With the mental health of players at the Western Force and Melbourne Rebels recently brought into question, where is RUPA in the Super Rugby scrap for survival?
It’s now been over two months since the ARU announced that either the Force or Rebels would be cut from next year’s restructured competition.
Ever since the axe has hovered over the two clubs, the ARU has copped plenty of criticism for the delay in making the decision – a call that was originally due to be delivered within 48-72 hours in April.
In a recent article, former Wallabies and Force hooker Brendan Cannon wrote a column expressing how “appalled” he felt by the treatment of the ARU towards the players facing the chop.
Cannon bemoaned the ARU’s lack of additional funding and resources for psychological support to those affected by the “trauma” as “inexcusable and astounding”.
He relayed a conversation with Force skipper Matt Hodgson, who said “the darkness hasn’t allowed us any escape”.
There were a number of reasons why the hold-up was so agonising for players and their families: those with children were dreading the moment they may have to tell them they’re leaving their friends behind to move to new cities and schools. Their partners can’t tell employers if they’ll be at work beyond the next two months. Some are looking after elderly parents who cannot be moved and some players couldn’t take educational courses.
I would’ve thought they are the type of dilemmas a lot of people in many different industries across a lot of different countries encounter every day. But certainly for a professional sportsperson, the uncertainty over whether they are offered a contract, for how long, in which country and city, is part and parcel of their chosen career.
It’s a pursuit with a limited lifespan, but given it’s also handsomely remunerated, the precariousness of the profession is usually tolerated.
Melbourne’s assistant coach Morgan Turinui last month labelled the ARU’s handling of the situation as “an absolute disgrace”.
“The ARU are putting them in a situation that puts them under extreme stress. It’s not acceptable,” he said.
Turinui’s spray included the lament that Rebels players couldn’t renew leases because of the wait for the ARU to make their cull call.
Really?
Nonetheless, let’s take Turinui at face value – and take into account Hodgson’s gloomy outlook – and accept that the Rebels and Force players are suffering significant psychological strain as they wait to learn their fate.
So where is the Rugby Union Players’ Association (RUPA) in all of this?
They could add significant weight in the attempt to bring about a quick resolution to the stand-off, thus ensuring the darkness is lifted and the players are able to move on.
How? By encouraging the two Super Rugby clubs in the firing line to drop their legal action. It’s the biggest impediment to the ARU making their decision. The governing body, already straining financially, can ill-afford to rack up a massive legal bill.
Rugby Western Australia has taken out an injunction against the ARU, insisting there’s an “alliance agreement” that states they should remain in Super Rugby until the end of the broadcast deal in 2020.
Andrew Cox and the Imperium Group, which owns the Rebels, have made it known they are prepared to launch a legal challenge to recoup the damages caused if the ARU axes them.
(AAP Image/Julian Smith)
The ARU are right in their stance that the current five-team Australian model is unsustainable both financially and in terms of on-field performance.
ARU chairman Cameron Clyne noted that cutting one team was necessary to stem a $28 million Super Rugby cost blowout over the last four years and ensure the survival of the sport in Australia.
How can RUPA support a Super Rugby structure in which all five teams have required financial assistance in recent years and results, especially from the two at-risk franchises, have been pretty dismal?
It’s not sustainable.
But more immediately, if one of RUPA’s key objectives is to look out for the welfare of its professional players in Australia, then why aren’t they demanding the Force and Rebels keep away from the courts?
Drawn-out, bitter and expensive legal battles will only damage the sport further. Both image-wise and financially. The money lost to barristers and lawyers putting on an eight-person shove in the court room is money that could be directed to growing the game in a much more meaningful way.
Five teams in Australia is unsustainable. It’s time to move on. Yes, RUPA’s membership will drop, but overall rugby union will be in a much stronger position – with fewer professional players – to foster and grow.
If RUPA can’t put the mental well-being of about 60 of its members at the top of their list, then its priorities are wrong.
It’s easy for RUPA to be reactionary and take pot-shots at the ARU when they try to push on with a justifiable restructure. But why support the litigious clubs while players are suffering psychologically? RUPA need to take a stance. Help to end the uncertainty and the players who are cut will have a chance to look elsewhere. Perhaps there’s still a window to land a contract in Europe or Japan. Maybe some players will want to return to their home states.
Judging by comments made by RUPA CEO Ross Xenos back in April – soon after the Force announced their legal action – he wasn’t entirely convinced about the direction taken.
