It didn’t get much traction on the east coast, but comments from Western Force coach Tim Sampson in a Nick Taylor article in The West Australian last week added yet more weight to a growing sentiment in Australian rugby.
“We had seen enough of Ollie over the last year or so to back him, but without a second-tier competition there is an element of risk for some players jumping from club rugby to Super Rugby with nothing in between,” Sampson said of young backrower Ollie Callan, who earned his first starts for the Force in the final games of Super Rugby trans-Tasman.
“Certainly, there is a bit of the unknown and it’s a huge step for some players who might be thrown into the deep end when they might not be quite ready.
“Without a two-tier competition there is a gaping hole. It is an extremely important stage in a player’s development,” Sampson said.
It’s a pretty obvious statement based on plenty of evidence just this year alone. Callan has made a pretty good fist of Super Rugby so far, and so has someone like Isaac Henry with the Queensland Reds.
But for every Callan and Henry, there’s someone like young Brumbies prop Archer Holz, and Waratahs winger James Turner, hugely talented players both of them, but they quickly learned just how big a step it now is from club rugby to the professional level.
Holz, at least, had been training with the Brumbies squad as a rookie pro; Turner and several other Waratahs call-ups in this season of injury hell were just plucked straight from first grade.
Tim Sampson’s comments were accurate, but the accuracy was only part of it. More significant was the fact that he was now the third current Australian Super Rugby coach – of five – to publicly lament the loss of the National Rugby Championship last year.
Now, the reasons for the NRC’s demise are obvious: Rugby Australia simply couldn’t afford to run the competition in the face of brutal and necessary cost-cutting. Even if they wanted to play the NRC last season, there were simply much higher financial priorities.
In many ways and to many people, it was a convenient casualty of a pandemic that impacted the governing body’s finances like they’d never been hit before.
But while the reasoning for discontinuing the NRC were understandable, the impact of not having that vital development bridge between Premier Rugby around the country and the Super Rugby programs hit home far quicker than was perhaps anticipated.
All five states were hit by injuries at different times, forcing them to call in injury replacements and granting hurried opportunities to academy and club players well before they would normally be declared ready. The Brumbies used 37 players through Super Rugby, and the Waratahs’ tally is quite likely higher.
Only a week before Tim Sampson had his say, Reds coach Brad Thorn had already made his view clear.
“The thing I’ll say is, my concern, is not having the NRC, this is the second year now,” Thorn said a few days after the Reds beat the Chiefs in Townsville.
“And you look at the Crusaders, they’ve got Tasman and they’ve got Canterbury, two of the strongest teams in the NPC, plus the academy.
“And for us we had (Queensland) Country and (Brisbane) City and you look at all our players who have come through that middle ground between club and Super.
“So not having the NRC, to me, it’s a tough one. Something has to be done.”
Brad Thorn. Down with N-P-C. (Photo by Chris Hyde/Getty Images)
McKellar has been on this same page for some time, though takes a view that whether it’s something like the NRC or something that brings existing clubs together on the national stage, it doesn’t matter. But something is still needed to bridge the ever-increasing gap.
Back in late April, he again raised the idea of an FA Cup-style national knockout competition that was first raised more than a year ago as the broadcast negotiations heated up.
“Having that next tier of competition is important moving forward. I think that [Cup-style tournament] is fair, then everyone is involved and the best survive,” the new Wallabies forwards coach said at the time.
“You’ll get your upsets which will create a whole lot of interest, like we see in soccer both overseas and in Australia. We see who the best of the best is.”
When three of the five coaches are saying player development is now harder without an NRC or some other competition in its place, you’d like to think their concerns were being heard at head office. But there hadn’t been much evidence that that was the case.
You can imagine my surprise, then, when RA CEO Andy Marinos was suddenly and enthusiastically agreeing with Thorn and the other coaches, even lamenting the fact that without that next tier competition, Australia will only continue to drop further behind New Zealand, South Africa, and even England and France.
“He’s (Thorn) not wrong, he’s not wrong,” Marinos told Christy Doran for an article on the Fox Sports site.
“If you look at any great structure in the world, there are those competitions and it’s a part of what I’ve been saying since I’ve come in. We’ve got to have a bottom-up approach, not a top-down approach to the game in this country if we’re going to be sustainable.
