‘Ambitious’ is the best word to describe Bill Pulver’s decision to resurrect the National Rugby Championship in 2014. Ambitious for a multitude of reasons, but let’s start with the timing.
As Georgina Robinson highlighted in the Sydney Morning Herald, we’re almost a quarter through 2014 and the competition is still a complete mystery.
How Pulver and his cronies at the ARU can conceivably think this competition is going to get off the ground this year is dumbfounding.
Put yourself in the position of perhaps one of the successful franchises; most of which are going to be formed from existing club sides.
In the space of four months they have to (at a minimum):
– Secure sponsorship
– Source ground availability
– Confirm a playing roster
– Confirm a coaching structure
– Co-ordinate administrative, legal and contractual requirements
– Elect a board of directors
– Develop brand awareness
– Build a supporter base
All of this on top of running their own clubs, some of which are already running at significant financial loss.
The concerns that the project is being rushed and the suggestions to at least give the competition another year in planning are completely valid.
The ARU are always quick to point out the success of the NPC in New Zealand and the Currie Cup in South Africa.
What they don’t seem to understand is the sports market place in Australia is far more competitive.
In New Zealand and South Africa, rugby reigns supreme in the winter. In Australia, rugby has to compete with rugby league and AFL, by far and away the two biggest winter codes in the country.
Combine that with the success of football’s A-League and you’ve got a very tough field to carve out a commercially viable provincial rugby competition.
One should also consider the fact rugby is yet to cement its place in the nation’s pecking order through Super Rugby, an international competition.
I’m not saying let’s just let the sport wither away into obscurity, but perhaps for now we are better restructuring and strengthening what we already have.
There may well be a time for third tier rugby in Australia, but I’m not convinced that time is now.
Rugby in Australia needs more momentum.
A good example of using momentum was the way in which the A-League catapulted itself off the success of the Socceroos’ 2006 World Cup campaign.
There is no point in launching a dead duck.
The other significant dilemma is launching new teams without established fan-bases.
The new franchises may be made from existing club sides but there is no guarantee that will ensure a following.
Currently, the clubs are dependent on two things; gate takings and beer consumption.
It’s simple, if the franchises can’t attract fans to games they will not make any money.
And don’t be looking at the ARU for to prop up teams in financial trouble, they’ve already washed their hands of fiscal accountability for the individual franchises.
This might then underline Pulver’s ambition to align the competition with universities, which could protect the franchise through government funding and promote the game through the student body – think an Australian version of the American Ivy League.
All this just reaffirms rugby’s position as a white-collar sport played by academics and private schools, again limiting itself to a common demographic.
Furthermore, Foxtel will only telecast one game per week, hardly a great endorsement of a new competition, and without any free-to-air matches it has limited its audience to pay TV viewers only.
Putting the commercial feasibility aside, Pulver’s desire to relaunch the previously failed NRC centralises on his theory to develop player depth and “accelerate the development of elite talent”.
Taking the latter into account, accelerate and development are two conflicting words when it comes to nurturing our finest young rugby talent.
If Pulver wants to accelerate development among the players, perhaps he is better off consulting Stephen Dank.
The domestic clubs already provide a platform for our future stars to ‘naturally progress’ in competitions brimming with history and reasoning.
The Sydney and Brisbane domestic competitions have been the backbone of the Wallabies for well over 100 years.
It is a breeding ground that has been neglected by the governing body for far too long.
For years, the ARU has pumped money into the top-end and neglected the survival of the clubs and, more importantly, the development and recruitment of juniors.
Our lack of depth doesn’t stem from the absence of a third tier competition, it stems from a decade of poor administration.
The ARU needs look as what the New Zealand Rugby Union did in centralising power over the provincial sides.
Competitions like Sydney and Brisbane should not be robbed of opportunities to see quality talent playing in their competitions week in week out.
The Super Rugby franchises in Australia have been holding on to non-matchday players without proper reasoning for years, therefore continually ensuring weak domestic competitions.
It is no surprise club rugby’s demise seemed to begin around the time the game went professional.
The 1997 Shute Shield Final between Manly and Eastwood saw 26,000 people at the SFS. Last week the Waratahs V Reds crowd was 16,000 at ANZ.
That is an incredibly damming statistic on the current state of the game in Australia.
The ARU needs to rethink its plan from the ground up; launching the NRC now is incredibly risky business.
