Not that they needed it, but Rugby Australia got another wake-up call earlier this week.
As Rugby Australia crawls toward finding their next Wallabies coach, the All Blacks hit the ground running with a pre-season camp led by new coach Scott Robertson and his brilliantly assembled coaching staff.
After being asked to stay away from the All Blacks during last year’s run to the World Cup final by his predecessor Ian Foster, the precious two-day camp in Auckland gave Robertson an early chance to run his eyes over his troops and develop working relationships with 22 players.
The camp occurred the best part of nine months after Robertson was unveiled as the next All Blacks coach.
All Blacks head coach Scott Robertson looks on during a New Zealand All Blacks Gym Session on January 09, 2024 in Auckland. (Photo by Hannah Peters/Getty Images)
Since then, Robertson, as well as leading the Crusaders to another extraordinary Super Rugby title, has been planning how to not just deal with, but prosper in spite of, the departure of generational talents Sam Whitelock, Brodie Retallick, Aaron Smith and Richie Mo’unga.
After all, Robertson doesn’t want to become the first coach to lose the Bledisloe Cup since John Mitchell’s All Blacks won the prized piece of silverware off the Wallabies in 2003.
RA, meanwhile, is likely still another six weeks away from naming Eddie Jones’ replacement, let alone assembling a coaching team.
The differences on and off the field between the trans-Tasman rivals wasn’t missed by veteran coach Laurie Fisher, who was a part of Dave Rennie’s Wallabies coaching staff in 2022 before being looked over by Jones in 2023.
The January slumber comes a year after RA sacked Rennie a week after their first camp of the year.
It meant the training camp on the Gold Coast was ultimately a wasted exercise, with not one of Rennie’s assistant coaches joining Jones’ program.
Once again, the Wallabies find themselves on the back foot in January after Jones’ abrupt departure left RA without a coach.
Although it was prudent of RA to wait until announcing their director of high-performance before finding Jones’ replacement, Peter Horne’s appointment, with David Nucifora as an advisor, took far too long.
Unsurprisingly, the search for Jones’ replacement is similarly taking too long.
The extraordinary lack of investment in Australian coaches means the shortlist can be counted on one hand: Dan McKellar, Stephen Larkham and Michael Cheika.
International candidates can be whittled down to a handful, too, with Joe Schmidt, Ian Foster, Jake White and Ronan O’Gara worthy of consideration. Schmidt, particularly, is well in contention for the role.
Rugby Australia chief executive Phil Waugh and new director of high performance Peter Horne have a lot of catching up to do. (Photo by Mark Evans/Getty Images for Rugby Australia)
RA want to ensure they get the right candidate after eight years of disappointment culminated in World Cup embarrassment last October, but no candidate is without risk.
No foreigner coaching in Australia has left these shores with their stocks higher, while Cheika’s five-year tenure came to an ugly end and McKellar and Larkham are still relatively untested at the international level.
What is known though is before RA knows it, Wales will be on Australian shores.
Warren Gatland’s side might have smashed the Wallabies in Lyon, but that said more about the disaster unfolding under Jones than the Welsh.
Success against Wales before The Rugby Championship and Bledisloe Cup is essential, especially with the British and Irish Lions (who already have their coach set in stone) less than 18 months away.
Indeed, the clock is ticking.
The Wallabies are still without a coach ten weeks after Eddie Jones quit. (Photo by Chris Hyde/Getty Images)
The national playing group might play down the fact they are coach-less, but for a governing body that has known for ten weeks that they need a new coach, RA is taking a relaxed Sunday morning drive approach to the search for Jones’ replacement rather than acting like time is of the essence. It is.
Sponsorships need to be found, player contracts signed and tickets at Super Rugby matches sold, but without a national coach that task is even more difficult.
Already Mark Nawaqanitawase has signed with a rival code.
Impressed by Trent Robinson’s manner and vision, he leapt at the chance of signing with the Sydney Roosters.
With the futures of many other players in the balance, including Jordan Petaia and Noah Lolesio, the game’s stars – and future ones – want clarity.
