NRC onwards and upwards

[Dave Beat]

David, if I have it right, your back stop position basically goes, if you're not "doing" anything (i.e. involved in the clubs), then your (my) opinion is tripe.

No not my back stop position.
I didnt say you were a key board warrior.
The old saying play the cards you are dealt the best you can means focusing on what is in front of you and planning - as they (the draw) cant be changed;

Back in the day Rod McQueen use to be in surf boats - he got dealt a surf boat, he used his inititive and ensured his was lighter and faster than all others.

• He took the same initiative to rugby as a coach, instead of kicking off to the tram tracks and having the pigs pouring through - the opposition new were to place the appropriate people to counteract. He said lets find the weakness and kick and attack there.
• Another one, why did the Aussies start watching the Haka in tracksuites, and then slowly taking them off after the Haka had finished

Back to topic.
Dru please give me some reasons why the NRC could not have moved back one or maybe two weeks.

I understand in NSW the are (12 teams) a number of Shute Shield teams that are impacted by cricket. I know there are fewer teams playing in other states premier comps so they may not feel that impact. So we need to be mindful of when the comp kicks off. I recall some teams having their first home game round 5 and I'm not sure that should really be the case.

The bye - maybe there could have been no bye, as i have said / asked prior could the bye have been after the last round and only used if there were wash out games to be made up. If not straight into the finals. The fact the bye is now on the test weekend is a great initiative and should make for a great weekend.

All the colts, 4th, 3rd, 2nd, and 1st graders who love playing rugby, but also bring alot to it as well - but didnt make an NRC team. Do they watch and think about there mates "still Playing" other winter codes late in the season and having a good time "playing". We've picked up some league players in colts because the 18,19, 20's is a basket case and kids want to play. The League has focused on rep (or NRC) and the missed the kids who want to play and we've pcked them up.

1. "Piss it up against the wall" a very broad quote that has been taken and flogged since it was made. Understanding the specific direction it was intended it was a very fair comment to make - but certain people crucified him with it (Pappy being the main one).
2. Over the past 12 - 18 months Pappy (& others) have returned fire with comments that i believe (could be both right & wrong) are just as damaging (right or wrong) and have brought about alot of the recent commentry on this open forum simply returning fire.

I believe both 1 & 2 are correct, i also believe 1 & 2 have Australian Rugby's best interest at heart and the various bodies (SRU, NSWRU, ARU) that are involved in this specific topic have arrived at a mutual best outcome that can be carried forward, and they are working and consulting each other to acheive this - cards have been dealt.
Is there reasons stopping the NRC shifting back 1 or 2 weeks, is there benifits or detractnouses in doing that - i dont know that is why i asked but still knowone has really provided any feedback (or I've maybe missed it)
I was getting the shits with people bitching, moaning, and pointing fingers without being very constructive in their posts by providing constructive alternatives with reasons and from my phone I shot off a short poor form email calling people sooks.

Cards have been dealt for 2017 - at what ever tier you are or support i hope it is a shit hot year.

 

[amirite]

There's a lot to be said for the point that being involved with the SS first-and-foremost, rather than being a fan of the whole Aussie 'pathway', brings in biases that make you less able to objectively speak on this issue.

That being said, I invest a lot of time and money in club rugby and if I ever end up in Sydney would definitely be involved at a SS club. I still think this move is silly and selfish for a league that I've always watched and seen as the pinnacle in club football.

The fact is the SS can move forward earlier because it has in the past. That is the bottom line.
The issues for the SS clubs as I see it (others have covered these) are:

• Earlier is hotter
• Cricket needs to run sometime
• Lower grades don't want to start early

Solutions are:

• Lower grades start later, this allows the higher grades where blokes are fitter to be the only ones dealing with the heat
• Clubs without the cricket issue get a lot of home games early.
• Lower grades start later (as above).

Yes, there are nuances here, like what happens to a first grader who misses out on NRC? Does he play? These could be nutted out elsewhere, but I'm convinced there are solutions.

Why can't the NRC be moved back? Lots of reasons, the first one is it can't clash with the spring tour for commercial (there's only so many eyeballs to go around) and player availability reasons (see: the Rising's issue in Seasons 1 where they lost 2 or 3 players to the spring tour).
And, the bottom line is - if the SS wanted the NRC to start and end later, that should've been a conversation and not a bludgeoning.

