• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Super 14 Franchise

Status
Not open for further replies.

en_force_er

Geoff Shaw (53)
Where do you guys want to see the 15th one go? Do you think there SHOULD be a 15th one?

I would love Melbourne, I'm from there, but I couldn't see the crowds being much bigger than those produced by Perth.

Any discussion welcome.
 
R

rugbywhisperer

Guest
OK, here is the rub.
Perth does NOT produce too many S14 players and have plundered the other 3 franchises - mainly Qld in order to succeed.
While it is a grand plan to promote the game in a predominantly AFL area, we are not rewarding the areas(s) which have done all the hard work in developing the players hence many of us on the eastern coast where the vast majority of the rugby support is based cannot identify with the Force.

I would like to see the team based either Nth Qld , Gold Coast or Central Coast of NSW.

Forget about fostering the game in someone else's backyard, it is our own backyard that needs the support.
 
F

formeropenside

Guest
I'll support a team called "Queensland White", but no one else. After the Force fiasco, the last thing Qld rugby needs is another Super team to poach Qld players. In addition, it has done Aust rugby no good either, as shown by lack of Wallaby strength these last few years.

I dont want a 5th team, and I dont even want the 4th one we have. We need an ARC, not another Super team.
 

Lindommer

Steve Williams (59)
Staff member
Over on The Roar. Bruce Ross is one of the heavies on the NSWRU.
Scatter-gun or clustering - where is the logical location for Australian rugby?s fifth Super franchise?

In considering locations for a fifth Australian Super franchise, the Australian Rugby Union appears to be neglecting the option of basing it in the heartland of Australian rugby - the inner city suburbs of Sydney. Both the ARL and AFL have the majority of their clubs located in the city in which their game developed.

Given that this week?s SANZAR board meeting was held in Dubai one should not expect too much respect to be paid to location theory in determining the next site for expanding the Super 14 competition. Australian Rugby Union supremo John O?Neill has justifiably argued strongly for the fifteenth franchise to be granted to Australia, but where should such a team be based? Perhaps an examination of the location of professional teams in other football codes in Australia might be illuminating.

The National Rugby League has sixteen Premiership clubs. Nine of these (56%) are located in Sydney; four (25%) in other traditional rugby league areas; and three (19%) in what might be classed as expansion areas, namely Melbourne, New Zealand and the Gold Coast. The Australian Football League also has sixteen Premiership clubs. Nine of these (56%) are located in Melbourne; five (31%) in other traditional Australian Rules areas; and two (13%) in expansion areas, namely Sydney and Brisbane. It can be seen that in both of the major codes with which rugby competes the majority of teams are located in the city in which their game developed. By contrast Australian rugby has just four professional teams; one in Sydney where the game has its Australian roots (25%); one in Brisbane, a traditional rugby area(25%); and two in expansion areas, namely Canberra and Perth(50%).

John O?Neill has been quoted as saying that in choosing a location for the additional team ?the Gold Coast, Melbourne and West Sydney boasted the necessary prerequisites, while also mentioning Gosford and Newcastle.? Let?s look at the logic of these five sites.

Starting with Gosford, its main attraction would appear to be that it has an underutilised stadium, apparently constructed by John Singleton in ?Field of Dreams? mode. Well he built it but they didn?t come. The area lacks critical population mass, is devoid of major corporations to provide sponsorship support, and lacks an underlying club competition of anything remotely like an appropriate standard. Newcastle would also seem to be deficient in terms of population, business support and strength of its club competition. In fact, a Newcastle team competed in the Sydney Club Premiership competition for a few seasons in the late 1990s but folded due to lack of support from the Newcastle public. Placing a team in Melbourne would create many of the same problems faced by the Western Force, namely being in a city where the overwhelming majority of the population have no interest in rugby and don?t really know the difference between rugby and rugby league, and not having an underpinning club competition of anywhere near acceptable standard. Giving a franchise to the Gold Coast, an area that supports just one team in the Brisbane Premiership club competition, means that the South-East Queensland conurbation, essentially Greater Brisbane, would have two Super 15 clubs while Sydney would have only one. Giving their relative populations, strength of their club football competitions and business clout, this does not make sense. So that just leaves West Sydney - or does it? John O?Neill has, if I recall correctly, mentioned both Blacktown and Parramatta as possible locations, but where is rugby?s heartland in Sydney? It has always been in the inner city suburbs, basically clustered around the harbour.

