Wherever you stand on whether the National Rugby Championship should remain in 2021 and beyond, and how feasible the idea of a national club competition is, one thing I’m genuinely happy about is that we’re having the conversation in the first place.
The national club competition has existed as a concept forever. Most recently, it’s re-emerged as something worth pursuing at pretty much the same time the NRC started doing the very job it was created for: bridging the ever-increasing gap between club rugby and the professional game.
The number of players to graduate from the NRC to Super Rugby over its six seasons is upward of a hundred. It’s taken a while for all the cogs to roll into place around the country, but the eventual takeover of the NSW teams by the Waratahs last season has completed the national pathway.
But NSW – and Sydney in particular – has always been the NRC’s biggest hurdle, and for reasons everyone is well aware of in Australian rugby. The fact that hurdle still exists is the reason the national club competition concept is being discussed so heavily again.
Indeed, it has suddenly become a major plank in Rugby Australia’s negotiations for the broadcast rights from next season.
Many of you will know my advocacy for the NRC has been there since day dot, and I make no apology for that. It’s been a level of rugby missing in Australia too long, and it should never have been killed off back in 2007.
But this has also been mistaken as me being anti-club rugby, and specifically having some sort of vendetta against Sydney club rugby. Considering I’ve never had any attachment or involvement to the club scene in Sydney in any way, and have attended maybe a couple of Shute Shield games in my life, it’s consistently the most bizarre barb thrown my way.
(Photo by Mark Kolbe/Getty Images)
For the removal of all doubt, I love club rugby. I love everything that everyone loves about club rugby. The pride, the passion, the irrational hate of the neighbours. I love beer in cans and steak sandwiches that only fools try to tackle one-handed.
Calling the last couple of ACT grand finals has been a genuine career highlight.
And to clarify further, my only issue with Sydney club rugby is limited to those who have sought to undermine the NRC since day one, and for the same reason they undermined the Australian Rugby Championship more than a decade ago: they don’t want to accept that their place in the rugby landscape is not as high as it used to be.
So when discussions and News Limited’s incredibly partisan reporting of the exclusive negation period between Fox Sports and Rugby Australia began, the emergence of club rugby as a bargaining tool on both sides of the negotiating table showed that all those years of undermining was about to pay off: the future of the NRC was well and truly in doubt.
Though initial reporting centred only on the Shute Shield competition, the Hospitals Cup competition in Brisbane soon appeared alongside, with the respective competitions’ 19 teams listed as the basis of a two-division competition comprising 22 clubs in all and with promotion and relegation. It had way too much detail to be just a thought bubble.
The national part of the concept name came with token inclusions of single teams from Canberra and Melbourne, listed right next to the Penrith clubs that the remaining Sydney clubs chose to jettison a few years back.
The concept rightly divided the rugby community several ways.
The Sydney die-hards loved the idea. The Brisbane die-hards were intrigued but sceptical. The Canberra die-hards were re-checking their email inboxes for unread invitations, while Melbourne was happy with the recognition but wondered if they were ready. Perth’s die-hards rightly shrugged their shoulders again and walked away muttering something about east coast elites.
Initially lost in translation but eventually realised was that the NRC was indeed set to be replaced for this silver-bullet behemoth.
Rugby Australia ultimately put out a statement that said the whole thing was just a thought bubble, and neither the two-division format nor the demise of the NRC was confirmed.
But over the weekend, widely regarded rugby writer Wayne Smith – known to visit these pages, it’s worth remembering – outlined in The Australian that while the national club competition was being discussed as a concept, if was far from a done deal.
It was one of 17 options, in fact. But so was the main thrust of his article: that Rugby Australia also has in its pocket the idea of national FA Cup style club knockout competition run in conjunction with the NRC from 2021.
“So while RA is endeavouring to reorganise its rugby calendar to take in a national club competition of some description, it also has an ongoing responsibility to the entire game to ensure that NRC’s proven capacity to develop players for Test and Super Rugby is not lost,” Smith wrote.
“That explains why RA has chosen not to go to broadcasters with a neat, signed-off package of club football.”
And for the first time in this whole episode, I saw a solution that might just be the best way for everyone involved to have their rugby cake and eat it.
A national cup competition could genuinely tick so many of the important boxes.
(Photo by Darrian Traynor/Getty Images)
It would certainly latch onto the aforementioned pride, passion and tribalism of club rugby, but more importantly, it would do it on a proper national level, not just Sydney-and-Brisbane national.
Running the early qualifying stages in the states and regions could allow country and sub-district clubs to enter. Clubs could choose to compete or not, and not just be excluded. Interstate travel wouldn’t really be needed right up until the pointy end of competition.
It would allow for the romantic magic of the cup narratives to develop organically if a club well down the pecking order went on a run. This is one of the great highlights of football’s cup competitions, even Australia’s own FFA Cup.
More importantly, the existing Premier Rugby competitions in Sydney and Brisbane and Canberra and Melbourne wouldn’t be compromised.
Broadcasters could still get their piece of club rugby action.
And the bridge between the club scene and the professional game – the NRC – would carry on readying players for the top levels.
