The Red’s 32-26 win over the Waratahs on Friday night was a fitting end of to seven years in purgatory for Queensland Rugby.
The Tahs didn’t gift wrap the Bob Templeton Cup for the Reds, with the Tahs’ lineout and goal kicking making the game a nail biter. Overall though the Reds dominated possession, territory and the scrum, coming away with four tries to the Waratahs’ two, topped off with a couple of handy James O’Connor penalty goals.
A lot has been made of the Waratahs being a young team and that they were missing four players to injury. Yet in Beth Newman’s article on rugby.com.au, it was highlighted that the average age of both the Waratahs and the Reds 23.4 years old. Furthermore, the Reds have recently lost two locks and a playmaker in contract disputes and 14 minutes into the game starting lock Angus Blyth was taken off with a head injury.
However, the Reds were able to call on bench lock Tuaina Tualima, who plays for Brisbane City in the National Rugby Championship, to get the job done.
This highlights the wisdom of the decision by the Queensland rugby union to embrace the NRC as its premier development competition. The Queensland Rugby Union has used the NRC to give the best club players like Tualima an opportunity to prepare for professional opportunities if they arise, to develop coaches like Brad Thorn before he joined the Reds and to further develop existing Reds players who do not have Wallabies obligations during the international season.
On the last point, the example of Hamish Stewart stands out. Stewart was recruited by the Reds as a prospective flyhalf and played well in the position, but flashier competition arrived at flyhalf and Stewart floated between the fullback and the bench.
However, the NRC provided the opportunity for the Reds to develop Stewart as an inside centre, which better suited his skill set, and he spent the 2019 NRC season learning the new position with Queensland Country. At Super Rugby level he plays the role very well, his brutal and accurate defence, in particular, is reminiscent of Reds stalwart and 23-cap Wallaby Anthony Fainga’a.
Yet because of his background at 10, Stewart also has excellent playmaking skills, in particular his fearlessness, timing and accurate passing mean that he runs straight into the teeth of the defence, creating the maximum amount of space for the players outside him. He is particularly effective when he combines with big, fast forwards like he did with Caleb Timu in a Wallabies trial match in 2018, to set up an excellent try.
See from 4:20 at this link.
As his partnership with O’Connor develops, we will hopefully see Stewart stepping up more often to first receiver and using the full range of his skills in attack, but the foundation for his role at inside-centre was laid in the NRC under the tutelage of Queensland Rugby Union staff.
The highlights how the NSW rugby union’s failure to embrace the NRC has put it behind the curve on player and coach development. In six seasons no NSW-based team has ever won the competition, and only NSW team to make the finals has been NSW Country.
Sydney-based teams have won the wooden spoon five times and the Waratahs have had to hire their second Kiwi coach in a row because none of their local people were up to the task of coaching at Super Rugby level.
The source of NSW’s failure in the NRC has been opposition from within the Shute Shield Club competition in Sydney, which was a major source of Wallabies during the amateur era and which apparently still sees itself as being perpetually entitled to that mantle.
The proponents of the Shute Shield have been hellbent on dumping the NRC and replacing it with a “super” club rugby competition, where the best Shute Shield clubs can play club rugby teams from elsewhere in Australia.
While a super club competition may attract some interest from the faithful, it doesn’t stack up in terms of professional player development. The problems include what to do with Super Rugby players whose club teams don’t make the super club competition.
Do they sit out for that season or are they shoehorned into other teams, compromising the integrity of the competition? How do the professional franchises work to develop their players and coaches when amateur clubs are calling the shots?
With the benefits of the NRC are just now being realised by teams like the Reds and also the Brumbies who have embraced it, there seems to be no reason to change things because NSW has failed to do so.
Crazy Horse
Roar Pro
The NRC draws good crowds in WA.
jeznez
Roar Guru
Well this discussion has massively morphed from where it started
AndyS
Guest
But I do wonder if people understand that, and that it may be the path they are heading down...a future where SU might just cancel everything below 1st grade and totally disconnect from community rugby, and where Randwick becomes a subbies team while the Gosford Galloping Greens claim a glorious heritage that includes the Ella brothers and 28 premiership? Because as above, that is what did happen in Britain when clubs with heritage and depth in a strong rugby community decided to become professional.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
No. I’m suggesting that since the Sukkars, the owners of Buildcorp are consider a couple of the most influential members of FOSURFC and Clyne was RA Chairman when the NRC was put in place, that it’s unlikely they have an agenda against it.
jeznez
Roar Guru
Uni were all for it when they were part of it. Now they are out they are less keen. You are suggesting that because Buildcrop sponsors both Uni and NRC, the club’s attitude to the comp must follow their sponsor? Seems a bit of a leap
AndyS
Guest
The way I saw it, they went to the clubs for the NRC because of what happened to the ARC.
Brett McKay
Expert
As I understand it, the same ARU proposal was put to the Qld clubs around them running two teams. But I also believe the QRU model to keep them in-house came quite early, too - so it may not have been a choice at the time of the offer to the clubs, but the choice became obvious when it was presented.. (For what it's worth, your take on the NSW evolution is pretty much the same as mine. The ARU suggestion was for four teams, but it was up to the clubs how they sliced them up..)
