So the latest Rugby World Cup is over and the recriminations are well underway, the Wallabies coach has fallen on his sword, a replacement will be selected in due course and the inevitable ‘independent’ review will soon start.
Based upon history, the wider community stakeholders, (including us the fans) are unlikely to see the resulting report and in due course, the dust will settle and business as usual will recommence.
This is, unless we the supporters and fans of rugby and those men and women within the wider rugby community who share our concerns are willing to exercise our voices and alter the trajectory of Australian rugby.
Without developing an effective voice for change, it would seem inevitable that our slide into irrelevance in world rugby will continue. The revenue base will continue to decline and the available talent pool will diminish further. Were this scenario to unfold, it is foreseeable that professional rugby will effectively cease in Australia in the future!
We all hear constantly about the revenue windfall that will come from the upcoming Lions and World Cup events; yet how confident are we that this administration has the collective ability to:
1) provide the means to produce a competitive Wallabies squad for these events
2) invest the expected windfall wisely (remember the waste following the last World Cup held in Australia)
As a representative of Wallabies supporters – which we all know is the hardest proposition in international sport – I say that even consideration of such an outcome is reprehensible and is not OK for fans and the wider rugby community.
Quite simply, we the wider rugby community need to become an irresistible team of change agents speaking a unified and clear message that resonates with all people of influence in the administration and direction of rugby in Australia. I would respectfully suggest that such an approach needs to eliminate personal attacks and infighting amongst ourselves, team/club bias and any other characteristic that undermines our message.
Any change program will have several identified and prioritised ‘work-streams’ within the program that are invariably informed by the findings of some form of ‘independent review’ (sound familiar?).
The review can reasonably be expected to have assembled a list of lessons learned from the matters under review and such lessons will have been informed by interviews with those directly involved and where available, objective evidence.
The independent review will produce a report which outlines the findings and associated evidence arising from the exercise. From these findings, the review team would develop a prioritised set of recommendations for consideration and further action by the organisation’s leadership team. All of the above is standard practice for such an activity.
Thereafter, the rubber meets the road at the leadership table: specifically, acceptance or rejection of the review recommendations.
It would be considered normal for the leadership to make some ‘adjustments’ to the recommendations. Thereafter, the leadership team and the accepted recommendations initiate the identification of the program scope and associated resourcing requirements.
Once established, the leadership team would then engage the services of a specialist and experienced program manager to develop and deliver a detailed program accepted by the leadership team.
It would seem appropriate at this point that I put forward what I would consider to be a high-priority work-stream within the proposed ‘program of change’ that can reasonably be expected to have been identified from an independent review.
(Photo by Matt King/Getty Images for Rugby Australia)
Work-stream 1: Identify, program and implement a dedicated strategy designed to provide elite players with the opportunity to participate in an increased number of high-performance matches which will provide players with improved match fitness, positional and game management skills (especially under pressure).
The identified work-stream is essentially an objective to be achieved – how it is to be achieved is the challenge.
In that context, I have detailed my thoughts on how the identified objective may be realised.
Work-stream #1 is to be achieved through the development of an inclusive program where each Super Rugby team would play a round against a ‘composite’ team whose players are drawn from all the other Super Rugby teams (e.g., Queensland Reds verse the best of the Waratahs, Brumbies, Rebels and Force). The following considerations should form the basis of such a program:
1) No player can be selected to play for the composite team from the Super Rugby team they are playing. Such an approach would provide all Super Rugby players with multiple opportunities to gain the extra competition necessary to satisfy the intent of work-stream 1
2) The team selected for each composite game will, by necessity, change as the players return to their clubs when playing against the Composite team.
3) The composite team would be selected by the incoming Wallabies coach, as such it could reasonably be assumed that each such player selected would likely be a Wallaby or a potential one.
(Photo by Paul Kane/Getty Images)
4) The composite team would logically be stronger than the individual Super teams they are playing – hence, each Super team in turn would be playing against a stronger team (the Composites).
5) It would be true however that the composite team would lack cohesion, at least initially, but as each Super player has the potential to play multiple games for the composites as well as the game for his Super team, it would seem reasonable to conclude that the incoming Wallabies coach (and his team) would have been able to progressively establish an increasing level of cohesion.
6) It would be possible for an individual player to play an extra five matches under a single-round program; however, it can reasonably be expected that the incoming Wallabies coach would select a wider pool of players which would realistically make five matches for any one player uncommon.
The above proposal is a variation of the possible versus probable matches long used in the selection of representative teams in the past. In that context, each match has relevance as it is an effective trial for future Wallabies selection. I would submit that this proposal would meet the spirit and intent of those among us who advocate for an Australian-only Super competition. However, the relative superior strengths and benefits of this alternate proposal would seem obvious (I hope).