“As we start embarking on a new strategic plan and a new strategic direction, the competition structure of having a second-tier competition – for want of a better word – that underpins what’s happening at Super Rugby level is going to become even more important because we have a group of players who play Super Rugby and can drop back into the Shute Shield and Hospital Cup but then after those competitions finish there’s very little rugby for them.”
Marinos went on to say that competition structures were being floated and determined, and that “I’d like to look at getting a second-tier structure underway in 2022 at least, so we can start building momentum”.
Getting Australia’s rugby structures right were also going to play an important role in building toward RA’s bid to host the 2027 Rugby World Cup and, you could safely assume, cashing in on and benefiting from the event thereafter.
“If we can have that by the time we have the World Cup in 2027 and we have a flourishing first, second and third-tier domestic rugby competition structure, I think that would be a really big statement for the game,” he said.
Well, colour me shocked.
This was the first public utterances I’d seen from anyone with the highest levels of Rugby Australia over the last year that were different to the very public position that utilising and strengthening existing Premier Rugby clubs around the country was the best way forward.
Marinos’ comment, that “it’s a part of what I’ve been saying since I’ve come in” made my ears prick up too.
Because that wasn’t the vibe I got when I raised the future of the NRC during a meet-and-greet discussion with Marinos I was part of in Canberra back in February.
Promoting the game at the community and club level around the country, strengthening club comps in Canberra, Melbourne, and Perth so that they were not too dissimilar to the levels in Brisbane and Sydney, and looking at ways of bringing existing clubs together on a national stage was very much the plan, Marinos told us, which was consistent with what Chairman Hamish McLennan had been saying since he’d come in earlier last year.
So, if Marinos had been talking about implementing – or reinstating, more accurately – a next tier competition in between club and Super Rugby, he’d not been saying it much. Because no-one from Rugby Australia had been.
Hence my surprise at his comments now.
I’ve maintained ever since the demise of the NRC that I would be pleasantly surprised if it ever returned, and that remains the case.
Even with Marinos now seemingly putting it back on the agenda, I remain hopeful rather than encouraged, and still a long way short of confident.
But the fact it is back on the agenda and up for discussion again, at least, is a very welcome development, for fans, players, and coaches alike.
David Begg
Guest
As one of those former faceless men. The president of a Shiite shield club in 2014, and president of the SRU 2017-2019 lets clear up a few of the regularly perpetuated “facts” that appear on the site. 1. All SS clubs supported the formation of the NRC in 2014. A unanimous vote took place to this effect. 2. In the case of my club, Manly, we contributed $50,000 over 3 years to the Rays. The Rats, Norths and Gordon did the same. 3. We moved our competition and cut it back 4 weeks (costing approx an additional 100 in revenue) to support the BRC. 4. We encouraged all of our players to play for the rays but could not mandate that. 5. In 2015, 2 days after a brutal GF which we lost to Eastwood 12-9 11 of our first team were at training with the Rays. So please let’s not perpetuate the lazy and frankly false narrative that NRC failed b/c of SS clubs. It is intellectually dishonest.
Lichtfield
Roar Rookie
Some of it might be paying wages for people based in Sydney versus paying wages for a workforce based in Auckland etc but I think you make an excellent point Jacko. It is hard to argue with those financial stats - Brett says RA have to administer a bigger population but do we have a bigger rugby population to administer or a smaller one. Wikipedia (FWIW) has Australia with 86,952 registered players and NZ with 156,893 registered players. Those figures are old - I suspect they have possibly declined for both countries although the number of female players has probably increased for both over that time. All players (regardless of gender) need to be administered by the governing body though so that doesn't make a difference.
Lichtfield
Roar Rookie
I think they take the full package but will probably only make money initially from Wallaby games and some SR AU/SR TT games. If we want any more than that shown we will have to pay either cash or in contra advertising as you say.