Charcoal
Guest
WCR, I have read your earlier post, but I still don't agree with your thesis. We may be talking about different things here, because my criticism of University involvement relates to direct ownership of teams, whether in whole or part, but I don't have a problem with University sponsorship which is an entirely different matter. You can't escape the fact that there is a perception in the sporting community, either rightly or wrongly, that Rugby Union is an elitist sport supported for the most part by the private school sector, which includes the Tertiary Universities' sector. I'm surprised that someone with your declared background would think that the future lies in fostering future growth for Rugby through the private school sector, even though it only represents around a third of the potential market. The support is already there in that sector and heavily reliant upon it, although facing increasing competition from other sports, particularly AFL. Whether you're prepared to admit or not, the biggest growth potential is overwhelmingly in the public school sector. This is the area in which the ARU has failed to capitalize on. I can recall a few decades ago when Combined GPS Schools refused to play Combined High Schools because of the latters' dominance at that time. It just happened to coincide with the period when Australian Rugby was at its strongest. So you have to ask the question, what went wrong after that era?
Working Class Rugger
Roar Guru
Charcoal, You argued that the concept of aligning with Uni's is flawed and would only further the perception that the game is only for private schoolboy's. I chose to highlight that Uni's are increasingly looking to build their brand awareness via sponsorship deals across essentially all the football codes in Australia. Can't claim elitism when everyone is involved. I also highlighted that private education now occupies a significant slice of the education sector. A steadily growing one at that. As for the public sector. I don't think they should be ignored. I actually wrote a piece in April last year on the direction I thought the ARU should look in the short to medium terms in order to engage schools from within both the private and public education sectors. http://www.theroar.com.au/2013/04/23/private-schools-are-the-key-to-rugby-growth/ It's a bit controversial for some but I think it makes more sense than doing nothing at all.
Detox from SANZA
Guest
Agree to an extent. But disagree with maintaining state teams QLD and NSW. Aleague went away from this. QLD Roar now Brisbane Roar. See post reply above for alternate structure.
Detox from SANZA
Guest
Jennez, you are making a lot of sense. Agree, top 30 on call for wallabies. I think we miss one thing here. The SANZA alliance serves one group. SA. We have set ourselves up like coke addicts on SA revenue stream. Need a detox. Best move I reckon. Australia pulls out of SANZA, but maintains a Trans Tasman alliance. NZ would want this to maintain Bledisloe. So this is key in negotiation deals. So with a 5 year time horizon... We can then fix up the Super Rugby and NRC once and for all. Roll things up... ACT-Canberra, Melbourne Rebels-Rising, Western Force-Perth, Adelaide Black Falcons. Rest is heartland. 5 NSW. 3 QLD. Total 12 team sustainable comp. Reinvirograte genuine origin teams once more. Have four teams, Qld Reds, NSW Waratahs, Brumbies, Combined WA-Vict-SA compete in round robin for one spot in Super Rugby Finals against SANZA. Reduce the number of Wallabies fixtures. Not only does it reduce players careers, it also customises the fans to the highest level of rugby only. Get them to appreciate the domestic rugby like NRL does so well.
Charcoal
Guest
What are you talking about WCR? Accepting your figures, if the private education sector accounts for between 35-38% of education providers at the primary and secondary levels, what about the 62-65% in the public school sector? Are they to be ignored? This is my whole argument about the flawed policy of focusing on the private school sector and universities. Only a minority actually go on to university, including those from private schools. What about the tradies?
Working Class Rugger
Roar Guru
Charcoal, So if aligning or being sponsored by a Uni will reinforce the elitist stereotype then does it do similar for the League and A-League teams that also have similar sponsorship arrangements. I'm sick of this perception that anything to do with Uni must equal elitism. If you actually went to practically any Uni in the country you'd find most students come from fairly average backgrounds. It's the same with private education. This isn't the bloody fifties. The private education sector accounts for between 35-38% of education providers at the primary and secondary levels and it's continuing to absorb market share.
jeznez
Roar Guru
Interesting - very different from the Aussie rugby model - but almost exactly the same as the model our rugby club employed when I was in Singapore. I helped coach our U-9's, U-12's and U-15's while I was playing for the Singapore Cricket Club rugby section. I'm not involved with the youth section in HK (am coaching our Men’s 4th Grade side) but my HK Cricket Club rugby section also has a large mini's like the Mariners and the SCC programmes it starts with kids in the U-6's and aims to bring them through the juniors up to seniors in a co-ordinated pathway. The comment I will make for the Central Coast, Singapore and Hong Kong is that the associated clubs are able to focus on just a small area. The Waratahs are formed from the NSW Rugby Union – the resources for them to run juniors through to seniors just aren’t there across such a large area. Instead within Sydney we have regional junior clubs as well as the school systems. Players who graduate from those clubs and schools then proceed on to the Premier Clubs or if they are less ambitious the Subbies Clubs in the local areas. The best of the Premier players proceed to NRC and in turn the best proceed to Super Rugby and finally the Wallabies. It is very much a pyramidal structure with loose links – largely regional – between each successive level of seniority/representative level. I particularly note that the tight five positions in particular often have players reach their prime in their late twenties. Scott Fardy is a classic case making his Super Rugby debut in the year he turned 28 years old. Size and strength is such a critical component that having very young juniors in professional programmes is going to be incredibly hit and miss in relation to correctly targeting potential players. I like the model but I’m not sure it is easily transferrable. Certainly Southern Districts when I played for them had strong ties to the junior clubs in those areas – Burraneer Dolphins, Rockdale, Sylvania Bulldogs etc but that relationship was fostered through development officers visiting, getting the clubs involved in carnivals and engagement with representative sides. It wasn’t the grade club running the juniors which is the model we see up above.
ak
Roar Guru
The management needs to get revamped. They need to work like professionals which they unfortunately do not seem like today.