I leave it to others better placed to find the time to schedule the proposed competition. In putting this submission together, I sincerely hope that it resonates with Roarers and, ultimately, the wider rugby community such that it inspires change, change the Wallabies need dearly.
Captain 15
Roar Rookie
Nothipwell!! What a great name! I like the idea but where does it fit into the current SR/International calendar?? The obvious answer is at the end of the SR season or during/after the SR finals depending on how many AU teams are competing. Another 5 rounds of playing under pressure, which seems to be what we are lacking? Hearing that McKellar/Fisher/Palmer are staying at Leicester is distressing as they are the obvious “saviours”. Larkham should stay at the untouched strong Brumbies as SR starts in 3 months. No Kiwi would come near us after the treatment of Rennie and Penney but Joe Schmidt should be spoken to. The Wallabies have built strong depth in the forwards but are clueless in the backs . We have always played better with ball playing no 12’s( Horan/giteau) and current NZ Barrett instead of boring behemoths (kerevi/parese)carrying it over the advantage line with no intention of passing or kicking.
Baz
Roar Rookie
Not a bad effort but I it is just a variation on possibles v probables which I think works far better. It provides real competition for each position and games would be far more competitive. In your hybrid arrangement maybe a handicapping system could ensure the games remain truly competitive. Leg weights spring to mind. Points start, or get the probables to play with 14 men for half the game. Many ways to keep the games competitive. You need to ensure the probables players are challenged and put under pressure. Also with the review process, interviewing the existing management and coaching staff would be a waste of time. They would simply be defensive and deflect blame. The review needs to be completely independent. Interview players and existing Super Rugby coaches and assistants.
Jack
Roar Rookie
Every senior manager that calls for an independent review of a management cluster over which he or she presided has admitted that they are incapable. That person should immediately resign. If you cannot objectively assess your own performance then you don’t meet the first criteria of a capable manager.
Ken Catchpole's Other Leg
Roar Guru
Exactly SAR! I suspect that the strengthening of Pumas, Fiji and Blossoms has come, at least in part, from the cohesion developed at the lower tier’s exposure to Tier1 nations (remember when Australia was one of those? It was just 10 months ago).
Ken Catchpole's Other Leg
Roar Guru
“ hybrid teams never really work.” But the suggestion is not just a hybrid aspect. It’s also the aspect of national coaching supervision. An early test squad. The Jaguares, Drua and Cherry Blossoms inclusion in Tier 2 rugby preceded (or at least coincided with) the rise in world rankings of their respective test teams. Such a short term distillation of talent has been suggested before. https://www.theroar.com.au/2021/10/01/to-be-or-not-to-wallaby-a-question-posed-to-tier-2-by-the-rennie-vation-of-tier-1-rugby/ Oz rugby has plenty of players. What it lacks is coaches, shared IP, intense development, games and comps with ascending pressure. Winning rugby is about creating and managing pressure. Except within the lungs and throats of a few heavyweight embarrassments, Oz rugby seriously lacks pressure.
Gravox
Roar Rookie
While I like some of the suggestions to create more game time hybrid teams never really work. Oz rugby seems to delight in throwing out the baby, the bath water and the nice meal we were about to eat. Look at the recent World Cup evidence. Of the 4 Southern rugby championship teams 3 made it to the semi finals. Only the bottom team( Australia) missed out and were Fiji brilliant or were we pathetic? You can’t have it both ways. That tells me we are playing in the toughest competition but it is good preparation for knockout World cups. And all except one World Cup has been won by Southern teams. Go figure eh? You want evidence. There it is. Our problem( and you see it in our cringe worthy sports reporting on a nightly basis where Aussies who don’t win are described as falling short etc and sometimes their victorious opponent isn’t named!) is winning obsession. We used to dominate Tennis, Swimming, Cricket ( still in there!) but the world has changed. I feel sorry for Northern Hemisphere teams ( no really, stop laughing) because when a game requires a try to be scored they can’t do it. 37 phases the experts gasp. Ireland were going nowhere. South Africa manufactured a try against England when they needed it and New Zealand did the same and so did Argentina. If kicks had succeeded NZ would have won. Excellent Bok defence was only part of the story. And penalties. Let’s sort out this advantage nonsense. As soon as the ref indicates a penalty to one team they know. They don’t have to try too hard as it will go back for a kick. Either award some penalties immediately or call advantage over if the team progresses more than twenty metres. Or be brave like soccer where an advantage call does not come back. You must play on. So much meaningless play happens while the ref tries to decide what exactly? If it’s for offside and the team is making progress why call it back? Just because they then make a mistake? And scrums. If players can’t physically manage to stay upright bring on a frame for them to lean on as they push! No resetting of scrums just play on. And coaching and selecting. Coach doesn’t pick team he is one of three , he gets a casting vote but only between the two different choices of the others. I have coached and selected and while I was happy to stand behind my selections coaching is much easier if three minds decide the choice. Players can’t whinge then (:but they will anyway) about favouritism. And the coach then has to accept that others may see things they can’t and this invigorates, or should, your coaching approach. Look at the appalling treatment dished out to Kurtly Beale, Noah, Quade, James etc etc players who never realised their full potential as they were attacking players trying to survive in a corporate win at all costs environment where mistakes were seen as unforgivable not just what happens when you try variations. I’d say the Ella brothers would struggle to make a Wallabies squad today where individual brilliance and passing seem to be dismissed. So Super Rugby is not broken but that doesn’t mean different things shouldn’t be tried. And forget about winning. Concentrate on playing great rugby, entertain the crowds, do back flips when you score and accept that winning is a privilege and losing is just the b side of love.
