Should the ARU cut their losses and abolish the National Academies?

[Quick Hands]

Once again we seem to be seeing the fragmented and dysfunctional nature of the game as it is currently being run.

If the Super Rugby teams have set up their own outifts, it strongly suggests that whatever the National Squad was doing wasn't meeting their needs.

The Super Rugby teams are the ones supposedly developing the talent and the best ones are then picked for the Wallabies. Super Rugby teams should have their own academies with the players not in the match squad playing club rugby.

What exactly do the players in the National Academy do that they couldn't do with their Super Team or Academy?

Is this a Nucifora/Deans initiative or has it come from elsewhere?

If this years U/20 team came through this process then the results were poor.

To me it sounds to much like Camp Wallaby at Coff Harbour all those years ago when players spent their time training, but not actually playing. Including the farcical training with the sprinklers on to help prepare for wet weather tours to the Northern Hemisphere.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

They are.
.

If it's anything more than travel costs then that's just ridiculous and as above the money could be put to better uses by providing greater competitive structures that would, in my opinion, greatly enhance their development. Being paid to be potential Super Rugby/7s/U20s is just crazy. The point of these squads should to identify talent and give them the means to prove themselves. It should be about dedication and ambition. No money should ever change hands.

 

[TOCC]

I thin one aspect which is also been overlooked is that when the Academy was initially formed a big selling point was that it was designed to cater for both XV's and 7's rugby rather then the previous setup which purely had the Super Rugby sides developing players for XV's.

From the ARU perspective this may be to maximise the benefits of olympic funding for 7's and also avoid a duplication of efforts.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Once again we seem to be seeing the fragmented and dysfunctional nature of the game as it is currently being run.

If the Super Rugby teams have set up their own outifts, it strongly suggests that whatever the National Squad was doing wasn't meeting their needs.

The Super Rugby teams are the ones supposedly developing the talent and the best ones are then picked for the Wallabies. Super Rugby teams should have their own academies with the players not in the match squad playing club rugby.

What exactly do the players in the National Academy do that they couldn't do with their Super Team or Academy?

Is this a Nucifora/Deans initiative or has it come from elsewhere?

If this years U/20 team came through this process then the results were poor.

To me it sounds to much like Camp Wallaby at Coff Harbour all those years ago when players spent their time training, but not actually playing. Including the farcical training with the sprinklers on to help prepare for wet weather tours to the Northern Hemisphere.

Agreed. These 'colleges', 'academies' or whatever they wish to call them should be there to provide ambitious players an opportunity to front up and chase their opportunities. They should all be playing club Rugby including the fringe squad members throughout the Super Rugby season with the money that would be used running the National Academies redirected to provide some sort of additional competitive structure post Super Rugby and Club for not only the remaining Super Rugby squad members but the best of those in the differing set ups and top performers from club Rugby. It doesn't need to be big and fancy. It shouldn't require players to be paid. It should be a proving ground, not a meal ticket.

It's why I've always liked the general set up of the Australian Rugby Shield. Allowing the best amateurs from our 'traditional' provincial set ups a chance to compete against one another. Should be revised with Super Rugby squad members being dropped in alongside those I've highlighted above.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I thin one aspect which is also been overlooked is that when the Academy was initially formed a big selling point was that it was designed to cater for both XV's and 7's rugby rather then the previous setup which purely had the Super Rugby sides developing players for XV's.

From the ARU perspective this may be to maximise the benefits of olympic funding for 7's and also avoid a duplication of efforts.

Rugby is a game that you need to play in order to improve. Constantly testing your ability in match conditions. Setting up some sort of 7s schedule to draw in the major clubs and using that as a means to identify talent would likely better serve that purpose.

 

[Quick Hands]

The NGS and JGS exist to provide talented juniors/school age players with additional skills etc. Surely after that point, the players should prove themselves on the field, playing rugby. It should be up to their Super Team to provide development through an academy and a club system.

The model of having a national squad doesn't seem sustainable. Who are these players going to play for? Super Rugby teams or Club teams I'd suggest.