 

[TOCC]

Soon someone will start banging on because the SS is playing the same weekend of subbies.
For one weekend you can be spoilt for choice you can watch NRC or SS - having a sook want change it.

This is a poor attitude David..

You can claim I'm having a sook or that ima keyboard warrior if you think that vindicates your opinion, but I've invested enough of my own time and effort into the game of rugby union over the years to be entitled to express an opinion.

I love the game, I love the Reds and the Wallabies and I want to see them all succeed. I see club rugby and the NRC been paramount at all levels to ensuring this succeed, and I've watched people put a lot of their own emotional investment to making that succeed.

So when a few personalities out of Sydney decide that the want of a few is above the need of the many I will express my frustration and anger. It's not as you put it just a weekend of been "spoilt for choice", the ramifications are much wider.

It undermines the viability of the competition by placing the NSW teams at a competitive disadvantage, it degrades the sponsorship viability of the NRC and it places both the players and coaches who are involved in both in a compromising situation.

If calling David Pegg out for being an arrogant asshole makes me a sook then so be it, that's what happens when you snub your nose at all the other states, sponsors, players, coaches and cars who are also investing money, time and effort into ensuring the NRC succeeds.

 

[Dave Beat]

This is a poor attitude David..

You can claim I'm having a sook if you want, but I've invested enough of my own time and effort into the game of rugby union over the years to be entitle to express an opinion.

I love the game, I love the Reds and the Wallabies and I want to see them all succeed. I see club rugby and the NRC been paramount at all levels to ensuring this succeed, and I've watched people put a lot of their own emotional investment to making that succeed.

So when a few personalities out of Sydney decide that the want of a few is above the need of the many I will express my frustration and anger. It's not as you put it just a weekend of been "spoilt for choice", the ramifications are much wider.

It undermines the viability of the competition by placing the NSW teams at a competitive disadvantage, it degrades the sponsorship viability of the NRC and it places both the players and coaches who are involved in both in a compromising situation.

If I'm a sook what's that make you, the blind monkey who refuses to acknowledge how bloody ludicrous the situation is and what an arrogant asshole David Pegg is by snubbing his nose at all the other states who are also investing money into ensuring the NRC succeeds.

I said above, that was sent off from my phone and it was poor form, hoping that poor form can be accepted and we can move on.

I did it because rightly or wrongly it seemed there was so much negativity about what has happened, can't be changed, and i was hoping we could look forward.

There's a lot to be said for the point that being involved with the SS first-and-foremost, rather than being a fan of the whole Aussie 'pathway', brings in biases that make you less able to objectively speak on this issue.

That being said, I invest a lot of time and money in club rugby and if I ever end up in Sydney would definitely be involved at a SS club. I still think this move is silly and selfish for a league that I've always watched and seen as the pinnacle in club football.

The fact is the SS can move forward earlier because it has in the past. That is the bottom line.
The issues for the SS clubs as I see it (others have covered these) are:

• Earlier is hotter
• Cricket needs to run sometime
• Lower grades don't want to start early

Solutions are:

• Lower grades start later, this allows the higher grades where blokes are fitter to be the only ones dealing with the heat
• Clubs without the cricket issue get a lot of home games early.
• Lower grades start later (as above).

Yes, there are nuances here, like what happens to a first grader who misses out on NRC? Does he play? These could be nutted out elsewhere, but I'm convinced there are solutions.


Why can't the NRC be moved back? Lots of reasons, the first one is it can't clash with the spring tour for commercial (there's only so many eyeballs to go around) and player availability reasons (see: the Rising's issue in Seasons 1 where they lost 2 or 3 players to the spring tour).
And, the bottom line is - if the SS wanted the NRC to start and end later, that should've been a conversation and not a bludgeoning.

good post, coming from a great angle, don't disagree with your reasonings

 

[I like to watch]

.....So when a few personalities out of Sydney decide that the want of a few is above the need of the many I will express my frustration and anger. It's not as you put it just a weekend of been "spoilt for choice", the ramifications are much wider.

It undermines the viability of the competition by placing the NSW teams at a competitive disadvantage, it degrades the sponsorship viability of the NRC and it places both the players and coaches who are involved in both in a compromising situation.

