The National Rugby Championships (NRC) almost here. The structure has been decided, the teams announced, the rosters named, the draw finalised. Will it work?
Time will tell, although I suspect that the initial season, at least, will be dogged by the lack of tribalism that comes with long-term support, and a lack of exposure that comes with a single broadcast game on pay television.
Will sponsors get and stay on board? Will the crowds turn out to the game? That will be the real indicator of success.
A third tier competition in whatever form it takes is a necessity for the game in Australia. But is the NRC the right format? I am not so sure.
Based on the bastard children of established but financially insecure semi-amateur clubs, the ARU has created a competition that will struggle to gain the excitement of the masses. In Sydney, and to a lesser extent Brisbane, the NRC has the capacity to diminish the traditional club competitions.
The NSW and Queensland teams, by and large, are born of odd mergers of traditional rivals leaving supporters with an odd conundrum: if my friend is to support a team that incorporates Warringah, is he therefore supporting those dastardly folks from Manly? Perhaps he should conclude that this team really does not represent him, and does nothing for his club.
Apathy is a killer for a commercial sporting competition. The rugby will be of a decent quality, for sure, but if I want to catch up on a good game over the weekend involving teams that mean nothing to me, the European competitions are only a few weeks away.
The ARU did not need to take on the traditional competitions, leaving uncertain fan-bases and the undoubted future internal bickering and power struggles that come with mergers. There is an alternative.
Universities are the largely untapped resource purpose built for rugby union in Australia.
Basing the teams around universities has massive upsides for Australian rugby, and the Abbott Government’s proposed changes to the university sector, like them or not, has opened a huge door that rugby union can leverage.
The Government’s changes have created a sense of competition in the higher education sector, meaning promotion of universities will be fundamental. This is the reason for the success of college sport in America: the colleges want to be involved because they need their school’s name to be known, and people passionate about the school.
The Government’s changes inherently move higher education in Australia towards the American system, and the Americans have made an art out of exploiting that system. We can learn from their approach.
To be clear, I make no judgement on the Government’s changes. But it is what it is.
Even without the changes to higher education, university involvement in rugby makes sense. Rugby may wish to broaden its appeal to the masses, but rather than try to throw away the private school label, maybe its time to embrace it and extend it to universities.
The reality is that most rugby union watchers in Australia remain to be university educated. Rugby is not going to win the war of the west, at least not yet. Rugby needs to shoot for the money.
Universities come with a ready made fan-base of present and former students, many of whom may have some spare cash around to throw towards sponsorship, established sporting facilities, a desire to promote, and importantly, a distinguishing feature from the traditional club competitions such to allow those competitions to retain pride in their place.
My Warringah friend could easily follow both his beloved Rats and his alma mater, Macquarie Uni.
The American system, of course, will not be a perfect fit for Australia. Not all players could be students. An under-23 competition would be enjoyable, but hardly third tier, and unlikely to gain the necessary popularity.
A quota system of present students would make more sense, mixing young and up-and-coming stars with the stalwarts of the club rugby game, along with a smattering of professionals not involved in the national team – in this regard, not unlike the NRC.
A requirement linking the under-23 players to the university would also make sense – scholarships would ensure not only the link to the university, but also mean that rugby is populated by persons with ready-made careers when their playing careers end.
It would also lessen the need for large player payments, with the other incentives at the school’s disposal. Sponsorship would also be a necessity, which does not exist in quite the same way in the American system.
Some universities in Australia already have a strong link to the game: Sydney University, University of Queensland and the home of the Brumbies, University of Canberra, come to mind. UC in particular, with no great history in rugby (UC does not even compete in the Canberra rugby competition – the University team is based at the Australian National University, and not UC), has reaped the benefits of aligning itself with the game, and there is a lesson in that.
Importantly, universities have an established history upon which to build support from the outset. Rivalries would be strong from the start; allegiances set.
The single biggest difficulty facing the NRC, getting people to support their team, is immediately offset with university allegiances.
Reducing club rugby to a fourth tier system is not in Australian rugby’s interest. By keeping the same season timing as set for the NRC so that the competitions are not on at the same time, with a completely different set of parameters, club rugby and a university-based NRC can stand side by side.
The NRC will still be the third tier – but not in club rugby’s place. Simply put, they would be different concepts and there would be no need for them to compete.
