Declining participation and ARU plans for the future

[Gnostic]

Can I ask why? I don't disagree with your post (in fact it seems more and more likely as the days go by) but I would be interested to see your justification

Because the development of our players no matter how innately skilled is just broken. We have professional players that cannot pass a ball. We have a first choice 15 that cannot kick effectively. We have 9's that cannot pass and are so slow in executing a kick from the base that a fat mid 40's me could charge them down. Basically the model that has our players picked from school and moved into "pro" pathways without grinding away improving their skills among other players of varying skill levels has undermined the actual ability of our players for a generation. I do actually think the talent is in Australia to be far better than what we have currently, I just do not think that the systems are in place, and in my opinion the NRC does absolutely zero to fix the issue and is a waste of time and money.

 

[lou75]

You are right Gnostic, no skill improvement past their innate abilities. It starts with the coaching and IMO the centralised coaching model of NZ is what we should be looking at. The NZ coaching model churns out player after player that can be placed in to any team as required - hence their amazing depth in AB selection.

 

[half]

O My Fucking God

http://www.roymorgan.com/findings/7...cipation-australia-december-2016-201703200905

Rugby is number 26.

This tells us why we can no longer win games..

 

[wamberal]

There are surveys and surveys. But whatever the methodology, the message is pretty stark. We are in deep doo-doo.

 

[half]

wam

Mate if those numbers are anywhere near correct [Roy Morgan has a good reputation in these matters] its a lot more than deep doo-doo.

From 148, 000 to 55, 000 regular participants a 63% fall in 15 years.

This information is in total contradiction to what the ARU have been telling us for yes.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Big drop since last year when Morgan reported 108,000

http://www.roymorgan.com/findings/6...s-play-olympic-sports-march-2016-201608111116

Or the 250,000 reported to enjoy playing our game in 2014

http://www.roymorgan.com/findings/5479-australian-sporting-participants-201403070439

Be nice to see what question was asked in each of these surveys, the methodology and margin of error

(And I'm not doubting participation has dropped, just that these type of surveys aren't exactly a great way to measure it)

 

[wamberal]

Totally agree. They should be taken with a grain of salt. Although a cup of tea, a Bex, and a good liedown might help as well.

 

[p.Tah]

Long post - but stay with me:

I'm afraid I'm not concerned about the latest results. Roy Morgan is a reputable market research firm and the methodology would be sound, but this is national survey. Rugby’s core participation is confined essentially to NSW, Qld and the ACT and within those state/territories it is confined even further to certain post codes. In Sydney it’s the North Shore and the Eastern Suburbs. The issue with this from a statistical perspective, is that one or two survey results can have a large effect on the numbers when they are scaled up.
So let’s break this down:

• 14,330 is a very large sample size for the 2016 survey and no doubt it would have been very representative across the states and demographics. According to the ABS there are 15.8M people in Australia aged between 15-65 years. So this 14,330 is only 0.09% of this population. This is important because it will become the scaling up factor (crudely)

• Let’s take Sydney as an example: There are approximately 300,000 people aged between 15-65 living in Sydney’s rugby heartland on Sydney North Shore and the Eastern Suburbs . That is 1.9% of this population (15.8M).

• If the 14,330 sample is properly representative of the total Australian population 1.9% of 14,330 is 272 people.

• This is actually a small number and if this is further broken down by 60 sports this number gets even smaller

• Therefore within this sample of 272 (playing 60 sports), if rugby in Sydney(for example) isn’t strongly represented in this sample, it’s going to impact it big time when the data is scaled up to a national figure.

• AFL and Soccer have made inroads into rugby in the last 15 years, but rugby has not declined from 150,000 down to 50,000 participants in that time. Most likely the 2001 was scaled too high or the 2016 was scaled too low, or a combination of both. This type of issue is less likely to effect sports such as Rugby League where it is much more popular across NSW, Qld and ACT and even less so for national sports such as Soccer.

Don’t stress over these numbers. We genuinely don’t know what the number are for rugby. My gut feel, and I am involved closely with kids sport is that there has been some decline over this time (as most contact sports have experienced) but its not as dramatic as these number suggest.

So how do we improve these survey results in the future? Increase rugby participation outside of its current heartland so the scaling factors aren’t such an issue.


So lets do what we’ve all been saying, grow Western Sydney and don’t cut the Brumbies, Force or Rebels and we'll get a better representation in the survey... and increasing the numbers will be better for the game as well!

