It was hardly going to be a topic that quietly faded away into the night. So, should the Western Sydney Force happen?
“Outgoing NSW Waratahs chief executive Greg Harris says the ARU should consider removing the Western Force from the Super Rugby competition and adding a second Sydney team,” the Sydney Morning Herald reported.
In the wake of Harris’ comments, the founding scribe of this very site jumped on the ‘Western Force at Parramatta’ bandwagon on Monday.
As a western Sydney fella myself, I’d love to join Spiro, but this is a complicated picture and it’s not clear at all a move should be made.
If there’s a person in rugby who should be able to judge the fortunes of one Super Rugby team and the potential of another, it’s Greg Harris. The departing Tahs boss was chief of the Rugby Union Players Association, and CEO of the Western Force before that. He has been on both sides of the administrative fence, so his claims are worth examining. (Side note: this was the fifth article I have seen referencing a not-yet-released ARU strategic plan.)
Taking a closer look at the conundrum is like taking a peek through the crack in a theatre curtain and seeing the set replacement in action – it jolts you out of your suspended disbelief.
In 2015, the somewhat surprising success of the Wallabies and having two teams playing like real finals contenders in Super Rugby papered over some of the game’s cracks.
The situation at the Reds, as I recounted last week, was enough to bring everyone back to Earth. The notion of closing or moving a club even more so.
Despite rugby running as a professional sport for nigh on 20 years now, the Queensland situation and other coaching and administrative appointments in the game show there is still a clubby culture. Now the financial state of the game is laid bare after a CEO of two teams says one is so desperate it should shut down and move.
In Monday’s Australian Financial Review’s John Stensholt dropped a few data points that provide context to the comments from Harris. He mentioned that not a single Super Rugby team made a profit last year. That is worrying.
The Waratahs made the semi-final and the year before won a final but can’t break even. The Brumbies have had an extended run of success, but don’t break even. The Force haven’t been financially buoyant since the days of the damaging Firepower debacle. The Rebels have just been privatised and I hold out hope they can make it work.
On top of that news, Stensholt revealed the ARU sent suits from Accenture to examine the books of each Super Rugby team. Clearly they don’t think it’ll turn around tomorrow.
Yes, rugby will get some extra TV money soon, but I’d expect most of that to be burned up just trying to keep our players in a market where Kurtley Beale can command over $1 million, and others who reach 60 caps will look at moves overseas.
Moving a team to western Sydney might be a bold financial-boosting move, but bins years and years of work creating a beachhead in the Perth market. Ultimately, I don’t think the case can be made right now that rugby has a sufficient toehold in western Sydney to be any more successful in the long term.
The NSWRU and Waratahs have fairly roundly neglected the NRC and the west. Clubs in Sydney are as busy fighting one another and the ARU as they are building a solid presence in the suburbs from Parramatta and further west. An opening round Shute Shield game will be played at Camden, so some effort is there, but to call what rugby has in western Sydney a grassroots movement would be an overstatement.
Put simply, if Perth cannot yet organically support a professional rugby team, neither can western Sydney.
But there are some pros to moving the team.
Western Sydney is a much bigger, and growing, market than Perth. That might be more attractive to sponsors and television rights-holders. The Force versus Brumbies match in Perth last Friday night was out-rated by the 5:30pm Blues versus Hurricanes game – by almost 50 per cent. That is not a good look at all. It also says something about the Brumbies’ pulling power, a successful team but in the smaller Canberra market.
Parramatta Stadium is being rebuilt and would be a natural size and fit for a western Sydney Super Rugby team, with new corporate facilities built in. That’s a plus. So would the ability for more players to live in Sydney, or on the east coast, and play for another franchise besides the Waratahs, Reds and Brumbies. There would be a player retention advantage at a Parramatta-based team over the Force in Perth.
The Waratahs as an organisation have not worked hard on western Sydney over the years. A lot of rugby fans would be willing to at least partially switch allegiance for a team that is more conveniently located – the Tahs have pulled all games from Stadium Australia – and one that specifically tries to win them over. That is a significant superficial audience readily available to be won over.
And in the long term, western Sydney is basically an untapped market as far as rugby goes. The number of young footballers across the region who end up playing rugby league, that might have otherwise played rugby if their fathers had anything to do with it, must number in the thousands every year.
