The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

Can rugby's third tier learn from football?

The Crusaders play the Chiefs at AMI Stadium in Round 1 of the revamped Super Rugby competition. (AAP Image/SNPA, David Alexander)
Roar Guru
10th December, 2013
12

The ARU developing a third tier, consisting of eight to ten teams across Australia, is long overdue. However given it’s taken this long, getting it right is critical.

There will be no second chance. If it fails, it is difficult to see another attempt within ten years, maybe never.

The ARC failed, the NSL failed, basketball failed, both football and basketball started again, because they had no top tier above them whereas rugby has the Super teams in place.

This means if this fails then rugby still has its main competition and the willingness to throw money at a twice-failed competition with limited media outcomes will be very difficult to find.

Lower tier competitions tend to drain funds and struggle for media. The ARU new format will be no different, it will cost and struggle for media.

I fear for the competition if new teams are created as many are saying based on the A-League model.

The obvious difference is the A-League is tier one. The A-League is the main media driver for football, and today the main revenue driver.

The new rugby competition will not drive revenue.

Advertisement

The smarter move would be to follow football’s National Premier League model.

Years in the making and years of painful negotiations, however most (aside from some Victoria clubs) are on board.

Rugby should not copy this model, simply take its best parts to suit the needs of rugby.

FFA have developed a set of standards that any team or association in Australia can adopt. If they reach FFA standards, they can apply and most likely be part of the NPL.

What this means is those clubs and regional associations with the funds, energy and willingness to adopt the standards set by FFA can join and those that don’t can still play but not in the NPL.

Rugby should consider aspects of this model.

Arguably all Shute Shield teams and all regional unions could consider if they wish to apply after considering ARU standards.

Advertisement

The Central Coast Union could say they wish to apply after considering the pros and cons. The advantage this provides is it provides an established fan-base, existing connections into the local communities and connections to local media.

Plus if you look at the Central Coast Union or Newcastle Union (as many others do as well), they both have underpinning junior competitions to draw players from, creating in itself a pathway to more senior teams.

It is inclusive rather than exclusive in so much as people can decide if they want to meet the standards set or not.

If they choose not too they don’t feel excluded and are more likely to support the competition or at least not be caustic about it and rubbish it to the high heaven, which is what happen to the ARC.

The problem of trying to site teams by some geographical location indicator by population underestimates the difficulty of start-up teams in a highly competitive sports market.

I am suggesting creating a model with high standards and inviting teams/ unions to apply is a better model than the ARU making the call from on high, on the, who, where and why.

Over to the experts now.

Advertisement
close