Deans pushing for domestic comp in Oz

[Spook]

Might not go down to well with JON but he's absolutely right:

http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,26227443-23217,00.html

 

[barbarian]

He is pretty much stating the obvious there. I think even JON would see the merits of his ideas. In practise, though, it is a lot harder to coordinate. In a time where the ARU isn't exactly rolling in dough I think it will stay on the backburner for a few years at least.

 

[Gagger]

ARU tackling Deans on strong local comp will be playing own man

Wayne Smith, Rugby union editor | October 19, 2009
Article from: The Australian

IS Wallabies coach Robbie Deans to become the latest victim of that great Australian rugby tradition of censuring people who tell the truth?

Certainly Deans would have induced apoplexy in the halls of power of the Australian Rugby Union with his observation in Sunday newspapers that the lack of a strong domestic competition is hurting Australia's international results.

No offence intended, but it was hardly an original insight. Even his plea for the creation of a competition that might do for Australian rugby what the Sheffield Shield does for cricket had a familiar ring to it. The past two Wallabies coaches have been saying much the same thing for some time but where the current ARU administration never has any qualms about ridiculing the ideas of John Connolly or Eddie Jones, this time the proposal comes from their own man, Deans.

Presumably that will completely change the dynamic. True, the ARU could once again respond with its customary heavyhandedness by playing the man but hopefully Deans' stature and respected standing in the game will afford him some measure of protection. Confronted with a situation when it can't play the man, the ARU for once might be forced to play the ball.

The ARU never wearies of pointing out that Australian rugby is operating in the most fiercely competitive sporting marketplace in the world. True enough. But that begs the question: If the marketplace is so fiercely competitive, why isn't Australian rugby competing fiercely?

On a weekend when just about every Springbok of note was involved in one of the two epic Currie Cup semi-final thrillers, the same weekend 27-year-old Bay of Plenty five-eighth Mike Delaney was forcing his way into his first All Blacks touring side on the strength of being the leading points scorer in the NPC -- aka the Air New Zealand Cup -- Australia's Wallabies were enjoying a leisurely weekend at home.

Admittedly, it was the last weekend they will have off until December because they are just a week away from embarking on their annual tour but the same applies to the All Blacks and Boks and yet there were all their stars giving their all in the respective NZ and SA domestic competitions.

Except for those Wallabies involved in the September 27 Shute Shield final, the most recent game any of them would have played was the September 19 Bledisloe Cup Test in Wellington. Unless of course you're taking about Quade Cooper or Peter Hynes, who were on the reserves bench in the NZ capital but weren't used.

And how their fellow reserves Dean Mumm and Luke Burgess must be thankful Sydney Uni made the club grand final and they were given a run off the bench, otherwise they wouldn't have played any rugby whatever since the end of August.

Digby Ioane too is crying out for match practice, not having played for five months because of injury. Heaven knows the Wallabies desperately need his firepower out wide but can Deans seriously select him for the October 31 Tokyo Test against the NPC-hardened All Blacks on the strength of his run in a charity sevens game at Ballymore on Saturday?

Does the ARU have a plan for developing the depth of Australian rugby, other than the one that basically involves crossing fingers and sending up prayers that Deans and his Wallabies win their next Test match?

Two seasons, two wasted seasons, have now gone by since the ARU killed off the Australian Rugby Championship. Its rationale then was that the game couldn't afford a third-tier competition yet the mounting evidence is that the game can't afford not to have it -- or at least something like it.

Admittedly, the expanded Super rugby format to be introduced in 2011 will take up some of the slack but that still leaves a gaping hole next season.

Each year the gap between Australia and its Tri-Nations partners/rivals grows wider. While the young Wallabies had their feet up watching the Caulfield Cup on Saturday, current and next generation Springboks were playing in front of 47,982 spectators at Newlands where the Blue Bulls scraped home 21-19 against Western Province. Meanwhile, on the Indian Ocean side of the republic, the Cheetahs were springing the upset of the Currie Cup season by toppling the Sharks at Durban's Absa Stadium, the winning margin again a nail-biting two points.

It's not just the Currie Cup final between the Bulls and Cheetahs that will be shown live on South African television but also the under-19 and -21 finals. And to think that the Shute Shield final wasn't even televised in Brisbane, Australia's second-biggest rugby market!

Australian rugby is being left behind, internationally and domestically, as the ARU's own market research attests. So where are all its dazzling initiatives to reverse this trend?

Wednesday should deliver some good news but that will depend on how convincingly the ARU sells Melbourne's bid for the Super 15 expansion licence to SANZAR. Notice, at this point, how well I restrained myself from making a snide, ironic comment about Melbourne's fate being in the hands of the ARU. OK, maybe I didn't.

