Thanks for clarifying Tony. Much appreciated.

I am pretty sure they are all being replaced as they have jobs for next season (except maybe 1 of them?). It will be interesting to see who they do bring in.

So best information we have now is that EJ is staying. For better or worse it’s what we have got. He said he’s staying so anything to the contrary is conjecture most likely based on emotion and to my mind is largely irrelevant. It is what it is, now we need to find a way to make the best of the situation.
Bottom line I don’t think it would matter too much who the coach is if the underlying system is flawed. I am more interested in what RA are going to do to restructure the system, where is their press conference where they outline the plan ahead? Surely if centralization has been on the cards for a while they would have a skeleton plan for what they want to achieve? Just saying ‘centralization’ tells us nothing.

I have offered constructive comments. I am just able to articulate my views without lowering myself to name calling or going personal. It helps nothing. Thank you for making my point though, if you had read any of my other comments you would know I’m not a great fan of EJ, it’s just pointless acting like an immature child when adult conversations and solutions are required.

Pretty disgusting comment to be honest. Is this seriously how low Australian rugby fans have stooped?

Not to mention the ones that make up spiteful nicknames or call him names for no other reason than to make themselves sound cool or tough. ‘Look guys, I called him Golem. How funny an I?’ Did you offer anything constructive? ‘Na I’m just here to call him names’

It’s not about facts, it’s about getting views and comments to regenerate income through ads. Though they got me to read and comment so well played to them I guess. And of course it provides another opportunity to call someone names and tell them they are horrible without ever actually having to put any equity up themselves.

SBW may be looking for a new job after the weekend, time to put your money where mouth is…
(It’s a joke)

Why would he give up confidential sources? I don’t think it’s far fetched to assume that in his years covering rugby that he cultivated confidential sources that, by definition, need to remain confidential. If the claim was media sources in Japan then asking who those are would be fine, but reading the comment I assume (rightly or wrongly) that it is from someone inside the organization. He gains nothing by making this up, in fact all that would do is hurt his credibility. I don’t think that’s the way this game works

I am not convinced a media personality giving up confidential sources to the public is conducive to a continued relationship with said sources.

Roar readers: Hamish and EJ’s egos wont let them admit they were wrong
Also Roar readers: here are all the reasons I don’t think I was wrong…

My opinion – if he leaves he leaves. If he stays he stays. Either way after whatever announcement is made on Monday can we all please just move on and start focusing on the areas that need to focused on

I have already said the current RA would need to prove they can do it. Not sure how else I need to say it. You are labouring the point about the current administration, I am talking about possibilities in the future.
Yes the sponsorship is via the cheetahs sponsor, that doesn’t help Australia. It was an example. Focus on the concept, not the current tour. Here is another one with ad narrative:
‘Antoine Dupont and Stade Toulousain tour thanks to Optus and Channel 9.’ If it’s centralised, again, the benefit is to ALL states in AU by playing top teams. Increasing the performance of ALL teams. It can also be an enduring sponsorship (something you don’t get if the touring team sponsors the tour). Enduring sponsorships at the national level bring more money. That’s the advantage.
The point you make about coordinating the tour is the same for any tour or major event. Plan it early. Have an annual cycle when they would come. Not hard. I plan and synchronize far harder things at my work. It’s not like a tour like this is only planned a month in advance, it would be planned at least a year in advance.
You seem to have a serious axe to grind so there is probably no convincing you that anything will be better under centralization, so I will leave it that I tried.