 

[Quick Hands]

Because the development of our players no matter how innately skilled is just broken. We have professional players that cannot pass a ball. We have a first choice 15 that cannot kick effectively. We have 9's that cannot pass and are so slow in executing a kick from the base that a fat mid 40's me could charge them down. Basically the model that has our players picked from school and moved into "pro" pathways without grinding away improving their skills among other players of varying skill levels has undermined the actual ability of our players for a generation. I do actually think the talent is in Australia to be far better than what we have currently, I just do not think that the systems are in place, and in my opinion the NRC does absolutely zero to fix the issue and is a waste of time and money.

You and I have made similar points before (as have other posters). We've often been shouted down on these threads for doing so.

I'd simply make the observation; almost all of the professional rugby players currently playing super rugby in Australia have been involved in ARU or state union elite programmes since their mid teens. That being the case, if we compare the players involved in the NZ super teams to the players involved in the Australian ones, there is a fairly obvious difference in the ability to execute the basic skills of the game and a distince lack of flair and imagination in attack. The most plausible explanation for this is that they are doing things better than us in the way they develop their players. However any suggestion that our elite programmes need to be revised is met with hostility and denial.

 

[KevinO]

O My Fucking God

http://www.roymorgan.com/findings/7...cipation-australia-december-2016-201703200905

Rugby is number 26.

This tells us why we can no longer win games..

Those numbers are so far from true,
1) Australia has 20 million people who don't play sport?

2) 50k people are doing archery while only 55k play rugby?

3) From 18 down is crap, Field Hockey has grown sufficently in the last 15 years. I have stopped playing but know my old club has nearly doubled since 2002.

O My Fucking God

http://www.roymorgan.com/findings/7...cipation-australia-december-2016-201703200905

Rugby is number 26.

This tells us why we can no longer win games..

Sent from my LG-H850 using Tapatalk

 

[Quick Hands]

Those numbers are so far from true,
1) Australia has 20 million people who don't play sport?

2) 50k people are doing archery while only 55k play rugby?

3) From 18 down is crap, Field Hockey has grown sufficently in the last 15 years. I have stopped playing but know my old club has nearly doubled since 2002.



Sent from my LG-H850 using Tapatalk

Can confirm that, my kids play field hockey and junior numbers have quadrupled in our club in the past 5 years. Similar growth in the competition in which they play.

 

[Harv]

The stats might be shaky but there is no point denying the game faces extraordinary challenges. Super Rugby's structure is a nonsense and the erosion of grassroots senior club rugby has been devastating, but the ARU and the wider rugby community's over-reliance on junior development through private schools is the fundamental issue. Rugby is not an inclusive and non-discriminatory culture in Australia and that's long been the problem. The authorities have let government school rugby, junior clubs and bush footy wither on the vine and now the establishment is watching its privileged kids turn away from the sport too. Australian rugby is always strongest when the game actively encourages something other than its traditional demographic of wealthy people to play and watch. Private schools will always be an important contributor to the talent and culture in the game, but the blinkered approach to development and nourishment of the base is strangling the sport. This, at a time when in just about every other country in the world, the game is growing rapidly because of inclusive practices, a focus on safety, and innovative competition structures. Sevens has been a big contributor, but 15s is flourishing too in places like the US, as access to clubs -- often hybrid school/district clubs -- improves. Sure, they should fix Super Rugby but the first comp they should look at creating/recreating is a meaningful junior level conference and seed competition that includes Rah rah schools, bushies, junior clubs and government school bruisers. A meaningful Waratah Shield. How are the GPS and CAS folks going to fit it in? Drop playing bloody "trial" games. Make the first half of the season an intelligently structured knockout comp. Play the plebs, then you can get back to patting each other on the leather patches in your traditional comps.

 

[Hugie]

The stats might be shaky but there is no point denying the game faces extraordinary challenges. Super Rugby's structure is a nonsense and the erosion of grassroots senior club rugby has been devastating, but the ARU and the wider rugby community's over-reliance on junior development through private schools is the fundamental issue. Rugby is not an inclusive and non-discriminatory culture in Australia and that's long been the problem. The authorities have let government school rugby, junior clubs and bush footy wither on the vine and now the establishment is watching its privileged kids turn away from the sport too. Australian rugby is always strongest when the game actively encourages something other than its traditional demographic of wealthy people to play and watch. Private schools will always be an important contributor to the talent and culture in the game, but the blinkered approach to development and nourishment of the base is strangling the sport. This, at a time when in just about every other country in the world, the game is growing rapidly because of inclusive practices, a focus on safety, and innovative competition structures. Sevens has been a big contributor, but 15s is flourishing too in places like the US, as access to clubs -- often hybrid school/district clubs -- improves. Sure, they should fix Super Rugby but the first comp they should look at creating/recreating is a meaningful junior level conference and seed competition that includes Rah rah schools, bushies, junior clubs and government school bruisers. A meaningful Waratah Shield. How are the GPS and CAS folks going to fit it in? Drop playing bloody "trial" games. Make the first half of the season an intelligently structured knockout comp. Play the plebs, then you can get back to patting each other on the leather patches in your traditional comps.

