Australian Rugby / RA

[Adam84]

starting your comment with waffle about superiority and donning a suit of armour only devalues the point you're trying to convey.

 

[The Red Baron]

I fully understand how perfect our admins are and how superior to all others in Australia.

However, even allowing for our superiority, I will don my helmet and in this case hire a suit of armour.

I often commented that the Nobody Really Cares two attempts were totally rushed and in the haste to get them off the ground, the seeds of failure flowered. My theory has always been it takes about four to five years from start to its up and going.

With the above in mind, when challenged I used Football Australia, maybe only good thing they achieved was they spent four years getting what they call the "Australia Cup" off the ground similar to the FA cup in the UK. Its one of the few successful things they have done. This was seen by some as offensive as we all know that soccer is !!!!!!, useless example etc,- but some years on its getting stronger and within the Football community is very popular.

Why you ask bring it up again, well I am not, just as an opener, and working example.

A client and after 20 years as a client now a mate as well, he is a big Central Coast Mariners fan, anyway he sent me this link on something often discussed in various threads on this site, i.e. setting up a second tier competition, akin in many ways to the principals and objectives of the NRC concepts.

It seems Football Australia, started a process almost four years ago to establish a "National Second Division",

Today they announced they are in phase 4, [I assume there were phases 1, 2 & 3 no idea what they did over almost four years] but the point is FA announced today they plan on 20 November to announce the teams, and it kicks off in 2025 from the link my client sent me.

First on bended knees, can we get past its soccer and its crap, the real story is by the time this kicks off somewhere between 4 & 5, years of discussion, negotiation, Will it succeed thats depends on the expected KPI's I guess.

Rugby has deep issues that IMO are far more complex to fix than people think, I love the idea they spend around two years simply talking to various stakeholders. Those who think Rugby can, by changing a few simple things fix Rugby IMO are far off the mark, if it was that easy it would already have been done.

AS I have posted over the past few months, I no longer believe we can establish a professional national domestic competition, because we have fallen to far. Further we need to use revenue from Super Rugby to help fund alternatives so we can escape the golden gains Super Rugby is holding us with. However we need to determine the best way forward, and the concept of a NRC competition if done correctly would do that. However rather than like before we get it competed from on high, rather than a bottom up approach, which is what Football Australia did.

For anyone interested the link I received.

National Second Tier application process advances to final phase

Football Australia is excited to report the successful conclusion of Phase 3, the Assessment and Review Phase, in the evolution of the National Second Tier (NST). This critical phase was dedicated to selecting the most viable and progressive proposals to carry into the future of Australian...

www.footballaustralia.com.au

 

[Tomikin]

starting your comment with waffle about superiority and donning a suit of armour only devalues the point you're trying to convey.

You got past that... I didn't... Yada I said 5 years ago.. Yada younger generation..Yada domestic comp Yada private money ?

Am I close ?

 

[John S]

You got past that... I didn't... Yada I said 5 years ago.. Yada younger generation..Yada domestic comp Yada private money ?

Am I close ?

Something along the lines of it took soccer 4-5 years to set up a second tier, rugby should do the same

 

[Tomikin]

Something along the lines of it took soccer 4-5 years to set up a second tier, rugby should do the same

Good idea thanks for summary

 

[Dan54]

@half, good post and I find interesting. You are right about looking at how other sports do things, and don't have to follow it too the letter, but adapt to and select the things/ideas you can use.
As you say it can be too easy to say but it's a different sport etc etc, but with careful work any sport can learn from others if open minds are kept etc.

 

[Froggy]

Firstly, I just don't see how we get better by getting out of playing Super rugby. The idea that we become a better rugby nation by avoiding playing good teams makes no sense. Any sport I've played, I've benefited most from playing people better than me, not by having easy wins.
One poster on here said (sorry, can't remember who) and Michael Cheika re-iterated, we need to accept the challenge of playing Super rugby against these Kiwi sides, and just get bloody better at it. Not easy? Things that are worthwhile never are, but if we can lift our competitiveness in Super rugby, so will the Wallabies lift. There's a whole lot to it, better coaching, better talent identification, improvement in basic skills at junior levels, better pathways, nothing easy there but the result will be worth it.

And I agree with Half (not always mind) that a second tier comp. is worthwhile, but it needs to be carefully planned and developed, not rushed in six months on a whim. That planning should start now, with afocus on perhaps 2026!

I believe that competitive and winning Super rugby teams, a winning Wallabies and a strong and tribal second tier competition will do all you need to bring crowds, grass roots participation, sponsors and dollars.

 

[Tomthumb]

Any sport I've played, I've benefited most from playing people better than me, not by having easy wins.

