Australian Rugby / RA

[Quick Hands]

Well, the senior clubs in Perth, Melbourne and Canberra don't receive the grants that the Shute Shield and Premier Rugby have received.

I understand that taking a grant away would upset many in the club land, but i really question whether clubs should have directly been receiving grants to start with. Was there a due diligence conducted on where the money was been spent? Whats the status of Shute Shield clubs directing some funds into the pockets of certain players? How has that money been spent for the benefit of the game?

Good points. I'm all for accountability and spending money wisely - I'm particularly for an overarching strategy to improve the game. This seems to be nothing more than (another) cost cutting exercise.

I'd be surprised if the clubs in Canberra, Perth and Melbourne received no support. I'd also assume that it would be less as they would have less players. Happy to be corrected if these assumptions are wrong.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

People should ask themselves what he ARUs role is.
If you think the wallabies are some standalone business ask yourself who the owners of that business are.
Where did it get its capital from?

 

[Tah and feathered]

About 3 years ago all sydney clubs had to do an audit on there rugby operations and costs and each club was given a band on the results and clubs were then allocated funding on these bands.
I would imagine most Sydney clubs are in training and running academies for colts and juniors. How many clubs in Perth, melbourne and canberra are in hard club training?

 

[Train Without a Station]

I believe Melbourne uni started this week. Though they have been running 7s since the season ended.

 

[Quick Hands]

I believe Melbourne uni started this week. Though they have been running 7s since the season ended.

That's great, but how many professional rugby players have Melbourne Uni produced?

 

[Quick Hands]

People should ask themselves what he ARUs role is.
If you think the wallabies are some standalone business ask yourself who the owners of that business are.
Where did it get its capital from?

Although some on these threads would suggest that the role of the ARU is to preside over a Darwinian organisation where only the profitable survive, let's go to the source:

The Pulveriser thinks among other things:

Most importantly this plan will take grass roots Rugby to a whole new level of performance.

http://www.rugby.com.au/Portals/18/...n/TryRugby_2012 Strategic Document_FINAL4.pdf

How's he going on those measurable targets?

 

[I like to watch]

How is he going?
About as good as you could expect with his implementation skills.
Just one example....

Participation Growth..
Goal is 320,000 participants = 17,700 new participants.
What initiatives do the ARU implement to achieve this goal?
Bring in a new levy on all club participants!
Fucking brilliant!
I would never have thought of that....

 

[Train Without a Station]

That's great, but how many professional rugby players have Melbourne Uni produced?

Define produced. Because that skews how many Shute Shield do. Fereti Sa'aga from the Rising plays for MU. But I wouldn't credit them with producing him even if he makes it.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Link for Dave Beat's Post

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...ver-funding-cuts/story-fni2fxyf-1227123554084

Can we have a fan forum at ARU headquarters. Maybe get the lot of the incompetent fools to resign? Sure as shit though Pulver and Hawker will take the money out of the coffee tin before they leave, if they haven't spent it on some media consultants already or an add campaign featuring Hooper getting a haircut.

Australian Rugby is a dire financial state......need major leadership changes but we can't exactly afford anyone decent now....lets hope someone like Gail Kelly would take a pro bono gig as yes we need ARU run like a professional commercial organisation focusing on growing the game and improving the bottom line..

Gail Kelly for head of ARU.....I would support any petition for that....

 

[Quick Hands]

Define produced. Because that skews how many Shute Shield do. Fereti Sa'aga from the Rising plays for MU. But I wouldn't credit them with producing him even if he makes it.

Had a significant impact on a player's rugby development.

In some cases more than one club or school could claim some credit for "producing" a particular player.

Historically the Sydney and Brisbane clubs and perhaps more recently the Canberra clubs have played a significant role in developing players, whether that's local juniors, colts or grade. I'd like to think that the Melbourne and Perth clubs can do the same - but they'll need help.

