There are drums beating louder that the National Rugby Championship is to be no longer, and while Rugby Australia remains steadfastly silent on the matter, the uncertainty gives rise to again consider the optimal domestic structure for the game.
What has been the role of the NRC? Is it fulfilling its objective, and are there better alternatives?
Compared to other domestic sports, rugby is complex, unwieldy and confusing. Internationalism is a key strength but also a weakness within Australia in how it demands multiple complex levels of engagement, detaches fans from personal attachment to the game, pulls players away from domestic roots, makes it expensive to stay competitive against other countries that have more money and is confusing for people who haven’t grown up with the sport.
Nowhere is this demonstrated better than in the divide between grassroots and high-performance rugby. Depending on where one sits, every dollar paid to a high-profile Wallaby is a dollar ripped from the soul of the game, or, alternatively, it is considered pointless investing in grassroots rugby alone if the Wallabies aren’t successful on the world stage and young players have no heroes to aspire to become.
For many, rugby in Australia has become a battleground between ‘our rugby’ and ‘their rugby’. It’s a ridiculous argument that shouldn’t require a zero-sum solution. Indeed everyone in Australian rugby can be a winner, amateur and professional.
It just requires a degree of strategic subtlety and collegiality conspicuously absent over the game’s recent history.
(Bradley Kanaris/Getty Images)
A starting point is to differentiate between the main objectives – one being fan, junior, player and volunteer engagement, the other being pathways to high-performance rugby – and consider how difficult it has proven to be to provide an effective single solution for both concerns.
The NRC fits into this category. Established ostensibly as a link in the professional pathway chain and required to fill the gap between club rugby and Super Rugby, it is designed to ensure there is a larger pool of professional-ready players to compete for Wallabies positions.
That’s all well and good, and we’ve seen a number of players perform well at NRC level continue on to develop into high-quality Super Rugby performers whose progress may not otherwise have been so advanced. Players like Tom Banks, Rob Valetini, Isi Naisarani, Jake Gordon and the Reds’ Smith brothers are among many others.
It’s also a proving ground for rising coaches, fans who have stuck with it will attest to the improvement in quality, and there have been more wins for Australia’s Super Rugby franchises this year.
However, not all has been rosy. For example, five years in and the NRC is yet to throw up a serious candidate for higher honours in the crucial flyhalf position, with Mack Mason, a steady performer in the NRC, infamously failing to measure up for the Waratahs against the Sunwolves in Round 7 this year.
(Matt King/Getty Images)
With respect to fan engagement, the NRC clearly hasn’t worked. For one, there is a perception – primarily in New South Wales but also in other states – that it is in conflict with existing tribal competitions (‘our rugby’ versus ‘their rugby’). Hence we have seen chopping and changing of teams in a short time period.
The NRC’s Wikipedia page describes the competition as “the most important club competition in Australia, following the Super Rugby competition”. That’s a description guaranteed to leave club members around the country scratching their heads.
Too many of the sides are new constructs that provide no historical, natural or logical support trigger for fans. They aren’t true representative or provincial sides in the sense that club members can follow players into higher levels in teams that they themselves naturally connect to.
The NRC also comes late in the season, after Super Rugby, after international rugby and after club rugby, and if fans are not genuinely fatigued by then, they might simply have no strong reason to follow another new team in another competition.
Broadcasting and media coverage certainly reflects this. Relying on live streaming that regularly slips into buffering mode at inopportune moments is unworthy of any national competition.
I am among those critical of Rugby Australia for setting up a competition without providing sufficient resources to promote it, but the truth is that most media – The Roar a notable exception – have by themselves found little reason to engage their viewership and readerships with the NRC.
(Bradley Kanaris/Getty Images)
So while there is valid disappointment that Rugby Australia has only dipped a toe into the water instead of jumping in with conviction and that the progress made in five years warrants persevering with, there is also an element of the ‘use it or lose it’ law at play here.