But of course, like the two-division, 22-team concept, the cup competition is just a thought bubble as well. And there are 15 more of them, apparently.
It is, however, one that stands out as a concept that might be financially and logistically and feasibly easier to make work. That alone makes it worthy of discussion.
There’s no doubting that the broadcaster will ultimately decide what they’re interested in.
But I’ll repeat the point I made right back at the start: rugby fans are having their say on what they do and don’t like about any club rugby idea that has been and will be floated is an incredibly important way for the broadcasters to realise what might appeal.
The cup competition is one concept I could certainly get behind.
Sterling
Guest
So how the hell were regional bodies doing tours and country comps etc in the amature days? And do you know how much actually makes it to the developing states and country districts/zones? Does the pro game really keep the amature unions running?
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Muglair without the pro game there is no income for everything else
Muglair
Roar Rookie
That is the eventual outcome of not solving the problems. Stars may end up in the NH on big dollars but the risk is that a lot of players will drift to league, just as they used to. The solution is for Union to get its act together. Throwing money at the professional game (players and administrators) might keep players in union but will eventually send you broke. The NRL might be going OK at the moment but they have to keep a perpetually vigilant eyes on club finances. Australia cannot continue to be a global force or a viable elite professional competition without getting its administration in order. If they cannot figure how to drum up support for SR and NRC clubs then what is the point? Keeping investing in a failing professional game saps the strength of everything else. Keeping the grassroots game strong is our responsibility for future generations. I think that preserving the culture and ethos of rugby is worth the effort.
Faithful
Roar Rookie
I love the NRC but as everyone knows the problem is the tribalism. Given this, I would propose to restructure the NRC to something like below (somewhat mirroring the Schoolboy Rep sides) After the National Club Comp, representative “State Club” teams would be formed (NSW Club XV, QLD Club XV, Canberra Club XV, Combined States Club XV). These State Club XVs would play trials for the Horan-Little Cup (currently exists in the NRC), thereafter an Australian Club XV Squad would be selected from the State Club teams to go on a “traditional” tour of one country (NZ, SA, Eng, France, Wales, Ireland etc etc). – Eligibility for the State Club teams would require players to have played a minimum number of games for their club, or been a Super Rugby squad member. – Each State Club teams must pick a minimum 70% of the squad from the National Club Competition. The remaining can come from Super Rugby Players not selected into the Wallabies. (for a 30 man squad that means 9 players from SR. The remaining 21 from Club). – Eligibility for the Australian Club XV would require players to have played a minimum number of games for their club or for the State Club teams and “cannot” be a Wallaby elected player. This means even Super Rugby players must have played a minimum number of games with Club. – From Club to State to Australian, the players would wear their club socks. – At the end of the tour,if the timing is right, they could play the Wallabies in a Charity Match.
AndyS
Guest
Me too. In the end though we are only really talking about different approaches to a given problem, and the directions each might take things. In practice nd on form I suspect we'll both be disappointed; even if the NRC survives, it'll likely head off in some other direction altogether.
jeznez
Roar Guru
ps and I desperately hope they do not kill the comp, rather that they continue to evolve!
jeznez
Roar Guru
I'm not sure it would mean that much more moving around. Each Super team already has a B team, by splitting their main and B squad across two NRC sides and giving opportunities to local premier rugby club players I think we achieve the goal of not that many moving about, leveling the playing field and the comp not being a Super lite. I appreciate you and I have quite different views here but just want to say that discussing this with you has helped me clarify my thinking, so thank you for that.
AndyS
Guest
I think adding sides would just mean lots of club players moving around, which is both worse for players and only likely to aggravate the tension between the Premier comps and NRC. Poor outcome all around, particularly for the standard of the competition. I have no doubt the SR teams wouldn't like it if players remained aligned to their NRC teams, but that is what comes of RA allowing it to become SR lite. They should always have been setting the NRC up independently, but that would have involved taking an active role instead of just sitting back and letting things devolve. It is ultimately what has happened in Sydney - it hasn't really improved things for the competition (hence this discussion about how it remains a bit harder for the Sydney teams), they've just normalised some of the behaviours they should have tried avoid in the first place. The problems it has set up is one of the reasons they are now likely to kill the competition.
jeznez
Roar Guru
Cheers, I much better understand where you are coming from now. I think the disadvantage stemmed from the NSW teams not being associated with the Tahs - that has now been addressed. There is still an inherent issue in NSW and Qld where they have a single Super side but split their talent across two NRC teams. While the other sides can concentrate their squad. This remaining imbalance can be addressed by either getting players to revert and play for for NRC teams associated with rival Super sides (can just imagine how poorly that would go down with the groups giving up players) or by ensuring that the ratio of NRC teams to Super sides is consistent. My clear preference is in adding teams in ACT, Vic and WA - if the Super sides are going to run the NRC teams then that seems the only sensible path. The only other alternative I see would be to sever the relationships whereby Super sides run NRC teams. Let the NRC sides be completely independent but that is the exact opposite of the evolution we've seen in NSW over the life of this competition.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
AFL has been expanding widely to athletes. Look at the Irish and now American (Mason Cox) players they've signed. The problem is you lose these players that grow into 2m+ athletes during their school years when they make rep teams (often being invited to trial) and are sucked up into elite programs. Things like academies which many become are picking up 12 year olds in Qld and Sydney for the Suns, Swans and Giants.