In general terms, the stronger the junior system is in any area, the more talent available for senior rugby in that area, the higher standard any particular club competition is, the better for the next level up as the players are playing at higher intensity/skill level. It's in the Wallabies interest for there to be strong club competitions in Sydney, Brisbane, Canberra, Melbourne and Perth - the stronger the better. Sydney just happens to be the biggest city in the country, the biggest market in the country and has the highest number of players. This doesn't mean that the other places don't count or aren't important, it just means that the higher player base will probably give Sydney a higher level competiton. They all should be supported by the ARU, how much or in what ways is a legitimate matter for debate, but the idea that the ARU has no interest in the success or failure of these club competitions is illogical as is the idea that clubs should only exist if they can turn a profit.

 

[Highlander35]

Dewar Shield needs a proper Colts set up. There's only 6 sides I think, with 2 Uni and 2 Quins.

Anyway, contracts are in place for the professional set up, and the NRC/Youth Pathways are of longer term importance, both for Pro game and Club game. So the clubs have to bear their share of the financial hardship coming, for at least 2015 Calendar year.

 

[Quick Hands]

Dewar Shield needs a proper Colts set up. There's only 6 sides I think, with 2 Uni and 2 Quins.

Anyway, contracts are in place for the professional set up, and the NRC/Youth Pathways are of longer term importance, both for Pro game and Club game. So the clubs have to bear their share of the financial hardship coming, for at least 2015 Calendar year.

But it shouldn't be an either/or choice. The ARU's job is to make the pie bigger, not change the way it's sliced.

Everything is important and nothing will be as strong as it could be unless the level immediately below is strong.

Stonger colts set up in Dewar Shield = Stronger Dewar Shield= Stronger Rising = Stronger Rebels = Stronger Wallabies.

Nothing exists in isolation and trying to pick winners and losers is notoriously difficult and I have grave reservations about the ARU's judgement in anything.

 

[Gnostic]

Australian Rugby is a dire financial state..need major leadership changes but we can't exactly afford anyone decent now..lets hope someone like Gail Kelly would take a pro bono gig as yes we need ARU run like a professional commercial organisation focusing on growing the game and improving the bottom line..

Gail Kelly for head of ARU...I would support any petition for that..

We want somebody with ethics. That basically counts out anybody from upper echelons of the banks.

Seriously though the ARU needs a proven sports administrator and not somebody from the old boys network.

 

[Brendan Hume]

Good players require pathways to develop their skills. Clubs below Shute Shield or Premier Rugby can only take players so far. Better competition is what is required. Players get better by playing with, and against, the best. Supporting those tiers of competition is important, as is supporting pathways from other competitions to that level, particularly in the juniors, and pathways past that level such as the NRC. The next step would be development tours for the top tier of the NRC players, which would be at a similar level to Super Rugby Academy. These initiatives require long term investments, and support from the Rugby community to find appropriate employment for these players.
If the proposed National Participant Registration Fee went towards these sort of initiatives, people would probably support them. As it stands, the fabric of rugby pathways in Australia is quite sheer when compared to the places that do it well (NZ, SA, Eng, France). Admittedly we have significant geographic issues to contend with, however these are overcome by other codes in Australia. The ARU need to tap into the huge human capital resource that is has in the rugby community to come up with, and implement, ideas to sustainably manage the game into the future.

 

[Dave Beat]

The ARU need to tap into the huge human capital resource that is has in the rugby community to come up with, and implement, ideas to sustainably manage the game into the future.

That is what i called Australian rugby.

The ARU should start an ARU thread for the sole purpose of that, a Q&A / ideas thread.

 

[Ash]

This thread has totally gone off the deep end; it's just going around in circles complaining about the same $28k cut to Shute Shield clubs. Rule 10 is coming into play. Unless something changes or new information comes up, it may be time to move on, or at least post less on the matter.

