The Australian Rugby Union is a sporting organisation that has repeatedly copped criticism.
While the areas of critique are many and varied, this is often for not being in touch with the real fans, being full of North Shore and Eastern Suburbs suits who care about GPS rugby and just generally not knowing what is going on at ground level.
It came as a welcome surprise when the ARU announced that they would be asking the fans for their opinions and to help shape the direction of rugby union in Australia over the next five years.
Unfortunately, the public survey was released a few weeks ago and some of the questions were, well, interesting to say the least.
The first question asked “Which statement best describes why you are involved in Rugby?” Not quite sure why the word rugby is capitalised there, but anyway the question isn’t what jumped out at me, it was the possible answers.
These answers include “I follow the Wallabies”, “I currently play Club Rugby” and “I previously played School Rugby”. At face value these answers are fair enough, but that is their problem, they don’t actually move beyond the surface.
If I asked someone why they’re involved in rugby and they told me it was because they followed the Wallabies I would respond with “why?” The answer doesn’t actually address the underlying reason as to why a person follows the Wallabies.
The situation is similar for the “I previously played School Rugby” answer. I can understand the thinking. A 14-year-old boy, let’s call him Tom, has never played or watched rugby in his life, he shows up at school and decides to play rugby.
Tom finds out that he actually really likes the sport and develops into a passionate supporter who plays for a club when he leaves school.
I understand this, but there is an underlying reason as to why he fell in love with the sport and continued his involvement with it. That is why there should have been an option such as “it has fostered lifelong friendships” or purely just because “it’s fun”. That is why Tom plays rugby once it is no longer compulsory, because he likes the environment in which the sport is based.
Simply stating “I previously played School Rugby” is far too simplistic and doesn’t give the ARU the information that it actually needs to understand why people are involved with the sport. In fact I fear that it will actually lead to them making decisions that actually harm the sport of rugby.
The suggested answers are symptomatic of the ARU’s past failures. An inability to look below the tip of the iceberg and at what is actually causing trends in the sport. This continues into question two, which asks why I watch and/or attend rugby games.
The answers to chose from include “I am a fan or member of a Super Rugby Franchise” and “I am a fan of the Wallabies”. I’m sure most people who are answering this survey are fans of the Wallabies and their respective Super Rugby franchise, finding out that 70 per cent of respondents watch rugby because they are fans means absolutely nothing to me.
What is important is to know why they are fans. Is it because of the free flowing nature of the sport or the contest between attack and defence at every ruck or maul?
There were some legitimate answers to this question though, such as “Family/friends are fans or members”. This is a legitimate answer because the respondent isn’t actually a fan, we don’t need to know why they enjoy rugby because they’ve stated they don’t. It would be interesting to find out how they could be converted from unwilling companion to engaged fan however that is not entirely relevant to this question.
The third question asking fans to rank the importance of the ARU’s five core values was fair enough, however there should have been an option for respondents to suggest their own value that they think is vital to future ARU success.
Questions five and six were also fairly on the money, they asked respondents to state how enjoyable rugby is to watch, on a scale of one to five, and then to rank a number of different proposals based on how much more entertaining they would make rugby.
The responses included “less time taken up with scrums/lineouts”, “ball in play more” and “simpler laws” all things fans seem to be clamouring for.
My chief concern with question five is not with the question but with how responses are analysed. Given that it is likely that most of the respondents are fans of rugby, there is a high chance that they are also the people who find the sport enjoyable.
They are the converted and I fear that the ARU will see that most respondents rated the enjoyment of watching rugby a four or five out five and trumpet how most Australian rugby fans think the sport is enjoyable to watch. If they do this they will be preaching to the converted and ignoring the very people that they should be targeting, those who don’t enjoy watching rugby.
Question nine was a question that really annoyed me. Like earlier questions, it wasn’t so much the question but the possible answers. The question asked fans to rank what classifies as success for Australian rugby over the next five years.