Of the last fifty Sydney First Grade Premierships, twenty-three have been won by Randwick and ten by Sydney University. If we then add in those won by other harbour-side clubs―Norths, Gordon, Manly and Easts―45 of the last 50 Premierships or 90% have been won by rugby-heartland clubs. Only five or 10% have been won by clubs which could be regarded as part of West Sydney―three by Eastwood and two by Parramatta. In addition, the great bulk of the wealthy private schools which have been the major nursery for Australian rugby players are located in the heartland suburbs. Club rugby has always struggled in West Sydney, and even the club which has enjoyed success in recent years, Eastwood, is facing a financial crisis partly due to a rapidly changing demographic unfavourable to rugby.

If we had a central Sydney team in addition to the NSW Waratahs where would it play? The obvious answer is the Sydney Football Stadium. Very few professional football teams own their own grounds; it makes much better economic sense to hire an existing facility. Would there be sufficient support to sustain two teams in the one city? Apart from the obvious examples from the ARL and the AFL, English cities such as Liverpool and Manchester, both much smaller than Sydney, have dual soccer clubs as well as numerous other clubs clustered nearby. The proximity of rivals seems to promote fierce tribalism and increased interest in the sport.

In discussing a new Australian franchise John O?Neill spoke about the possibility of a ?hybrid team including Pacific Islanders, Australia expats and league converts.? Ignoring the wisdom or otherwise of sourcing players in this way, why might there be a deficiency of professional standard rugby players in Australia? Precisely because there are so few opportunities for rugby players to ply their trade in their own country.

As mentioned above, there are sixteen fully professional clubs in both the NRL and the AFL. By contrast, there are only four Australian Super 14 clubs. In broad terms this means that there are four times as many opportunities for rugby league and Australian football players to play professionally here as there are in rugby. Given time, the additional demand for players created by a fifth franchise will produce the necessary supply. That process will take much longer than it should because, with a few notable exceptions, player development has been grossly neglected by the administrators of rugby in Australia.

Comments at http://www.theroar.com.au/2009/03/0...ian-rugby’s-fifth-super-franchise/#more-16088
 

naza

Alan Cameron (40)
I don't think S14 has worked. Its watered down the comp and quality has gone downhill. Let's go back to a Super 12.
 

mark_s

Chilla Wilson (44)
Lindommer said:
Over on The Roar. Bruce Ross is one of the heavies on the NSWRU.
Scatter-gun or clustering - where is the logical location for Australian rugby?s fifth Super franchise?

In considering locations for a fifth Australian Super franchise, the Australian Rugby Union appears to be neglecting the option of basing it in the heartland of Australian rugby - the inner city suburbs of Sydney. Both the ARL and AFL have the majority of their clubs located in the city in which their game developed.

Given that this week?s SANZAR board meeting was held in Dubai one should not expect too much respect to be paid to location theory in determining the next site for expanding the Super 14 competition. Australian Rugby Union supremo John O?Neill has justifiably argued strongly for the fifteenth franchise to be granted to Australia, but where should such a team be based? Perhaps an examination of the location of professional teams in other football codes in Australia might be illuminating.

The National Rugby League has sixteen Premiership clubs. Nine of these (56%) are located in Sydney; four (25%) in other traditional rugby league areas; and three (19%) in what might be classed as expansion areas, namely Melbourne, New Zealand and the Gold Coast. The Australian Football League also has sixteen Premiership clubs. Nine of these (56%) are located in Melbourne; five (31%) in other traditional Australian Rules areas; and two (13%) in expansion areas, namely Sydney and Brisbane. It can be seen that in both of the major codes with which rugby competes the majority of teams are located in the city in which their game developed. By contrast Australian rugby has just four professional teams; one in Sydney where the game has its Australian roots (25%); one in Brisbane, a traditional rugby area(25%); and two in expansion areas, namely Canberra and Perth(50%).

John O?Neill has been quoted as saying that in choosing a location for the additional team ?the Gold Coast, Melbourne and West Sydney boasted the necessary prerequisites, while also mentioning Gosford and Newcastle.? Let?s look at the logic of these five sites.

