How do the ARU ensure the best Wallabies stay in Australia, while making certain that the remaining players in the Super Rugby competition are well paid enough not to leave?
Where does the ARU get the money to financially compete to keep its best Wallabies playing in Australia and from being plundered by cashed up French and UK clubs?
I wrote a similar article a year ago suggesting a revised model for the ARU to adopt. The ARU is having more difficulty in protecting the game in Australia, because it’s current model is too grandiose as the financially strapped ARU does not have enough money to do everything.
The ARU’s biggest brand and the biggest money generator is the Wallabies. It’s obligation is to protect this brand at all costs.
The simple fact is the ARU cannot afford to keep the whole squad together. This position will only to deteriorate as the gap between the money in Australia versus the big money available overseas is only going to widen.
The lure of a Wallaby jersey is important, but clearly there is a price on that too.
I am thinking of the most recent departure of Kane Douglas, but Ben Mowen and Digby Ioane also come to mind.
So what should the ARU do?
I think it is time to consider tweaking the current Wallaby eligibility rules.
Why not allow a player having played 50+ Tests for Australia to be permitted to play overseas and still be eligible to be selected for the Wallabies.
This will keep the bulk of the Wallabies playing in Australia in the Super Rugby competition building the all-important combinations, as well as keeping an eye on their workloads.
The other benefit to the ARU is it would free up their cash reserves from having to pay the most expensive top ups for the top 10 players of a squad. The ARU could shed the cost of many of the top 10 top ups and reduce this squad down to say 25 players or have 50 players on less money. It would be interesting to see how the numbers work.
The other benefit is that the Wallaby selectors would have the luxury to choose from the best talent onshore and select the overseas Wallabies if need be.
I think this would maintain the strength of the Wallabies and maintain the international standing of Australia as the competition for the best players heats up.
I also think by providing a goal to those players and managers approaching 50+ Tests would keep them in Australia longer and for less money.
BeastieBoy
Guest
Dont give any of them ARU topups. Let them just negotiate with the super rugby teams. If they want to go let them. Pick the wallabies from Australian players playing overseas as well. There will be a saturation point. Overseas will eventually introduce quotas. Make all the super teams privately owned so they get proper management. Change the ARU to the Australian International Rugby Union as that is what interests them. Set up a separate domestic governing body with separate directors.
BeastieBoy
Guest
Dont give any of them ARU topups. Let them just negotiate with the super rugby teams. If they want to go let them. Pick the wallabies from Australian players playing overseas as well. There will be a saturation point. Overseas will eventually introduce quotas. Make all the super teams privately owned so they get proper management. Change the ARU to the Australian International Rugby Union as that is what interests them. Set up a separate domestic governing body with separate directors.
Redbull
Guest
The problem seems to be the very fact that the wallabies are the ARUs prime source of income. With a stronger domestic competition the money would follow. This will only happen if the best players are encourged to stay by the current selection policies
hoqni
Guest
I agree with Simon. Ioane, Giteau, Genia, Cooper, and soon O'Connor can all go play in Europe, but yet be available for subsequent RWC.
richard
Guest
Simon,if you come up with the answer,can you pass it on to the NZRU.
Redback
Guest
Aus and NZ need to scrap the current super rugby model and play in a pacicfic comp. Include 6-8 teams from both aus and nz 3-4 from the pacific and asia. localise the comp and introduce private investors and govt support throughout the pacfic and asia. There is no reason with asia included there could not be a 20 team comp. free to air tv and pay tv can share the rights. Scrap the test matchs with the northern hemisphere until Nov and test between Sa,NZ,Arg and the pacific can be in October generating the money that needed for rugby to remain competitve with northern rugby. Some will say there arnt the players but allow players to play for any team.
Danoz
Guest
What about allowing private money into the NRC? A large amount of the money overseas is private money, and its working for them, so why not in Oz? I am sure that something could be worked out between the ARU, Super Franchises and private equity to reduce the allure of OS. It may even entice some more to come south.
Combesy
Roar Guru
interesting, but I don't see it working. Ben Mowen had only play 10 or so test, so nothing was going to keep him and douglas had played less than 50 test. The only people its going to benefit are those that are towards the end of their international career anyway. Or have young wallabies that have been playing for some time like cooper and JOC go overseas for big money at the detriment of local super rugby franchises..
Stray Gator
Roar Rookie
An interesting hypothesis, Simon. How certain are you, though, that: a) the ARU would free up cash reserves by not paying top-ups for the squad's top 10 players? b) the Wallaby selectors would select overseas-based players, confident they would be made available by their other employer(s)?