Two answers in particular bugged me, one stated “Wallabies winning the Rugby World Cup, ranking is irrelevant” and the other was “Wallabies maintaining a ranking in the top three in the world, year-on-year”. The two responses seem to imply that winning World Cups and maintaining a high ranking are mutually exclusive, that we can have one or the other.
They’re not. And the answers should have reflected this.
I understand that the answers are specifically asking what the public think is more important, World Cups or a high ranking, but I still don’t agree with it. If the administrators don’t think that Australia can be the best in the world on a year-on-year basis and World Cup winners, the Wallabies have no hope.
The other perplexing aspect of question nine was the answer “Increased positive media coverage of Rugby in Australia”. I’m not quite sure how positive media coverage is a sign of success. Are they claiming that positive media coverage is independent of results? Or is it dependent of results? It’s quite ambiguous and could easily have been worded better.
Question eleven drilled down further on question nine, asking the most important measure of success for the Wallabies over the next five years. One of the responses was “Winning more games than we lose across all teams internationally” and another being “Defeating New Zealand at least once every year”.
Those two responses are so mediocre it’s not funny. I seriously hope that no respondent selected either of those. We shouldn’t be striving to be average, to win 50 per cent of our games every year and beating New Zealand once a year. The Wallabies have done this over the past decade and look where it has got them, in serious decline.
The ARU needs to strive to ensure the Wallabies are the best team in the world, that they can beat the All Blacks on a regular basis and win and retain the Bledisloe Cup.
Another question in which one of the suggested responses is so preposterous that I am hoping it was included as a joke is question thirteen. It asked what the most important thing to grow the game in Australia is.
The fifth option was “Investing in the Rugby heartlands of NSW and Queensland, focusing on traditional Rugby Clubs and Schools”.
I’m hoping that even if anyone selected this box, it is ignored by the ARU because it is most definitely not the best strategy and you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to figure that out.
Rugby union will not expand and grow in Australia if we are to focus purely on NSW and Queensland and we won’t expand our talent base – which is currently on of Australian rugby’s primary problems.
This brings us to question 15, the final question of the survey which asked “Is there anything else you would like to tell us?” This is a reasonable question except for the fact that it included a 1000 character limit which really inhibits respondents’ ability to elaborate on their answers in the survey and explain what they think is wrong with Australian rugby and how to fix it.
If someone is taking the time to fill out this optional question, it is clear that they are a passionate fan with strong views as to how to improve rugby. They should be given an adequate number of words to get this message across.
Overall we should be praising what the ARU is doing, asking their fans, their paying customers, how rugby could be improved in this country, something many organisations are unwilling to do.
Unfortunately some of the possible responses to questions were not detailed enough to provide the ARU any useful information, while others were so absurd that they make you wonder why they were even possible answers in the first place.
Hopefully the ARU is able to generate some insightful answers and use them to establish a plan that sets Australian rugby up for the future.
hog
Guest
Agreed Ross, sorry about my rant, But it is a subject i feel strongly about. You make good points, I will will add that we have suffered from a top down approach that is finally coming home to roost. someone said that with rugby here we built the roof first, but with no walls to support it. Yes Super rugby has delivered a professional league for 20 years, but has failed to deliver the growth that is so vital to sustain the code. We have always taken the easy option, that is why i think it is a massive mistake neglecting the domestic side of the code here. The problem with the ARU is that it is always about the Wallabies, but they forgot that you need fans or grassroots or the Wallabies will simply not exist. In a nutshell, whatever set up we have, we cannot grow the code from the top down.