AndyS
Guest
NRL perhaps, but no-one makes the grade for the AFL if they haven't been living and breathing it since they were small. Some of them would have made incredible rugby players, but they were lost on the primary school playground.
AndyS
Guest
But this discussion started with how the Sydney clubs are being disadvantaged. That is happening because their players go elsewhere and then get warehoused, rather than returning to their NRC team. If they don't want to do anything about that, if it is all about the players, the clubs just need to suck it up. But if the player stays and plays locally, then chances are he'll be on the bench behind the same incumbent. And a lot of those benefits won't apply - he is no longer a local kid made good, he is some random blow-in depriving a local kid of their opportunity. Or forcing that kid to take on all those impositions of moving to some other NRC team, without the benefit of even an entry level SR contract behind him. For mine, it is one of the reasons the NRC struggles for traction with their underlying competitions.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Really? NRL and AFL attract the best athletes simply because they are offering full time gigs to 18 year olds regularly. If they offer 2 per team there's 32 and 36 spots every year for the pick of the best 18 year olds.
jeznez
Roar Guru
My assumption is that he's playing for the NRC team associated to the Super side he is trying to crack, not sitting in the stands. So when it becomes a chance to show/grow etc. then doing it not just on game day but also at training in front of the coaches he's trying to impress has to be much better for him. If he isn't making the NRC team associated with the Super team he's attached to then by all means he should be trying to find someone that he can play for but that isn't the scenario I was envisaging.
AndyS
Guest
Off the top of my head... Because it would be his chance to play week in and out rather than sit in the stands or just act as a tackle bag. Because it It would be his chance to show his coaches he actually has what it takes on the field; better still, at some point up against the incumbent for the spot he wants. Because it would be a chance to show those same coaches his progress from the same time the year before. Because it is his chance to take on and grow into a senior role within a team, years before that will happen at SR level. Because it would be a chance for him start developing a 'brand' (eww, I just threw up a little bit in my mouth), being one of the aspirational role models for the NRC showing that dreams can come true. Because with that profile might come sponsorship. Because it would be a good chance to experience some of the other community roles that come with being a professional player. Because he'd get to play with a bunch of other people he came up with, and bring through the next generation. Because he might want to put back to the community that started it for him. Some of those would be doable if he can talk his local team into taking him on. But if not, then I guess it is a choice...
ScottD
Roar Guru
Yeah, I can only speak to the Perth games
jeznez
Roar Guru
I'm clearly not explaining my position very well! Ignore financial imposition for a minute and tell me what the benefit for a fringe Super rugby player is to play for an NRC side that is not aligned to the Super team he is trying to crack?
AndyS
Guest
I think you are still looking at it too much through the lens of the current amateur set-up. But if it is such an imposition on a particular player, he could choose to sit it out and be billy no-mates in the gym while the rest of the team (including most of the coaches, to date) are training and playing NRC. Or he convinces the local team that he is worth taking on. Or they even organise some sort of trade - as I say, it is a closed circuit and if all the teams are contributing players, there is likely someone else in the same boat at the other end. Personally, I think even a pretty modest match payment would cover their costs. My observation of the younger players is they tend to gravitate to sharing accommodation, even assuming they don't have family. Bear in mind too, most would be kids going back to where they originated. But I'd definitely say it is a first world problem if it is all fine for it to happen to some aspiring player with nothing behind him but just hoping for an opportunity, but then a totally unfair imposition on exactly the same player after he has been given that opportunity, had time and effort put into him by the team and made the grade. Perhaps it would be the graduation lesson for what's expected of a professional player in Australia...
soapit
Roar Guru
horan had all but signed with league when he did his knee. but yep, those super league dollars would have been enough to drain the best form many international teams, not just league. then there was the world rugby corporation which apparently came pretty close as well. those two meant it had to go pro or take a massive public back seat in the people playing it. before then those left in rugby generally had enough income from their day jobs to make the pay from league not particularly appealing
jeznez
Roar Guru
Not so sure it's just a first world problem. The guys in the fringe squads aren't earning much - they are pushing trying to make the Super squad they are attached to. Saying they have to pay for travel, do a house swap to offset costs and return to play for different team has zero pay-off for them. In fact not being in front of the coaches of the squad they are trying to make is an arguable negative whether you are talking playing or training even before you get to any financial imposition. I know I floated this as an idea above but as we've discussed it, it's become clear to me that it's not fair to the players. Which means we need to look at NRC sides aligned to Super teams, in which case either NSW and Qld should shed a team to reach level pegging or the other Super sides should support two teams as well. Of those two options I lean to adding sides in ACT, Vic and ideally WA for the same reason you point out above, that playing Super without the Wallabies is still too much of the same from what we'll have just seen in the Super season.