However Deans' call for a Sheffield Shield-style domestic rugby competition is received at ARU headquarters, the undeniable fact is that he has only spoken the truth. As inconvenient as that truth might be, it cannot be ignored.

If the ARU refuses to act on it, the states must. After all, it's their problem too.

 

[Spook]

It's clear the ARU can't afford to run it so what are the options? Join the ANZC if we're allowed..

 

[Spook]

ARU serious about third tier: Deans

* Font Size: Decrease Increase
* Print Page: Print

Wayne Smith | October 20, 2009
Article from: The Australian

WALLABIES coach Robbie Deans has revealed the ARU is seriously investigating reviving a third-tier competition to improve the depth in Australian rugby and provide a meaningful stepping stone between club and professional football.

Deans conceded on the weekend the lack of a strong domestic competition was hurting Australia's international results, suggesting the game needed to adopt a model akin to cricket's Sheffield Shield competition.

It was a valid analogy for more reasons than one, because like the Sheffield Shield, which is an invaluable component of Australian cricket yet runs at a loss, the brief experiment of the third-tier Australian Rugby Championship in 2007 also proved a heavy drain on the ARU's budget.

Despite the fact all parties involved believed it had been an outstanding success from a rugby perspective and vowed that the second year of the competition would be played at a fraction of the cost, the ARC was cancelled after only one season.

The ARU has come under increasing fire for not reviving the concept, but Deans yesterday insisted the criticism was not warranted.

"It's something the ARU is looking at," Deans said. "There is a lot going on."

The coach said the introduction of a likely fifth Australian franchise -- in Melbourne -- and extension of Super rugby to a 22-week season extending from February to the first weekend in August would take up some of the slack in Australia's calendar.

But Deans stressed there was still a need for a third tier, post-club tournament.

"Any form of half-way competition that is economically sustainable would be good," he said.

Earlier this year, ARU chief executive John O'Neill indicated a modified version of the ARC might be considered if the new SANZAR broadcast deal poured sufficient money into the ARU coffers.

Indeed, he foreshadowed the possibility of a trans-Tasman competition that might take the place of New Zealand's financially-troubled NPC -- the Air New Zealand Cup, to give it its official title.

The existing 14-team NPC is teetering on the brink of collapse and almost certainly will be trimmed back in size in 2011, possibly to 10 teams. But where all previous attempts to tap into the domestic New Zealand competition have come to nothing, this time it is in the NZRU's interest to seriously consider an Australian involvement.

Whether or not that avenue opens up, the chairmen and CEO's of Australia's four Super rugby franchises -- possibly to be joined by their Victorian counterparts if tomorrow's SANZAR meeting approves Melbourne's admission to the Super 15 -- will have a third-tier competition at the top of their agenda when they meet in Sydney next Tuesday.

The meeting is designed to achieve some unity of purpose among the states before their December 7 summit with the ARU, with seemingly everyone but Queensland convinced there is a pressing need for a third-tier competition.

"I liked what I saw of club football this season and we'd probably end up going to club footy to create a pathway (through to the professional ranks)," QRU chairman Rod McCall said.

While existing clubs would certainly provide the tribalism that was missing from the ARC, the downside of taking that approach is that it would create a handful of super-clubs at the expense of all the rest. If, for instance Sydney University, Randwick and Eastern Suburbs formed the nucleus of a third-tier competition, any school-leaver with ambitions of playing professional rugby would feel compelled to join one of them.

Deans admitted he was encouraged by the fact that the state chairmen intend to discuss a third-tier competition next week.
Story

 

[waratahjesus]

joining the npc would surely be the best option, if the comp is going to run succesfully, it has to get a television contract and i cant see that happening with second string aussie sides alone.

 

[Lindommer]

If the ARC Mark II could trim costs (less travel, fewer interstate overnight stays, etc) and do a shitload more work on the income side, it'd be a goer. Added to that the allocation of playing stadiums in Sydney needs a thoughtful revision. Let's say Sydney Fleet play at the redeveloped Redfern Oval and a tarted-up Forshaw Park, the Northern Rays play at Rat Park and Bluetongue Stadium at Gosford and the Western Rams play at Concord and that nice new stadium at St Marys. That'd have to be a damned side less expensive than North Sydney Oval and Parramatta Stadium. Allied with that Melbourne and the Brisbane sides should fly in and out of Sydney and Canberra the same day they play and vice versa. That should cut expenses down considerably.

One thing a new domestic competition must not do is allow the stronger clubs to dictate their inclusion to the detriment of rugby's expansion. Western Sydney desperately needs another avenue for talented young rugby players to parade their wares without them being pinched by the stronger clubs. The Rams' performance in the 2007 version shows how well this part of Sydney can do if given the opportunity. And the second Queensland side gives Gold Coast rugby supporters a perfect occasion to parade their code in the face of the other three.

