Western Force could return: Players union

It would just be nice to see rugby become a national sport again and for the juniors in WA to again have interest in the game and a professional pathway. Their numbers had been growing quickly from the Force Effect... I just can’t see this same level of interest in Melbourne ever happening even with the Melbourne Force...

It's hilarious to talk of champion teams, then reference the Force who lost more games than they won. It's rather amusing the ability of Force fans to paint a mediocre season as an amazing performance.

Or perhaps they lied and are incompetent and is hiding behind confidentiality.... A good coach and culture produces a champion team and you know what a champion team do to a team of champions... just look at what the starless Force did to the star studded Warratahs and Reds in 2017! The Reds will surprise this year as they are doing the right things. Having more champions in your team does not make a team better. "Regression to the mean" will ensure that Australian Superugby sides do better. They cannot do worst than losing all their games against Kiwi opposition. The ARU/RA will claim "success" but this would have happened regardless if the Force was not axed or not. The Force would have targeted finals in 2018 if they were allowed to compete. You can only claim success of consolidation if all Australian teams show a substantial improvement, e.g. winning more than 50% of the Superugby games against Kiwi opposition. Less than this is not statistically significant.

As we have established. Confidential, or not publicly reported negotiations are not uncommon. The ARU needs to be competitive to retain players, which it needs in order to maintain revenue (the Wallabies). Perhaps modelling shows that if we perform better we will increase revenue. Perhaps they've made a horrible decision. Perhaps it's all spin and they were already spending over the req'd %, and this "pay increase" doesn't change anything in reality other than 5 more bottom level contracts per team. How often have unions agreed to pay cuts? And if so, when we lose more players and revenue drops further, how do we deal with that? You can't dispute that if the 4 remaining teams are stronger by splitting the Force's player money, then they will all likely be more profitable. Actually let's just start with profitable. That's a big step for most franchises in itself.

TWAS it is your ARU that is secretive about any of their deals. Experience tell me when it comes to the Rebels that once the details of these secretive deals become known they are far worst than anyone originally though. So lets see how this play out. You have always claimed that the ARU/RA was facing "bankruptcy" and therefore had no choice than to cut a Superugby franchise,. However you continue to ignore the fact that the ARU/RA is not acting like an organisation that is facing bankruptcy. An organisation that is facing bankruptcy freeze pay packages or even reduce it, do not waste money on rebranding and do spend money like drunken sailors.! So TWAS (Cameron), have you lied about facing bankruptcy or are you incompetent?

One source said $20M. Another has said $14M. It's entirely possible that $14M is what the ARU will take. We do not know it' multiple Bledisloe's. We know it's at least one. We also know that there are a limited number of Bledisloe's available. There's in fact a maximum of 3 available before 2026 outside of the agreed tests in Sydney and the 2019 Perth test. Brisbane will get at least one of those. If it gets 2 in the next 8 years - which is highly likely, then that leaves a single test for Melbourne. So again, you don't know. You're speculating, in a manner which suits you. But given the declining nature of attendance, it's hardly poor decision making to lock in a fixed price now on a declining asset. As for the 12.5% pay increase. That's over the CBA which is 5 years. Which per year, where the rest of Australia is getting 2-3%, that actually works out at 2.5%.

Cameron you are the one who stated the nonsense that the Force were marginally more self sufficient then the Rebels last year.

I have resoonded to your post but the moderated probably believe it was too critical of the ARU . This is a moderated summary of what I said before without the links to,the articles. It is true that we do not have enough details to figure out by just how much the ARU is subsidising Victoria and the Rebels throught the deal that channel a part of the revenue for hosting tests in Melbourne towards the Rebels. The reason why we cannot do it because the ARU is keeping this information secret. What we do know based on media reports are that these tests include multiple Bledisloe tests plus a Lions test. The ARU has not refuted nor clarified any of these media reports, the only figure that was challenged in early media reports were the $20 million that was severely reduced to $14 million. We also know that any Australian capital city that wants to host a major rugby union test is expected to make a financial contribution and that the going rate of a Bledisloe test is $5 million. We can expect that with the publicity and tourism potential that a Lions test would be worth more. So we can safely assume at least two Bledisloe tests and one Lions test. Just these three tests alone are already worth more than $15 million. The ARU is getting only 75% of $14 million or just over $10 million for them. So clearly this deal is so bad that based on only 3 tests that the ARU is already subsidising the Victorian government and Rebels by more than $5 million. So no, we do not need all the information to figure out that this is another secretive deal to prop up the Rebels at the cost of say funding grassroots rugby. Don't you think a deal that sell future tests cheaply is strange for an organization that is "facing bankruptcy"? The same organisation is also spending millions on rebranding and just gave their players a 12.5% pay increase when the rest of Australia is getting 2-3%. If you truely believe that the ARU is in financial strive and therefore had to axe the Force, then you should at least be critical on the quality of the leadership.