Ross
Guest
5 year exclusive, successive deals have a habit of yielding the situation we have. I imagine it looked attractive and easy 20 years ago and then every 5 years it was a matter of tweaking and negotiating and getting mildly better (seemingly) outcomes. We can beat a lot more than Japan and USA, those were the countries we would be ranked with if we stayed amateur. Moot point. Game is professional now, so the question remains, what is the best model and how do you get yourself their. The best athletes cost serious money. We see that. They can choose different codes when they are 14. Even the rugby players can choose different markets (countries) to play in. The administrators need to figure out if a truly professional domestic league is possible and commercially viable, then they need to save and plan for it and capitalise on their current funding model to get there. But they need to find the formula to grow the enthusiasm. And a fan shouldn't be limited to "loves the Wallabies" or "played in school" or "play for a club". NRL and AFL have successfully built a base of fans who never played the game. Something inclusive, attractive and accessible that leverages rugby's history and exploits its differentiators is what is called for. I guess we agree that the current administration seems to be administering a contract instead of planning for hyper growth and new models and reaching new markets... Soccer took a long hard look at itself in this country a decade ago and reinvented itself and is reaping massive rewards today.
hog
Guest
No I'm not kidding Ross, Because ask yourself exactly where Super rugby has got the code here. We are Broke, a sad 4th in the code wars, stuck on pay TV, Invisible to 90% of the population, still relying on private schools, declining participation, declining viewer numbers, 33,000 watched the Rebels last weekend on pay TV????. We have to flog the crap out of the Wallabies 15-18 tests a year just to pay the bills. So just ask yourself exactly what KPI's has Super rugby delivered to the code here. I never said it would be easy but for 20 years we've taken the easy option of Super rugby, while the other codes have built genuine domestic leagues that have delivered ten times more to each of their codes. Well so we can beat Japan and USA, great so what price have we paid for that wonderful privilege. Are we that scared of our product that is apparently taking over the world, but we cower in the thought of competing against the AFL/NRL. Its not about being as big as them, but having a sustainable domestic league that builds up over time and generates support and tribal passions and gives a better demographic spread than the 5 current teams. ffs we have just one professional rugby team in the whole of NSW. I never said don't play SA/NZ but ffs not in a domestic competition, ever heard of champions league. I never said go without Pay TV, but don't sell them the whole f____g farm so that you are so compromised that the whole comp is just set up to deliver a dividend to a pay TV company. Please tell me what business Manual that is in.!!!!! So no i was not kidding.
Ross
Guest
Hog, you are kidding right???? You think AUS rugby would have been better off over the last 20 years of professionalism without Super Rugby? Or do you still romantically wish the code was still amateur in AUS and all the Wallabies played in the Shute Shield week in week out? And in that case we'd be battling with teams like Japan and USA to see who could get the 15th spot in world rugby rankings! Or maybe you have/had an alternate model for professional rugby in AUS? If so, please share. Because if we went without pay TV and without the help of SA and NZ and tried a full blown professional domestic competition head to head with NRL and AFL, I shudder to think where we would be. The truth of all of this for rugby (and other sports) in the professional era is to be inclusive, attractive and accessible. Not too sure how this survey will garner the insights to figure that out. It sounds more like a way for the ARU board to get public opinions on their existing KPI's so in the future they can hold up their KPI's and say this is what we (the public) asked for (sic).
RobC
Roar Guru
Thanks Cameron. I thought the survey was a good initiative and most questions made sense. If I recall correctly, there was good questions about TV / streaming, about school / clubs, geographical spread, equal opportunity and national team The survey is now closed. Im interested to see what everyone else things. Finally, I think this should be an annual activity, and broadcast through every school, club, SR and ARU/WB social networks - both web and personal.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Rugby is also competing with 2 contact oval ball games, both which were basically born here whilst rugby was still in it's infancy. To make your comment "When rugby is growing all round the world it is it in its deathnell in Australia" you are completely ignorant of the world around you. Most of the places where rugby is booming, Football is the only competitor. Different games that appeal to different demographics. They also have populations large enough to support both codes well. London has a metropolitan population of 13 million. That's over half the population of Australia. Is it's the ARU's fault it happened to be located in a small country that was the birth place of AFL and well organised rugby league? (Which came about due to the RFU's arrogance did it not? Rugby here was just not as strong at the time).