Sure that’s one to look at it. Keep the status quo where state based money remains in the state. It’s certainly working strengthen Australian rugby now…
Or we can put tribalism aside for the ‘greater good’. As a Qlder I find it bad that NSWRU are in financial worry. As much as I hate the Tahs it’s a love hate relationship and the competition will be poorer for not having them. NZ have acknowledged that a strong AUS competition helps create a stronger NZ. Same goes here.
Individual states bringing out their own teams for state based competition is inefficient because you will be doubling up on admin fees (salaries, accommodation deals, etc) and states on their own can’t afford the same level of competition that pooling certain amounts of money can provide. For example Qld are being out Japanese sides. No disrespect to our Japanese friends but the standard of their competition is not that of Europe or SA. WA brought out the Cheetahs which is great for them. The Cheetahs will provide a far higher standard of competition than a Japanese side. So right now WA reap all the benefits because WA organized the tour. If RA organized the tour then the Cheetahs could play more than just the Force. With a national tour can come national sponsorship of the the tour. Call it the Dick Smith Cheetahs tour of Australia. With sponsorship can come broadcasting rights. None of that is as attractive if the competition is localised or state based as the audience is limited.
Of course there has to be give and take, so let’s say that RA take the lead on international sides into Australia and states take the lead on tours out of Australia. If NSWRU can’t afford an ‘out’ leg then that’s unfortunate but they can still get the benefits of the ‘in’ leg. Right now they are just going to be left behind.
This is just off the top of my head. I am sure there are smarter people than me that could find 100 more reasons this would be better.
We all want an Australian team to win SRP, but maybe some don’t want it enough to compromise.

100%. That’s the point though right. At no stage did I say we should all sign up right now. Quite the opposite actually. There needs to be a demonstrated accountability by the national body before state franchises sign up to complete centralization. And the national body needs to provide a detailed plan for how we get from where we are to where we want to be. But…
Centralization does allow for the national body to bring international clubs out to Australia for a provincial contest that at the moment there is no benefit to the states organising. Each state is bringing out sides or going on tours which is completely inefficient and costly.
It also allows for national revenue opportunities that are currently unavailable to some franchises. A national broadcasting contract for state competitions as a (highly unlikely) example.
There is money to be saved and made by centralization which could have benefits for everyone, but not before RA has a clear and detailed plan of how to get there.

I think the Tahs aren’t doing an end of season / off season tour because they are broke right? Tours cost money, hard to do if you have none and have to hand control to the national body. I know their solvency is disputed by their financial statement last year but it is what has been reported. Venues, accommodation, travel, etc all cost money.
While it’s legitimately great that each state is doing their own tour which is reflective of the federated model by which rugby is administered in Australia, this is 100% something that could be fixed under centralization. Instead of each state spending money, if it was centrally controlled it would be nice to bring the Top 14 champs over for a series against each SRP AU team. Or a few teams, whatever works and we can afford.
There has to be a reason why the NRC was abandoned and it’s fully possible that the federated model we have didn’t support a national comp. Politics around how much each state should pay, how much the national body would pay, etc would all have led to possible talks about the comp being too much effort.

Caveat – I am not saying this is the reason he might be leaving but…
Also why would he stay? The amount of hate thrown his way by the rugby public (yes yes yes some of it is completely on him) and ridicule who would stay? Nobody would want to hang around given the hate leveled at him. As a coach some things are hard to forgive but as a human I think some things have been completely unfair.

Hi Mike,
Is it possible to reference the ‘multiple reports’? Are these insiders that have contacted you or other news agencies? The only thing i can find in Japan Times is reference the Sydney Morning Herald article. Japan Today has nothing.
Just trying to understand how weight could be given to this and how much is rumour and conjecture.