That is untapped. But it has been untapped for rugby for decades and no one has seemed serious about doing something about it. We aren’t even digging test wells, let alone seriously mining this area. Which is probably a plus to Perth, unless something changes; they’ve had years of putting in the work now.
On the flip side, Force fans would absolutely revolt if their team was taken from them after ten years. It would be a waste of the work already done.
The ARU just gave the Force $800,000 for IP rights – whatever accounting name rights column on the spreadsheet it falls under – pulling the plug is eating that investment now.
One of rugby’s unique selling points to fans, sponsors and investors is the sport’s national and international footprint. Pulling back from the western frontier subtracts from that argument, and while it is a peripheral consideration, it is more important than some people realise.
And as I explained above, western Sydney really is beyond the infrastructure of rugby right now. Perth deserves to keep their team until a network is established in western Sydney that at least matches, if not outstrips, theirs.
And at that point, after more years of work, wouldn’t it make sense just to expand rugby’s footprint, rather than shift it?
Let Perth keep their team.
Rugby should work in western Sydney for its own sake, not for the sake of a superficial commercial boost. Grow the game, don’t play accounting games.
Invest in western Sydney, make rugby known in public schools, and develop clear pathways through the neglected Shute Shield clubs. Make it worthwhile for players to stay and reward Penrith, Parramatta and West Harbour for developing them. Put down roots. And then when the time is right, expand.
Mel R
Guest
Well said PF' realistically speaking having a look at the demographic here in WA would tell you that rugby aside from soccer does have a high potentilal market! What with all the saffas, kiwis( and islanders) and brits here we certainly have the potential for growth.Especially if eastern teams can resist the urge to poach our players!RugbyWA is trying and I believe we will get the developement right coming through eventually.Coach Foley's pursuit of a new expansive game would be great if it filters through to the junior grades.I reckon we could be on to something.Here here to investment first in our grassroots rather than simple band aid solutions.Transfer WF?...no way man!
Chivas
Guest
Rebel, who are these innocent parties you speak so loosely of. The Western Force, the Western Force fans... or the author of a spurious piece, which you are purporting to be an innocent piece of journalism, totally without bias or agenda. Saying what you think I have an issue with or don't is hardly consistent with your commentary about jumping to conclusions about what someone thinks or doesn't think. If you are saying that Spiro is responsible for lobbing grenades without any consideration of the parties he is offending, then we are in agreement. add to that, that I don't have an issue with Spiro taking a controversial position, but without being able to debate it openly and honestly is hardly an opinion I tend to give a lot of credence to. As a result I certainly think there is an agenda in play, because in my experience, journalists who lob grenades don't do so innocently as your comments seem to suggest. Your comments also don't seem to be directed at Spiro or include him but rather at others, like TWAS, PeterK or Brett. But if I am wrong you have my apologies. Finally, I agree that this site would get bogged down if everything had to be analysed in terms of bias and agenda. But when someone comes out with big sweeping statements of this nature it is quite natural and normal for them to be measured in those terms. And personally I have no issue with requesting that someone states if they have a conflict of interest and discuss their bias or agenda.
Crazy Horse
Roar Pro
Real Rugby in WA, that played at the clubs, has exploded since the advent of the Western Force. Despite the Force being denied the advantages granted to the Rebels and not having a fawning Sydneycentric ARU the game continues to grow in WA. In fact the biggest problem in WA is not recruiting players. It's finding grounds to put them on. This beat up was started last week by a incredibly biased Sydney journalist. Someone so biased she did not include a single shot of the Force in her report leading up to the last Force V Waratahs match in Perth (that the Force won). This despite having to drive past the Force training grounds to get to where the Tahs were training.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
No. You just think 2 + 2 = 10. Squirrel claimed that NZRU spend money on grassroots and premier clubs. I asked what they spend on premier clubs and gave the figure on what they did, and what they will spend on grassroots. I didn't specifically say it was premier rugby or grassroots. Considering I have repeatedly said that premier clubs should not get funding, why would you assume I am saying that they are? Considering we have discussed these exact figures repeatedly, why would you assume that's what I meant.
concerned supporter
Guest
TWAS, you said 'Train Without A Station said | March 17th 2016 @ 8:29am | Report comment Really? What do the NZRU grant to their premier clubs? The ARU puts $4M a year previously and is upping that to $10M a year. Reply Your answer is misleading & deceptive,
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
No you have. Squirrel said that the NZRU put money into grassroots. I asked what they put into their premier clubs only and noted the ARU spent $4M on grassroots.
