• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

3rd tier is back in 2014 [Discontinued]

Status
Not open for further replies.

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
Some other bits of information contained in the EOI form:

There will be a salary cap
ARU to cover travel, accomodation and cost of staging competition
All expenses relating to staff, team set-up, preparing and running the teams and match day costs to be born by the team, who will keep the gate etc. (I assume this includes wages to players and staff?)

Also the form only specifies 13 January 2014 and doesn't give a day, with applicants then being sent a formal tender document and successful teams announced on 28 February 2014.
 

Inside Shoulder

Nathan Sharpe (72)

Hawko

Tony Shaw (54)
" 'Won't somebody please think of the Shute Shield!?' "

I'd be surprised if the ARU have given SS much thought at all. The NSWRU have given it little thought for the past 20 years.

I know that people have had a go at proving the Shute will be dead and buried by the NRC but I just don't get it. Unless 3T sucks out all the money from the Shute teams (the only doomsday scenario I can see) then the competitions will not be in direct competition. Shute will be over in August, without the deluge of Super rugby players that significantly distorts the competition (that's a positive improvement). 3T starts in September and finishes in October. That means they will complement each other.

If the rumours are true all the Shute teams want to get involved in the NRC in some way as they see it as a logical progression from where they are. In my opinion the dangers of 3T revolve around financing it without losing a huge bundle of money. Shute is likely to survive and prosper under this scenario, not be destroyed by it.
 

Hawko

Tony Shaw (54)
Won't/wouldn't that require IRB approval?

I'd have thought so. And I think that the Pulveriser is on the IRB and maybe even on the laws committee.

I wonder what the IRB think about "re-kindling excitement" as from what I know Australia is the only place that this is required;).


Bill Pulver explained on Rugby HQ last year that they are able to make changes for internal competitions without IRB approval. Once you get to International level the IRB must rule.
 

Inside Shoulder

Nathan Sharpe (72)
Bill Pulver explained on Rugby HQ last year that they are able to make changes for internal competitions without IRB approval. Once you get to International level the IRB must rule.

I guess that's the problem with not having enough lawyers on the ARU Board:
Screen Shot 2014-01-14 at 7.04.29 am.png
 

the coach

Bob Davidson (42)
I know that people have had a go at proving the Shute will be dead and buried by the NRC but I just don't get it. Unless 3T sucks out all the money from the Shute teams (the only doomsday scenario I can see) then the competitions will not be in direct competition. Shute will be over in August, without the deluge of Super rugby players that significantly distorts the competition (that's a positive improvement). 3T starts in September and finishes in October. That means they will complement each other.

If the rumours are true all the Shute teams want to get involved in the NRC in some way as they see it as a logical progression from where they are. In my opinion the dangers of 3T revolve around financing it without losing a huge bundle of money. Shute is likely to survive and prosper under this scenario, not be destroyed by it.

The S15 competition rounds finish on 12/7 with the final scheduled for 2/8.
The revised draft Shute Shield draw has the comp starting on 29/3 with the GF scheduled for 16/8.

That seems to suggest that players from S15 teams which don't make the playoffs could be available to their SS clubs for rounds 17 and 18 and the playoffs ie similar to previous years.

Does anyone know whether the intention is to ban the players from returning to their SS teams before the NRC kicks off?
 

Jets

Paul McLean (56)
Staff member
I think we should be pushing for players to play when possible, not prevent them from playing.
 

RugbyReg

Rocky Elsom (76)
Staff member
I think we should be pushing for players to play when possible, not prevent them from playing.


has worked wonders for the Aussie cricket team. I know different sports, but lets stop protecting our rugby players from rugby! Especially the youngsters. I know you have to be wary of some injuries, but not niggles. Let them play through them. Cope. Toughen up. Mentally overcome it. etc etc. They'll be better for the game in the end, rather than another massage and ice bath.
 

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
I guess that's the problem with not having enough lawyers on the ARU Board:
View attachment 4357
And it would seem counter-productive to have different laws for 3rd Tier than for 4th, 2nd and 1st Tier. How would 3T provide a pathway from 4T to 2T if it's played under different laws?

The different laws thought buble is/was the most dangerous part of the whole thing as far as I can see.
 

Inside Shoulder

Nathan Sharpe (72)
And it would seem counter-productive to have different laws for 3rd Tier than for 4th, 2nd and 1st Tier. How would 3T provide a pathway from 4T to 2T if it's played under different laws?

The different laws thought buble is/was the most dangerous part of the whole thing as far as I can see.

If its the ones he was suggesting it seems counter productive.
But I come back to my hobby horse: no new followers are going to be attracted by an assurance that a change to law x is going to produce a game to their liking so dont bother.
 

p.Tah

John Thornett (49)
And it would seem counter-productive to have different laws for 3rd Tier than for 4th, 2nd and 1st Tier. How would 3T provide a pathway from 4T to 2T if it's played under different laws?

The different laws thought buble is/was the most dangerous part of the whole thing as far as I can see.
I can't recall. Was the SS played under the EVLs when the ARC was on?
 

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
If its the ones he was suggesting it seems counter productive.
But I come back to my hobby horse: no new followers are going to be attracted by an assurance that a change to law x is going to produce a game to their liking so dont bother.
All sports have boring matches and thrilling matches and tinkering with the laws won't change that. If anyone thinks that a law change will eliminate boring rugby matches, they are going to be disappointed.
 

Jets

Paul McLean (56)
Staff member
I'm pretty sure the ARC was the first comp to use them and then they came into effect the following year.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top