How to fix the wallabies

[Twoilms]

We aren't like those leagues. The teams aren't privately owned and are all from organisations that are subsets of the ARU.

I am not saying that they exert centralised control over coaching appointments but trying to help create a situation where coaches can be developed and promoted inside Australia so they don't need to go overseas seems like a good plan. We are losing a lot of our talented coaches to foreign clubs (like our players) and often getting stuck with substandard ones here. Giving them more development opportunities in a more structured progression from club to NRC to Super Rugby to the national team seems like a good idea to me.

I think the ARU is being run in a much better fashion now than it was in the past. The state unions aren't exactly showering themselves in glory around the country. I guess the hope is that by having a more centralised model we have better governance at all levels with less duplication and waste given how little money there is to go around.

The improvement in the pathways and selection tournaments up through the age groups to the under 20s makes it better than it ever has been and gives a far better opportunity to select the teams in a more professional manner with less nepotism etc.

Following on from your point about teams not being privately owned. Private Equity would be a fantastic way to fund rugby in the future. Sporting clubs, even super successful ones, tend to hemorrhage great amounts of money either to reach a level where they can sustain a level of income necessary to compete, or simply lose money to sustain competitiveness (ie billionaires spend their own dosh).

Classic footballing examples would be PSG or Manchester City. PSG loses money but has enough continuous private investment to cover costs to remain competitive whilst Manchester City have had enough Oil money (billion+ pounds) invested that they have been able to increase their revenue to a point where it will eventually cover costs and be self sustaining.

Obviously, ARU will never be in a position to fund genuine competition from a club such as, for example, the Western Force a) because they have to pay a premium on any half decent player and b) because they have negative money. Private equity could provide those funds.

We could apply this model to Rugby, and maintain a level of centralized control over, say, when international players are to be released for duty, etc.

Another point; thoughts on moving the Western Force to Western Sydney, televising a few games for free and trying to tap into the League market? Maybe sign a marquee leaguey or two to kick start interest.

 

[Rock Lobster]

Almost every player in the Wallabies has been through our elite coaching programmes since their mid teens. They play the way the do because they've been coached that way over a long period of time - it's not just Michael Cheika.

You'll notice I did mention our Super Rugby sides as well, wasn't pinning this all on Cheika

 

[Stands]

Another point; thoughts on moving the Western Force to Western Sydney, televising a few games for free and trying to tap into the League market? Maybe sign a marquee leaguey or two to kick start interest.

I think we should look at bringing the Force into Western Sydney maybe even based at Concord it certainly has the capacity and would give an option for NSW fans to follow another team other than the Tahs.

I fell that one thing we have to do is stop bringing marquee Leaguys in over the top, if they want the bucks they have to spend the time in the system, maybe not from juniors but certainly grade, I think the parachuting of League players just cheapens our code.

 

[Lorenzo]

I doubt concord has the lights required for broadcast TV.

 

[Train Without a Station]

I have to agree with BH that the ARU are NOW doing better. Obviously they could still do better but really much of the blame rests on the state untions.

Everybody automatically blames the ARU but never considers that these state unions charge fees and also receive grants from the ARU (with the NSWRU also receiving a 7 figure licence fee from the Waratahs).

They are being funded from both ends. Yet the blame always comes to the ARU.

Wamberal for example claims that the lack of Under 15s Junior Competition is all the fault of the ARU. What does he think the GCDRU and QRU are there for?

These lower levels don't want to align and comply with national interest and are horribly mismanaging the game in their regions. Fixing these is what's needed before we worry about the ARU side of things (which certainly can improve also).

I also do wonder if perhaps in the short term, these wallabies struggles may be a good thing.

Personally i have found myself more excited about the NRC this season due to this. If this can help funnel more Aus rugby fans into the NRC this will actually only help our national team in the long term.

 

[half]

TWAS

Thats an excellent point about the state unions could not agree more.

I often wonder in this day and age are they a part of middle management that is not needed anymore.

I personally would be happy for the state unions to be disbanded and the role they plan passed onto the ARU.

