“Would you rather get a bullet to the head, or five to the chest and bleed to death?” When the Brad Pitt-portrayed Billy Beane uttered those words in Moneyball, the point he made was clear: as unappetising a pair of options as those are, there’s little doubt which one most of us would take.
If we have to receive bad news, make it quick. Make it relatively painless. Make it professional.
As it is, the ARU has decided to inflict Australia’s rugby teams and fans with the far less desirable of the two.
Following SANZAAR’s confirmation that Super Rugby would be shifting from an 18-team to 15-team format, the ARU called a press conference for this morning. It was the perfect opportunity to finally end all the speculation about who will, and won’t, be playing in the competition next year – an opportunity every rugby fan in the country surely hoped they would take.
They didn’t.
“Consultation is required with both the Western Force and Melbourne Rebels to further understand their financial position,” ARU chairman Cameron Clyne said.
“We don’t anticipate this final consultation period being a drawn-out process and expect to be able to deliver an outcome in the very near future.”
After revealing the unsurprising news that the race to escape the gallows is now being run by the Force and Rebels, Clyne went on to say he hopes a final decision will be announced within 48-72 hours. Regardless of that (relatively) short time, it’s a bit rich for the ARU to be talking about how any part of this process won’t be drawn out.
Today’s announcement has ultimately left everyone in suspense, much like any bog-standard reality TV show.
Unlike reality TV, however, this is a real issue, one where the future of many a rugby employee, be they a player, support staff member or anyone else, could be on the line. Look no further than Matt Hodgson’s teary press conference yesterday for evidence of how serious this is.
Unlike reality TV, there’s no benefit to delaying the announcement, no advertisement views to be milked from the suspense.
It begs the question of who the ARU is actually governing for. It is surely not the fans, who will soon have one fewer team to support. It is not the players, 20 per cent of whom will be out of a job next season. It’s hardly themselves, either, given the hammering their image and reputation have taken over the past months.
The greatest tragedy from all this is the Super Rugby product on the field is nothing short of tremendous. This morning alone, both Spiro Zavos and Geoff Parkes have spoken of how the players deserve far better than their administrators.
However, the decision to cut back to four teams, sad as it is, is understandable.
It will be devastating for that team – its players, staff, fans and all other stakeholders. But from a bone-dry and emotionless financial standpoint, it’s understandable. When you don’t have the mega-bucks of the AFL or NRL broadcast deals, sport is an expensive business.
The ARU certainly doesn’t have those mega-bucks.
But the fact we still can’t definitively name the teams that won’t be around next year is just wrong for everyone who has even a passing interest in rugby.
When asked whether he’d prefer the aforementioned single bullet to the head or five to the chest, Peter Brand astutely asks if those are his only two options.
The ARU decided they are for Australian rugby fans by making the call to cut one team. The least they could have done, and undoubtedly should have done, was give us all a single bullet, because we’ve found out that five in the chest is awfully painful.
Rico
Guest
Sorry to say but aru is a joke,not willing to stick up for their teams says it all
andrewM
Guest
Huh? So the 12 local Force players would go..where? I'm sure as many of them as possible will be buying one way tickets to Europe just to spite the ARU - and I'll be at the airport to wish them Bon Voyage. All assuming that the Force do fold, and the longer this goes on, the more distant that is becoming
sheek
Roar Guru
Thanks Max, Trip down memory lane! I had it slightly mucked up.
Max Mowen
Guest
Hi Sheek Kone were in Tigers colours gold and black DCA were white with blue stripes in a V Hawks were green with a white hawk emblem Paga were light blue Magani -maroon and another colour
Max Mowen
Guest
TWAS I didn't suggest that Lote was a dud! The view was that for $ 700K per season the money could have been better spent on grass roots rugby or player development. I agree Lote was great but realistically that money and the ARU "top ups" to under performing or consistently injured players severely depleted the ARU coffers. I wonder what the ARU annual player payments are in comparison to the NZRU.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
I am pretty sure that the ARU is still bound by the RUPA CBA to spend the $5M of Force salaries on player salaries. If we put that all into the NRC we can ensure that the 100 non contracted players are on full time salaries.
andrewM
Guest
TWAS "This may be a dramatic boost to the NRC"? Please explain your logic? The most likely scenario means that unarguably the second most successful NRC team, the Spirit, will essentially be devoid of meaningful ties to a Super team? In the geographical context, I can't see too many Super players making anything more than a token contribution to the spirit in the future should the Force fold, so for those club players making the step up, who will they learn from?