The Italian rugby team didn't get that memo

 

[Rebel man]

Firstly, I just don't see how we get better by getting out of playing Super rugby. The idea that we become a better rugby nation by avoiding playing good teams makes no sense. Any sport I've played, I've benefited most from playing people better than me, not by having easy wins.
One poster on here said (sorry, can't remember who) and Michael Cheika re-iterated, we need to accept the challenge of playing Super rugby against these Kiwi sides, and just get bloody better at it. Not easy? Things that are worthwhile never are, but if we can lift our competitiveness in Super rugby, so will the Wallabies lift. There's a whole lot to it, better coaching, better talent identification, improvement in basic skills at junior levels, better pathways, nothing easy there but the result will be worth it.

And I agree with Half (not always mind) that a second tier comp. is worthwhile, but it needs to be carefully planned and developed, not rushed in six months on a whim. That planning should start now, with afocus on perhaps 2026!

I believe that competitive and winning Super rugby teams, a winning Wallabies and a strong and tribal second tier competition will do all you need to bring crowds, grass roots participation, sponsors and dollars.

Tell that to Ireland and France

 

[hoggy]

Firstly, I just don't see how we get better by getting out of playing Super rugby. The idea that we become a better rugby nation by avoiding playing good teams makes no sense. Any sport I've played, I've benefited most from playing people better than me, not by having easy wins.

Shit we must be bloody brilliant then after 25 years of Super rugby.

 

[Wallaby Man]

I think the fixture list from our franchise/club (whatever you want to call them) could definitely improve. Yes I agree just playing easy matches would be stupid as the kiwis bring about a challenge needed to improve but also we need the confidence of actually winning some matches and/or silverware for engagement and therefore providing an attractive proposition for talent to select our sport and sponsors to pump money into the game to correctly resource it. This is the balance that isn’t achieved.

If you continually lose it’s essentially a diminishing returns process, where less people will engage, less money is provided and therefore worse quality is provided, so almost impossible to correct the quality issue and it’s not just a conversation of just get better, the real world doesnt work that simply as many variables help define quality. But again you need competitive tension for an opponent to refine practices.

I’m absolutely adamant that SRAU and Super Rugby should co-exist to provide the correct balance of quality and winning mentality. Ideally a double round robin (8-10 game) SRAU and then a single round Super Rugby (11 game) season. That way we always have an Australian champion to celebrate but also competitive matches against kiwi teams in another competition.

I also don’t mind the thought of an FFA Cup or FA Cup style competition. Perhaps like these cups you could have certain level of teams entering the comp later in the stages so you don’t get massive miss matches. Maybe the SS or QPrem clubs enter the competition in round 3/4 and the. The Super Rugby sides in the round of 16. Have Randwick vs the Rebels or Tahs vs Brothers etc.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Firstly, I just don't see how we get better by getting out of playing Super rugby. The idea that we become a better rugby nation by avoiding playing good teams makes no sense. Any sport I've played, I've benefited most from playing people better than me, not by having easy wins.
One poster on here said (sorry, can't remember who) and Michael Cheika re-iterated, we need to accept the challenge of playing Super rugby against these Kiwi sides, and just get bloody better at it. Not easy? Things that are worthwhile never are, but if we can lift our competitiveness in Super rugby, so will the Wallabies lift. There's a whole lot to it, better coaching, better talent identification, improvement in basic skills at junior levels, better pathways, nothing easy there but the result will be worth it.

And I agree with Half (not always mind) that a second tier comp. is worthwhile, but it needs to be carefully planned and developed, not rushed in six months on a whim. That planning should start now, with afocus on perhaps 2026!

I believe that competitive and winning Super rugby teams, a winning Wallabies and a strong and tribal second tier competition will do all you need to bring crowds, grass roots participation, sponsors and dollars.

Well participating in Super Rugby hasn't exactly helped of late. The idea of 5 teams concentrating talent is great but it has also led to missing out on being competitive with League in terms of opportunity.

It also fails to cater to our market. Which has no issue with paying for what it deems as quality domestic products. Having an Australian winner annually is more attractive to our market than the Crusaders winning their upteenth title.

 

[Froggy]

I just can't see that running around playing ourselves, patting ourselves on the back and then fronting up to a test and getting blown off the park is going to help anything. It's not like we are so far behind in Super rugby it can't be done, we have won four titles, and of late the Brumbies have been mixing it with the Kiwis. I don't think it would take a huge improvement for the Tahs and Reds to be up there, the other two sides may take longer, but that doesn't mean it can't happen.

