3rd tier is back in 2014 [Discontinued]

[ChargerWA]

So I lost track of time. When do we find out who had been selected for the NRC?

 

[MACCA]

The say won not one

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Dear Dave Beat - I suspect there are a lot of issues & criteria being applied, I also suspect that different rules/treatment/criteria will be applied to each consortium as they all have different strengths.
The objective seems to be to get competitive Rugby Teams playing in an interesting competition and to do whatever to achieve that.
I suspect also that the ARU want a few recognisable brands to build some support from. A big tick for Randwick. That criteria may not be applied consistently. (And BTW, Randwick did make the Semis and beat West Harbour, they did not finish outside the 8)
I am sure that S15 players will be distributed between the various franchises. The ARU WILL push players to Randwick & everyone other team for that matter. Good.
I suspect Melbourne & Perth may have the advantage of getting first dibs on their players & also that they will not have to compete with other NRC teams in their home cities.
Personally, I reckon they ARU are doing whatever they can and have to to ensure this works and good on them.

 

[Dave Beat]

Dear Dave Beat - I suspect there are a lot of issues & criteria being applied, I also suspect that different rules/treatment/criteria will be applied to each consortium as they all have different strengths.
The objective seems to be to get competitive Rugby Teams playing in an interesting competition and to do whatever to achieve that.
I suspect also that the ARU want a few recognisable brands to build some support from. A big tick for Randwick. That criteria may not be applied consistently. (And BTW, Randwick did make the Semis and beat West Harbour, they did not finish outside the 8)
I am sure that S15 players will be distributed between the various franchises. The ARU WILL push players to Randwick & everyone other team for that matter. Good.
I suspect Melbourne & Perth may have the advantage of getting first dibs on their players & also that they will not have to compete with other NRC teams in their home cities.
Personally, I reckon they ARU are doing whatever they can and have to to ensure this works and good on them.

I thought they made the finals as well, hence why I posted the rugby news link.
I think I also said something along the lines of my beef is not with Randwick, I'm looking to contribute my thoughts on what I think will work for the 3T
Macca I enjoy the rugby and i travel on atrocious days link the bath Randwick put on for Manly on ladies day last year - felt for Randwick that day.

I could go on about Manly as a stand alone as they would no doubt tick a lot of boxes on and off the field - but I'm looking at 3T and not club rugby.

IMO as I have said I don't think they should stand alone.

 

[djeff]

I think having a traditionally great club like Randwick gives the comp a bit of cred. It adds a bit of familiarity in an otherwise manufactured competition. randwick really is a legend of the aussie sporting landscape with the ellas and campo and what not. However I do think that if a stand alone club does step up yo NRC they should forgo competing at local club level.

 

[MACCA]

I thought they made the finals as well, hence why I posted the rugby news link.
I think I also said something along the lines of my beef is not with Randwick, I'm looking to contribute my thoughts on what I think will work for the 3T
Macca I enjoy the rugby and i travel on atrocious days link the bath Randwick put on for Manly on ladies day last year - felt for Randwick that day.

I could go on about Manly as a stand alone as they would no doubt tick a lot of boxes on and off the field - but I'm looking at 3T and not club rugby.

IMO as I have said I don't think they should stand alone.

Thanks DB - I agree with your thoughts. My point was that the ARU seem to apply and act as they see fit to get this Comp to work, which I think is OK if the result is a winner.
Manly has been way in front of the Wicks for the recent past and could mount a strong case to be a stand alone club.
The ARU may have taken a different approach & strategy with each bid in order to get the best comp. For example, they may have overlooked Randwick's recent past to get the iconic Randwick name into the comp.
Also, Randwick probably helped its cause by rebuilding its footy operations & getting UNSW on board.

 

[Dave Beat]

Thanks DB

Cheers Macca

 

[RugbyFuture]

I think if they get promoted as randwick to the 3tier level, as with usyd, they should look at not having the same club in the shute shield. since htey will have close affiliations with balmain and unsw those could be options to promote in their place.

 

[Done that]

Isn't it all about giving the "next" group of players the opportunity to show their wares at a higher level,& in the process ,in effect ,about being discovered &
possibly be given the opportunity & impetus to move up to Super 15 level or beyond,& consequently giving Australia a greater pool of potential Wallabies.
Is it logical therefore to give that opportunity to the players of one stand alone club only , instead of a larger group of players from 2,3 or 4 clubs where clearly there
must be other players who are equally deserving of said opportunity?
Secondly,I don't believe that a stand alone club team would engender as much public interest,patrons through the turnstiles or viewers on TV,as a team
consisting of players from a group of clubs,representing for example,the North ,East or Western catchment areas of Sydney.This approach is all inclusive,not only
in terms of player/club representation, but also in terms of the population of the followers of each club & therefore the interest generated.

 

[Bruce Ross]

I think if they get promoted as randwick to the 3tier level, as with usyd, they should look at not having the same club in the shute shield. since htey will have close affiliations with balmain and unsw those could be options to promote in their place.

Yes, that will work, RF. Take the club that produces more professional rugby players than any other club in the world out of the competition and replace it with a Subbies club. That will materially assist the ARU's objective of strengthening Australian rugby.
.

 

[Dave Beat]

Yes, that will work, RF. Take the club that produces more professional rugby players than any other club in the world out of the competition and replace it with a Subbies club. That will materially assist the ARU's objective of strengthening Australian rugby.
.

