At the risk of telling the same story that billions of Aussie rugby fans have told the morning after a big Wallabies loss at Eden Park, let me name a hypothetical team of Australian rugby players currently contracted with clubs overseas and who are thus not eligible for Wallabies selection.
1. Les Makin
2. Tolu Latu
3. Ollie Hoskins
4. Will Skelton
5. Rory Arnold
6. Jack Dempsey
7. Liam Gill
8. Sean McMahon
9. Ryan Louwrens
10. Isaac Lucas
11. Taqele Naiyaravoro
12. Samu Kerevi
13. Billy Meakes
14. Luke Morahan
15. Jesse Mogg
The purpose of naming this team, of course, is to illustrate the quantity of Australian talent that could be available in an ideal world to represent our Super Rugby clubs and the Wallabies.
To be as realistic as possible I’ve avoided naming players who already served their fair share of time in Australian rugby and have moved overseas for the tail end of their careers.
Players that fit this description who come to mind include Sekope Kepu, Scott Fardy, Scott Higginbotham, Will Genia, Quade Cooper and Kurtley Beale.
An interesting point is that many of these sorts of players signed short contracts overseas in the middle of their careers including Higginbotham, Cooper and Beale, and played good rugby either side of this stint.
Whilst COVID-19 may temporarily plug the drain of Australian rugby players to Japan and Europe in search of lucrative playing contracts, international travel is gradually opening back up and as time goes on apprehension and fear will dissolve in favour of the lure of the Euro and the Yen.
I don’t begrudge players for this and frankly am not a fan of bagging professional athletes from behind the computer screen for any reason.
Everyone understands the nature of a rugby player’s finite number of years in their prime and their obligations to their family to utilise this time effectively. Players need be concerned about their life after retiring from the sport, and there are only so many jobs available in commentary, of which vacancies don’t seem to open up too often.
Of course, these players are only human as well, and one can’t blame any of them for finding appealing the thought of relocating overseas for an extended period of time to a new country while playing rugby to experience a different lifestyle, just like how many businessmen around the world relocate abroad to work in a new environment and usually for greater income.
(Photo by Cameron Spencer/Getty Images)
I don’t believe that Rugby Australia is naïve of these conflicting interests held by every player it employs. What I do think is that they could actually use these to their advantage.
The market forces moderate the distribution of rugby talent around the world according to supply and demand. Unfortunately, demand by Australia for the rugby product macroscopically does not correspond with the supply of players.
In fact, demand in overseas markets outweighs that derived from the Australian population and hence French, British and Japanese clubs are able to outbid the Tahs, Reds, Brums, Rebels and Force for player contracts.
Demand for rugby will not increase in the short term. Only improvements in on-field results and the management of the game that allow it to better compete with the AFL and rugby league will help to increase demand for rugby, increase revenue from professional fixtures and pay our top players enough money to stay in Australia for longer.
How many locally produced players lost to overseas clubs is too many? How young must an Australian player be when signing a contract with an overseas club to constitute as too young?
Australian rugby wrestles with the problem of sustaining and improving a domestic competition while driving greater performances from the Wallabies. If it abstains from selecting its best players who may have signed higher paying contracts overseas, the national team may not achieve the best results it can in the short term.
But it’s a slippery slope, and if it opens the floodgates too wide without the exclusive incentive of Wallabies representative opportunities, the cost to the domestic competition may be irreparable. A decline in the quality of the domestic competition may have a flow on effect to the local pathways causing huge long term damage to the game in this country.
Therefore, in the interests of easing the financial burden of retaining the top players in Super Rugby, while also facilitating the best possible results for the Wallabies by allowing for selection of the best players, without depleting the local playing stock, Rugby Australia should rethink their contracting and better align their interests with their players.
A new type of player contract would allow current and fringe Wallabies to sign lucrative contracts with clubs overseas.
Not only this, but it would allow them to play for the Wallabies if they were in form. The difference is that within the contract would be a guarantee for the player to return to their Australian club after a predetermined overseas stay of roughly one or two years.
Players eligible for this contract would be those who have played for at least a certain number of years in Australian rugby, perhaps six. They don’t have to have played for the Wallabies in this time in my opinion because the key point is that they have agreed to return to their Super Rugby club after one or two years.