But the most crucial thing a new domestic competition must do is generate income. Broadcast rights, sponsorship, more responsibility at franchise level, doesn't matter. If the money side can work the ARU should tell the state unions and clubs the new competition WILL stick around for five years, no matter what.

 

[Newb]

exactly Lindo

it will never happen if JO'N et al see it as only breaking even or coming up short in the $$ department. and at this stage of the economic game, i'm not sure i see it happening. maybe in 2 years time. but i think few things could better improve rugby in australia (perhaps bringing back australia a).

one of the things lacking in the wallabies side has been a consistent skill level. it's always up or down, even within the same match. more high level rugby would do wonders in improving this. gives the young blokes more time to develop and the older fellas a chance to work into and then retain some form. nearly every member of the current squad needs either of the two.

and other nations with this type of comp will have it over us until the aru really do something about it.

another idea: how about getting an airline as a sponsor? they get their name everywhere and the teams get cheap travel through them. win-win. and have the buggers stay in hostels. it will be a unique experience.

 

[Scotty]

Maybe it would be enough to just have the (hopefully soon to be) 5 provincial teams play a round robin tournament with one week final series after the S15 has finished. Afterall it would run at the same time as the test matches, so at least 30 regular players would not be involved in it, meaning that a lot more players will get involvement at state level, and that fringe wallabies will be able to push their causes in case of injuries or for the EOYT.

I guess the other option is for the states to have their own under 21 sides and run an under 21 comp concurrent with the S15.

I think introducing more teams, with no history is not the way to go, and will not have the crowd/tv viewer support.

 

[waratahjesus]

north sydney oval cant be that expensive if norths can play there, also its a couple of hundread metres from aru headquarters, and plus i love going there and its an awesome place to watch rugby, it should be the centrepiece of the comp.

i think we should just have a 2nds side from the four (five) aussie super teams, round robin after clubland, no contracts though, meaning you can play into the team through your club performances. Maybe Perth could base themselves in sydney or something to cut costs (i know its not popular but it would work!)

 

[TOCC]

north sydney oval cant be that expensive if norths can play there, also its a couple of hundread metres from aru headquarters, and plus i love going there and its an awesome place to watch rugby, it should be the centrepiece of the comp.

i think we should just have a 2nds side from the four (five) aussie super teams, round robin after clubland, no contracts though, meaning you can play into the team through your club performances. Maybe Perth could base themselves in sydney or something to cut costs (i know its not popular but it would work!)

well i dont know if norths should be the centrepiece, i mean realistically Ballymore is the only rugby union stadium in Australia and games can be held there for free

 

[waratahjesus]

north sydney oval cant be that expensive if norths can play there, also its a couple of hundread metres from aru headquarters, and plus i love going there and its an awesome place to watch rugby, it should be the centrepiece of the comp.

i think we should just have a 2nds side from the four (five) aussie super teams, round robin after clubland, no contracts though, meaning you can play into the team through your club performances. Maybe Perth could base themselves in sydney or something to cut costs (i know its not popular but it would work!)

well i dont know if norths should be the centrepiece, i mean realistically Ballymore is the only rugby union stadium in Australia and games can be held there for free

agree with you there tocc, meant for games in sydney.

maybe they could make it a travelling rugby carnival, four teams, for three cities, north/south/east/west. they could play a friday night game, then a saturday double header, ad some kiddies to the before game for the friday night, you have four hours of rugby to sell, comps over in three weeks

 

[fatprop]

The reality is Deans is looking for some relevant games to be played between the end of the Tri Nations and the November tour for his squad and the next level.

How the ARU creates and funds that, I don't care, I just want it.

 

[Scott Allen]

Don't think you'll find many people who disagree that we need a way to offer development for more players. The ARC was always going to struggle not being based on existing clubs but I can see the logic in trying to run combined teams so we don't end up with just a few clubs dominating.

Perhaps we could consider a hybrid, something like the following:

Two conferences with 5 teams each - 4 rounds - then a semi-final weekend 1st in Conf A v 2nd in Conf B and 2nd in Conf B v 2nd in Conf A - then a GF - that's 6 weeks of competiton.

Conference A - 1 team from Sydney Comp (could be one of the top two in a pre-season comp rather than the Grand Finalists to mix it up a bit) - Melbourne Composite team - ACT Composite team - Central Coast Composite team - Sydney team drawn from other Sydney clubs.

Conference B - 2 teams from Brisbane (again top 2 in a pre-season comp or the top 2 from the State Cup) - Sunshine Coast composite team - the other top 2 Sydney team - a Brisbane Mixed team drawn from the other Brisbane clubs.