With all the things that the ARU could be doing with its money, this seems a poor option.

If they have spare dollars: Development Officers and Club support in Western Sydney, Melbourne, Perth and other areas where rugby has little or no infastructure would seem better options.

 

[TOCC]

Rugby is a game that you need to play in order to improve. Constantly testing your ability in match conditions. Setting up some sort of 7s schedule to draw in the major clubs and using that as a means to identify talent would likely better serve that purpose.

So you solve one problem by creating another... The academy isn't about identifying talent, the talent has already been identified it's now a matter of development.

A 7's schedule based on the Super Rugby teams will not happen in the near future nor do i believe that it ever should, i think that would be the wrong way to promote 7's rugby within Australia.

 

[Jets]

So you want the ARU to develop players up until they leave school and hope they stick with rugby when league is offering a National U20 comp. I'm sorry but thats a bit small minded.

The academy players get around $5K a year to train. During this time many of them find it hard to hold down a job as they have to commit to a huge workload to be part of the squad plus they have club rugby on top. A few of them are students and are able to fit in study around their training but not all of them are looking to study. I don't see how you can begrudge a kid from getting a little bit of money to put their life on hold while they try to break into professional rugby.

The Australian Rugby Shield isn't a pathway option to professional rugby. Country teams and state steams from Vic, Tas, NT, SA and WA isn't a great investment in my eyes as it wont produce the results.

As for this years U20 team being a reflection of the academy program I think it's a bit early to make that call. The national academy system only started this year so it will take a few years to have it running at it's optimum level. Also you have to take into account how the team is selected and who is coaching it as these kids could be improving out of sight but if they aren't being selected or are being played out of position without any sort of game plan they wont win anything.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

So you want the ARU to develop players up until they leave school and hope they stick with rugby when league is offering a National U20 comp. I'm sorry but thats a bit small minded.

The academy players get around $5K a year to train. During this time many of them find it hard to hold down a job as they have to commit to a huge workload to be part of the squad plus they have club rugby on top. A few of them are students and are able to fit in study around their training but not all of them are looking to study. I don't see how you can begrudge a kid from getting a little bit of money to put their life on hold while they try to break into professional rugby.

The Australian Rugby Shield isn't a pathway option to professional rugby. Country teams and state steams from Vic, Tas, NT, SA and WA isn't a great investment in my eyes as it wont produce the results.

As for this years U20 team being a reflection of the academy program I think it's a bit early to make that call. The national academy system only started this year so it will take a few years to have it running at it's optimum level. Also you have to take into account how the team is selected and who is coaching it as these kids could be improving out of sight but if they aren't being selected or are being played out of position without any sort of game plan they wont win anything.

That already occurs regardless of the $5,000 offered by the ARU to take part in the Academy setups and contrary to many, the budget for those Toyota Cup teams isn't significant by any means. Many of those who take up that option do so due to greater opportunities to possible move on to the NRL. However, the majority end up either in either the NSW or Queensland Cup. Some even further down in the Bundaberg Cup.

It's not always about money. Rugby has to and in the case of some Sydney clubs need to look (and have) to create similar work and educational opportunities to make staying in Rugby just as attractive as going to League.

Are you telling me that a player cannot commit to training either before or after work/school? You're kidding right. I know it can be done. I played for Randwick but lived on the outer South West fringe of Sydney. I hit the gym in the morning before school, go to school, and go to training after school. When I left school and was working while attending Uni I still managed to do it. Why? Because I wanted at the time. These guys can do it. If they ask them to train during the day then the issue is with those running the academies not the players.

The old model of the ARS certainly wasn't pathway in its original form. That's doesn't mean it couldn't be upgraded to one. If you have the Super Rugby squad members and up and coming talent fill these spots to compete as an extra development structure it would be quite strong. You wouldn't necessarily include the likes of Tas, Darwin or SA initially. Perhaps never. Same for the country Unions unless they are able to prove a case. It would prove Sydney and Brisbane with potentially two squads and one for the other cities with franchises (and their set ups) present.