If the question thus becomes ‘does Australia need the NRC?’, can such a national domestic competition adequately meet the twin objectives of fan engagement and provision of professional pathways?
In terms of fan engagement, rugby people, particularly in Sydney and to a degree in Brisbane, are resoundingly saying no – unless, perhaps, it involved their existing clubs as opposed to a new entity. It’s a different story in the ACT, Victoria and Western Australia, as you would expect, although these are smaller markets.
The matter of professional pathways is somewhat more complex. Super Rugby is a brutally intense high-quality competition that accommodates only the best-conditioned and talented players. It is fanciful to suggest players can be plucked out of the Shute Shield and Queensland Premier Rugby one week and be competitive against the Crusaders in Christchurch the next.
But is it possible to enjoy what club rugby currently offers (clubs with individual histories, long-held rivalries and engaged fans), to add a national component without diminishing what exists at a local level and to find other ways to ensure that the best players are prepared for professional rugby?
Perhaps. And here’s the rider: it would require stripping away the agenda-driven behaviour of some involved in club and state rugby circles and further demonstration by Rugby Australia, under Raelene Castle, that their objectives are genuinely about inclusivity and better outcomes rather than control at all costs.
(AAP Image/Daniel Munoz)
For example, there would be no point trashing the NRC if all it achieved was to allow Sydney’s Shute Shield to become the de facto professional pathway, concentrating all of Australia’s best players into Sydney and with any wealth generated siphoned into a select few clubs only.
Sydney Rugby Union president David Begg recently spoke to this possibility, grasping at fool’s gold, when he said of the Shute Shield; “It now truly is a semi-professional competition where we are getting players ready for professional rugby”.
Very confusing for those who have been told repeatedly that Sydney club rugby represents the heart of grassroots rugby.
Clubs that have visions of being the next Saracens or Toulon should undertake a reality check and consider how:
the rugby population base (thus revenue base) in the UK and France is many times larger;
- funding shortfalls are met either by accumulation of massive amounts of debt or the largesse of wealthy private owners, not by meat raffles or a few pokies in the corner of the bar;
- rugby is spread geographically through these countries, not concentrated in one city;
- players in Australia are contracted to the central governing body, not to the clubs, as they are in England and France; and
- players in Australia are free to compete for contracts in more lucrative overseas markets.
Nevertheless, there is a potential path forward that doesn’t require Rugby Australia to hand over the keys to the game to Sydney Rugby Union – which some might see as rewarding the wreckers – but does tap into the Shute Shield’s obvious strengths.
(Darrian Traynor/Getty Images)
Rugby Australia could cut the NRC, not as an acknowledgement that it has lost any war with the Sydney clubs but as a way to simplify the structure of the game, to step around governance issues involving the SRU and NSWRU and to focus fan and media attention around a far more simply understood and more popular narrative.
For example, what might be possible is a shift to a hybrid model that blends the very best tribal aspects of club rugby with some national component – say, with introducing the Vikings, Rising and Force at a later stage to ensure geographical balance and serve as a complement to the existing club competitions, not as a competitor to them.
That’s potentially an outcome that would have far improved commercial sponsorship prospects and is one which Fox Sports has already indicated interest in supporting.
It’s also a potential outcome that might create value for the game and for broadcast partners. Not at AFL or NRL level, to be sure, but real, mutually beneficial outcomes. Anyone can get on television if you pay enough money, but to be sustainable rugby needs to be paid for providing the content.
There would need to be safeguards in place to ensure that the best players didn’t all gravitate to one or two clubs, but that’s detail that shouldn’t prove insurmountable if there were a genuine desire from all parties to improve rugby outcomes in Australia.
Needless to say, it would also be a way for Rugby Australia to show faith with large sections of the rugby public who have been calling for a heightened focus on the club game.
As for the matter of professional player development, the loss of the NRC would initially be seen as a blow, one that would only partially be made up through a ramped up nationwide conclusion to the club season.