K.F.T.D.
Roar Rookie
I’ve got your back
Kens lovechild
Roar Rookie
He a always a picking on me
Kens lovechild
Roar Rookie
Its what the nymb nuts keep banging on about
Jacko
Roar Rookie
More competiive comps overseas. Thats a Fallacy. Where do you get that from? Many of your best already do..... Thats a fallacy. There are less than a handful of OS players worth bothering bringing into Wallabies contension. More broadcast money.... Thats a fallacy. Why pay more for a lower level comp. Also the broadcasters have Aus rugby by the nuts. so wont pay overs. Oz already gets nothing from overseas so the only way is up. You dont have a seperate comp so there is nothing to get from OS except the current SR and Wallabies broadcast deals. SR and Wallabies tests ARE shown OS. Thats what you get roughly 25mil a year for.
jeznez
Roar Guru
Oz already gets nothing from overseas so the only way is up. They should be able to build more broadcast, matchday and sponsorship revenue, if they can offer a local comp with more teams, a longer season, more matches and more local viewers. I fully accept that our top players will head offshore to richer comps. Many of our best already do. And yes, NZR will be fine with a 10 team comp and it will be higher quality than ours. Aussie’s will still watch our local comp. Just like more Australians watch the current comp rather than the more competitive overseas comps now.
Objective Observer
Roar Rookie
Welcome to the new year and to the new millennium. In 1987 we could have looked at NZ but now it is SA, Ireland and France that make the most of their talent. NZ are yesterdays heroes.
Jacko
Roar Rookie
Its not about caring if no one from NZ tunes in, its about if anyone outside of Aus wants to buy the TV rights. Without that the comp dies. RA gets about 25mil now and any tv company would be very weary about paying much for a domestic only comp. RA doesnt need another TV contract worth 25mil, or maybe even half that, they need a major upgrade. No one upgrades the price to see a lower quality comp. It wont be cheaper at all to set up more teams and it wont be an attraction to Wallabies currently on over 500k to be being offered 250k to stay in an NRC. Quite simply if NZR decided to run its own 10 team comp they have all the cash they need to blow Aus rugby out of the window. I agree that watching Aus sides constantly lose to NZ sides isnt a way forward but the WHOLE reason for that lower standard in the Aus SR sides, and therefore the constant losses to NZ sides, is that RA ignored a NRC for way too long. Not once has it been given the chance it needs to make a difference because RA constantly chases the quick fix and never lasts the distance.
K.F.T.D.
Roar Rookie
Is that you Kenny , if so Loggin!
Richie
Roar Rookie
Wearing the coat of many colours.
Richie
Roar Rookie
Nah Lefty is definitely the name of one of them. After the Merle Haggard song I think.
jeznez
Roar Guru
Peta, a better representation of my position is: * believing we should have been investing in a national comp and * saying we can no longer afford Super There is no contradiction in those two positions. It’s about building foundations for Super/Wallabies to grow. How will building 120m in debt to maintain the current loss making structure help us grow? Fans have fled in droves and nothing material has been proposed the bring them back. We are about to waste our "Golden Decade" paying off debts incurred on a structure that doesn't work and at the end of it, we'll have the same structure and kick off a new run on debt. High time we come up with a sustainable model. Imagine if we didn't run up the debt and instead used the "Golden Decade" revenue to build a structure that can grow in the future.
Peta Smith
Roar Rookie
I agree the third tier should have been done from the get-go, but that's not Super Rugby's fault as you asserted. That's just "scapegoating" to me. Picking only a national comp will sink Oz Rugby for good. Too much of a risk for mine. Players with aspirations will leave by the dozens. Can't see that being helpful for Oz Rugby. It's high time RA & it's supporters stop looking/arguing for a money making third tier. It's about building foundations for Super/Wallabies to grow.
jeznez
Roar Guru
Aussies will watch an Aussie comp. It's ok if no one from NZ tunes in. And no one from anywhere else is tuning in to Super today so they won't be missed either. The number one goal for Oz rugby has to be to get more Aussies playing the game and supporting the game. The clear path to drive that is a domestic comp - more teams, more matches and some uncertainty of outcome regarding who will win matches. The above isn't driven by getting Skelton, Kerevi etc. back onshore. We can work towards that if we can generate the revenue to afford them. The first step is creating a competition that Aussies want to watch (quick tip, watching us lose to NZ over and over again isn't that).
