with basically the same names as in the ARC, but with some modification. My suggested Sydney teams would be North Harbour Rays based at North Sydney Oval, South Harbour (or Sydney) Fleet based at Kogarah Oval (or at an alternative venue that is not too far out) and Western Sydney Rams based at either Parramatta Stadium or Concord Oval. This could all come to nought if the successful tenderers don't necessarily represent these districts. Sorry, the hoops idea for every team doesn't grab me. Perhaps for some, but there also needs to be a more contemporary marketing appeal in the mix of team branding.
Hopperdoggy
Guest
Was good when they trialled the beer backpacks a while back at Balleymore. I think they stopped it when some kiwis on the hill roughed up the vendor and stole his backpack.
Dane
Guest
Who is Brisbane would go and watch a side owned by the Western Force? Likewise in Sydney for a Rebels mob. Flat out getting Sydney folk to attend games of their own team.
Dane
Guest
If you manage to get served before 1/2 time. IT took us 30 minutes to get a round at Ballymore during the Classic wallabies match there last year.
Westie
Guest
North Harbour could never win away against my Rams. They have no idea where we are.