The cost saving would IMO be huge and arguably national policies could be set and place and cost saving directed at key areas.

 

[TOCC]

I like the AFL's model, state governing bodies are less relevant, clubs answer to the AFL and not state bodies.

IMO the Super Rugby clubs should become independent of the state bodies and bound to the ARU, state bodies remain as the governing body for grass roots and the amateur arm of the game, state bodies could have a board representative on the relevant super rugby clubs board, but reduced influence and not bound financially.

Allow the state bodies to refocus their energy on the amateur part of the game, while improving economies of scale by consolidating some of the Super Rugby operations under the ARU's roof.

 

[Quick Hands]

I like the AFL's model, state governing bodies are less relevant, clubs answer to the AFL and not state bodies.

IMO the Super Rugby clubs should become independent of the state bodies and bound to the ARU, state bodies remain as the governing body for grass roots and the amateur arm of the game, state bodies could have a board representative on the relevant super rugby clubs board, but reduced influence and not bound financially.

Allow the state bodies to refocus their energy on the amateur part of the game, while improving economies of scale by consolidating some of the Super Rugby operations under the ARU's roof.

AFL clubs answer to the AFL because the AFL runs the competition that they are in. Clubs playing in the VFL answer to the VFL and so on. The AFL is the ultimate authority though.

The right to run super teams is vested in the ARU - it is the ARU who decide to whom they give a licence. It would be open to them to cut the state unions out if they wished.

(Noting that I don't agree with the ARU running all 5 super franchises)

 

[Quick Hands]

T

I personally would be happy for the state unions to be disbanded and the role they plan passed onto the ARU.

The cost saving would IMO be huge and arguably national policies could be set and place and cost saving directed at key areas.

I have previously argued this point, and it's interesting to note that some of those who opposed me and criticised the idea are now advancing it.

Clubs and regions should be able to afiliate direcly to the ARU - the only thing that the state bodies seem to do is funnel money from one place to another and take a little cut along the way.

This does not mean that the ARU should micromanaging local issues or having some sort of central, Soviet style control.

 

[Quick Hands]

I also do wonder if perhaps in the short term, these wallabies struggles may be a good thing.

I tend to think so as well, but for different reasons. I hope that this finally brings matters to a head in terms of the decline in club based juniors - it is this which had led to the current state of rugby at super and test level and until there is a long term fix, things will not significantly improve.

 

[TOCC]

AFL clubs answer to the AFL because the AFL runs the competition that they are in. Clubs playing in the VFL answer to the VFL and so on. The AFL is the ultimate authority though.

The right to run super teams is vested in the ARU - it is the ARU who decide to whom they give a licence. It would be open to them to cut the state unions out if they wished.

(Noting that I don't agree with the ARU running all 5 super franchises)

That's the same as what I just said?

And not suggesting the ARU 'run' the super rugby franchises, I'm suggesting that some of the Super Rugby operations could be consolidated under the one roof to lower operating costs and achieve greater scales of economies. Things like marketing, ticketing, merchandise and certain parts of IT/media could be consolidated to achieve cheaper costs and a better outcome then what's currently produces. The actual Rugby department could for the most part remain independent.

It also removes the financial burden and liability from the state bodies and allows them to refocus their energies onto the parts of the game which need it.

 

[BlackFan]

How to fix the Wallabies?

I don't like this thread. The Wallabies aren't broken. Our coach is. Do we really think that the WALLABIES, do not have 15 players that can play and beat the All Blacks? Codswallop if you ask me.

The England series was a result of feeble, amateur era coaching. Chieka had 9 months to prepare for this series, and it honestly looked like an Under 11's team playing "tire our halfback out" from side to side to side. Then it continued for the next two games. Never a more appropriate definition for insanity. The NZ loss was just a little bit of icing on the cake.

