Just when you thought this year couldn’t get any worse for the ARU, Buildcorp has pulled out of their deal as major sponsor of the NRC.
The decision to back out as the naming rights sponsor of the third-tier rugby competition is a result of the ARU’s inaction in creating a national women’s competition in the same vein as the NRC.
The ARU is launching a national sevens competition later this year, with eight teams linked to universities around the country, but no such tournament for 15-a-side rugby exists.
“At Buildcorp we really need to align any partnership we’re involved with our values and it was not a championship that was able to produce a women’s competition,” Josephine Sukkar, Buildcorp’s co-founder and principal, said.
“We had asked for that for a long time and we had wanted it to look the same as the men’s and for them to be playing on the same fields as curtain raisers.
“That is a problem for the ARU at the moment to be able to deliver that. So we discontinued that sponsorship this year. It’s the first time we’ve ever discontinued a rugby sponsorship, but that was pretty difficult for us to stand alongside that.”
[latest_videos_strip category=”rugby” name=”Rugby”]
Sukkar indicated her company would consider a new deal with the ARU if and when the creation of a national women’s XVs competition is introduced.
The decision from Buildcorp has coincided with two of the ARU’s other partners – Lion Nathan and BMW – also pulling their sponsorships.
“Each year ARU has a number of partners come up for renewal and it is normal for partners to re-evaluate their sponsorship portfolios from time-to-time during their contract tenure based on their marketing objectives and budgets,” an ARU spokesman told the Daily Telegraph.
“We have been fortunate that we’ve managed to retain over 90% of our partners across all forms of the game over the past five years but there is inevitably some turnover. We are currently in market having some positive conversations about filling the vacancies in those two categories.”
The loss of three key sponsors could hardly have come at a worse time for the ARU. The organisation is currently in the midst of deciding which of the Force or Rebels will be cut from Super Rugby next season, a decision that was originally planned to be made in early April.
AndyS
Guest
No, it's not, and if they structure it properly as it develops it would become even less so. The teams should represent the local competition in each location, as a genuine rep team. If someone was not locally based and playing, no NRC contract. The competition would sort itself out very quickly.
concerned supporter
Guest
Hi Brett, Jock went a bit overboard. I like the NRC, and watch plenty of the games (on TV),but as Sheek says it is a duplication of Super Rugby,without the overseas teams. The problem is Marketing & Promotion of the competition. Last season my rusted on rugby mates had no idea who was playing,where they were playing etc. Yet most of these rugby people knew who,where & when about NRL games. I am excluding you from this diabolical NRC exercise, you gave a very good coverage of the competition on the Roar, but not everybody reads the Roar
In brief
Guest
Sydney club rugby is an elitist closed shop not grass roots
Daniel Jeffrey
Editor
Unfortunately a copy error Mark - apologies to any Brumbies fans out there I may have alarmed!
Train Without A Station
Guest
Well no. They signed to sponsor the NRC. That agreement has now ended after fulfilling their obligation. They've chosen not to enter a new deal. They've offered a grievance to explain why. Some of us are skeptical about that though.
Sydneysider
Guest
'and is if all girls are vapid simpletons that are only interested in hollow pursuits." Being interested in fashion, make up, TV shows might be hollow to some (me included) but for most girls it isn't.
piru
Roar Rookie
You guys might be surprised at how popular women's rugby actually is
John R
Roar Guru
Exactly - it's so obvious that it doesn't need to be said. It'd be like pointing out that little kids are more interested in eating candy than playing rugby. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, but the way you've typed it out as well, comes across as derogatory and is if all girls are vapid simpletons that are only interested in hollow pursuits.
Brett McKay
Expert
This is next level irony, considering what you've sprouted about the NRC over the last few years. So let's hear it all, kindly list everything about the NRC I've written that wasn't true. I'm all ears...
Sydneysider
Guest
That's exactly my point Bamboo. Agreed.
Sydneysider
Guest
"What a load of patronising, sexist drivel." is it??? So if a women is more interested in fashion, make up, celebrities, Movie stars etc... it's sexist?? It's just an observation. You can live in fantasy world or in reality world. Yes there would be girls that like playing rugby, but it wouldn't be anywhere near the number that some portray on here.
John R
Roar Guru
Won't be holding my breath. Would be genuinely interested to hear it though.
Sterling
Guest
Don't expect a reply to that one.
piru
Roar Rookie
Cut the board
John R
Roar Guru
Can agree with you there 100%. That was truly baffling. Why sit in silence when there's damaging and false news out there?
Worlds Biggest
Guest
Mate there is frustration coming out in my initial post which you probably gathered. In this instance I don't know if I would have put out a statement. Losing 2 major sponsors is a PR disaster, why amplify that with a statement. I find there media protocol all over the shop. On the other hand when the player numbers were released by Roy Morgan it took them 2 days ( after coaxing by Spiro ) to put out a release. This should have been done as soon as the poll went public. Anyway just my 2 bobs worth, plenty might disagree with me.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
It hasn't been stated anywhere that it was a condition of the contract either.
YeahRight
Guest
You may be right Big Dog, but you also may be jumping to conclusions. For me Buildcorp sound a bit lame with this excuse.
John R
Roar Guru
That's a fair point Big Dog. Buildcorp have been great supporters of rugby. And don't deserve to be bagged in anyway. But you'd be able to see the other side of the argument as well right? If someone's giving you a million bucks in sponsorship money, but a condition of that is you need to administer a comp that is going to cost 2 million, and all your spare cash is tied up in funding a loss leading women's 7's comp, then what else can you do? I like to give the ARU the benefit of the doubt, that they'd love nothing more but to have a National Women's XV comp up and running, but the reality is, they can't afford it.
John R
Roar Guru
Hey Jock, how do you define 'grassroots'? Like what comes to mind when you hear that term?