Lichtfield
Roar Rookie
Another alternative might be to re-imagine/re-invigorate Global Rapid Rugby (GRR) and include five Australian sides in that competition. Ideally, the whole timetable needs to be looked at but, in the short term we could play the SR TT in the Feb - June period from July - October/November we could play NRC/GRR. For the Australian teams we would keep the existing five Australian franchises initially. Squads would be made up of non-Wallaby squad members from the Super Rugby teams and their academy players. These are players that a generally missing from Club Rugby anyway so they aren't necessarily losing anyone (they just aren't having them come back after the SR TT was finished). This may keep costs for Australian franchises down a little - they don't need to contract new players - just play their existing squad players. Coaching staff are the same, no need for new training set-ups etc - all run by the existing SR AU clubs/franchises but some games could be moved to country areas. A bit more product for Stan too that should be above the club level competitions. Add to that 4 - 6 of the teams that played in GRR - Malaysia Valke (with some backing from SA sides), South China (HK), Beijing (Bay of Plenty), Fiji, Tonga, Samoa - funding of some teams from World Rugby and perhaps some from corporate sponsors (China spends millions in the Pacific looking to increase their influence - this could be a vehicle from them and others) to help develop rugby in the region. if it was a 10 or 11 team comp with everyone playing each other once (Home one year Away the next). More Australian sides could be added over time. Keep the junior development requirements that the GRR had for their sides. 9 - 10 comp games - 2 - 3 weeks of finals - run over the 3 months of the northern hemisphere tour and the Players not playing for the Wallabies have a comp to drop back into that is, hopefully, above club level (certainly it should be for the Australia sides), it helps develop rugby in the Asian and Pacific region, brings in some new audience (hopefully). Players who are in the frame for the Wallabies but not in the current squad have a comp that they can be noticed in. Players who haven't been exposed to professionalism get a beginning exposure to the practicalities, training, travel etc. It has some shortfalls but it I think it overcomes at least some of the blocks imposed by
Tom G
Roar Rookie
I suspect that Randwick would actually love all the power that is attributed to them by those who know nothing about the Shute Shield other than one team
Micko
Roar Rookie
Kerry Stokes?
AndyS
Guest
There are less than 1,400 of those in the whole place.
K.F.T.D.
Roar Rookie
Good to hear from you. Keep the faith. We trudge from ruck to ruck.
Phil
Roar Rookie
Interesting but nothing in the article to say what the NRC actually achieved in its time. Can anyone actually point out what it achieved? It always seems to come up when coaches need to defend poor performances or poor selections. If coaches can’t select the right players from premier rugby something is wrong with their selections. If their results aren’t good, maybe it’s their game plan or they choose players based on physical attributes more than rugby smarts. I’m any case, what difference did the NRC made to our Super Rugby results? It didn’t.
Tom G
Roar Rookie
You keep telling yourself that
sheek
Roar Guru
Brett, As is often my want, I view this matter somewhat differently. Of course Australian rugby requires something else between premier rugby district club & super rugby, like an ARC/NRC. That's because the Southern Hemisphere stuffed around with what was a sound, broad operating structure back in 1995, as they sought elusive revenue pots of gold at the end of imaginary rainbows. There's a saying if your primary purpose for existence is purely money, you'll eventually come unstuck. Southern Hemisphere rugby has come unstuck because it chased irrational revenue streams at the expense of sound structures. How is South African rugby relocating its provincial teams to the northern hemisphere away from home, an improvement for them? With the Springboks to follow? Back in 1995, Southern Hemisphere rugby had a solid structure in place that required fleshing out, not displacing with other comps that have struggled for permanency. The Super 10 was like a Champion's Cup, which it should have remained. But NZ rugby refused to have the fight that was necessary with its minor unions. It piked out, instead creating five hybrid franchises. Logically, NZ should have sought an 8 team NPC comp of say, Auckland, Canterbury, Wellington, Otago, Waikato, Bay of Plenty, Hawke's Bay & Tasman. Pretty much the provinces occupying the 8 largest centres. Practical common sense thinking that was sadly absent form the debate. SA could have expanded it's Currie Cup with Western Province, Northern Gauteng, Kwazulu-Natal, Gauteng, Free State, Eastern Province, Border & Griqualand. Australia, the poor cousin, would have been forced to expand in stages, NSW, Queensland, ACT, WA & Victoria eventually being joined by perhaps South Australia, Eastern Australia (Newcastle) & NQ (Townsville). NZ & SA would already have had an 8 team, 14 home & away season plus several finals matches. Australia (& also Argentina) would have eventually joined them in time. That's a minimum meaty season of 14-17 matches that doesn't require splitting super rugby & NRC teams to fill a hole that didn't need to be created in the first place. Nor would I take any notice of anything Andy Marinos says. He was part of the problem as chief executive of SANZAAR. Although he had plenty of help there. As for the Pacific nations, the proposed two divisions by 12 teams International league or whatever it was called, would have been invaluable for the Islanders. But self-interest took precedence. Back in 1996 when rugby became professional, Southern Hemisphere rugby took the wrong fork in the road. Now the Southern hemisphere is paying for its mistakes. Now Australian rugby doesn't have enough money to buy a candle (poetic license used).