If calling David Pegg out for being an arrogant asshole makes me a sook then so be it, that's what happens when you snub your nose at all the other states, sponsors, players, coaches and cars who are also investing money, time and effort into ensuring the NRC succeeds.

That's all great, and in theory,we all share the same goal in having Rugby as a strong & successful as possible.

But our definitions of success differs with our personal preferences.

It's naive to expect that volunteers investing in many cases,both time and money, should work harder in a direction they don't agree with ,without question.

In the past 5 years, SS clubs have gone from receiving a direct subsidy of $100k to having to subsidise NRC teams. ARU have also increased their tax on the grassroots at registration.

What do you do when the ruling body ignores you, or worse continues to make decisions that affect you adversely?

 

[TOCC]

That's all great, and in theory,we all share the same goal in having Rugby as a strong & successful as possible.

But our definitions of success differs with our personal preferences.

It's naive to expect that volunteers investing in many cases,both time and money, should work harder in a direction they don't agree with ,without question.

In the past 5 years, SS clubs have gone from receiving a direct subsidy of $100k to having to subsidise NRC teams. ARU have also increased their tax on the grassroots at registration.

What do you do when the ruling body ignores you, or worse continues to make decisions that affect you adversely?

As my mum used to say, 2 wrongs don't make a right..

Yes the ARU has reduced grants to club, no this wasn't done to redirect into the NRC teams instead.

Financial difficulties of the governing body aren't cause or reason to complicate the landscape further by scheduling clashes on the calendar.

 

[amirite]

I think what the SS clubs have to realise is, for a really long time they were the 3rd tier. This model sadly just didn't have good development outcomes for the ARU - we've all bemoaned the cattle coming through Aus Rugby for many a year. The NRC is demonstratively changing that.

This isn't a slight on the SS, it's just that the way they (and the Hospital Cup) operate doesn't emulate (or iterate on) successful structures we see in other nations that have our same rugby calendar.

So, the pathway got changed and the money pointed elsewhere. This is sensible.

And, I honestly get why the SS community feels mistreated, but they've gone from the good old, hard working, rugby loving, local community to behaving like the petulant child.

I'll also add that considering the SS are currently not running a full 2 round, home/away season, what's one lost round? Or a top 4 instead of a top 6?

Other options are for the SS clubs to compete in different tournaments each year, many European and American clubs play in 2-3 different tournaments and something like this could work.

 

[kiap]

Regarding SS clubs (or indeed QPR clubs) having $100k p.a. from the ARU phased out, IMO there is no cause for complaint. Clubs should be happy their JON-era party lasted so long. That funding was for developing elite players to enter pro rugby. 20 plus clubs - many of them weak as piss - the standard ain't good enough.

Having to subsidise NRC teams? Hmmm …

Not with money, mandated money. Players? Yeah, but clubs don't own players. The clubs' rooster tails lost a feather or two when dropping down the pecking order but they aren't even scheduling for NRC now. They're increasing their comp length (which is fine).

Increased tax on the grassroots at registration?

This is something that could be argued. It's a question of how much is clawed back from the professionals (to be blunt, the wallabies, their coaching and other costs) and the administration (corporates). Then given to the bottom of the pyramid. Bearing in mind the pro players through RUPA have a fixed minumum share of the revenue.

 

[I like to watch]

4 clubs own Ray's, each had to invest $30k pa to fund the franchise.
Syd Uni were the dominant partner in the Stars.
Rams had several clubs involved in their ownership structure.
So yeah,with money.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

4 clubs own Ray's, each had to invest $30k pa to fund the franchise.
Syd Uni were the dominant partner in the Stars.
Rams had several clubs involved in their ownership structure.
So yeah,with money.

We've discussed this previously. Only 5 clubs contribute anything financially to NRC teams.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Regarding SS clubs (or indeed QPR clubs) having $100k p.a. from the ARU phased out, IMO there is no cause for complaint. Clubs should be happy their JON-era party lasted so long. That funding was for developing elite players to enter pro rugby. 20 plus clubs - many of them weak as piss - the standard ain't good enough.

Having to subsidise NRC teams? Hmmm …

Not with money, mandated money. Players? Yeah, but clubs don't own players. The clubs' rooster tails lost a feather or two when dropping down the pecking order but they aren't even scheduling for NRC now. They're increasing their comp length (which is fine).