There are, however, other outside-the-box ways to ensure that developing players are provided with enough high-level coaching and matches to bridge to Super Rugby, including altering the way Super Rugby franchises structure their preseasons and work with their non-international players through closer working relationships with overseas competitions, including in New Zealand and potentially even some cross-over engagement with Global Rapid Rugby.
Remember that current Test players are already absent from the NRC. If the next cohort of developing players are playing club rugby, a beefed up ‘play-off’ series with other semi-professional players before moving into improved coaching and conditioning programs aligned with the Super Rugby franchises, is that really far removed from the current situation anyway? Without the cost?
Personally, I’ve been on board with the NRC since day one, but that makes me a member of a very exclusive club.
Certainly it is hard to imagine today’s NRC players will miss playing in front of paltry crowds for what is barely pocket money, all for the chance of winning a fancy toast rack.
What an improved domestic structure is not is an opportunity for Australia to withdraw from SANZAAR, no matter how populist that idea might be. The AFL and NRL derive many advantages from operating domestically, but this does not mean that Australian rugby can be like them solely for the reason that it might want to.
Rugby operates in a global professional marketplace, and all components of the sport, including grassroots, require substantial, secure and repeatable sources of revenue.
Putting the NRC to rest might eventually be a pathway to a domestic revenue stream, as opposed to the cost it currently represents. But for now, while the search for an elusive domestic solution goes on, Australia’s fortunes remain inextricably linked to those of its global partners.
Jaybes
Roar Rookie
Good insight, nice suggestions, I don't personally agree but love that you're putting forward a creative, tangible, plausible idea. We need more of this!
Jaybes
Roar Rookie
I get your point Andy S but I disagree with the continued line that it is a top down revenue model. That is the case with all other sports that Rugby can not replicate. Our strength is the supporters and the proportion of them who are educated, trade qualified or professional - by increasing the numbers of them that feel engaged the more likely you are to unearth corporate support. In 2015 the Wallabies nearly won the RWC and in 2016 we lost two major sponsors and zero upswing in corporate revenues or Government grants. I have worked in the trenches selling Rugby corporate products (AFL & NRL as well) and the number one question is about community influence. The packages are then padded out with HP assets (front of jersey, signage, hospitality, VIP etc etc) but corporate Australia wants to know how their HP investment is dripping down into the grassroots - NRL & AFL articulate this very well, Rugby can't because they have lost all connection with their heartland.
Kashmir Pete
Roar Guru
Brett FYI: super photo (2/3 front page) + full sports page of photos of Shute Shield event in Mudgee Guardian, focused on children having fun/coaching by visiting players. Cheers KP
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Australia would have gone further backwards had it been fully amateur. Without a broadcaster willing to pay for a professional domestic competition, which we don't have, it won't work. You're looking at this the wrong way, you're comparing the result of Super Rugby against a hypothetical alternative, which is fine. But you have to compare it to a realistic hypothetical alternative. Without the fans and viewers you cannot replace Super Rugby with any NRC or ARC.