 

[stillmissit]

I wonder if Twiggy would finance a pre (or post) season rugby tournament with the top 2 club teams from all Super Rugby states playing a tournament with finals hosting rights moving on a 5 year cycle. A couple of ideas: No Super Rugby or Wallaby players to play, The comp is played over a 4 week period home and away with both local teams not playing each other in the knockout stages but could play in the finals.
The finals being played over a weekend.

This might ID some talent that's been over looked, the guys would get additional rugby games into them and hopefully Twiggy would finance a winners check for the club and individual payments to the players.

 

[LeCheese]

I wonder if Twiggy would finance a pre (or post) season rugby tournament with the top 2 club teams from all Super Rugby states playing a tournament with finals hosting rights moving on a 5 year cycle. A couple of ideas: No Super Rugby or Wallaby players to play, The comp is played over a 4 week period home and away with both local teams not playing each other in the knockout stages but could play in the finals.
The finals being played over a weekend.

This might ID some talent that's been over looked, the guys would get additional rugby games into them and hopefully Twiggy would finance a winners check for the club and individual payments to the players.

If Twiggy were to fund it, as a business case, it would be a very hard sell to exclude the significantly higher drawing power of known players.

 

[stillmissit]

If Twiggy were to fund it, as a business case, it would be a very hard sell to exclude the significantly higher drawing power of known players.

I agree, but he might if he felt that he was lifting all boats and not just the elite. Thinking about it Gina Rhinehart might just fund it, it's odd enough for her to suit her focus on lesser sports - assuming women players were included.

 

[ForceFan]

SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) 2023 and the limited Test matches exposed the lack of talent and skills of the current group of available Australian players.
The lack of impact/availability of the OS players selected did little to help the situation.
Jones had little to work with and I can understand his frustration once reality bit.
The choice of Skelton as captain was a poor one.
The over-hyping of the squad pre-RWC created unrealistic expectations.

I attended 2 x QF, in Marseille, and the 2 x SF but left Australia with no expectation that I’d see the Wallabies play.
I’m glad that I didn’t pay to see the disappointing pool matches.
The 4 x QF matches were excellent - the 2 x SF less so - the Final hardly a showcase that will attract new fans.

The game in Australia is broken and I’m not sure that we have yet reached rock-bottom.
Too many people are still in denial and protecting tired, old positions.
The sooner we accept that there are no quick fixes the better.

Unfortunately, I’m not at all hopeful of any meaningful outcomes from the proposed slow-walked review as RAu ignored all previous reviews and ALL of the matters raised in the Senate Inquiry following the axing of the Western Force in 2017.

I am hopeful that sensible player development will enable a competitive squad for RWC2027 but have little hopes for the Lions Tour in 2025.

Those hopeful that Andrew Forrest will save the game nation-wide ignore the reality that his previous offer to spend $50M on grass-roots rugby was rejected in 2017. Since then Tattarang walked away from private investment which would have meant backing the existing structures.

 

[hoggy]

I just can't see that running around playing ourselves, patting ourselves on the back and then fronting up to a test and getting blown off the park is going to help anything.

I am always bemused how any domestic option is always reduced to running around on a Sunday afternoon in the over 35's with Oranges & Port at halftime.
Its hard to see how the game moves forward in Australia, when the only validation it craves becomes increasingly harder to achieve as each year passes.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I just can't see that running around playing ourselves, patting ourselves on the back and then fronting up to a test and getting blown off the park is going to help anything. It's not like we are so far behind in Super rugby it can't be done, we have won four titles, and of late the Brumbies have been mixing it with the Kiwis. I don't think it would take a huge improvement for the Tahs and Reds to be up there, the other two sides may take longer, but that doesn't mean it can't happen.

I understand your point of view. In terms of competition it would offer a better level than a domestic competition. But that's only part of the equation. Super Rugby is not seen as a premium commercial property in our market because 1) it's practically invisible. 2) Half the teams barely anyone on our side of the Tasman could care less about 3) We don't win it often and therefore cannot build momentum.

These are all important. Netball had a similar set up as Super Rugby but dumped it as it became apparent that most Australian fans didn't bother with the NZ teams. Now they are experiencing financial issues but that's got to do with mismanagement rather than interest.

We need to build a domestic first structure as our premium product purely to appeal to our market. But that doesn't mean abandoning playing NZ teams.

If we went to 7 teams plus the Drua and NZ took Moana plus 7 of their provinces we could run av 14 week home and away competition plus a Cup comp. Or go something like Origin and pick two sides to comp (let's go with NSW and Qld being the two 'traditional' states) to play in a abridged SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) featuring our two Nth and Sth Island NZ squads plus others.

 

[Wilson]

RA boss fesses up to World Cup budget blowout

'More than we would like'

wwos.nine.com.au

No real surprises here, but you'd think McLennan might have learnt not to be quite so flippant about a budget overrun.