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
It's odd that you perceive the Buildcorp sponsored Sydney Uni to oppose the Buildcorp NRC.
jeznez
Roar Guru
I wish, I'd read this comment before posting the above. I knew the offer went to the NSW clubs, I didn't realise the same offer had been made to the Qld clubs.
jeznez
Roar Guru
Uni tried to enter as a stand alone club, when told that only merged entities would be accepted they then announced their merger with the Subbies team. Not sure if there was a rejection from Randwick and Easts in between those two events but given Randwicks subsequent stipulation of requirements (to Easts and Souths) I can well imagine that to have been a sticking point. Pulver absolutely approached the clubs, RA went to a meeting of the NSW Presidents with the request for them to implement and run without grants from the then ARU or NSWRU. I've had that directly and independently from two presidents of clubs. If I look at the three main clubs that have generally been seen to oppose the NRC in Eastwood, Uni and Randwick. Eastwood said, no thanks and only joined the Rams reluctantly later on. Randwick were keen but couldn't get anyone to join them in playing in their colours, at their home ground. Uni had both a stand alone proposal and when that got knocked back a merger with a junior entity ready to go. It's a narrative the appears to fit the facts.
Brett McKay
Expert
I wonder if it was also a case of offering 'enough rope' to the clubs, Jez. And don't forget, the same offer was made to the Qld clubs, but they quickly worked amongst themselves that it made no financial sense to pretend they could do it better than the Reds running both teams..
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
But didn't the SU/Balmain team come about because Randwick and Easts wouldn't go in with SU? The answer is Pulver didn't approach anything. The QRU approached the Hospitals Cup teams and said this is the approach we need to take, and they got behind it. The landscape in NSW was of course different...
jeznez
Roar Guru
I can only wonder why Pulver approached the Sydney clubs to run the NSW NRC teams, when everywhere else they approached the local Super side. Uni were ready to go with their merged entity with a Subbies side in Balmain and lo and behold we had the Sydney Stars as one of the first teams announced. The northern and western clubs dusted off their ARC structures with the Rays and Rams. Albeit with Eastwood holding out and only joining the Rams late. Meanwhile the Fleet never re-appeared with Uni all set. Randwick initially cheered thinking they'd bully the remaining pair in Southern Districts and Easts, saying they'd be happy to merge as long as the team wore myrtle green and played their matches at Coogee oval. That got scuppered by Southo's digging in their heels and joining the Rams. Eventually NSW Country held out an olive branch and Randwick and Easts made uncomfortable bedfellows with them. Of course I can only speculate but if I ask why did Pulver approach NSW differently from Qld and the rest of the country, the obvious answer IMO, was to allow Uni entity entrance to the NRC.
LBJ
Roar Rookie
Interesting, thanks - I appreciate the background. I'm certainly not going to pretend to be an expert on the history of any O/S club - the only point I'm trying to make is that Clubs are a better model than Manufactured Rep teams such as the NRC consisted of. And clubs with heritage and depth in a strong rugby community are best placed to succeed. I do believe the Shute Shield and the Hospital Cup is the logical starting point - that seems obvious to me - but it doesn't mean that those competitions or their clubs will remain completely untouched in the future - rather it will shift and change over time.
Rhys Bosley
Roar Pro
I know about the Heelers, I don’t see why they should be considered more “authentic” than QC and they certainly aren’t going to provide good players from the bush with the same opportunities.
AndyS
Guest
I would note that the original Wasps team established in the 1800's still exists (Wasps FC), but is no longer part of the Wasps you are talking about (Wasps RFC). They felt it appropriate to make them independent of each other as soon as professionalism struck, no longer sharing a ground or even being based in the same city. Is that the model for the Shute Shield you are intending? ;)
AndyS
Guest
You are wrong; they may have age, but they hardly have depth. As noted, the Tigers have a development squad, academy and a wheelchair team (https://www.leicestertigers.com/team/senior). Wasps don't even have that, only having an academy and women's team (https://www.wasps.co.uk/players-staff/). They don't have juniors or minis, they aren't part of the amateur scene or have any involvement in the amateur game, they are professional teams. If they are your template for a strong base, you are looking in the wrong place in the Shute Shield.
LBJ
Roar Rookie
I've only got the same link I'm afraid. But I've heard so many models - I can only assume it will continue to iterate. What i heard at training tonight though was that the ARU is so broke they had to cancel the deal they made with the Shute Shield and have handed it back to Seven - who are planning on a full Super Rugby standard broadcast package. Could be interesting.
LBJ
Roar Rookie
Thanks for clarifying - you think that it's good if the rugby community dies in Australia , so long as the Wallabies do well. Whereas I'd rather see a healthy Australian rugby community and live with the results we can best achieve with our wallabies. Although I'd point out that it is also the most likely route to wallabies success. That is to say - I'd much rather be in England's or France's shoes right now than Australia's - their game is in rude health and we are bankrupt (after following your route).
LBJ
Roar Rookie
Ummm the tigers club originated in 1881. Wasps in 1867. These are clubs - not manufactured representative teams designed to meet the needs of some 'higher' purpose. They have heritage and depth in the community - including minis and juniors program. Regardless, The point is not that the existing club structures aren't moveable - quite the opposite, we need the ability to be agile, nor that there can never be a newly created sides. The point is that we need a strong base to build from - and that is quite clearly the strong clubs in Sydney and Brisbane.