As for the sevens thing, I didn't even mention the Super Rugby franchises. I said clubs. It wouldn't necessarily be all that expensive as many of the tournaments already exist. Teams wouldn't even need to travel that far. Keep them state base. Choose a possible vs probables and play them off. That way players will have to compete for their spots constantly on a yearly basis, meaning they will always be looking to improve their games.

 

[Quick Hands]

So you want the ARU to develop players up until they leave school and hope they stick with rugby when league is offering a National U20 comp. I'm sorry but thats a bit small minded.

The academy players get around $5K a year to train. During this time many of them find it hard to hold down a job as they have to commit to a huge workload to be part of the squad plus they have club rugby on top. A few of them are students and are able to fit in study around their training but not all of them are looking to study. I don't see how you can begrudge a kid from getting a little bit of money to put their life on hold while they try to break into professional rugby.

The Australian Rugby Shield isn't a pathway option to professional rugby. Country teams and state steams from Vic, Tas, NT, SA and WA isn't a great investment in my eyes as it wont produce the results.

As for this years U20 team being a reflection of the academy program I think it's a bit early to make that call. The national academy system only started this year so it will take a few years to have it running at it's optimum level. Also you have to take into account how the team is selected and who is coaching it as these kids could be improving out of sight but if they aren't being selected or are being played out of position without any sort of game plan they wont win anything.

The NRL U/20s competition is just that, a competition where the players play. They are developed by the clubs while they play. Same should be happening in rugby, i.e. they play. The Super teams can have them in an academy and they should play Shute Shield or equivalent in addition to this.

 

[Sully]

I think the biggest problem with the national academy is it took the players away from training with provincial teams. This doesn't expose them to professional athletes in professional set ups. But more importantly for the provinces doesn't expose the players to their structures and systems. So when they need to call on a player they get this guy who's walking in cold and basically has to introduce himself to the guys he'll be playing with and learn a shitload of stuff in a short amount of time to catch up. It's just not going to work.

 

[Quick Hands]

I think the biggest problem with the national academy is it took the players away from training with provincial teams. This doesn't expose them to professional athletes in professional set ups. But more importantly for the provinces doesn't expose the players to their structures and systems. So when they need to call on a player they get this guy who's walking in cold and basically has to introduce himself to the guys he'll be playing with and learn a shitload of stuff in a short amount of time to catch up. It's just not going to work.

Spot on. Summed it up in a paragraph.

 

[TOCC]

As for the sevens thing, I didn't even mention the Super Rugby franchises. I said clubs. It wouldn't necessarily be all that expensive as many of the tournaments already exist. Teams wouldn't even need to travel that far. Keep them state base. Choose a possible vs probables and play them off. That way players will have to compete for their spots constantly on a yearly basis, meaning they will always be looking to improve their games.

You are underestimating the development in the 7's circuit, to win the Olympics these guys need to be in Elite programs training under a structure program all year...
Those who are going to represent Australia in 2015 will need to be in the elite system from at least 2013/2014. Picking players from club tournaments run throughout the year is an amateur set-up.

It makes perfect sense to combine the 7's and XV's academies as the major focus is on S&C and skills which are transferred across both versions of the game..

Im not advocating that the system is perfect, it quite obviously isn't, but it has its merits.

 

[Quick Hands]

You are underestimating the development in the 7's circuit, to win the Olympics these guys need to be in Elite programs training under a structure program all year.
Those who are going to represent Australia in 2015 will need to be in the elite system from at least 2013/2014. Picking players from club tournaments run throughout the year is an amateur set-up.

It makes perfect sense to combine the 7's and XV's academies as the major focus is on S&C and skills which are transferred across both versions of the game..

Im not advocating that the system is perfect, it quite obviously isn't, but it has its merits.

The 7s players are already in an elite program. The IRB 7s provides this and there's nothing wrong with the ARU running that programme nationally because there is no State based competition for them to play elite 7s in.

In XV rugby the teams are run by super rugby teams and they should run the elite development in conjunction with their teams.

7s and XV rugby have grown apart much like test cricket and one day cricket. Once the same guys played both, now completely different teams are picked.