Ray L
Roar Rookie
But for what purpose? The game in Australia has gone backwards anyway in spite of the income from the broadcast rights. So what’s the point of it? The product of Super Rugby in Australia hasn’t resonated with the sporting public, no doubt due in part to the broad range of time zones and the lack of identification of which regions/countries the teams actually represent. As stated earlier, no one gives a toss about SA teams. They’re completely alien in the Australian sporting landscape compared with the other codes. The ideal scenario would be if Super Rugby was an Aus/NZ competition in time friendly zones, but that’s not going to happen because the Kiwis want to continue to compete with SA’s best. It’s a different matter with the Rugby Championship though and I can see no reason why this 4 Nations competition shouldn’t continue as a separate product. That begs the question, what is the alternative for an Australian domestic product which will appeal to the local sporting community and at the same time attract a reasonable level of broadcast revenue? There’s no easy answer to that and I’m not sure if there is one, particularly in attracting the revenues to maintain a domestic competition. There are two alternatives. The first is to beef up the NRC to a fully professional season long competition, replacing Super Rugby altogether and the second is to boost the Premier Rugby competitions in each State as semi-professional leagues, with an end of season Champions League playoff. I actually prefer the former as I can’t see how it would be financially viable to support a semi-professional Premier Rugby competition in each State or Territory. It’s not just about Sydney and Brisbane. I say this as a passionate Shute Shield club supporter who attends home and away games every week. The problem with the ARC/NRC concept from the very beginning, particularly with the NSW teams and to a lesser extent in Qld, was that there was no regional tribal following in the artificially created teams in those two States. The original ARC teams in NSW were probably closer to the mark, with the Sydney Fleet representing Eastern and Southern Sydney and the Western Sydney Rams, representing Western and North Western Sydney. The exception was the Central Coast Rays, based in Gosford, which purportedly represented the North Shore and Northern Beaches. This was doomed to failure from the start and continued with the reincarnation of the NRC. It wasn’t and still isn’t an issue with the single city teams from Canberra, Melbourne and Perth, which appear to have widespread support. Just to remind you of the outcome of that first and only ARC competition in 2007, the Western Sydney Rams finished top of the table with the Central Coast Rays second. I attended a packed out North Sydney Oval when the Rams played the Rays. The Rams lost to Perth Spirit in the semi-final and the Central Coast Rays went on to win the final. There was enough positive feedback for the concept of the ARC, although not financially, to warrant its continuation with some modifications, particularly for the team makeups in Sydney and Brisbane. IMO , it was prematurely abandoned after only one season. Contrast this with the performance of the NSW based teams in the NRC. This comes down to the abandoning of the regional tribal following in Sydney with the creation of artificial teams, including Country, which have no relevance to the tribal following of the respective Shute Shield clubs. For my tuppence worth, Australia should abandon Super Rugby altogether and focus on a fully professional domestic competition, played from March to June with home and away games and a finals’ series. It could initially involve eight teams, North, South/East and West from Sydney, North and South from Brisbane and single city teams from Canberra, Melbourne and Perth. Further teams could be added as the competition matured. The finals would be concluded prior to the inbound international series in July. It would provide a fully professional environment for a greater number of players, drawn from the respective Premier State competitions, increasing pathways for National selection. Those not selected for the Wallabies would return to their respective clubs in the Premier State competitions. I don’t see this as creating any conflict with the State based competitions. It would be no different to the current situation where Super Rugby players who aren’t selected for the Wallabies return to their respective clubs. There is no conflict.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
It's not whataboutery when it was published that SS clubs as a group complained they weren't a part of the structure. The difference was in QLD that the clubs just got behind what the QRU chose to do without any discussion of how much power they did or didn't deserve.
John R
Roar Guru
People pay money to attend SS as well, and that is still amateur.
concerned supporter
Roar Rookie
Crazy Horse. ''There are 14 Premier Grade Clubs in Perth.'' Tell that to TWAS, most people in Sydney I know were uncomfortable with the culling of the Western Force. In SS now, with the 2018 culling of Penrith,(after 4 completed rounds) there are ONLY 11 clubs, a bye every week????
Istanbul Wingman
Roar Guru
Just another idea off the top of my head: With so many players now representing other states in Super Rugby how about setting up a bonafide fair dinkum State of Origin series between NSW and Queensland, and treat it with just as much respect as league does theirs? Who cares if league got their first? They've copied practically everything innovation union has come up with, from a proper World Cup to international 7s. Make a 3-match series with a test each in Sydney, Brisbane and Melbourne.
Crazy Horse
Roar Pro
I can guarantee you that R[EC]A will not be getting their hands on GRR or anything else in WA while DeClyne and Co are running things on the East Coast. After the dishonourable treatment of WA by those clowns everything has been set up legally so R[EC]A has little say in WA.
Crazy Horse
Roar Pro
There are 14 Premier Grade Clubs in Perth.