Due to the aforementioned reasons it is natural for players to seek opportunities in competitions abroad for reasons of financial gain and personal growth and in many cases this outweighs the lure of the Wallabies jersey.
Australian rugby should help players to scratch this itch if they wish to do so by implementing medium term contracts with a guarantee to return to Australian rugby, after a season or in some cases two seasons overseas. This will overall be to the benefit of Australian rugby.
By allowing players to take “playing sabbaticals” or “exchanges” Rugby Australia will be able to control the flow of its talent overseas.
(Mark Kolbe/Getty Images)
Furthermore, by inviting top players to make extended stays at overseas clubs, Rugby Australia can use the budgets of rich Japanese and French to pay the wages of its elite players and Wallabies in the trust of their long term commitment to Australian rugby.
This contract may be able to prevent a promising young wallaby from signing an indefinite contract overseas and instead lead them to sign a contract of finite length with the guarantee to return home after some time in a new environment to rejuvenate mentally and rediscover lost form.
A number of players have benefitted from time abroad such as a recent example in Andrew Kellaway. Maybe a change in scenery could be of benefit to players looking to move overseas who are not in the same form that earned them their reputation in the first place such as Jack Dempsey. A contract guaranteeing them to return after some time would ensure they are not lost to Australian rugby forever.
Of particular interest is the career of 27-year-old Matt Phillip. After a shaky 2020 where Phillip was a shining light in a Wallabies team lean on depth and even leaner on wins. It appeared all hope was lost when he signed on for a stint overseas with French club Pau, however news soon followed that he sought an opportunity overseas to improve his tight forward play in the more attritional French competition with full intentions to return home and bolster the Wallabies squad.
In a similar vein, even the Wallabies captain Michael Hooper left Australian rugby for dead in its darkest days during the COVID-19 pandemic, signing with Toyota in Japan for a season in the Japanese Top League, while in his absence his Waratahs fell to their first ever winless season.
However, this narrative, commonly perpetuated by Queenslanders, neglects the fact that Hooper timed his overseas sabbatical during this period to ease the financial pressure on Rugby Australia during the economic recession. This is not to mention, of course, Hooper’s loyalty to Australian rugby since 2010 during which time he has probably played more minutes than any other player in the country.
Michael Hooper in action against France. (Photo by Daniel Pockett/Getty Images)
In both of these cases, players have timed their own overseas contracts with the best interests of not only their own personal experience and development in mind but also the best interests of Australian rugby overall.
As a mere Wallabies fan who has observed the vigour with which the Wallabies defended their own line against the French this series, it comes as no surprise that its players are committed to the team’s cause and the team’s success.
So with these contract guarantees, Australian rugby can reward its high performing players with the chance to pursue short opportunities abroad, enriching their personal lives and being exposed to a different style of rugby with the agreement to return to Australia.
With this system in place, Australian rugby will be able to convert some of its Rory Arnolds, Luke Morahans and Sean McMahons from talented journeymen into Wallabies stalwarts. It allows the players to exercise their right to ply their trade overseas and experience a different style of rugby and culture.
In exchange for the players’ loyalty, there is a greater chance for them to spent the majority of their career in Australian rugby, even if this career is split into two halves either side of a stay overseas.
Of course, complications may arise due to clashes between the international calendar and some of the European competitions however overall the concept is certainly achievable. Even this year, Matt Phillip and Michael Hooper have both returned from France and Japan respectively to play for the Wallabies.
This type of contract essentially shifts Rugby Australia’s investment into a player, the contract, from a short term investment horizon into a medium or long term investment horizon.
Of course, the bigger picture is to increase the proportion of a player’s entire career that is actually spent playing in Australia.
It is inevitable that most players will seek opportunities overseas at some point and my proposition of these contract guarantees actually helps support players to do this in the best interests of Australian rugby.
A contract with this condition in place would improve the transparency in contract negotiation between Rugby Australia and its players and would help to get the best of both worlds of managing the domestic game. The contract would help maintain the quality of the Super Rugby squads by allowing for the control of flow of rugby talent out of Australia by timing deserving players’ overseas stints in small batches.
It would also increase standards within the Wallabies squad by allowing for some overseas players who have committed to returning to Australian rugby to be selected, giving the national coach a greater pool of talent to select from.
This contract really does take the best of both worlds from either side of the Wallabies eligibility debate. It gives Australian rugby the ability to moderate the amount of its talent playing overseas at any one time. Obviously there will still be players who move overseas forever however this contract gives Australian rugby far more leverage.