“When teams engage in legal action, that places the time frames of the ARU process into another sphere of uncertainty… so long as they (the Force) are prepared to mount a challenge to any prospective decision, that casts the entire process into another shadow just when we thought that there was greater transparency and resolution not too far away.”
If RUPA is truly representative of the professional players and sincerely concerned about the welfare of its players, then it’s time they encourage the Western Force and Melbourne Rebels to drop any legal action against the ARU.
If Hodgson and Turinui have accurately articulated the fragile state of their players’ mindsets due to the uncertainty, then what can be more important?
scottd
Guest
This answers your question mate. The Force are being sacrificed because some a/hole wants the Rebels to stay even though they have cost the ARU over $13m to bail out to date. The total debacle is disgraceful. http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/who-do-you-think-you-are-kidding-mr-clyne-if-you-think-we-cant-do-sums/
Scottd
Guest
Really? Then why did the RUPA rep on the ARU board vote to remove a team mate? A bit inconsistent wouldn't you say?
ForceFan
Guest
Apologies for the poor proof reading... The average career for a Supper Rugby player is <3 years. 60% of it’s players off contract beyond 2017. Missing out on the Nthn Hemisphere window means that these players could easily lose an entire year of their career. The ARU may have WANTED, or even thought, that the so called "consultation" period of 2-3 days was adequate. Please don't try and say that player welfare was ever part of the Board's considerations. It's ALL about the dollars. The fairest way to revert back to 15 teams would be to remover the last 3 teams added. But it was never going to be Japan after their $30 Million incentive paid to be in the competition. Who was going to provide that refund? I have yet to find what $ incentive was paid, and by whom, to get Argentina into SR. With this background the Rebels and Force are entitled to fight however they can. Once again, it was RUPA who placed pressure on the ARU to enable the Force and Rebels to negotiate player contracts. The ARU could have enabled this possibility right from the start of this debacle.
Scottd
Guest
I'm almost at the point where I agree with you mate
Scottd
Guest
RUPA is also required to take some responsibility for this debacle Their appointee on the ARU board voted to remove a team and then RUPA made a public statement that the ARU should keep 5 teams. Go figure? WARU and VRU have every right to fight for procedural and contractual fairness for their union and supporters and their employees (which includes their players). RUPA needs to accept some responsibility for this cock up as well as the ARU and the other unions that voted for a cut including the VRU. The only rep on the ARU that voted against the cut was from WA. It's enough to put a man off his beer
kickedmyheight
Roar Pro
Why should the balance be better with four teams? What is actually solved at a base level? Europe still have more money to offer than us but we will have 30 less professional places to offer, so I would expect more Aus players will try their luck offshore. How does it improve the quality of the teams beyond the very short term (which is still a debatable point)? How does this ensure the continued solvency of the four remaining teams? Especially given that we will likely get a smaller cut of the SANZAAR pie at the next broadcast deal due to having fewer teams in the comp. It is at best a very short term elixir, not a cure for Aus rugby. I fear we will end up in a worse position than we are now.
kickedmyheight
Roar Pro
As I said, mental health has been raised and it was appropriate that it was raised by the people that raised with concern for those affected. I dispute your claim that it is being used as a bargaining chip. My initial point there was that the way in which you have raised mental is as bargaining chip to be used against the clubs to convince them to drop the legal action. It is not the fact that the clubs have threatened legal action that has delayed this process, it is that ARU did not do their homework properly before initiating the "cull". It was obvious that any club threatened with extinction was going to fight in whatever way possible, likely through the courts if the option was available, so the ARU should havr foreseen that from even the most basic due diligence. The initial plan of the ARU failed which skeweres their initial timeline, them they went silent. The delay and the uncertainty is entirely the fault of the ARU.
JPR
Roar Rookie
I totally disagree with the way you are putting forward your case to reduce Australia to 4 teams plus Japan. When SANZAAR meet last year they had 3 options on the table. Option one remove 2 teams, Option 2 remove 3 teams and finally Option 3 leave all teams in until 2020. Why did the ARU make such a major executive decision without firstly consulting with its own members.(Unless they had already contrived about culling the Force seeing in their eyes they owned them, just forgot they had signed a binding alliance agreement until 2020.) I digress, Please will someone from the ARU actually show us what the extra $28 million was spent on above what was budgeted for that period. I have a pretty good idea who had the lions share and it was not the Force. Would be good if the ARU gave all teams a level playing field with equal shares and represented the whole of Australia in Rugby Union without moving the goal posts every couple of years.
Reverse Wheel
Guest
Yes it will. Significantly.