I feel the problem that isn’t resolved with the idea of getting rugby into more schools (regardless of Private vs public but will have a greater effect on the public schools) is how is that going to be paid for? Public school systems don’t have the money to invest in equipment, facilities (most public schools don’t have fields and if they use Govt owned ones you are competing with league and AFL) and the like so while it’s easy to say ‘get the game into public schools’ and ‘get more state comps’ someone has to pay for those.
1 – cutting back to 3 SRP sides is anything but simple and has nothing to do with backbone IMO. Broadcasting deals and the ability to reach a broader audience are essential to generating income for the game and the deal with Stan/Channel 9 stipulated 5 SRP teams. To arbitrarily drop 2 of those will incur a breach of contract. Legal battles and subsequent fines means less money.
2 – SA rugby left the SR competition after years of discontent from SA rugby with the way the competition was administered. It was all politics but COVID provided the excuse to do what SA had wanted to do for years, which was join the European competitions. We won’t get them back, especially while SRP comp is below that standard (perceived or otherwise).
3 – again this assumes players want to come to SRP and play in Australian teams. What kind of player would we get if they weren’t good enough for the top and second tier European comps?
4 – Again who pays for this? We want to cut back to 3 teams which could have an impact on broadcasting deals but want to spend more money in other areas. We want to bring SA back in SR or the Pumas or Sunwolves which means all SR nations need to kick in more money.
This is a hugely complex problem of which carry significant second and third order effects. The review needs to offer solutions to the second and third order effects of all the things being suggested.

The issue I have with this report is that a call for ‘returning to what worked’ is fraught with danger. I am not suggesting that there aren’t good ideas in Mark’s report but the way this article is written it appears (to me) like the suggestion is that centralization isn’t the answer, that we should reinstitute components of what we did in the 90’s – before professionalisation. It could be that I am putting too much weight in one paragraph and not looking at the broader ideas but I would have assumed that the connections with the AIS, bringing back coaching schools, etc. which have all been touted on here before are a part of centralization (i.e. a centralized coaching curriculum, etc.). Why not look at successful systems and see if there are ways to make them fit the Australian landscape? Especially given the Irish model was driven by an Australian who only left because RA didn’t listen to him.

I tried to find the results I was referencing but can’t. I am happy that will people will point out all the dominant NSW sides (fair cop if I can’t back up my claim) but the point remains that there will be mistrust between the franchises while the upper echelons are dominated by one state, even if it is just the forward facing positions.

Taking personalities out of the equation, fair representation across all SRP franchises needs to be achieved in the upper echelons of RA for everyone to get on board. Granted I am not a decision maker in QRU, but I agree with your point that while the Chairman and CEO are from NSW other franchises will always have a certain amount of skepticism

I am not sure why we (Qlders) should trust RA/NSWRU with the commercial aspects that we have built. There has always been a heavy NSW influence over rugby in Australia and sometimes to the detriment of other states. I look to the selection of Australian Schools team last year when NSW came 4th but made up over 1/2 the side (from memory – it was significantly higher than other state) and the Brumbies who won the comp had less than a quarter of the selections. Made my blood boil but granted I am unsure of the inner politics that happened. I agree that true centralization will find efficiencies in salaries that are replicated across franchises but it’s possible that is a necessary evil until actions prove there is no bias for any state.
RA is yet to release a plan for how centralization will work and how we get from where we are to where we want to be. To me it looks like NSWRU was strong armed into handing over their keys (though the insolvency claims are disputed on here, I can only go on what’s reported) and the Brumbies may have felt something similar. The devil will be in the detail for this and at the moment it feels like there is a distinct lack of that.

I see the Brisbane Roar are also using Ballymore as their training facility. Another reason there is no way RA are getting their hands on QRU commercial assets.

I didn’t read the Reds are blaming anyone? They support a review into the whole system which is a direct reflection of all SR results and the cascading effects onto commercial issues. I don’t think any Australian rugby side has a performance history they can be proud of except ACT. At least they are competitive. I just read that the Reds don’t have the solvency issues other SR clubs have and their commercial strategy is working so they don’t want to hand it over. I think it’s widely accepted that the issues facing rugby in Australia extend beyond any one franchise.

The article covers the B&I Lions Tour and men’s WC but nothing about planning for the women’s, which unless I am wrong is a home WC in 2029. I think given the experience of the Matildas home WC and their brand financial increase (it’s reported they could now be worth about AUD$210 million as a brand) is something to look at as well. Not saying they are the panacea to RA problems but could provide a good avenue. Just thoughts anyway. Fixing the whole game definitely needs to be the focus.
Still waiting for something tangible from RA about what – exactly – centralization means in the Australian context.