Harv, you are exactly right and have summed it up well. The only outstanding question is "how painful does it have to get before the ARU moves?" My guess is that we haven't exceeded the "pain threshold" of the ARU yet and so it's going to get worse before it gets better.

 

[Quick Hands]

Harv, you are exactly right and have summed it up well. The only outstanding question is "how painful does it have to get before the ARU moves?" My guess is that we haven't exceeded the "pain threshold" of the ARU yet and so it's going to get worse before it gets better.

They will only move when it affects the parts of the game in which they have an interest. Hence the inaction - it's only affected rugby at junior club level, state schools and in the bush. You'll note the areas not affected until very recently - private schools, super rugby and the Wallabies.

 

[Harv]

They will only move when it affects the parts of the game in which they have an interest. Hence the inaction - it's only affected rugby at junior club level, state schools and in the bush. You'll note the areas not affected until very recently - private schools, super rugby and the Wallabies.

Agree mate, but I'd suggest we were there ten years ago if not earlier. The game was not holding its ground and it was obvious action was needed. The pathways of Oz rugby are a telling indicator -- the schoolboys have always been a shining light, but have struggled in recent years and the u-19, u-20 programs, internationally, have been pretty mediocre. There's this on-going delusion that it will all eventually come good because of the exceptionalism of the unquestionably fantastic contribution of the elite private schools. But that's a concept designed to preserve the elitist bias of the development pathway. It's a tough thing to discuss because many of the contemporary rugby faithful are rightfully passionate about their school allegiance and revel in the incredible tradition of their school teams. It makes them defensive about criticism and reluctant to embrace change. But we've run out of time. I love the game, as does everybody else on this site. We've been ill served by the outdated and prejudicial priorities of the powerhouses of the sport. If the wider community gives a shit, there's no better time than now to insist on change, because it might save the game from becoming a quaint relic in Australia.

 

[Quick Hands]

^^^I don't have aproblem with the private school system, I think that it's a great strength of rugby. My issue is that those running the game thought that nothing else mattered in terms of youth development, so they stood idly by while other parts of the game withered away.

Now they've been stung into activity because and only because it's started to affect the professional game. I use the word activity advisedly, as there has been some activty, but not too much in the action department. Largely because they have little concept of what to do. In fact, it's declined so far we're talking 20-30 years before we can recover what we've lost, let alone expand.

Just home from a Shute Shield trial between Manly and Easts and it was a very enjoyable afternoon. Instead of insulting the SS clubs, the ARU might even consider working with them for the common good.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Isn't the big issue that the ARU has absolutely no power or probably even any influence over against whom the GPS etc schools play?

 

[Quick Hands]

Isn't the big issue that the ARU has absolutely no power or probably even any influence over against whom the GPS etc schools play?

Which is the reason that they should have been resourcing junior clubs for the past 30 years, instead of relying on schools.

 

[Gnostic]

Isn't the big issue that the ARU has absolutely no power or probably even any influence over against whom the GPS etc schools play?

Its not that hard to gain some influence. Offer resources and assistance for a "price", that being the influence. When their competition is taking up the "offer" they will eagerly accept to maintain the level playing field.

The problem is the lack of interest and genuine long term planning away from "their" core business areas unless they directly effect those interests.

 

[Hugie]

My view is that it is the perception that needs to be addressed as a high priority. The private schools can't be stopped, they are very big, wealth and powerful businesses with very strong connections. It is the club system that need to be brought up to the same level.
For instance the ARU could send a message by:

1. Picking an Australian U18 team out of the Junior gold cup competition, and give it the green and gold (i.e. take the green and gold off the Australian school boys). Swing the money going from the ARU to the schools system to the JGS. Move the JGC competition into the rugby season.
2. Paying the districts/zones to run an U18 comp. and only pay for performance i.e. pay per game played. If they want to complain about not getting any money make them deliver something for the good of the games development.
3. MARKETING THE HELL OUT OF THE ABOVE. SEND A STRONG AND LOUD MESSAGE "RUGBY IS CHANGING, IT'S A NEW ERA OF INCLUSIVENESS" AND HERE'S HOW. Get the development officers to sell this message hard.
4. Engaging in a serious culture change program, there's a lot of theory on culture change so nothing has to be invented.

This is not the be all and end all of the grass routes problem but is a start, would be low cost and is about sending a message, "RUGBY IS NOT ALL ABOUT EXPENSIVE PRIVATE SCHOOLS".