JPR
Roar Rookie
Well said ForceFan, in addition RUPA made a statement that Five Australian teams are their only way forward. They must tell the ARU next week to inform SANZAAR there is no change to the status quo until the end of the current broadcasting deal in 2020. If it needs a show of solidarity well so be it. Any employee has the right to show action against their employer regarding changes to their terms & conditions of employment, weather it be by the courts or simply downing tools.
Paul D
Roar Rookie
Sure it was a poor performance, but I think you are selling the Kings short. And full strength? With no Kepu, Dempsey or Kellaway?
sheek
Roar Guru
Ha, ha, thanks Geoff for the heads up! Obviously you've heard me rant that while I accept the Golden Slipper as Australia's premier 2yo race, I in no way agree with it being in the top four most valuable races on the Australian calendar. I was brought up in a different time. Back in the mid-late 60s, my entry point into thoroughbred racing, there weren't overflowing champions around, but there was a nice balance between staying races & sprints, between wfa & handicaps. Every aspect of racing was more or less valued & appreciated & good horses were raced over many years providing horse lovers with genuine pleasure watching them race other good horses plenty of times. Less so now. Hopefully, my local newsagent will have a copy left over tomorrow morning. The Australian newspaper is my personal favourite, despite all the Murdoch haters, the journalism is usually very good. But my wife loves the trashy Daily Telegraph, while I also buy the SMH during the week for a counter viewpoint. I usually always buy the Weekend Australian though.
Will Knight
Expert
Yeah interesting times. Can argue that if players get paid more, then drain to Europe and Japan may lessen. Balance should be better with four SR teams.
Will Knight
Expert
The Waratahs lost to the Southern Kings. At home. At full strength.
Will Knight
Expert
Who brought mental health into it? I've just plucked that from thin air have I? Turinui on May 17: “How the ARU is handling it is an absolute disgrace,” Turinui said. “We have genuine issues and worries with our players and we’ve been pretty focused that their wellbeing is paramount and this has made that situation really hard for our guys. “The ARU are putting them in a situation that puts them under extreme stress; it’s not acceptable.” Yes, mental health is a genuine concern. How can this "extreme stress" be alleviated? Drop the legal action, the ARU makes a call. We move on. Players have clarity. My argument is simply offering an alternative direction on how to break what seems to be an impasse. The clubs initiate legal action, but apparently "the ARU are putting them in a situation that puts them under extreme stress". Remember the ARU wanted to make a call within 48-72 hours.
Will Knight
Expert
Nah, Turinui, Cannon raised mental health. Not me. Nothing to disguise regarding number of Aussie Super Rugby teams. Needs to go to four. Force season finishes: 14th, 7th, 8th, 8th, 13th, 12th, 14th, 13th, 8th, 15th, 16th, currently 13th Rebels season finishes: 15th, 13th, 12th, 15th, 10th, 12th, currently 17th All five teams have been bailed out over the last 6 or so years. Crowds are down, TV ratings are poor. Got 12,000 to a Wallabies Test in Melbourne last Saturday. Haven't beaten a NZ team this year. Tahs got beaten by the Southern Kings. Everything is fine. Five teams it is.
Perthstayer
Roar Rookie
I was referring to not being a neutral on the issue of whether a team is killed off or not. Being of the opinion one team should be cut as well as saying the teams should drop their legal actions makes it an easy link to assume you are pushing an agenda. But I do not think that you are. What I do think though is that some of the responses to your article have been influenced by the connection, which is why I said originally it may have been best to remain neutral on the cutting issue.
Will Knight
Expert
It's an opinion piece. I'm not representing the Rebels, Force, ARU, RUPA, Waratahs, anyone. I don't have to be neutral. I can support whatever and whoever.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
We aren't performing well and we have been hammered by the Kiwi sides this year. But it isn't just as. Have a look at the two SA conferences, One is highflying and the other is worse than what we are. What is the difference? SA 1 plays the Kiwis (their top side is below the Brumbies) while SA 2 is flying high but do not play any NZ sides. Yes, we aren't travelling well but we aren't on our p[at Malone.
Phil
Guest
My goodness,Jacko,I finally get to agree with you on something! This article and Will's repetitive responses that it is only about mental health is just wrong.The ARU/SANZAAR are totally responsible for this current fiasco and deserve any legal action that comes their way. If RUPA backed dropping legal action,which means one team gets dropped,I think it would have a much greater effect on the mental health of the players from that club.I believe all the players would rather their team fights for survival.