A further point is that through increasing formalisation of player contracts to cooperative overseas clubs could lead to the explicit creation of relationships between Super Rugby clubs and clubs overseas. These relationships could establish regular intervals where players head overseas.
An example where this has already occurred is with the Reds announcing an “alliance” with the Panasonic Wild Knights in Japan, no doubt a product of the close bond between respective head coaches Brad Thorn and Robbie Deans.
This agreement will incorporate player and coach exchanges and an overall combined effort to high performance and improvement between the two clubs to help facilitate exactly the type of smart player contracting I have described.
If a club is already attempting to construct such a scenario, why not apply the model to all clubs and invest in the game’s future?
Doctordbx
Roar Rookie
This would be good for the Wallabies (in the short term) and devastating for every tier under it. Rugby in Australia is more than just the Wallabies, a myopic vision that has got us to the horrible predicament we are in all already.
The Yabbie
Roar Rookie
I have a simple solution BH101. For every 2 years spent in Australia allow players one season O/S to exercise their curiosity and bolster their pay. This would push their value down to a reasonable level and make our prime stock a little less attractive given players of high profile are eligible for international duty thus lies the risk of having to release them. Secondly it encourage player to keep one eye at home. Maybe not severing all mental ties with the mother land and keeping them attached mentally. If our clubs could get some kind of compensation from the rich north that would be a bonus but I'm not sure how this could be executed. As mentioned many would benefit a different playing environment too.
carnivean
Roar Rookie
It's easy to show an example of an entrenched Wallaby that could earn more money overseas. Marika Koroibete. BH101's idea essentially has the player sign 2 contracts in the same way that the current super rugby players have 2 contracts, one with the super rugby franchise and another with the ARU. The ARU contract gets set up strategically and the player signs a shorter term contract with a club in another league. The ARU contract sets various expectations including the return of the player to the domestic league and availability for the Wallabies.
carnivean
Roar Rookie
Contracts where the player is contracted to return to AU after a stint in a foreign league. Where the AU management structure helps find the right fit for the players they want to develop in other leagues, and who want to try something new for a while, and help facilitate that within a plan.
carnivean
Roar Rookie
The quota system was always meant to lead to squads being selected where the quota wasn't even discussed. The continued development and inclusion of quota eligible players was the means to the end, that being teams where they are included on merit alone.
Zero_Cool
Roar Rookie
I'm meaning guys before they are ready or needed in Super Rugby. An example could be Cater Gordon who last year was probably borderline ready to play some Super Rugby, but the Reds weren't ready to play him, so send him to the US/Japan for a season subsides his pay and get him some time at the wheel. Obviously Top League or Major League Rugby aren't a replacement for guys getting Super Rugby time, but it's a good attractive bonus you can throw at an Australian School Boy... You want a year or two in the US/Japan before we bring you back to play Super Rugby. Plus mix in some kind of subsidy from the MRL/Top Leage and it's a win, win, win situation.
jcmasher
Roar Rookie
Nice article BH and well written. There's definitely an issue with the balance of providing players and coaches with a nice bank balance at the end of what is a pretty short career and then having enough good players remain in Australia so that the game here is at the level that attracts and retains supporters. While I agree with the idea of managing this through a good contract process I think there's a number of issues. Firstly, I think the European and other clubs will not willingly sign contracts that don't give them control over the players. To a certain extent I'm with them as they need to look after their interests. Secondly, I think that this needs a level of centralised control within RA that just doesn't exist at the moment. I am not sure that the current structure will get to this either and I'm not sure a major restructure is available as an option at the moment.
jcmasher
Roar Rookie
I think the biggest issue to these changes is bringing in a central contracting process. This would mean the "old & Bold" from QLD and NSW in particular would have to agree to relinquish some of their hold on things. With the way these selfish pr!cks have screwed rugby and RA for years I just can't see it happening anytime soon.
TJ-Go Force!