Increased tax on the grassroots at registration?

This is something that could be argued. It's a question of how much is clawed back from the professionals (to be blunt, the wallabies, their coaching and other costs) and the administration (corporates). Then given to the bottom of the pyramid. Bearing in mind the pro players through RUPA have a fixed minumum share of the revenue.

The SS hasn't extended the number of actual games. Which is my biggest issue as it was one of the early means to rationalise altering the schedule. All they've done is ensure that the SS now directly conflicts with thr NRC by moving its start date back a fortnight and adding a bye week.

 

[kiap]

4 clubs own Ray's, each had to invest $30k pa to fund the franchise.
Syd Uni were the dominant partner in the Stars.
Rams had several clubs involved in their ownership structure.
So yeah,with money.

And that's great. The three teams now can work.

No one put a gun to their head, though, which is what I'm saying. It ain't mandated.

It *might* have been less political if the Sydney team was effectively Waratahs A (Gen Blue). The Rams are fine with 4 clubs at 5% and the Eagles with 1 club at 20-25%.

I only say might, though, because almost no matter what was done in Sydney there would've been whinging.

 

[amirite]

And that's great. The three teams now can work.

No one put a gun to their head, though, which is what I'm saying. It ain't mandated.

It *might* have been less political if the Sydney team was effectively Waratahs A (Gen Blue). The Rams are fine with 4 clubs at 5% and the Eagles with 1 club at 20-25%.

I only say might, though, because almost no matter what was done in Sydney there would've been whinging.

Yeah, in all fairness to our passionate SS friends, the Sydney ownership system has been sub-optimal.

But the connection between this and the disregard for the rugby calendar and the ownership issue are loosely connected at best (and I know you're not saying otherwise kiap).

 

[Dave Beat]

I think what the SS clubs have to realise is, for a really long time they were the 3rd tier. This model sadly just didn't have good development outcomes for the ARU - we've all bemoaned the cattle coming through Aus Rugby for many a year. The NRC is demonstratively changing that.

Not saying it is or isnt - i think at present it is to early to tell.

 

[Dave Beat]

We've discussed this previously. Only 5 clubs contribute anything financially to NRC teams.

True, but 5 clubs did.
When the ARU is funding the State Unions, and the state unions only have one NRC team it is a different comparison.

 

[amirite]

Not saying it is or isnt - i think at present it is to early to tell.

I think that's a fair point, but the only way to tell is to keep the experiment going until there's an adequate amount of 'data'.

 

[Dave Beat]

Why can't the NRC be moved back? Lots of reasons, the first one is it can't clash with the spring tour for commercial (there's only so many eyeballs to go around) and player availability reasons (see: the Rising's issue in Seasons 1 where they lost 2 or 3 players to the spring tour).
And, the bottom line is - if the SS wanted the NRC to start and end later, that should've been a conversation and not a bludgeoning.

I don't know the vic comp well enough to comment.
I didn't think the NRC comp was set up for Wallaby players who maybe on the spring tour. I thought it was set up to create another tier to help bring players up, to develop, to attract players to Soup rugby.
As i have said - i don't know the depth or the quality of the Vic comp but it would be great if these players were being exposed.
I think there is circa 30 players in the soup squad, if you remove 6 for Wallaby duty that is still leaving a fair Soup squad to run around playing 3rd tier NRC.

 

[Dave Beat]

I think that's a fair point, but the only way to tell is to keep the experiment going until there's an adequate amount of 'data'.

100% agree.
I also wish there is 2 weeks gap between the 2 comps.
Unfortunately there isnt, and i cant do anything about it.

 

[TOCC]

True, but 5 clubs did.
When the ARU is funding the State Unions, and the state unions only have one NRC team it is a different comparison.

NSW have one less team then QLD but the NSWRU contribute nothing? Why have the NSWRU and Waratahs done anything to assist?

Additionally, if the SS clubs are contributing so much financially, wouldn't it be in their best interest to protect that investment, or are they no longer contributing financiall?

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

True, but 5 clubs did.
When the ARU is funding the State Unions, and the state unions only have one NRC team it is a different comparison.

No one held a gun to the heads of those clubs to fund a team. They all chose to compete and thus provide funding. Truth be told if it were only the Rams and Eagles from day one the NSW teams would be even stronger than they were this season.