Declining participation and ARU plans for the future

[Braveheart81]

They've had an ARU function for the Bledisloe Cup Festival a week or two out from the Sydney Bledisloe Cup game for several years.

It's always a week or two before the Bledisloe Cup depending on when the race day is at Randwick.

Should they have cancelled it this year because the race day was on the same day as the Shute Shield Grand Final?

 

[I like to watch]

The races are on every Saturday, randwick/Rosehill what's the difference?
And I would have thought a week before the game,would make more sense than 2 weeks before the game.
Anyway,enough about when and where Bill should get on the drink on the company's money.

 

[Braveheart81]

Anyway,enough about when and where Bill should get on the drink on the company's money.

You realise it was a fundraising event right?

 

[dru]

Yep, its the sort of inference that a Pauline Hanson could make. Easy, and wrong.


For starters, do you believe that the CEO of the Australian Rugby Union should attend all Grand Finals? Or only the Sydney one?

What about the other capitals, or even the country? What about the subbies? Presumably if you were CEO you would be out with the real grass-roots, not just the fat cats of Sydney's north shore and the Camperdown Corporation?

I met and spoke at length with Bill Pulver at a Stars match last year. He was out in the crowd not up in the stands. Not exactly grass roots, but not glamour either.

PS: I'd consider myself generally a supporter of Bill, but being publically engaged on SS GF but not at the GF DOES seem somewhat inopportune to me.

 

[Wilson]

For an aru event is fine, though it would be best if he could have been at one of the major club gf days. Characterising the Shute shield grand final as "grass roots" is a bit of a joke though.

 

[Tip]

When Brett Papsworth complains that no are no ARU representatives at the Shute Shield Grand-final, every person not from NSW breathes a sigh of relief and says, GOOD. WHY?

a) It's a fucking local amateur rugby competition that has held Australia back for decades.
b) The ARU might finally be getting their heads out of their Sydney-centric asses.

 

[I like to watch]

Pulled a bigger crowd than a lot of Oz super games this year.
Looks like the ARU has its head up a lot of asses.....
the haters can moan all they like, but it's one part of the game that's going ok.
And it's the one part that the ARU seems to be distancing itself from.
Coincidence?

 

[Quick Hands]

Two consecutive posts on this page; one characterises the SS as "a local amateur rugby competition" and another says characterising it as "grass roots" is a joke.

I would have thought that a "local amateur rugby competition" would be exactly what "grass roots' is?

 

[Quick Hands]

b) The ARU might finally be getting their heads out of their Sydney-centric asses.

What, you mean like establishing a super rugby team in Canberra, and another in Perth and another in Melbourne or introduce an NRC with teams from all around the country, or start playing test rugby in Perth and Melbourne?

 

[Quick Hands]

local amateur rugby competition that has held Australia back for decades.
b) .

Which decades might these have been?

The decade when the QRU and rugby in Queensland went out of business, or the decades when they produced most of the test players?

 

[Tip]

Unfortunately, I do not have the time to go into complete detail on WHY the Shute Shield and their clubs held Rugby Union back for decades.

But I'll try and educate the uninformed masses.

Shute Shield clubs (most, anyway) fought against any and all moves to take Rugby out of the "(sh)Amateur" era. Shute Shield clubs were perfectly happy being the big fish in the small pond, paying players under the table for their services. Shute Shield didn't want the brumbies, hell, they didn't even want Super Rugby. It is taking their Star players away from their suburban ovals and making their $200 dollars a game cash bonus look like chickenfeed.

Meanwhile, these very clubs are the ones that have been overseeing a drastic decline in player numbers for the past decade and sat idly by as League and AFL take over the area. But no, due to their self-centred, Sydney-centric nature, they cry that the ARU isn't doing anywhere near enough for Grassroots rugby. Forget the fact that they get 300k and non-international rugby broadcast on FTA, which no other state has.

Pardon me, but no premier club deserves 1 cent of funding from the national body. These clubs are the same clubs that took their ARU grants and put it straight into the back pockets of their players for the past three decades.
In Summary: SS clubs

1. Actively campaigned against Super Rugby
2. Actively fought against the NRC, insisting that their local comp remain Aus' 3rd tier.
3. Spent their ARU money (and good faith) on players and not player development

Point 3 is the reason WHY the ARU refuses to put any dollar into club rugby unless they know exactlywhere it's going.

Here's an idea. Why doesn't the Shute Shield clubs band together, and put all the money they spend on player payments in a kitty. I bet you'd be able to run a one-man mobile coaching clinic that could go to schools and spread word of the game they play in heaven. You might even recoup the costs if enough juniors end up signing up to clubs.
The thing is, it'll never happen. Uni would continue offering scholarships, Eastwood would say "now's our chance" and start paying players to try and clinch the premiership (and a few of the best local players too).

SS clubs dont' want to grow the pie and share it. They want to make their slice of the pie bigger and eat it.

 

[Lindommer]

Too true, Tip. Over the last 20 years Sydney club team numbers have shrunk from five grade+four colts to four grade+three colts, and even then with the reduced numbers required some clubs haven't turned out their full complements in the recent past.

 

[I like to watch]

So the volunteers arent doing enough to recruit juniors,so the decline in numbers is totally their fault.
Meanwhile, the ARU's contribution to growing junior numbers is to place a levy on junior registrations!
Clubs Actively fought the NRC by investing in the NRC teams?

 

[dru]

So the volunteers arent doing enough to recruit juniors,so the decline in numbers is totally their fault.
Meanwhile, the ARU's contribution to growing junior numbers is to place a levy on junior registrations!
Clubs Actively fought the NRC by investing in the NRC teams?