FYI, those that know and understand Gail Kelly's history, would be horrified at the thought of her involved. Nothing against her personally, but one example of her handiwork was to make St George appear to have large growth (lever it up massively on risky loans), move to Westpac, and then during the GFC when the disaster of what she did to St George came home to roost, she had Westpac buy St George on the cheap.

There's already an ex-bank head from NAB (?) on the board anyway, why people think Kelly would be any better without knowing anything more than she was head of Westpac is beyond me.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Good players require pathways to develop their skills. Clubs below Shute Shield or Premier Rugby can only take players so far. Better competition is what is required. Players get better by playing with, and against, the best. [/quote]

Brendan, this is a big point of mine in the other thread.

As I said I understand the positive of Shute Shield but consider it more of a luxury than a necessity. Things are better with it but the sky won't completely fall down without it.

My point is that people in support of the Shute Shield Clubs come out (in my view incorrectly) with the view that without the Shute Shield, subbies would be the exact same state as it is now it sits below Shute Shield, when in fact without Shute Shield, there's a number of players, coaches, etc. who would still be interested in rugby and likely gravitate towards the top level of subbies and it would be come somewhat of a de facto premier grade.

I'm not saying this is what the ARU should be pushing or anything of the sort. I'm merely saying that perhaps the ARU shouldn't send themselves broke supporting the clubs for fear of this.

Sure in their current state these clubs would not compete. But part of why they are in their current state is because there is 12 clubs in what is a bit of a closed off competition (how does a team gain entry to the Shute Shield? Has this occurred any time recently?) and therefore are aware they sit at their current ceiling in the pecking order. From what I can see, no club exists in the Shute Shield that was not there before 1995. Please correct me if I'm wrong as information is difficult to come by.

For example, is it inconceivable to think that Warren Livingstone would not financially support Balmain if they were in the top division of Sydney rugby? Could Mosman Rugby club not potentially gain financial support if they were at more elite level in 2014? Because what I can see is that currently, the elite has been decided based on where they were in 1995.

So my point is that if the change occurred then players would generally still play against the best as barring geographical barriers, players who want to continue to play rugby would gravitate towards these teams, perhaps lower division teams would strengthen due to this. Whatever. My point is that if the 12 clubs ceased to exist today, the top level of rugby wouldn't be stuck at the 2014 Kentwell Cup forever.

Of course this is not a preferred solution. This is for one primary reason. Time. The time it would take for the competition to settle after a restructure and see the best teams back in the best division, etc. Also the standard would drop in the short term which would see the time in takes for a player to adapt to the higher level lengthen.

But the point I'm getting at is part of the reason these teams are stronger, is because they are already stronger.


If I'm a bloke that lives in Bondi, if I'm a really good player, I probably go down to Easts as opposed to Colleagues. Do I make that decision between the two because I know Easts is inherently better? No it's because they are in the top comp and therefore I assume it's a more challenging environment with more chance to progress

 

[Braveheart81]

FYI, those that know and understand Gail Kelly's history, would be horrified at the thought of her involved. Nothing against her personally, but one example of her handiwork was to make St George appear to have large growth (lever it up massively on risky loans), move to Westpac, and then during the GFC when the disaster of what she did to St George came home to roost, she had Westpac buy St George on the cheap.

There's already an ex-bank head from NAB (?) on the board anyway, why people think Kelly would be any better without knowing anything more than she was head of Westpac is beyond me.

Yes, Cameron Clyne ex NAB is on the board.

I agree with you regarding Kelly (although not really in relation to her personally).

I don't see much similarity between running a bank that returns billion dollar profits and running a sporting organisation strapped for cash and fighting falling revenues.

Personally I would look for a CEO who is good at that sort of thing and seek better strategic guidance from the board which I think has been the most lacking element of the ARU bureaucracy.

 

[Dave Beat]

With the annual reports coming out now - can anyone share an annual report from a team within the Kentwall Cup?

 

[Dave Beat]

just received this
http://myrugby.rugby.com.au/myrugby/images/edm/14/update/NSW/#/4/