Roar Rookie
If we can’t develop a genuine domestic comp, or try get some kind of inclusion in NZ’s NPC, I would say 4-5 month loan deals to European clubs might need to be a solution. As the super rugby season is so short and what do these players do if not in wallabies between now and when preseason starts proper in November/December? For example, Billy Meakes went on loan at Irish for 3 months. He was unreal for them and it was unreal for his rugby. Now he’s killing it for the Giltinis. We should be saying to guys like Scott Young, Blyth, Samu, Stewart, Robertson, Lee Warner, Koteka, etc. These types of fringe players. See if you can find yourself a club for the rest of 2021 in Europe. Play as much rugby as you can. Come back in January ahead of the Super season. I know this will be easier post Covid. But these players will earn some good money, and be better players for it in the long run and be playing more competitive rugby than Schute Or Qld Cup.
TJ-Go Force!
Roar Rookie
The biggest issue we have is that we aren’t signing anyone on anything longer than a 2 year deal at the moment. Even Angus Scott Young and Liam Wright have only resigned for 1 year. The system can only work if we start can start offering long enough contracts where we can then have the option of a loan year to a club of the player’s choice included in the contract. This might keep a few of these ‘greedy’ player agents happy and keep a few more players in super rugby and wallabies gold. 1 or 2 year deals though won’t cut it.
West Aussie Exile
Roar Rookie
I agree, Tim O. Possibly Kerevi, Arnold and Skelton but even then they would have to prove their worth back in Australia. Thanks BH, for the post -the right questions and issues, I'm not sure about the suggested solutions, though. Short term sabbaticals like Hooper and AB's, yes, but contracts longer don't usually work. Once you leave a job, even if you've liked it there, it's never the same when you go back!
jeznez
Roar Guru
I feel once you have Paenga-Amosa, Latu, Arnold, Arnold, Skelton, McMahon, Naisarani, Kerevi, Koroibete and Morahan in the unavailable bracket then there is a fair bit talent that would be candidates for the top side missing. And that is against a backdrop where Covid has slowed recruitment from the North. We’ll have to see how we hold up. I felt we were missing 10 genuine candidates for this series between overseas and injured. To me it made the performance more impressive (knowing France were missing so many as well but they’ll get all theirs back).
Ray L
Roar Rookie
There is a persistent narrative throughout this and other threads, particularly from some ill-informed Kiwi commentators, that the standard of AU Rugby will continue to drift along as it has done over the past couple of decades and will forever be inferior to that in NZ. Either through ignorance or an unrealistic sense of superiority, they fail to acknowledge the changes which are now underway within RA in terms of governance and structural reform to broaden the base for elite player development into the District Junior clubs and the Public School system, which has been ignored for many years, instead of being reliant on the limited number of Private School competitions. This strategy is now beginning to pay dividends after only a few years, with the Australian Schoolboys and Under 20s comprehensively beating their NZ counterparts in 2019. The Under 20s thrashed NZ 24-0 and went on to be narrowly beaten by France in the Under 20 World Championship Final. Looking to the future, so much for AU Rugby being inferior to NZ, or anyone else for that matter. Many of those Under 20 players are now graduating into the Super Rugby AU teams and the current Wallaby squad and I expect that trend will continue into the future. I have no doubt that the standard of AU Rugby will lift accordingly. This is in no small way due to the retention of Schoolboy and Under 20 talented players in Rugby, with RA’s aggressive recruiting strategy in competition with the NRL, which in past years recruited the cream of talent. There is a vast reservoir of player talent within the Rugby codes which is ripe for the picking. It would be a mistake to assume that AU Rugby standards won’t improve beyond what has been the case up until recently. My point in emphasising this, is to put to bed the inference that an AU domestic competition wouldn’t be viable and that the standard of AU Rugby would suffer if we didn’t play NZ teams on a regular basis. Nothing could be further from the truth. This years Super Rugby AU appears to have been successful as a stand alone competition, notwithstanding the poor results in the TT competition, not to mention we’re in the middle of a pandemic. A greater exposure on Stan Sport, at a more reasonable price, and FTA on the Nine network has also helped. Hopefully, Nine will expand its coverage on FTA to more than one game a week in the future. However, there aren’t enough teams to make a fully domestic National competition sustainable in the longer term. Forgive me for being repetitive, but my preferred domestic competition model, call it what you will, would be for an 8 team fully professional structure initially (let’s not bite off more than we can chew), consisting of the Brumbies, Rebels, Western Force and 5 regionally based teams in Sydney and Brisbane, with their respective Premier Clubs as feeders. My suggested NSW and QLD structured teams would be Sydney North, South and West and in Brisbane, North and South. This is where that missing tribal following can be created in Sydney and Brisbane. It closely mirrors the original ARC concept, which was marginalised by the lack of support from the NSWRU. I can’t see any relevance for nomadic “Country” teams (no other National football codes have them), although regionally based teams such as Newcastle or Townsville could be added in the future as the competition matures. This is where PE could play a role in bankrolling a purely domestic competition and creating some incentive for talented club players, who are otherwise overlooked, to remain in Australia with the greater number of pathways available in more fully professional teams. In the absence of Super Rugby as we’ve known it, NZ could organise their own domestic competition as they see fit, whether it be a fully professional NPC or a modified version of it. I would still support a short sharp TT crossover Champions League involving the top 2 or 3 teams from each domestic competition. It could be expanded in future years to include the Japanese League and Pacific Islands.