BL
Guest
Does anyone know what the Key Performance Indicators( KPI's) are for S Rugby Australian Conference retention - other than Fort Fumble suits and hired hands ? Thanks
Zero Gain
Guest
Australian rugby needs a strong national competition and identity. We would be far better off to unhitch from the Kiwi bandwagon and go it alone.
Zero Gain
Guest
If there is an ANZAC spirit then why don't your words ever reflect that?
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
The ARU were happy to. Not just their call though. Kind of need the NZRU to agree...
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
I doubt the WA government could get that back. That's a grant/sponsorship as part of bidding for an event. As the event is still being held there there is no loss.
Tom
Guest
The ARU doesn't have to sell them their license back, if they cant get rid of them by 2020. All the WA govt could get back is their $5m for Bled Cup next year and an additional small ex gratis payment. The Force would get nothing as it theoretically doesn't owe anything to it apart from staff & player costs owing.
Rugbynutter
Guest
It is clear under the strategic leadership (read lack of) under the ARU rugby has continued to go backwards at a rate of knots and hence the open disdain NZRU administration has for ARU administrators, and one can therefore understand why they are therefore reluctant to consider a Trans Tasman competition with this incompetent leadership offered by the ARU as who would want to partner with those bunch of muppets who could not grow anything but only self destruction. We need radical change and that has to be the removal of the ARU and replacement with better leadership. I would entertain at this point a rebel competition and the removal of the ARU if it was possible or offered at this point as so lost any confidence that the ARU can do anything but just continue to lead rugby down its current terminal decline. Considering the growth of the world game and opportunities in early 2000 rugby in this country had through incompetent leadership under the ARU this has been a wasted opportunity that now sees its finances so bad that recovery from here with this major setback means I can't see rugby making any major inroads for the next decade. RIP Australian Rugby....We need alternative leadership and thinking and even prepared to listen to the Brett Papworth's at this point who has about as much strategic thinking as my left toe but accept can't get much worse than the current bunch of ARU muppets who are still trying to discover what the word strategy means. Australian rugby needs a saviour and most of us know that...but we have now created such a mindfield and disjointed product that has so disengaged fans that this also means attracting those who might be willing to invest in the game away. Foxsports is not our long term saviour.....we need others but won't get it especially while we have the ARU.....
mick
Guest
I'd genuinely like to know if the SANZAAR has committed to maintaining the revenue sharing beyond 2020? Reports are that Steve Tew is out saying that there has been no agreement beyond the next few years. Are the NZRU or others going to force a financial re-distribution based on the number of teams? They are forcing the ARU to take a potential serious long-term hit in order to make a short-term gain. In my opinion the ARU are crazy to be going along with this. For years quite a few of the NZ teams struggled and no-one suggested cutting them. Likewise for the SA teams. The competition takes a momentary dip in Oz and SA and all of a sudden the NZRU is demanding that they cut the number of teams? Next time NZ are in a dip I wonder if the other partners will sink the boot into them?
AndyS
Guest
He probably couldn't say what the NZ reps actually said when it came up. I'm certainly in the hang together camp, because we will hang separately otherwise. But the strategy is clearly still expansionist otherwise they wouldn't be keeping the new teams in, especially the Sunwolves. If they are ultimately planning to go back down the conference path, it would be nice to think they were lending their minds to a format that might actually work, assuming any will. They have certainly found one that doesn't...let's hope they aren't going to work through all the various forms of that in the process.
davSA
Guest
Not really Andy S . I spend enough time viewing Aussie opinion on this sight in particular and am very sympathetic and understanding of their dilemma. Truth be told and BB has been consistent on this , probably dissolve the entire comp and all move on. I just have also always held the opinion here that we either all stand together or go together. Clyne did use the word NZ used their vetoe. Unless he has been misquoted . Always possible.
AndyS
Guest
But it wouldn't have been a threat, it is dav that is characterising it as some sort of face-down or argument. it likely only came up when exploring which options to consider, along with 3x6,3x5, stay unchanged, etc. It is not like the possibilty wasn't already out in the public arena, after all. Clyne probably only mentioned to try and hose down RUPA and a bunch of other commentators who keep digging it up as their preferred option, heading them off and highlighting that NZ obviously have a say in the matter.
Then they should follow through with it, empty threats mean nothing.
AndyS
Guest
I doubt it was actually voted on. But I would not be surprised if it was floated as an option, would have been surprised if it wasn't. It might well have been raised as "SA constantly threatens to leave, so is it actually just big talk and what would we do if it isn't?". The threat gets made often enough; probably unreasonable to complain if people start considering the alternatives...