Starting with Gosford, its main attraction would appear to be that it has an underutilised stadium, apparently constructed by John Singleton in ?Field of Dreams? mode. Well he built it but they didn?t come. The area lacks critical population mass, is devoid of major corporations to provide sponsorship support, and lacks an underlying club competition of anything remotely like an appropriate standard. Newcastle would also seem to be deficient in terms of population, business support and strength of its club competition. In fact, a Newcastle team competed in the Sydney Club Premiership competition for a few seasons in the late 1990s but folded due to lack of support from the Newcastle public. Placing a team in Melbourne would create many of the same problems faced by the Western Force, namely being in a city where the overwhelming majority of the population have no interest in rugby and don?t really know the difference between rugby and rugby league, and not having an underpinning club competition of anywhere near acceptable standard. Giving a franchise to the Gold Coast, an area that supports just one team in the Brisbane Premiership club competition, means that the South-East Queensland conurbation, essentially Greater Brisbane, would have two Super 15 clubs while Sydney would have only one. Giving their relative populations, strength of their club football competitions and business clout, this does not make sense. So that just leaves West Sydney - or does it? John O?Neill has, if I recall correctly, mentioned both Blacktown and Parramatta as possible locations, but where is rugby?s heartland in Sydney? It has always been in the inner city suburbs, basically clustered around the harbour.

Of the last fifty Sydney First Grade Premierships, twenty-three have been won by Randwick and ten by Sydney University. If we then add in those won by other harbour-side clubs―Norths, Gordon, Manly and Easts―45 of the last 50 Premierships or 90% have been won by rugby-heartland clubs. Only five or 10% have been won by clubs which could be regarded as part of West Sydney―three by Eastwood and two by Parramatta. In addition, the great bulk of the wealthy private schools which have been the major nursery for Australian rugby players are located in the heartland suburbs. Club rugby has always struggled in West Sydney, and even the club which has enjoyed success in recent years, Eastwood, is facing a financial crisis partly due to a rapidly changing demographic unfavourable to rugby.

If we had a central Sydney team in addition to the NSW Waratahs where would it play? The obvious answer is the Sydney Football Stadium. Very few professional football teams own their own grounds; it makes much better economic sense to hire an existing facility. Would there be sufficient support to sustain two teams in the one city? Apart from the obvious examples from the ARL and the AFL, English cities such as Liverpool and Manchester, both much smaller than Sydney, have dual soccer clubs as well as numerous other clubs clustered nearby. The proximity of rivals seems to promote fierce tribalism and increased interest in the sport.

In discussing a new Australian franchise John O?Neill spoke about the possibility of a ?hybrid team including Pacific Islanders, Australia expats and league converts.? Ignoring the wisdom or otherwise of sourcing players in this way, why might there be a deficiency of professional standard rugby players in Australia? Precisely because there are so few opportunities for rugby players to ply their trade in their own country.

As mentioned above, there are sixteen fully professional clubs in both the NRL and the AFL. By contrast, there are only four Australian Super 14 clubs. In broad terms this means that there are four times as many opportunities for rugby league and Australian football players to play professionally here as there are in rugby. Given time, the additional demand for players created by a fifth franchise will produce the necessary supply. That process will take much longer than it should because, with a few notable exceptions, player development has been grossly neglected by the administrators of rugby in Australia.

Comments at http://www.theroar.com.au/2009/03/0...ian-rugby’s-fifth-super-franchise/#more-16088

I disagree with a fair bit of this article. 1st Norths built the stadium at Gosford, unfortunately they started a few years too late and so got caught in no mans land when the criteria for the post super league competition started. Singleton brought it after Norths folded (at the top grade level anyway).

The article overlooks the fact that the teams struggling in the NRL and AFL are the traditional teams stuck in overcrowded home cities. Look at league, Souths and Cronulla have an annual battle for survival. Despite winning the comp last year, Manly aren't much better.

Then there is the idea of basing another Sydney team at the SFS, which would be a complete disaster. The tahs only draw 20-25k at the moment, why split that crowd in two? It just won't happen.

One of the reasons rugby's support base is so concentrated is that the game is so poor at trying to expand it. On free to air TV, the average joe blow can watch 3 games of league each week, 3 games of gayfl. What can he see of rugby? Well ABC shows Sydney grade rugby, which is good watching for the direhard fans but will never convert anyone to the game, plus there are 7-8 test shown at near prime time but about half of these are usually against piss weak competition.