No. The funding structures that are in place are not reaching the people we all agree should have a focus. A big chunk of the reason why is the historical and current behaviour of those in charge of the SS and the SRU and that they consider themselves protected elite to be propped up by everyone else.

The problems are pretty much unique in application to NSW, though the silver spoon attitude is prevalent.

 

[Quick Hands]

Unfortunately, I do not have the time to go into complete detail on WHY the Shute Shield and their clubs held Rugby Union back for decades.
.

But you'll slander a whole group of decent rugby people because some of them haven't and possibly still aren't doing the right thing?

Maybe you should get a job at ICAC where such sweeping generalisations based on scant or no evidence are the norm.

The thing is, it'll never happen. Uni would continue offering scholarships, Eastwood would say "now's our chance" and start paying players to try and clinch the premiership (and a few of the best local players too).

So that's 2 clubs out of 12. How does the fact that some of the other clubs are actively part of the NRC through joint NRC ventures fit with your conspiracy?

 

[Quick Hands]

No. The funding structures that are in place are not reaching the people we all agree should have a focus. A big chunk of the reason why is the historical and current behaviour of those in charge of the SS and the SRU and that they consider themselves protected elite to be propped up by everyone else.

The problems are pretty much unique in application to NSW, though the silver spoon attitude is prevalent.

Some may consider themselves the elite. They are there for all to see - name them and criticise them and their actions by all means.

I for one criticised Randwick, Easts, Uni and Eastwood for not getting fully behind the NRC when it first started. That criticism stands because I think that they are wrong.

As with so many things in life, where whole groups a smeared because some have done or are doing the wrong thing, it's completely unfair on those who are doing the right thing.

It's also counter productive - I'd have thought that highlighting positive behaviour and actions is at least as important as highlighting the opposite.

 

[dru]

Some may consider themselves the elite. They are there for all to see - name them and criticise them and their actions by all means.

I for one criticised Randwick, Easts, Uni and Eastwood for not getting fully behind the NRC when it first started. That criticism stands because I think that they are wrong.

As with so many things in life, where whole groups a smeared because some have done or are doing the wrong thing, it's completely unfair on those who are doing the right thing.

It's also counter productive - I'd have thought that highlighting positive behaviour and actions is at least as important as highlighting the opposite.

I was building so e sympathy and then saw this straight out of the Papworth rant book as made PC by Alan Jones:

Nailed it IS. He's been in elite rugby programmes since his teens (like almost all of them). Sigh.

Those HPU systems have made Mumm a compelling bench option at international level. Way more than he may have achieved otherwise.

Unfortunately those HPUs are gradually and convincingly reducing the importance of the SS in terms of producing Super Rugby players. Certainly the Premier (thence NRC) is the slot currently for producing late bloomers into this system. But are they (you?) working with us? (In this case the Waratahs Ltd?)

Attempting to tear down successful existing systems smacks of nothing but a bloody-mindedness to confuse self interest with the greater good.

 

[I like to watch]

You do know that the Tahs have been releasing squad members to play SS, when not selected in match day squad?
HPU's are great in theory.
It's the selection of who should be in these systems, and then, who should stay in these systems, is where it breaks down.

 

[half]

Its very possible there is no right answer and both sides on the BP debate have degrees of being right.

My concern as most would be aware is the structural quality of our systems.

At State schools we are near non existence
At GPS schools still number one but with both soccer and AFL catching up fast.
At local district park, grassroots our systems compared to almost every other sport are poor.
At SS see debates in previous pages.
The NRC, has morphed into something IMO will struggle to grow and will struggle to survive. As always the national team interests seem to trump all other rugby issues.
Super Rugby wow how can we analysis it. Its grown this year but is well down on its peaks.

The media deal seems if some media and posts on this site are correct is under pressure, keeping five teams is being questioned by some.

We kinda all need to accept, everyone needs to lift and IMO we need something in place to step in to take over Super Rugby within four years and everyone needs to be in the decision making process even BP.

There is only so long, the business contacts, the old boys network etc can keep our current market position without new players i.e netball, volleyball, BMX racing etc pushing in further with the AFL, NRL and Football pushing at the other end. Rugby needs be in control of itself, rather than relying and living off the coattails of the SA and International TV ratings.

 

[Joe King]

The overall goal for Australian rugby should be to get as many people playing the game as possible, and providing as much enjoyment for the fans as possible.

For this to occur, there needs to be a long term plan to feed and develop interest and skills at all levels of the pyramid.

Australian rugby cannot depend upon the Wallabies winning to do this. Realistically, the Wallabies are not going to win all the time, especially when playing NZ and SA as regularly as they do. We need a new strategy that can withstand the dry spells for the Wallabies.

Super Rugby can’t play this role. Yes, Super Rugby helps to keep the top players from going overseas, which apparently prevents professional rugby in Australia from sinking altogether. But it is not going to feed and develop interest at all levels of the pyramid below. Part of the reason is because it’s not on free to air TV. But that’s not actually main reason. Even without free to air TV, when an Australian Super Rugby team looks likely to win the Super Rugby competition, it still gains a lot of interest. The main reason Super Rugby cannot be the solution is because most of the time (only 4 times in the last 20 years) the glory and benefits of winning do not go to some part of Australia.

The premier clubs in Sydney (and perhaps Qld) can’t play this role. They can gain a lot of interest in Sydney (and perhaps Qld), but do they really help rugby outside of these areas? And are they really able to develop players who can easily step up to Super Rugby?

The NRC is a step towards following the model in NZ and SA, and I can see it growing and developing a stronger following. But its main function will always be developing players, rather than capturing the imagination of fans and truly competing with the domestic competitions of rival codes. Perhaps the main reason for this is that all the test players are not available for it.

This seems to be a problem for Australian rugby. We do have the women's 7's, which is great. But we probably need something else in the men's department as well.