Nothipwell
Roar Rookie
Jim - The simple proposal set out by Nothipwell about a 5 round series for each Super Club playing a game against a team selected by the incoming Wallaby coach's team selected from all the other 4 Super Clubs would have resonate with those who love rugby. This proposal would tick a lot of boxes for all stakeholders - RA (extra revenue), STAN (extra content - perhaps a mid week scheduling), the incoming Wallaby coach (has opportunity to mix&match elite players in a structured way), the Super coaches and players (they get to showcase the skills to the Wallaby coach) and us the fans (as the matches will provide additional elite level competition, interest and viewing). That said, I would think that the Roar experts and commentators would have access to Justin........... would seem to be totally within RA ball park with no connection to Super Rugby - so it is doable in short timefram. I would think that Justine Harrison is the conduit for this 5 game series to be put before the decision makers at RA, STAN, Players and club Administrators. I say that as Justin has just been appointed to the Independent Review Panel by RA, is in charge of the players union, is a broadcaster with STAN and has just witnessed 1st hand the depths that the Wallabies have sunk.
Monorchid
Roar Rookie
Good article Nothipwell. This will be a bit of a rant from an older bloke. I was quite surprised when comments started to come out of the World Cup criticising the Wallabies' fitness. How can that be these days with all the equipment and facilities, and coaches being paid so much to put fit players on the field. But what's worried me more for some years now is what I view as a gradual deterioration of skills. These aren't park players. They're paid whopping amounts of money just to get angry at an odd shaped ball. The least they can do is be fit, and have skills levels commensurate with the "elite" level at which they play. Eddie was only part of the problem. As for investing money wisely, good luck with that. Rugby League is no better. Remember when COVID hit and the NRL realised it had no assets, and only enough money to last the year. How much was wasted after the World Cup in, was it 2003?. About $40 million or so? And in a pretty short time too. And where is RA at now. Looking for someone to loan them $90 million relying on events not in the near future; being rejected by private equity groups; and trying for a much bigger broadcasting income for a product which it has trashed itself. Success starts in the board room, not in the dressing room. Unless the review forces the board to look hard into a mirror, our top tier may eventually disappear.
Virgil
Roar Rookie
Who is going to want to play in a lions team against an ordinary Wallabies team?
K.F.T.D.
Roar Rookie
No more Captain calls, otherwise I’ll have to get out of my armchair.
Just Nuisance
Roar Rookie
A complex and detailed solution to a simple problem…..You simply need a single person…One coach who selects the best players available ..respects experience and blends that and nurtures it with youth ….Not 10 months ago The Wallabies were amongst the most feared teams on the planet ..Ran France and Ireland close on their home soil .Remember Boks also narrowly lost to both these teams same time frame….The experience gained from those matches by the team leaders and coaching staff pure gold ..But then bang ..Overnight you got Eddie Ego ..Who discarded all that in favor of his own legacy …The damage done by him to The Wallaby brand incalculable …Just get a sensible strong minded coach in and build on that .You have the playérs for sure ..Structures , lower tiers etc. all can be addressed…But fix The Wallabies first ….All else can follow ..And while RA are about so much excruciating self analysis just man up and apologise to one person ( Dave Rennie) who was busy doing just that. Dont need a 3 person commision of enquiry and volumes of reports to do the decent thing ….But I wont hold my breath .
Jim
Roar Rookie
This is a great idea, can see the immediate benefits to the current and future crop of Australian players, getting them the experience in high pressure situations against quality opposition that they seemingly lack. Also would be a really good watch. How do you get this idea to those that can do something about it?
Support Aussie Rugby
Roar Rookie
Look at how well Argentina have gone at the World Cup and what effect the introduction the Jaguares has had on their national side. Most of the Puma side come from the Jagaures who have enjoyed a lot of game time together, probably more so than any other national team in the world. Your suggestion seems to have worked for Argentina. We need ideas that resemble others ideas that have worked.