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Wasn't there an option for us to write our own? I'm sure I noted at least once that focusing on junior club rugby was of the greatest importance.
Bakkies
Guest
The first decent thing you have said in a long while, the ARU has to go. Torn up and started again whether it as Rugby Australia with new statutes, governance, commercial approach, grows the game organically rather than through quick fixes and common sense. Forget this code wars (this isn't IT) rubbish and focus on Rugby and Rugby only.
Westie
Guest
This is what's wrong with oz rugby, grammar. Ffs.
PeterK
Roar Guru
I know it is the truth. However articles about Aust rugby for australians do not need constant gloating or jibing comments from kiwis. It is not helpful. It is just tr@lling in many cases. It certainly does not match the myth of humble gracious kiwis we hear about all the time.
Bfc
Guest
Yep...like staff surveys...ask the questions that will give the desired answer. "lies, damned lies and statistics...". The ARU is not as bad as FIFA...but...
sheek
Roar Guru
Hi Middie, I am feeling extremely frustrated at present, & have been for quite some time. I enjoy all the footy codes, but none inspire great passion in me. Rugby union used to be my favourite, but the game is losing touch with its constituents. At least in Australia. Each code is all okay up to a point, but each has flaws that hold it back. Rugby union just sucks on so many levels, particularly refs blowing their whistle for pedantic penalties & numerous scrum resets. Rugby league scrums on the other hand are a joke. While they are genuinely trying to construct & score more tries than in union, 'aerial' tries dominate because there's no space between attackers & defenders anymore. In world football, players try too hard to milk penalties with petulant & pathetic displays of hurt. Because it's a low-scoring game, there is often too much negativity. In Australian football, on the other hand, goals are plentiful, but finding a tight, close contest is often rare. So each code thrills a bit, & also frustrates a lot.
pjm
Roar Rookie
That's why we've been secretly funding NZ Rugby League.
Magic Sponge
Guest
They just sent the survey to gps schools. The aru should be defunct. When rugby is growing all round the world it is it in its deathnell in Australia. R.I.P Rugby. Super rugby is dying, 8000 at a Force match , We use to get10k at a club game.
sheek
Roar Guru
Cameron, From what I remember of the survey, as soon as I looked at the options available for many questions, not to mention some of the questions themselves, I couldn't shake the feeling that the 'fix' was in. By fix I mean the ARU had already decided what was important (to them) - Wallabies, super rugby, foxtel, sponsors, private school rugby - & the questions were designed to "steer" people to the findings the ARU wanted. They say in politics never ask a question of an opponent unless you know the answer first. By extension, never run a survey until you know the outcome you which to facilitate. But hey, I'm a jaundiced cynic.
sheek
Roar Guru
Well Pete, The truth is out there. Having our rugby bagged by Kiwis is something we Aussies have to suck up because, well, our rugby sucks. And has done so more often than not for 116 years of international rugby. We've produced many fine individuals, but not too many great teams. Compare this to NZ, which produces wonderful individuals & many great teams over its history of 112 years international rugby. That's the truth.
nickoldschool
Roar Guru
completely agree WNM. As a new aussie yet lifelong rugby fan I felt excluded in many questions/answers, which on one hand is fair enough as I am probably not their primary target but on the other just shows they are probably omitting people who love rugby, watch rugby at the stadium and on TV yet do not fit their traditional target. Many migrants from the P.I, NZ, SA, England etc may have felt the same (if they bothered looking at the questionnaire).
Groundhog Day
Guest
Couldn't agree more PeterK. Every day it's the same old comments which always try so hard to validate why NZ far superior to Australia in everything they do. Also initiated by the same old tired people.
Jerry
Guest
"someone having to show...by inference or by actual comment how poor australian rugby is in every way." Unless that "someone" is you Peter, you used the wrong word.
Akari
Roar Rookie
You obviously missed it when Roar brought it to our attention a couple of weeks back.