Rhys Bosley
Roar Pro
I'm not sure any of them are so far ahead of the pack that I would worry about it to be honest, based on recent history at least a couple will be back to try their luck come World Cup time anyway.
TimO
Roar Rookie
Having the players named in the overseas 15 back would boost Aussie super teams. But would I pick any of them ahead of the last Wallabies starting 15? After watching the Wallabies beat France on Saturday, no I wouldn't.
scubasteve
Guest
Even better. Let's send them o/s to develop on a trade system. France you want out best new talent then you pay us. We will contract them over to you on a transfer fee for a period of time with options to bring them back.
scubasteve
Guest
This all sounds good until you think about the following scenario. Hooper goes overseas for two years. No issues here. Carl Tizzano comes in and fills his spot; develops as a player We now have a situation where we either have Carl out the door or Hooper out the door in terms of retention due to salary issues. Yes the cream rises to the top. But then there is also the issue of players coming back and not having form. What do we do with them? send them back o/s? Unlike NRL we only have five teams. The five teams themselves can't afford large squads and club rugby isn't the space for proper talent. I just see a player squeeze. I would though like to see young talent being able to play o/s or in other SR franchises to develop. Then we bring them in if they are worthy. Perhaps as you suggest we send young talent over to Japan and French rugby to develop and then we bring them back selectively? That to me sounds like a dream job if I am a young kid learning to ply my trade. Get o/s, earn some coin and then if ready fly back into the best comp in the world.
CPM
Roar Rookie
It’s a great one-sided idea which does not look at the other side of the coin. Clubs are looking for long term commitments. That is on average 3 year contracts as a minimum. These “sabbaticals” on offer only by Japanese clubs will soon come to an end with the launch of the new Top League. They are going full time professional and will need full time commitments.
pm
Roar Rookie
He must mean Sam Carter. .. Ball Handling, I like your article and it is something worth continuing to find a better solution for, but I can't quite see in your article what it is you are proposing. I jumped back and forwards a few times over the last 5 or so paragraphs. But it seems you're basically just saying be less strict than the Giteau rule. Or is it more specific? Sorry if I missed it
Rugby Geek
Roar Rookie
BH, All I can say is I have been there and moved on. The secret to grand plans is to keep them simple. The fact is the Aussie rugby market is way too small and you can’t blame anyone looking to make the big bucks. ARU & RA boards have always been obsessed with the fear they won’t win test matches and make a motza so they can pay bills, grow castles, and lunch all over the world. But if you look past that you would agree is that players become highly marketable in Europe and Japanese club markets with test caps on their resume. So we should allow Scott and Dave to offer “squad train-on contracts for possible selections to the Wallabies for those who we feel we need to fill gaps in the local cohort of players. Essentially, if you’re good enough, you can have the chance to play for the Green & Gold. But overseas players don’t get a retainer contract from RA they only get match fees. So when they leave they know the deal. If you want to commit locally then a contract can be discussed. That way the likes of Skelton & co who have developed well overseas can be available for test roles, through a process. But when you really look closely at the OS players there are not that many you would want over the current crop. Remember, Rugby is a young man’s game, and every year a new bunch of stunning young players leaves the U20’s ready for the next stage of their professional career. So, looking abroad who do we really need at the moment? Maybe some front row, a few locks perhaps, loose forwards possibly not a back or two, mostly wingers and F/backs. So when we finally get over ourselves and let the player market be bigger for the WB’s then we will rise in our standings and live happily ever after! Or so the fairy tale goes.