Frankly, I see the addition of a 5th Aus team (if thats the way Sanzar want to go, and there are no guarantees), will be complete disaster unless the team is effectively a PI team using an Aus base (and I could see that working in Melbourne) or if Aus rugby is able to expand its supporter and development base so that it can support 5 teams long term. The latter will only happen in NSW/Qld as AFL just too entrenched elsewhere.

Oh, if Bruce Ross wrote this article, well than that explains alot about NSWRU.
 

Scarfman

Knitter of the Scarf
The smart rugby decision is to run a national domestic semi-pro competition. Unfortunately that costs money instead of makes money. So we're going to have to put up with a decision that doesn't make rugby sense. My favourite is Melbourne - it's a big town, they have a decent number of local players, VICs will watch about anything.
 

Sagerian

Allen Oxlade (6)
We can barely support 4 teams in Australia. The 5th (and I'm just being realistic here) team needs to come from another country with money they can pump in. Japan, etc.
 

Ash

Michael Lynagh (62)
Well said mark_s. Remember the NSWRU are currnetly making a loss supporting one team with currently very low crowds. Adding another in exactly the same area? Someone seriously needs to look at the quality of the talent on the NSWRU board.
 

RugbyReg

Rocky Elsom (76)
Staff member
yeah, I'm starting to come around to the same conclusion that others have had for a while. We can't support this player-wise.

The only way we could was if the ARU (or another party) opened up the coffers and we signed everyone. We got Lyons, Heenan, Blake, Harrison, Latham, Cordingly, Berry, Coutts, McInally, et al from overseas. Everyone.

And then got all the exes playing league - Tamone, Wing, Cronk, Hunt and that star schoolboy last year from the AFL.

So it would cost a motza. But then we have to set up another comp, underneath Super 15 so that we don't end up losing the likes of Feotai, Batger, Stannard, Wykes etc to somewhere else.

Not feasible unfortunately.
 

Moses

Simon Poidevin (60)
Staff member
fatprop said:
I have said it before, we don't have the cattle.
Perhaps the new franchise could go to uncontested scrums, along with the Force..
 

Ash

Michael Lynagh (62)
Am I correct in saying that Bruce Ross is a member of Sydney Uni and one of the strong backers for the strong clubs?

Check out his responses:

Bruce Ross said | Today | Report comment

Having read anopinion?s post a few times I am very much attracted to the logic of what he advocates. An extension of his idea of the ?Sydney Clubs? could be a way of having two teams based in Sydney but without fracturing support between Sydney?s traditional clubs and those in the West. Perhaps the ?Clubs? could be based at Parramatta, for example, which would mean that the western Premiership clubs would not feel frozen out. The essential element would be that the promoters and board of the new franchise be drawn from those whose roots and allegiances are in Sydney club rugby.

That is very different to having a franchise labelled as West Sydney with which the traditional clubs would never identify.

And rather than having a centralised academy system the new franchise should develop its emerging players at their existing clubs thus strengthening its feeder base.

Bruce Ross said | Today | Report comment

There is some very good discussion in this thread but I would like to focus on Ash?s post.

The problems with crowd numbers don?t just apply to the Waratahs. It would appear from published attendances and television footage that stadiums throughout the competition have too many empty seats.

It does not make sense that a wealthy city of 4.2 million people, with a business community who are overwhelmingly rugby supporters, cannot sustain two professional teams. The NSWRU has made many mistakes over the years, not the least of which is failure to positively engage the supporters of its Premership clubs.

Any franchise that reputedly needs home attendances averaging 26,000 to break-even has serious budgetary problems. That these still remain to be addressed is evidenced by the number of coaching and other officials who are out on the ground while the Waratah players are warming up pre-match. It appears that the players only narrowly outnumber the officials.

Let me give you the attendances from this weekend?s Guinness Premiership matches:

Bath - Bristol 10,600
Leicester - Gloucester 17,498 (capacity)
Harlequins - Saracens 12,638
Worcester - Northampton 10,319
Sale - Newcastle 7,907
London Wasps - London Irish 9525

And these are clubs which by our standards have massive player payments.

As far as the Sydney clubs standing up against the ARC, it was NSWRU that hijacked the four franchises allocated to New South Wales, giving one to Melbourne and then operating three of them themselves through synthetic entities, thus dooming the competition to failure. And who provided a huge number of the players in the ARC competition? A very few strong Sydney clubs.

