Spiro Zavos’ recent article, ‘The Australian Rugby Union should be stronger‘ was extremely frustrating, because I agreed wholeheartedly with one sentence and then completely disagreed with the next.
Firstly, why I agree.
The ARU are under pressure from all sides to make the most out of their limited resources.
The must grow the game, pander to the fans, players and advertisers, and try to fit in all their other commitments. To that end they have a tough task, but they can do better.
I agree that the Wallabies matches should be played in front of large, filled stadia rather than in front of a half-filled Skilled Park. Playing in front of a full stadium is worth a couple of points to the Wallabies, and the soccer leagues in Europe would seem to confirm that by punishing teams, for various offences, by playing in front of an empty stadium.
To suggest the ARU don’t listen to public opinion is probably true too. A combination of playing some games during the afternoon (let’s face it, a cold, wet afternoon is still nicer than a cold, wet night) and changing up the Rugby championship schedule might help. Possibly by holding the first Bledisloe at Suncorp, where the Wallabies have a good record, and also the first Bledisloe not necessarily be the opening game of the championship.
Secondly, why I disagree.
I fail to see how it is the ARU’s place to come out and say, ‘Well, Adam Ashley-Cooper is out injured as a result of that tackle so it was a fair decision.’ Surely, that should be a referee liaison’s job (whatever their title is), probably in there with the match report.
But, if the ARU were to say anything, it should go along the lines of…
John Eales: “The IRB defines a high tackle as ‘a player must not tackle (or try to tackle) an opponent above the line of the shoulders even if the tackle starts below the line of the shoulders. A tackle around the opponent’s neck or head is dangerous play. Sanction: penalty kick’.
“So, going by the IRB, you can see the tackle starts here and finishes here (points up around neck). Therefore the referee deemed it a high tackle. Being close to the line and given the match situation, it was then upgraded to a yellow card.”
Once again, I would have thought that was the domain of the broadcaster to explain it to the viewers live, or the refereeing body, but I’ll let it slide simply because someone should be doing it.
What makes even less sense is the suggestion that the outcome can validate or invalidate decisions. While it was a tragedy that Adam Ashley-Cooper was injured, it can’t be said that because he was injured the tackle was deserving of a yellow card. This statement is completely irrelevant, and if anything, this sort of comment only sets the code back.
Had he not have been injured would it have been less of a yellow card? The opposite argument for a lifting tackle would be that it didn’t cause an injury therefore the lifting tackling shouldn’t be penalised.
This thinking, thankfully, has (almost) disappeared from our game.
Even further, why would the ARU comment on a match featuring a French official and played between New Zealand and Argentina?
In summary, I seem to agree with Spiro on the macro but not the micro. It frustrates me because as an involved rugby fan – posting about it online in fact – it is exactly this uncertainty about how to proceed that isn’t helping our game.
Still, it invites discussion, so we should debate all aspects of the game, to discard the bad ideas and embrace the good.
Let’s do our part and keep the conversations going.
I can only assume The Roar will be given an honorary position on the Australian rugby board as of next year.
rugby fan
Guest
To start with why would the ARU have the wallabies pay in qld twice, They were never going to get anyone to the GC game knowing they had the all blacks in bris in October, (near sold out) To come out and say there is no support is crazy, if the only game was on the GC it would have been a sell out, Poor scheduling by the ARU.
Andrew Kennard
Roar Pro
Good points about television revenues and ground attendances Train w/o station. There is obviously overlap between the two, and is a very detail specific issue that I wrote an article on this specifically a while back. As the only afternoon game this season, does anyone have viewer numbers for the France test in Sydney?
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Or perhaps it was difficult to get into because it is the least interesting game in the Wallaby calendar with almost nothing to play for.
Reality
Guest
Yes money is in TV ratings, but TV ratings are affected by the crowd. I know if I watch a game on TV with a large vocal crowd I get more from it. Watching the latest NZ vs SA game I was on the edge of my seat the whole game (with no skin in the game I might add), the hairs on my neck stood up as the crowd got going. Conversely watching the Gold coast game was completely the opposite, it was very difficult to get into and I kept channel surfing.
The Sheriff
Guest
I think Colin has REPETITIVE ATTENTION DISORDER. It is curable with some swift editing.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Colin whilst I agree, I don't think you need to say it 4 times.
Colin
Guest
I think the ARU are doing a lot right unfortunately the growth of rugby often hinges on the wallabies success or failure its such a shame that growth is based on this. I think their investment in grassroots rugby will definately start paying dividends in the near future. Lets hope the NRC is a success financially as well (undoubtedly it wont make money now) and it helps us provide a greater depth in our super rugby teams I can see substantial growth in player depth already occurring there are a lot of positives domestically, lets hope the ARU doesn't take their foot off the pedal. Locally in Perth I would love to see members equity packed out for a real test match Subi oval just isn't a rugby venue sorry its not, its a aussie rules venue. Why not keep the domestic schedule at the venues where local super rugby teams play makes more sense for me?