Rugby needs to embrace what it can, and universities have the desire and facilities, while rugby needs the money that university graduates bring without disrupting the grassroots.
hog
Guest
Apologies to Mike & Sheikh, next time i shall read the post more thoroughly.
midfielder
Guest
Sheek Thanks for your kind comment .Recently we n Hog discussed the lack of critical evaluation of key admin directions I have the perfect example for you Will post link next time I see you post. On the heavy lifting Tis sadly true
Chivas
Guest
For the record Bakkies, I didn't slip into name calling, until you lowered the tone. I have nothing further to say to you. You understand rugby in NZ and Austtalia better than anyone else, so who could add anything more to it. Certainly not me. The fact that you need to ask questions I have already covered says it all. If your took your hand off it for a moment, you might get that. Seems like you have a firm grip of it, so I guess you have that is why you think others ought to. As I said, there is nothing wrong with using available facilities. What I was saying was the extent of it. Still this conversation has already gone past the point of reasonableness, so go at it as you want.
Bakkies
Guest
Sheek spot on that's one of the reasons why I got annoyed at Chivas above. The game in Australia isn't self sufficient and has relied on other countries for so long. University ties might not be ideal in some eyes but at least it's coming from inside Australia. Not NZ, not SA, not the Lions. The war chest from the 2003 RWC might have created a completely different path but the money is gone. Has been for some time. Even the stubborn stuck in their ways UAR has a national comp without being tied to an alliance or relying on other unions. However their faults lies elsewhere. Their attitude of clinging on to amateurism over a long period of time in the pro era suits the Zero Gain and Magic Sponge types.
Bakkies
Guest
'National comp doesn’t have to be club based, although I concede that’s how it’s developing. Especially in the professional world. Provincial comps tend to work like a senate, one per city/region irrespective of population size. Not really practical in the professional world. National club comps work like a general assembly (house of reps), more clubs being located where the greater the population, or interest, in a particular sport.' Sheek the problem is that Australian Rugby is not like Aus Cricket where they could bring in states from the initial three (Vic, NSW and SA) or SA Rugby that can form a league system with over a dozen provinces with clubs feeding to them and adapt the model to suit how the game is changing. Sure Queensland and Tasmania took years to win the title but they still contributed players to the test side and recruited overseas stars to play for them which boosts the profile of the Shield. That's why a provincial system wouldn't work historically until say now where there are 5 teams incorporating a quasi national championship in the Aus Super Rugby conference. The talented players were and still are in the district clubs in the cities so splitting up NSW and Qld in to regional areas to create a sort of provincial competition within the two main Rugby states would have been a challenge. That way wouldn't have worked long term either (central west, monaro, new england, GC, FNQ, etc). Those regional areas produce players in doses but they couldn't compete in a league against the city teams. As full time workers it would have costed those regional areas time to compete. So it had to stem from the district clubs in the cities. They couldn't agree to it. Now they don't have the funds so they have to pool resources and unite with their local rivals to compete. Queensland and NSW were still there as rep sides but you couldn't have them play each other 14 times a season. Even O'Neill would get tired of that. Your last point in the quote validates my point.
Bakkies
Guest
'the club needs to be its own entity and in this I disagree with the Canberra Uni label,' They are the sponsor though. If they paid for naming rights that's what they get. That is the reality of Australian Rugby. SA and Australia carry on this necessary evil.
Bakkies
Guest
I am not coming across as well? Well you are a k..bh...d for getting so defensive about questions that I raised to YOU about NZ Rugby because YOU brought it in to the discussion. All you did was get defensive and come across as a patronising p...k. All I said was this 'As a side do you think that the NZRU and the Super Rugby teams have the money and land to build their own high performance facilities to match what Massey already provides? How many teams in NZ own their own training grounds? If not why not use facilities that are already there and just upgrade them. If unis have them then so be it.' So get a grip chump. Rollaway, exactly.
sheek
Guest
Midfielder, Once again you have articulated the matter very well. That's very impressive word imagery - "as long as someone else does the heavy lifting" - this is precisely the attitude of folk in Australian rugby.And has been for a long time. It began back in the 70s when Qld & NSW used NZ provinces to piggy-back their pseudo two-team national comp.Although you could argue back then it was wise. Then Australian rugby used both NZ & SA to piggy-back their pseudo national comp through super rugby. Australian rugby goes just fine, as long as someone else is doing the donkey work for us! At some point we are going to have to stand on our own feet. The NRC is a step in the right direction, but again, there are far too many questions surrounding the makeup of some of these teams.
sheek
Guest
Zero Gain, Nothing has been said about rugby becoming the no. 1 sport, at least not from me. It's about Australian rugby being the best that it can be, not better than anyone, or everyone, else. Obviously we (you & I) have very different ideas on how Australian rugby can fulfill its potential.
sheek
Guest
Fair enough jeznez, But it is my frustration that too many Australian rugby fans appear to live in a bubble.
paul craggie
Guest
If you think there is only 6% unemployment, it is not I that wears the blinkers Nic old boy but I do appreciate your education lesson on the global fallout of the GFC, I will reflect on your thoughts next time I am stuck in another traffic jam on my way to Allianz or ANZ.