Crazy Horse
Roar Pro
It's only a disaster for Sydney with it's claim to being so much better than the rest of the country being exposed as a myth. Everywhere else it's doing fine thank you.
Crazy Horse
Roar Pro
"SS clubs have at least 4 Senior grades, 3 Colts, & junior teams." Oh woopie do. So do other clubs right around the nation. For example The University of Western Australia Rugby Club has teams from under 6 right through to Premier Grade (and an Oldies team, Hartly's Horribles). Then when Club Rugby finishes the NRC is played on UWA's home ground with 5000 attending. BTW UWA's 2018 Fairest and Best is currently playing for the Junior Wallabies and others are away with the Force on their Asian GRR tour. The world didn't end. The Premier Grade team still played and won last week. It's a similar picture in the other clubs.
rebel
Roar Guru
I'll stick with the fact that they didn't get involved and leave the whataboutery to others with an axe to grind.
Crazy Horse
Roar Pro
Twiggy is pouring a lot of money into junior Rugby in WA through the Rugby Roos and Future Force programs. He offered to help nationally but Rugby [East Coast] Australia told him his money wasn't wanted so he's spending it on GRR.
Crazy Horse
Roar Pro
That's a problem in NSW and Queensland but not in the rest of the country where League is a novelty.
Crazy Horse
Roar Pro
If only there was an Aussie billionaire prepared to pour money into Rugby.
Crazy Horse
Roar Pro
Maybe in Sydney owing apparently to selfish lack of engagement by little tin gods protecting their micro-empires. Elsewhere in the country (and Fiji) it's a different story. NRC games in Perth have been consistently well attended. We have our own equivalent of the ShuteShield, The FMG Premier Grade but that doesn't stop us from enjoying a pleasant spring day at the Rugby once the Premier Gradeisdone and dusted.
Ray L
Roar Rookie
That's all very well, but the other district clubs don't have the resources to match that provided by Sydney Uni and UQ, without financial assistance from RA. Let's not forget that these parasites plunder the talent pool developed by the district clubs through juniors and colts. They have no place in a district competition and the sooner they are relegated to Subbies, the better.
Ray L
Roar Rookie
Couldn't agree more. Sydney Uni are a pox on the Shute Shield, when they have consistently won the Colts Club Championship since the dawn of time (thankfully except for last year) by attracting the elite schoolboy players by offering scholarships, which no other club, with the possible exception of Randwick with their sponsorship with UNSW, being able to compete. It's a myth that the talented schoolboy players are attracted to the likes of Sydney Uni because of their superior training and conditioning programs. It may no doubt have some bearing, but at the end of the day, it's all about money, which most other clubs don't have. It's not a level playing field. This has carried through to the Grade ranks. When you look at the plight of clubs like Gordon, which is in the heartland of the Rugby community on Sydney's North Shore, you have to ask the question why after a long history of success with an abundance of Rugby playing private schools in the district, that they have been the cellar dwellers in the Shute Shield over the last decade? It wouldn't surprise me if a significant proportion of their talented players have been scooped up by Sydney Uni. I may be wrong, but it's the only logical conclusion I can come up with. It would be interesting to see where Sydney Uni's player base originated. They claim to have a junior base in the Inner West, but it's all smoke and mirrors, compared with the other district clubs. Having said that, a positive outcome of last year was the rise of Gordon's Colts, as well as Randwick, for the first time in a long while putting Sydney Uni in its place. This may well have something to do with the changing of recruitment rules to Colts by the NSWRU (SRU). It's a good start to create a more level playing field. As a passionate Eastwood supporter, nothing gives me greater pleasure than to see a win over Sydney Uni, as they achieved in last weekend's clash at Mudgee (in 2nd Grade as well) , as I'm sure most other clubs' supporters would empathise with. The Woodies also beat them in the trials, which is a good omen for the future. The return clash at T G Millner will be a must watch event, between the two most successful sides this century.