Well that would be awesome, spectacular even. I’m not holding my breath though... It still looks like Australia’s fastest shrinking sport from what I’m seeing...

No one cares in WA unless your an expat from a rugby background. Rebels are like the Storm for pay tv reasons. It should go back to 3 teams. The Farce wont be back, Twiggy's moneyball wont amount to anything.

Did I mention WA specifically? No, there is no grass roots money for anyone (sur)realist.

WA had their own positives. But elite player development wasn’t one of them where they stood out over other regions. The point wasn't to 'stand out over other areas' but to create a third heartland in Australia - this was happening, now it isn't and even if the Force were rushed back this year it would take a good 3 or 4 years to get back on track.

Because you state professionalism helps. But still Victoria has been producing before this, and this has only accelerated it. It's only since professionalism that money has started flowing. The Force were also allowed extra international players FYI. Not sure how this produces Wallabies though. There were not more than 4 WA produced players that became capped Wallabies in 2017. There may have been players who played for the Force. But that's no different to Timani, McMahon, Hodge, etc. from the Rebels.

Actually isn't it 6 tests? And it hasn't been established that it is $14M. it's been claimed between $14M and $20M. You're just taking the claim that serves your point best and ignores the other claim. And no. It's not $1.75M per test because what we know is that 2 tests are similar to the tests sold to WA for $5M. What we don't know is what the other 4-6 tests are. What we do know is that based on the Bledisloe Cup hosting agreements, they can't be another Bledisloe. So they are likely June tests. Ireland next June is one. What did Perth pay to host Argentina in 2016? Anything at all. Because that's the cost the remaining tests would be valued at. Different tests have different values and until you can establish what the other tests are (which as stated can't be premium tests actually), you can't say it's undervalued.

First you state the professional era is the only era you consider and then use data dating back to 20s and 30s to argue that Victoria produced more Wallabies. Have your cake and eat it....no! The fact remains that WA started the professional era with a huge disadvantage compared to the Rebels. WA only produced one Wallaby prior to the Force while Victoria produced several and all other Superugby side was better funded by the ARU and the Rebels were even allowed extra international players when they started. WA had to do it all with the minimum backing from the ARU and we did it well, very well. This produced several Wallabies that became Wallabies from the opportunity provided to them from playing for the Force. I can count more than four that became Wallabies only in 2017!

The ARU is funding the Rebels by selling the test matches cheaply to Victoria. Without that financial rescue deal the Rebels would not be able to survive. The ARU could have set the terms if they wanted to, they did not want to as they already decided they want to kill rugby in WA. Before you muddle the water, the ARU agreed to receive only $14 million for 8 tests over an 8-10 year period that includes a Lions test and several Bleddisloe cup tests when a single Bleddisloe test in 2019 were "sold" to WA for $5 million. Of this $14 million 25% will go directly to fund the Rebels so the ARU will get only $1.75 million per test. They sold the crown jewels of Australian rugby to keep the Rebels afloat. If the ARU wanted a merger they had enough leverage to make it happen as the Rebels cannot survive without the ARU's financial backing, The ARU lie when thry argue that they would be bankrupt if they did not cut a team or that they only had one option and that was to cut the Force. They had several options but made up their mind long ago that the Force needs to go, everything else was Clyne and Pulver's farce.

When did that have any relevance to any of the discussion here?

When was the last time the Force were sold for a dollar?

5 year head start on having a professional team - which is what the discussion is about. How does WA have the lowest cost per wallaby? It's produced 4 after receiving somewhere in the vicinity of $55M in funding through Super Rugby and community rugby funding. Victoria has produced 14 or more Wallabies dating back to the 20s/30s and Victorian Rugby would not have received over $40M in funding across all types of grants.

Let's put the supposedly 5 year head start that WA enjoyed in context. Rugby union started in Victoria in 1888 vs 1893 in WA. The first rugby test in Melbourne was played in 1888 (the first Lions tour) while the first test in Perth was played in 1997 more than a century later. To measure the quality of an elite program it is not good enough to just count the number of Wallabies produced but ALSO take into account the funding required to produce a Wallaby, the history and the size of the population in that city. WA has the lowest cost per Wallaby - therefore who knows how many elite athletes WA could have produced if it received the same level of ARU funding that Melbourne received. I hope this set a better context to understand from what a level of disadvantage WA had to overcome before we can produce elite sportsman. Before the establishment of the Force, WA produced only ONE Wallaby while Victoria produced several. How many Wallabies did the Force deliver last year alone.....and then the ARU betrayed WA.