Jacko
Roar Rookie
What has Argentina got to do with Aus rugby? They are thousands of miles away and have so little in common with Aus rugby. many countries arnt in Super but I cant think of any country's in deep debt like Aus is either. Clesrly you have your mind made up around wanting RA to abandon SR and do a domestic only comp well if oblivian is your wish so be it. I dont understand what you believe is possible by doing so. You are just leaving a comp to flounder in tier 3 land. You count the 120mil debt as the whole focus on why RA should pull out of SR but you fail to say how that debt will ever be reduced with a low level domestic comp and with your Wallabies not in that comp because there is no money. You also dont explain howe RA will suddenly start making a profit from this or how this will improve the Wallabies enough to start bringing back a lot of sponsors or fans. NZR will survive no matter what RA does but will RA survive being the equavilent of a poor mans NPC?
jeznez
Roar Guru
That’s a false dichotomy Jacko. Argentina aren’t in Super, are they dead? People used to mockingly ask if we wanted to be like Argentina, at the moment yes. Exiting Super isn’t the end state, it’s the start of rebuilding the code in Oz.
whistleblower (retired)
Roar Rookie
In these days of instant communication it does not seem relevant to 'wait for someone to arrive'. We do not have time Faf about - pun intended
Jacko
Roar Rookie
Well RA needs to make a choice dont they. Do they want to be pro and compete or do they want to fold and let the sport die? You will never grow the sport without a 2nd and 3rd tier comp so only having one is pointless. An NRC isnt optional. Its completely necessary. SR isnt optional. Is necessary. Test rugby grows the pool financially so you need to compete at that level and to do that you need the other two comps. You need to be questioning why RA is 120mil in dept and NZR has 300Mil plus in the bank not what comps you need. 20plus years of failure has killed the sport. Maybe sell RA to NZR! lol.
jeznez
Roar Guru
Jacko - 120m of debt (at least that's what we are on the way to). We may wind up amateur in Oz. I don't think we'll still be in Super if that happens so better we make a comp we can survive on rather than face full bankruptcy. All the chat about the so called 'Golden Period' of Lions and WC, the funds are just going to go to pay off the debt the current system is seeing us build. At the end of it, we have to change the structure or we'll just rebuild the debt.
AndyS
Roar Rookie
Just saying, one of the reasons for that is because all that stuff - remote area housing, living away from home allowances, employee relocation expenses, work-related items like protective clothing and tools of trade, etc - are specifically exempt from FBT. So FBT hasn't 'seen' the things you've listed and issues in the bush, but the lack of it may have played its part. You could as easily make the case that wifi/cellular comms and the ability to relocate much of the operational load back to the city has caused the issue. That happened around the same time too. Or for that matter, the changes in safety culture since then. Transport, especially road transport, is the single biggest risk factor for a remote workforce. So the companies can (and do) legitimately argue that using camps are a demonstrable safety measure. None of this stuff happens in a vacuum. All a long way from the original point about whether rugby jollies are legitimately work related expenses for everyone though, given the thousands they would cost if it was their own money... :laughing:
The Late News
Roar Rookie
Basically what I am saying Andy is FBT has seen no new town being constructed in regional areas and a pile of road trains bring in transportable buildings and an airstrip is constructed. That’s not really regional development. I know a few sites in WA where the roads to the sites are so bad some contractors refuse to drive out there. Management of course rides to and from in a plane, and so never know how dangerous the roads are. I realise that Australia has seen a reduction in the population of the regions since about 1960. Farms and grazing has become more industrial leading to smaller rural communities. I’m not laying all of this at the feet of FBT but it’s a huge cause.