Colin
Guest
I think the ARU are doing a lot right unfortunately the growth of rugby often hinges on the wallabies success or failure its such a shame that growth is based on this. I think their investment in grassroots rugby will definately start paying dividends in the near future. Lets hope the NRC is a success financially as well (undoubtedly it wont make money now) and it helps us provide a greater depth in our super rugby teams I can see substantial growth in player depth already occurring there are a lot of positives domestically, lets hope the ARU doesn't take their foot off the pedal. Locally in Perth I would love to see members equity packed out for a real test match Subi oval just isn't a rugby venue sorry its not, its a aussie rules venue. Why not keep the domestic schedule at the venues where local super rugby teams play makes more sense for me?
Colin
Guest
I think the ARU are doing a lot right unfortunately the growth of rugby often hinges on the wallabies success or failure its such a shame that growth is based on this. I think their investment in grassroots rugby will definately start paying dividends in the near future. Lets hope the NRC is a success financially as well (undoubtedly it wont make money now) and it helps us provide a greater depth in our super rugby teams I can see substantial growth in player depth already occurring there are a lot of positives domestically, lets hope the ARU doesn't take their foot off the pedal. Locally in Perth I would love to see members equity packed out for a real test match Subi oval just isn't a rugby venue sorry its not, its a aussie rules venue. Why not keep the domestic schedule at the venues where local super rugby teams play makes more sense for me?
Colin
Guest
I think the ARU are doing a lot right unfortunately the growth of rugby often hinges on the wallabies success or failure its such a shame that growth is based on this. I think their investment in grassroots rugby will definately start paying dividends in the near future. Lets hope the NRC is a success financially as well (undoubtedly it wont make money now) and it helps us provide a greater depth in our super rugby teams I can see substantial growth in player depth already occurring there are a lot of positives domestically, lets hope the ARU doesn't take their foot off the pedal. Locally in Perth I would love to see members equity packed out for a real test match Subi oval just isn't a rugby venue sorry its not, its a aussie rules venue. Why not keep the domestic schedule at the venues where local super rugby teams play makes more sense for me?
Colin
Guest
I think the ARU are doing a lot right unfortunately the growth of rugby often hinges on the wallabies success or failure its such a shame that growth is based on this. I think their investment in grassroots rugby will definately start paying dividends in the near future. Lets hope the NRC is a success financially as well (undoubtedly it wont make money now) and it helps us provide a greater depth in our super rugby teams I can see substantial growth in player depth already occurring there are a lot of positives domestically, lets hope the ARU doesn't take their foot off the pedal. Locally in Perth I would love to see members equity packed out for a real test match Subi oval just isn't a rugby venue sorry its not, its a aussie rules venue. Why not keep the domestic schedule at the venues where local super rugby teams play makes more sense for me?
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Listen mate I honestly stopped reading at "To suggest the ARU don’t listen to public opinion is probably true too. A combination of playing some games during the afternoon (let’s face it, a cold, wet afternoon is still nicer than a cold, wet night) and changing up the Rugby championship schedule might help." Do you realize that night test matches get more viewers than daytime test matches. The more viewers they get is greater than the more attendees they get during the day. Therefore by playing at night they clearly do listen to public opinion. Further to that, TV revenue is a greater source of income than attendance revenue. High attendance is good when it is in addition to maximized TV revenue. If it is at the expense of viewers, it is counter productive. ARU is strapped for cash, therefore they need to placate there largest benefactor, the TV broadcasters. The higher the ratings, the higher value they can earn on the next TV deal. It's that simple. Talking about afternoon test matches is all well and good, if we want to ignore the primary source of revenue.
Lostintokyo
Guest
Spiro often gets the most 'hits' on The Roar. Controversy is Spiro's middle name and this is one reason for his success as a writer on The Roar, Herald or books. I for one am glad we have him writing on The Roar. We may not always agree with his logic but his aim is to be thought provoking and he succeeds week in week out. Have been reading Spiro for a few decades now and will miss it if he retires. Hang in there "ole Spiro".
Parra
Guest
"This thinking, thankfully, has (almost) disappeared from our game." Extremely well said.
Scrumpoacher
Guest
Get a new marketing and PR dept ARU-problem solved...
I agree Australia should play in the stadia that will provide the most spectators, wherever it may be. As for the high tackle, the French referee etc. Who cares, let them say what they want, the game is done, the result in the books and nothing said now makes any real difference anyway.
Shop
Roar Guru
Exactly what I think when I read most of Spiro's articles!! He can either be absolutely correct and accurate when making certain points and at other times base his arguments on complete speculation. He is always interesting because I never know if we're going to get 'good Spiro' or 'bad Spiro'!
Harry Jones
Expert
Totally agree on NOT using subsequent injury (direct or indirect) as criteria or retroactive proof of illegality of the play on the field. Plenty of legal moves hurt players; and vice versa.