RollAway7
Guest
Having lived in Australia for 8 years now I have come to understand the unique (only to Aus) divide in class to sport. Its very interesting to study from the outside but if the Wallabies are to remain a top tier rugby nation the talent needs to increase. For this to happen you need two things, the culture/class split needs to be eradicated and an effective nation club competition. So most of you are right doesn’t matter which side of the argument. First off lets deal with the national comp, it needs to be national so it can suck in players from around the country. This will increases the player pool and tribal support. Now the reality of it is, and this can’t be side stepped the ARC failed due to money, the ARU went through a tough time and killed off the ARC. Incorporating the universities strengthens the clubs financially and adds a source of talent feed. The NRC needs to be self sustainable to avoid another cost cut if the ARU suffers hard times. Joining forces with Uni’s\longterm sponsors to strengthen these clubs is a smart choice as long as it does not dominate the brand, the club needs to be its own entity and in this I disagree with the Canberra Uni label, it does not represent Canberra in my eyes. The NRC should be above uni rugby but not isolated from it. In 5-10 years from now when these clubs have built some support and built strong brands they can have a symbiotic relationship with universities as long as the club remains for everyone. With a brand you can start to change the cultural/class split but it has to start at junior levels you can’t change this from the top down, its ingrained. With a brand you can bring it to all schools not just private schools but it would take heavy involvement from the clubs and the ARU, no to mention money. In the end this can be addressed now but will take a 15-20 years to see real results. In the end the first and most important thing is to keep the NRC alive and for that it needs money/facilities and talent, without these the NRC won’t survive a weak wallaby RWC cycle and you stand even less of a chance to change the culture/class split. The Clubs must use any means possible to become self sustainable. When this is achieved you can start the long term project of changing the “rugby is for rich people” mentality. Junior rugby levels upto under 18’s: The NRC clubs need to provide free training for junior coaches, professional players need to be heavily involved too. The club should hold annual competitions for the regional schools under the club brand. Uni Rugby: Already has programs in place and can be fed from the NRC junior club comps. NRC: Fed by junior comps and Uni rugby programs Super rugby: fed by NRC and Uni Wallabies fed by all of it.
hog
Guest
When you say “the NRC will end up being nothing more than a feeder comp to the Super teams”, yes, that’s the point. The Super teams are a feeder comp to the Wallabies and the Wallabies are what draws money into the ARU so that it can be fed back into Super/NRC/4th tier rugby. Sorry Mike what part of the above statement does not state that the Wallabies are not the main revenue driver.
RollAway7
Guest
Also Chivas as a side note, Bakkies was not talking about NZ until you brought it in, then you accuse him of bringing NZ into the discussion?
RollAway7
Guest
Chivas I think its clear that he was not talking about NZ, in NZ rugby does not complete with other codes, there is a rugby field on every block in NZ. In Aus rugby money/talent split is an issue, if clubs are aligned with Uni's I don't see a problem but the club name should not have the words "uni" in it, this is where I agree. The club should represent the region and can be aligned/sponsored by whom ever fronts cash/facilities/talent.
TahDan
Roar Guru
The central thesis presented unfortunately seems to assume that the US tertiary sporting culture can some how be transplanted to Australia, where people's association with their alma maters are far less defining and tribal.
Hoges
Guest
Really? Why bother with this - the horse has bolted. Furthermore, if you put teams out as UQ, Sydney Uni and Melb Uni you would completely alienate the rest of the rugby supporters in those cities. Also, you insult so many people by assuming they are university educated to like rugby. Just confirms the ridiculous, elitist opinion I'm afraid.
dave
Guest
whoever wrote this is either very old and out of touch with what university is like now-a-days or has never attended university. Either way will never work....
Daz
Guest
Bernie you should get out more and take a look at the sport through the eyes of non-fans. It's not how I see it and I want it to succeed but oftentimes it's the people not buying your product who can give you the most valuable insights.
Marlins Tragic
Guest
NSW Uni is associated with the NSW Country side