The reality is that player development is still predominantly being done at club level, not by the franchises. Clear evidence of this came on February 20 when NSW A (Junior Waratahs) played a Barbarians side composed of Sydney club players. The Barbarians had no training runs together and in fact only assembled at 3pm on the day for a 5.30 kick-off. They beat NSW A with a scoreline of 36 to 19.

Those involved in club rugby know that Academy players or those on ?tackle bag contracts? do not come back to their clubs from the franchises with their skills and fitness greatly upgraded. More commonly they come back injured or burnt out from long hours of seemingly mindless training. It is about time that rugby administrators realised that appropriately-resourced clubs provide the ideal environment for player development.

In the italicised part he has a go at the Tahs, saying the reason their crowds are so low is because they do not work or engage with the premiership clubs. No doubt he means that the Tahs do not liase actively with Syd Uni, Randwick, Easts etc to entice their supporter base to Tahs game.

In the bold part, he claims that premiership clubs provide better development than professional academies and dirt trackers who can't make the matchday 22. Unsurprisingly as players need top-level game time to improve, something that the Academy does not provide enough of. Unfortunately, the Sydney club comp isn't top level either compared to the NPC.

Oh, he also took aim at the NSWRU and blamed them for the ARC's failure.

Head over, leave some comments! :)
 

RugbyReg

Rocky Elsom (76)
Staff member
speaking of Sydney clubs, a little snippet in today's paper up here:

THIS is a worry with word Sydney rugby union clubs are offering Brisbane based players up to $50,000 a season. No wonder they wanted to sink the APC and we also wonder whether it is part of a plan to make Sydney the hub of a national club competition.
 

Pfitzy

George Gregan (70)
That was the word ever since Flowers got the MARC up in the first place Nodster - Uni, Randwick, and various other Old Boys Unions weren't interested unless they got a slice of the pie (i.e. the whole fucking thing, the tray, the oven, and the kitchen).

So I say let it happen - rugby will continue to inbreed in a small, weak playing pool where the best clubs buy the best talent and let it fester in second grade just to deny other clubs a chance at titles.
 
R

rugbywhisperer

Guest
Scarfman said:
The smart rugby decision is to run a national domestic semi-pro competition. Unfortunately that costs money instead of makes money. So we're going to have to put up with a decision that doesn't make rugby sense. My favourite is Melbourne - it's a big town, they have a decent number of local players, VICs will watch about anything.

Well this time they can plunder the Tahs for their players cause the Reds ain't got nothin to give thanks to the Force. How will you feel about the team in Melbourne then?
 

Lindommer

Steve Williams (59)
Staff member
Ash said:
Am I correct in saying that Bruce Ross is a member of Sydney Uni Football Club and Sydney Uni Sport and one of the strong backers for the strong clubs?

Spot on, Ash. Bruce Ross is one of the Old Farts who delight in the success of Uni, East and Randwick pillaging any rugby talent developed in greater western Sydney. Take the junior club I was involved with, Wests Junior Rugby at Concord. Produced Laurie Weeks and Leo Afeaki, both of whom played Australian Schoolboys. They intended to return to their junior roots until some slimey bastard sidled up with the offer of a "scholarship" to play for Sydney Uni. What's a poor islander kid to do? The attraction of a free education at Australia's oldest university was too hard to resist and so they pulled on the blue and gold. It's the same in my house: if my bloke got offered a scholarship to play for Sydney Uni his mother'd drag him down and sign him up.

Ross has been on the board of NSWRU on various occasions and has shown no interest in the overall development of rugby. He counts his greatest achievement the establishment of the scholarship scheme at Sydney Uni Sport, which has fuck all to do with the development of sport but everything to do with self-aggrandisement of Sydney Uni at the expense of others. What these Old Farts fail to understand is rugby NEEDS strong clubs elsewhere to make a healthy competition for Uni, Randwick and Easts to compete in. His remark re rugby development at "appropriately-resourced clubs" is laughable. The current predicaments of Southern Districts, Parramatta and Penrith are a direct result of the attitude of Old Farts such as Bruce Ross.

PS. I don't bear any animosity towards the University of Sydney as an academic institution. My young bloke started at Sydney as a student recently and his mother and I met there many years ago. You know, Arts I = Marriage I, for us it really happened.
 
R

Rugby Rat

Guest
A combined Randwick/Easts/Uni team with the home ground being Coogee Oval. Not that I am biased or anything.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top