If we want to fix the Wallabies, I'm starting to think that an independent board of selectors could be the way to go. The past.. decade has left me with little or no faith in Australian coaches. It's either been a personal agenda that's gotten in the way of their job (Cheika, Deans) or players refusing to change the "me-me-me" culture of the Wallabies and shafting our most promising coach in 2 decades. (Yeah, McKenzie had a whole lot more than just 1, easy to read gameplan)

But isn't Cheika the World Rugby (IRB) Coach of the Year? Or are we now acknowledging that that was a sop to Australia to prevent NZ winning everything.

 

[cyclopath]

But isn't Cheika the World Rugby (IRB) Coach of the Year? Or are we now acknowledging that that was a sop to Australia to prevent NZ winning everything.

Who's we?

 

[Quick Hands]

That's the same as what I just said?

No, you seemed to be saying that Aussie Rules clubs weren't answerable to state bodies, which isn't correct.

You seemed to be saying that super clubs should be bound to the ARU - well they already are. State bodies are only running teams because the ARU lets them.

You seemed to be saying that the ARU should run super rugby operations "under one roof" - which I disagree with strongly.

 

[Gillys_ghost]

No, you seemed to be saying that Aussie Rules clubs weren't answerable to state bodies, which isn't correct.

You seemed to be saying that super clubs should be bound to the ARU - well they already are. State bodies are only running teams because the ARU lets them.

You seemed to be saying that the ARU should run super rugby operations "under one roof" - which I disagree with strongly.

Dont the NZRU operate all the super rugby teams under a centralized system? i dunno much about it but its obviously working for them. i wouldn't mind copying everything we can from them

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

I like the AFL's model, state governing bodies are less relevant, clubs answer to the AFL and not state bodies.

IMO the Super Rugby clubs should become independent of the state bodies and bound to the ARU, state bodies remain as the governing body for grass roots and the amateur arm of the game, state bodies could have a board representative on the relevant super rugby clubs board, but reduced influence and not bound financially.

Allow the state bodies to refocus their energy on the amateur part of the game, while improving economies of scale by consolidating some of the Super Rugby operations under the ARU's roof.

I'm not so sure about that. My boy's footy club reports up through our local district WAFL club (Perth in this case, others being Swan Districts, East Fremantle, West Perth etc) and on to the WAFC (WA Football Commission) from there. The WAFC is effectively the owner of the two AFL franchises too. The AFL Commission is the peak body and the state commissions report into it. Is this any different to how rugby works at the local, state and national level (NSW being the obvious exception)? In WA it's certainly club --> WARU/RugbyWA --> ARU. Are there really many other ways of doing it?

 

[Lindommer]

I doubt Concord has the lights required for broadcast TV.

It does. A very small recalcitrant number (about three) of local residents have held up the switching on of stadium lights for years.

 

[Lorenzo]

It does. A very small recalcitrant number (about three) of local residents have held up the switching on of stadium lights for years.

Concord? I don't think so? The 2012 Plan of management proposed 500 lux (training) lighting be installed. Did that materialise? Still not the 1400 lux you need for HDTV.

 

[Lindommer]

Fair 'nuff, me old mucker, I'm a wine merchant not a lighting gizmo. I stand corrected. My remarks stem from some years ago when West Harbour wanted to make Concord playable under lights.

Lux, WTF are they? Do they pack down in scrums?

 

[TOCC]

No, you seemed to be saying that Aussie Rules clubs weren't answerable to state bodies, which isn't correct.

You seemed to be saying that super clubs should be bound to the ARU - well they already are. State bodies are only running teams because the ARU lets them.

You seemed to be saying that the ARU should run super rugby operations "under one roof" - which I disagree with strongly.

Nah that's not what I was saying

1. I said state bodies should refocus onto the grass roots and amateur parts of the game i.e. Managing club competitions and grassroot programs.

2. State bodies shouldn't be running the team, all bodies have failed find to balance between running a professional sporting team and a state wide grassroots program, that is clear.

3. No, and you actually deleted my comments from my post you quoted where I clarified this... So I won't repeat all of it, but savings and economied of scales can be achieved by consolidating areas of the Super Rugby clubs like marketing/media/merchandise etc under the one roof.. HPU or the actual Rugby departments would remain independent.