That's a better response than mine Mr Ross.
1. The draw is out.
2. Screw 2's, 3rds, 4ths and colts.
If there was a Wicks, East, Souths team I think Wicks would have the lowest representation - Sths would have good numbers, Wicks and Easts similar.

 

[Dave Beat]

Well didn't Fridays media put the cat amongst the pigeons, was there any substance behind it?
Plus
Terry Smiths article in today's Tele;
Wallaby laden Sydney Uni standing alone - I think 2 Wobs on the bench in the last test plus Izzy (truck loads of Super Rugby talent though).
Wicks JV discussions had the JV paying in green, at Coogee (possibly upsetting the curator) whilst the hooker stands at silly mid off waiting for the bat pad.

 

[RugbyFuture]

Yes, that will work, RF. Take the club that produces more professional rugby players than any other club in the world out of the competition and replace it with a Subbies club. That will materially assist the ARU's objective of strengthening Australian rugby.
.

well its not, its just replacing it in the 3 tier comp rather than the Shute Shield. It should be able to be more professional in that capacity shouldn't it? particularly with the ability to work with a subbies club obviously owned by a very wealthy and smart backer who's confident in rugby. It would also give it the ability to have more relationships with district clubs and create a clearer structure in getting into that pro club.

I think there's hypocrisy to not compare usyd to randwick and object to an individual one against the other. Its just this comp is hitting at the right time. If a third tier and professionalism were established during the 80's would you have still objected?

I don't like the fact that Randwick's working relationship with Easts and southern wasn't good enough for them to actually partner up with them - for the good of rugby - but if they can find the funds and set themselves up for a little while in it until it can be a self sustaining or owned operation then good on them in the same vein as uni. Uni can do it, why not randwick. Meanwhile the northern clubs and the Rams coalition seem to be able to work together to ensure that their clubs are viable, have strengths and roots in a wide range of locations and more importantly, from what I've witnessed are in it to a T for the good of rugby and not just THEIR clubs. In any case, I don't doubt that any of these clubs will be unsuccessful. They've made sure they're viable options for the NRC commission and Mr Boultbee and that's who will reward them righteously or not.

 

[Bruce Ross]

well its not, its just replacing it in the 3 tier comp rather than the Shute Shield. It should be able to be more professional in that capacity shouldn't it?

So on your model Uni is to drop from having seven development grades to one semi-professional team, RF.

The development of professional rugby players is most effectively done by providing the appropriate conditions for young players to earn their craft. A good example was Luke Burgess starting in 4th Colts after leaving Joey's. Or both Nick Phipps and Bernard Foley spending three years in Colts, with Phipps starting off in 3rd Colts IIRR. My strongly held view is that young players with exceptional potential are far better off to start out in a grade where they can dominate than in one where they struggle to survive. I know which model allows players to reach their full potential.

Taking Uni completely out of school-leaver player development would of course have the benefit of solving the problem of Shute Shield dominance, wouldn't it? People who have affiliation with other Shute Shield clubs might see this as a good thing, but those who want to see the Wallabies rise to parity with the All Blacks might view it as a rather large step backwards.
.

 

[RugbyFuture]

the pathway would simply be at balmain or another affiliated club wouldn't it, you could easily transfer the development program there and differentiate the pro club from the "amateur" club.

Uni were prominent from '99, won in 2001, then their dominance in 2005 through to now didn't they? how have the wallabies gone since then compared to before uni was dominant?

correlation doesn't equal causation, but to use the argument that usyd's dominance is linked to the wallabies success is statistically incorrect.

....in fact Randwicks success seems to equal wallaby success....

 

[Bruce Ross]

I concede, RF, on the grounds of total incomprehension of the system of logic you subscribe to.
.

 

[RugbyFuture]

I know, its hard for uni boys to understand that rugby exists outside of Camperdown.

 

[I like to watch]

You cannot be serious.
The Students dominate the SS.
Randwick have been serial failures in the same comp in recent years.
It is reasonable to expect that Uni with their existing funding,structure and playing personnel would succeed at a higher level.
I seriously would not be confident that Randwick with their existing funding,structure and playing personnel will be successful at the SS level.
Quoting the Glory days of 30 years ago,as a reason to ignore logic.
Is just not logical.

 

[RugbyFuture]

It isn't in regard to those comments that that is a rebuttal for I like to watch, it was his statement that " People who have affiliation with other Shute Shield clubs might see this as a good thing, but those who want to see the Wallabies rise to parity with the All Blacks might view it as a rather large step backwards." where that logic is applicable.

 

[MACCA]

You cannot be serious.
The Students dominate the SS.
Randwick have been serial failures in the same comp in recent years.
It is reasonable to expect that Uni with their existing funding,structure and playing personnel would succeed at a higher level.
I seriously would not be confident that Randwick with their existing funding,structure and playing personnel will be successful at the SS level.
Quoting the Glory days of 30 years ago,as a reason to ignore logic.
Is just not logical.

I don't think even Randwick believe that "with existing funding, structure etc etc" they will succeed. That is precisely why they have overhauled the place. UNSW partnership, new management & coaching structure, new players, strong Colts etc etc. Randwick is on the up.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Macca, though couldn't you say that just about any club rugby team is on the up? How many out there wouldn't be currently progressing in their most advanced state of professionalism? That's just natural evolution of amateur - semi-pro sport.

Regardless of where they sit on the table and what they're financial state is, almost any club would be improving their structures and systems based on what professional teams have done. E.g. Bond Uni Breakers have - they are still in probably one of their least successful periods ever.