AndyS
Guest
What happens in Melbourne or Perth is irrelevant to Sydney. The available evidence could easily support the conclusion that supporters there keep their hands firmly in their pockets, or that all the genuinely parochial supporters have been cornered by the NRL, or perhaps that their parochialness has already been activated in support of the Shute Shield and nothing else. In which case a Sydney heavy SR replacement dies on the vine, along with the code if it has placed all its eggs in that basket. The Shute Shield true believers might even see that as a strong tactical move on their part, allowing them to pick up the remaining pieces and achieve their most fervent wish.
piru
Roar Rookie
It’s been given chances and
failedbeen white anted by selfish parties. Fixed it for yapiru
Roar Rookie
Mick what do you reckon would be the best way to get more indigenous kids into rugby? Is there even an awareness of it out in the communities or is it all AFL?
piru
Roar Rookie
So what do you do? Give NSW an ultimatum, the NRC is going ahead, they can either be a part of it or not. If they continue to be recalcitrant, form the new NRC without them and go on our merry ways. Or to quote Danerys Targaryen "They may live in our new world or die in their old one"
piru
Roar Rookie
Oof!
1997 Brumbies
Roar Rookie
I see three options for the NRC if it was to come into fruition. Option 1: 10 NRC teams of which each super team runs 2 each. After the wallabies are taken out each super team should have about 30 players each left on average not including academy players (40ish with academy players involved). So each NRC team would only be looking to recruit at most 10 players who have professional aspirations from club rugby. The 10 teams and feeder franchise would be: - North Sydney (Waratahs) - Manly, Norths, Warringah, Gordon - South Sydney (Waratahs) - Souths, SUni, Easts, Randwick - Western Sydney (Rebels) - West Harbour, Parramatta, Penrith, Eastwood - NSW Country (Brumbies) - Wildfires, All other NSW county comps and ACT regional comp - North Brisbane (Reds) - Brothers, GPS, Norths, Wests - South Brisbane (Reds) - QUni, Sunnybank, Souths, Easts - QLD County (Force) - Bond, All other QLD County comps - Melbourne (Rebels) - Melbourne, Adelaide, Tassie Premier Grades - Canberra - ACT Premier Grade - Perth - WA Premier Grade Each team would be made up of a majority of full time professionals with aspiring players added in. Options 2: Remain how it was with NSW and QLD having a City and Country team each making a 7 teams comp. Option 3: Having each super teams academy play in a comp with Tonga, Fiji, and Samoa academy teams that feed into the Drua and Manoa teams making an 8 team comp. (I believe our academy sides should already be playing throughout the Super RugbyAU season already but if its not possible this is a good alternative).
piru
Roar Rookie
Any club comp will basically be no higher standard than suburban comps – it’s the same teams. Precisely - I don't know why we are still having to have this discussion.
AndyS
Guest
Agreed, one of the reasons I now lean towards professionalisation of the existing representative pathways such that players in a particular location would be part of their local NRC system from the time they were selected for regional age comps. Those already largely reflect an NRC team distribution, or even the old ARC one, tied to defined regions. I believe ACT, Vic and WA have just had a round of U18 matches, with two teams from each of Brisbane and Sydney squaring off soon (Country in both states having separate teams again, I think). IMO those teams should each be part of a larger structure right the way up to a senior team, by which time the players would be semi-pro and have been part of that team since they were kids. Which doesn't mean they wouldn't still be an integral part of their local club, just like 'state' players of all ages always historically were. It was only really making the NSW and Q'ld state teams professional that derailed that, although it would still fit if the major sub-Union rep teams became the semi-pro NRC teams feeding them.
Micko
Roar Rookie
4 premierships and multiple grand finals in the past 25 years...they're certainly having a good run recently!