Benefits:

* There'd be a bit of travel involved but far less than with the ARC
* Could still retain some tribalism by having established teams participating
* Would offer another comp within the Sydney and Brisbane competition for teams to qualify through
* Gets some more high quality rugby to areas like Central Coast, Sunshine Coast, ACT and Melbourne to keep building the brand
* Six weeks is short enough to maintain interest
* Those in the Wallaby squad whose clubs are not involved could be distributed by Wallabies coaching staff to the hybrid teams so they're also getting a run

 

[Lindommer]

north sydney oval cant be that expensive if norths can play there...its an awesome place to watch rugby

One could reasonably presume Northern Suburbs would be charged considerably less to play at North Sydney Oval than Sydney Fleet or the northern team, Rays or whatever. It'd require about one security bloke and a dog for Norths matches, a few less than that first night of the ARC with, what was it?, 7,000.

There's no doubt North Sydney Oval's a pretty oval, but that's about all it is. No stand's square on to the sides to watch rugby and they're all too far away. Rat Park, Forshaw, Concord, Ballymore, Bruce Stadium are all so much better for viewing rugby.

 

[eddo]

Maybe we need to rethink the whole comp season..

Maybe we don't need a whole new setup for clubs/teams etc.. like the Rams, but a heineken style comp shared with nz..

you take the top two clubs from Syd, Bris, Can and the top two from Auk, Wellie and Christchurch..

Radical changes for the NZ teams considering they don't need it at all.. but you wouldn't need to come up with half the cash the arc cost..

you could drop the kiwis and take the top four from syd and bris, two from canberra..

Suddenly you have clubs from out of town coming in to play your local lads.. There needs to be some change,.. some variety in the opposition if you want crowds to turn up..

I wouldn't needlessly go down to watch a randwick v easts match in just another round of the shute. but I would turn up to see randwick v brothers or tuggy vikings..

 

[RugbyReg]

Just reading the Rugby Heaven article on Ben Alexander reminds me of what the ARC is capable of.

Part of me is resigned to the fact that we will copy the NRL model, i.e. NSWRL/NSWRU comp just signs all the best players and maybe a team from Brisbane (or two) and one from Canberra, perhaps Melbourne join. There will have to be some cutting (of teams) down the track, but perhaps that's the start? Just get all the best players playing in the one comp. Who cares if Ben Lucas et al plays for one of the Brisbane teams or the Rats/Woodies or Students. In the end we just want a comp for our best players. Then it can evolve into another NRL/NRU.

The Brisbane comp my struggle (as per the QRL comp did for a little while), but the QRL bounced back. The main clubs (in the NRU) will adopt teams up here (and elsewhere) to have a developmet path etc.

Just get the comp started.

 

[Geronimo]

I seriously don't think that there was too much wrong with the ARC. Yes they didn't quite get ground allocation right, they could have played at the best suburban grounds with no cover charge to initially build team followings. I got right into the ACES who were based here on the coast and I miss that comp. I will admit Carrara was a bad choice in terms of a facility to watch rugby and also as a cost. They wouldn't have covered the ground fees with the entry. But at the best suburban ground at no charge people would have flocked to watch and thereby building up a following. It would not necessarily have to be here but at say Sunnybank (great facility). The fans needed time to tribalise and it would have happened. You also got to meet the players on the ground after games and for the younger kids this was an absolute highlight. As a someone said, to start fly in fly out same day to minimise costs, but it needs to start somewhere. Noddy it is interesting that you mentioned Ben Lucas, he played for the ACES and I have followed him and Ben Mowen ever since

 

[Cutter]

There are some good ideas here.

I think the ARC Mark II has merit. As mentioned, costs should be cut. Play at suburban ovals which have a reputation for getting good crowds and charge $10 for adults. Students, pensioners and children free. A small point, but Rat Park is a horrible place to watch rugby. It has no soul. Manly oval, although not a pure rugby ground, is a much nicer place to watch a game and is more likely to draw in passers by.

I also like the idea of a Heinekin Cup type comp using the ARC teams and including NZ teams. Perhaps we could also host the winner of the Argie premiership for a month or six weeks to allow them to compete too.

I disagree that it should be aimed at making money, particularly initially. With low costs, community support and good rugby, it will eventually become a valid product. Until then, we will need to finance it.

 

[fatprop]

Part of what really hurt the ARC apparently was the travel and accommodation costs. The Melbourne side of course had to be put up somewhere (as none lived in Victoria) and then travel etc etc

Each team also apparently travelled at least the day before each long distance game which also added extra accommodation costs.

Getting crowds is one thing, but they also need find a way of keeping costs down as well.

I think the first thing we need to consider is what is the real goal of the comp. To "grow" the game or provide more hard rugby for the players between the end of September and the end of October.

To me the Cricket scenario is a good one, no one watches the Sheffield Shield, they play in empty stadia, but it creates a strong breeding ground for hardened cricketers and is a loss leader from Cricket Australia - with everyone happy. But the adminstrators do manage the costs very tightly to control the expected loss.