concerned supporter
Guest
TWAS, AGAIN you got it wrong. The ARU paid COMMUNITY RUGBY $4 M PREMIER RUGBY NIL
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Sheek How has the system worked reasonably well? When it was at it's peak and Shute Shield was the 3rd tier Australia had one of it's worst ever periods (2004-2013). You can say the move to a system when players come out of High School into academies should never have happened, but that's what happens with the best NRL and AFL players. So to compete with them for talent you need to do something. You repeatedly ignore my comment that players won't just ignore other opportunity and slog away in club rugby in hope of being spotted because you say so. It also ignores the fact that Shute Shield has not properly prepared players for the level above and that's been shown repeatedly through players stepping up, and being well behind. This system is close to mirroring the NZ system, which is more successful at preparing players. Rebel I agree that Shute Shield brings in some players. I agree it always will in fact. But in any business you have to look at return on investment when you have limited funds. Under the current limited funds we need to focus on the areas that bring the best return (more fans) and most elite players. As for Radike Samo, he came back because McKenzie signed him at the Reds. He didn't slog away in club rugby for a shot. He just picked up a bit of match fitness before coming back to Super Rugby. Shute Shield is currently neither. It picks up those that slip through the cracks. This is a decreasing number due to more professional structures being put in place. As for your comments about lower div subbies being paid, are there players below 3rd div being paid? I'd doubt it. Regardless these clubs are not asking for help. And this is not what we want to grow. We want them clubs having 4+ grades and want new clubs popping up in these divisions. As for concerned supporter. Seems to be typical gibberish from him with no point.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Really? So they fought the ARC when they had no direct stake but support the NRC when they do and it's just a coincidence?
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Really? What do the NZRU grant to their premier clubs? The ARU puts $4M a year previously and is upping that to $10M a year.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
They aren't exactly guesses when he has acted as a mouth piece for Bob Dwyer and Brett Papworth and it follows Papworth's latest blog complaining about the ARU investing money in these regions.
rebel
Guest
Good comments Sheek, the Premier rugby thing really is a red herring in how to improve Rugby in Aus. It is distracting from the real issues.
rebel
Guest
Sorry, just to clarify, Spiro did not make a comment he wrote an article with his reasons for what he believed. Those points can be easily discusses and rebutted. I actually did this myself as I do not believe the Force should move. A number of people have clearly and concisely countered these points in Spiro's article also, for example the Author of this piece. My issue is that guesses about the motive that are only that, guesses, but then get passed off as fact. If all the possible motives behind everyone's comments on this site get questioned, it will really get bogged down.
Rebel
Guest
A theory is something that is not proven hence not fact. So when innocent parties get dragged in to it that is a problem. You obviously don't have an issue with that. I don't think Spiro is beyond reproach at all and never suggested anything like it. In fact I clearly stated people are within their right to disagree. In regards to grenades I repeated it. Read what I said again you are just repeating what I said. Not sure what the disagreement is.
PeterK
Roar Guru
How does folding back the premier clubs into being the first division of sydney suburban club rugby stop the best players progressing to higher honours? The only difference folding them back makes is that it is no longer insular and protected. The best teams end up in division 1, if penrith, southern districts, whatever are poor the bottom team drops down a level and the best from division 2 steps up. This is fact keeps the best teams at the highest division. I am not suggesting the premier clubs disappear. If NSWRU then thought the top division in suburban clubs deserved more money than lower ones then so be it. At least they would be there on merit. Not one logical reason has been provided why this would not work. Keeping premier clubs separate is not effecient and does not mean the best 12 clubs are playing each other.
RobC
Roar Guru
Yup in NZ$. Equity is around US$60+ 2014 Balance sheet:
Brett McKay
Expert
For sure. What are we talking, upwards of $60M in cash reserves, isn't it?
RobC
Roar Guru
As they say sheek, "facts are friendly". Wait for the article.
RobC
Roar Guru
Elisha, thanks for your post. I liken the Force to the unplanned child: - So now its been born, it should be nurtured - Until a major financial impasse occurs. Or when WA graduates into a major Rugby heartland Lets see what happens first.
sheek
Roar Guru
Careful RobC, Agreeing with me will get you accused of heresy!