Midfielder
Guest
jeznez I think you in a sense answered your own and my question... park teams for me start at U 5 and go tho to the Over 45's... The U 5 to say U 15 is where base skills, an understanding of the workings, you become a long term fan etc... and it is in this area where the other codes are very strong and where rugby by comparison is poor ... Run your eye over this ...and scroll to the bottom... http://www.marinersdevelopment.com.au/
jeznez
Roar Guru
Cheers AD. So they have 5 months until kickoff and don't even name the teams for another three weeks? Scary.
Atawhai Drive
Roar Guru
Jeznez, as Anthony says above, there is still so much for the bidding franchises to do before they can consider entering a competition that is probably meant to start in August. The 2014 Shute Shield draw has been released and the Grand Final is set down for August 16. This is a bit later than the Grand Final in the year of the ARC, 2007. It was played on July 28 that year. I'm guessing that the NRC, if it goes ahead this year, will begin on August 23. Not much time left to get it sorted. And if it does fall over this year, what will the first-grade Shute Shield clubs do? Organise a second tournament to run into October, like the Trevor Allan Cup in 2007?
Justin3
Guest
Thats rubbish, how many All Blacks play in the NPC?
hog
Guest
In a nutshell Glenn Innes, Rugby will never compete with the 2 big boys soon to be 3 in Australia with the Top down approach from Intenationals and Super rugby, because the current set up will never be able to infriltate enough mainstream support. So at what stage do we not start examining what Super rugby is delivering to the code here, the competition does not even raise enough revenue in Australia to sustain the Super teams yet the other codes are all signing billion $ TV deals. Super rugby is do doing exactly the opposite of what it was suppose to do in Australia, it is slowly killing the game here.
jeznez
Roar Guru
I'd say the clubs used to prosper because they had lots of playing members and the lower grades drank the bar dry every Saturday in winter. Now the clubs have got rid of their lower grades and wonder why there isn't as much coming over the bar anymore.
jeznez
Roar Guru
That graphic implies the community game contributes three million to the ARU and gets 10 million back. Not sure if the community game has other funds that don't go up to the ARU in the first place. Agree with most of your post though Andy. Premier rugby should return to being fully amateur. Clubs should load up on as many numbers as they can - we used to have six grade sides and four colts when I joined Southo's. Great club spirit and plenty of money over the bar to keep the club healthy. Since the premier clubs have tried to be semi-pro they have buggered off their lower grades and wonder where everybody is. I'm excited that club footy will hopefully be returning to its roots.
Glenn Innes
Guest
Boy I am glad I am not Pulver if I was I would be in a dark room with a very bad migraine.I keep swinging on the NRC and feel the ARU are kind of damned if they do and damned if they don't. The big problem I see is how is it going to grab a celebrity obsessed culture when the handful of Rugby Players they actually know of are not playing in it. The second tier AFL and League comps draw a man and his dog everyone follows AFL/NRL other than family and friends and a few old barfly club stalwarts - so why will Rugby be any different? Rugby is stuck between a rock and a hard place..super Rugby works ok but the transnational nature of it means it will never be really mainstream...if Rugby is ever going to compete with the two big boys it needs a strong domestic League. Yet the nature of the sport with so much emphasis on internationals and then a transnational provincial comp makes it almost impossible to have one because the best players are never available .
Paul Crann
Guest
Shouldn't that be cheers bro
sheek
Roar Guru
Newcastle Rugby Union originally formed in 1888, although first club was formed in 1877.
sheek
Roar Guru
Well, I can do better - Qld Reds, ACT Brumbies, WA Force, Vic Rebels, NSW Waratahs & Sydney Fleet. Down the track you can add SA Black Falcons, EA (Newcastle) Wildfires. NSWRU formed 1874; QRU formed 1883; VRU formed 1888 (first time); WARU formed 1893 (first time); ACTRU formed 1974; SRU formed 1962; SARU formed 1932; Hunter-Newcastle (EA) formed (I think) 1875. So you see, these provincial rugby entities have been around a very long time. Just sadly very UN-developed! Neither NSW nor Sydney need to be east or west, north or south. They can aspire to all areas of Sydney. However, in saying that, with the name Fleet & an anchor as the emblem, their drawing area would be based around the waterways. Which is most places in Sydney bar Greater West.
colvin
Guest
Why has Bill got his finger in his ear?