The speed and aerobic fitness required for 7s are different from 15 a side rugby. Set plays and breakdown work are also different as there are less players on the field, so contact is less, ball emerges quicker and is spread quicker. This means that the players need to be able to run for 14 minutes at speed, but don't need the same physical bulk needed for 8 man scrums and 4-8 man rucks/mauls.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

You are underestimating the development in the 7's circuit, to win the Olympics these guys need to be in Elite programs training under a structure program all year.
Those who are going to represent Australia in 2015 will need to be in the elite system from at least 2013/2014. Picking players from club tournaments run throughout the year is an amateur set-up.

It makes perfect sense to combine the 7's and XV's academies as the major focus is on S&C and skills which are transferred across both versions of the game..

Im not advocating that the system is perfect, it quite obviously isn't, but it has its merits.

In terms of the 7s set up. Going from the results our team(s) have recorded over the past two seasons apart from the Tokyo event, and London the year before, the general level of performance has been rather disappointing. This suggests there's something serious flawed in the system.

 

[Quick Hands]

Another problem with these academies when they aren't directly linked to a team is that there is no accountability for performance.

The idea that players who haven't made it into a professional team or squad at super level should then be placed into some sort of national academy for players with potential, who might be good enough one day is not a model which is used in other sports or other countries.

Absolutely money and resources should be placed into players under the age of 18, but once you're an adult, you need to make it on your own ability. If you have the ability, you will be picked up by a professional team, because they want the best players available in order to win.

This goes on in professional football codes all over the world, whether it is Man Utd, Collingwood, Brisbane Broncos or anyone else. You have your elite level players who currently play in your 1st team, below that you have fringe players and new potential top-liners, who play in a 2nd level team and usually have some sort of academy attached and below that you have your youth and junior programmes to develop teenagers for your elite programmes. That's professional sport. There isn't really a place in this structure for what the ARU are doing with their national academy.

It is not unusual in professional sport that players who were good at junior level don't all make it into professional teams. That's the way of the world, you either have to work harder to prove people wrong or accept that you have gone as far as you can go and play at that level.

 

[fatprop]

I think the biggest problem with the national academy is it took the players away from training with provincial teams. This doesn't expose them to professional athletes in professional set ups. But more importantly for the provinces doesn't expose the players to their structures and systems. So when they need to call on a player they get this guy who's walking in cold and basically has to introduce himself to the guys he'll be playing with and learn a shitload of stuff in a short amount of time to catch up. It's just not going to work.

Yeah, I would think that half the issue for these kids is learning how to be a pro athlete, having those leaders about could only be benefical

The challenge for the ARU to me is giving up control and trusting a distributed system, they have the money, they want value and in the end have to justify the expenditure.

 

[nomis]

An AUS u20/21 comp during Super Rugby is what is needed to develop players and pick a national u20 team for the JWC. They should play as curtain raisers to Super Rugby games in AUS. I thought the ARU had already recognised this.

This coupled with a 3rd tier comp after Super Rugby and club rugby will cover all the development bases AUS needs. Everyone knows this. But there is disagreement over it's purpose. But we should save this conversation for the relevant thread.

Should the national acadamies for the purpose of 7's be in operation over summer instead?

 

[qwerty51]

There were whispers of something being done at u20 but so far nothing...

 

[Quick Hands]

An AUS u20/21 comp during Super Rugby is what is needed to develop players and pick a national u20 team for the JWC. They should play as curtain raisers to Super Rugby games in AUS. I thought the ARU had already recognised this.


?

A relatively easy way to start thing off would be every time 2 Australian super teams played each other, their academy or U20 squad would play the curtain raiser. Something similar happened at a couple of games this year, but I don't think it was a regular fixture or competition.

Maybe it should be?

A 5 team, 2 round competition, played at the same grounds immediately before the same super teams play. The grounds and travel arrangements are already set. It shouldn't take that much organising and it gives the players in those academies valuable game time at a higher level.

When these games aren't on - they play club rugby. 1st grade in Sydney Club rugby is an infinitely higher standard that the NRL Toyota Cup.