Sydney Shake Up

[Dave Beat]

Gee whiz, where do I start?

Firstly, I agree absolutely that if a restructure of the Shute Shield were to take place, a redistribution of junior clubs more equitably should take place.

I also agree that University has an advantage over the other clubs. This advantage, however, has been forged to a large degree by them- given that they were about to be booted out in the mid nineties. Also I understand the role compulsory student unionism has played in their financial advantage. This no longer exists, and their current situation is built upon great relationships with sponsors and an active alma mater.

As a senior club, they are doing things well. Most of it by hard work and commitment. So i see no benefit in dragging them down. Hell, I never thought they were unconquerable.

Now, on the subject of juniors - I merely said they were doing a good job (in my opinion). I was asked to use measures provided by I like to Watch, and did so, comparing them to the club I am currently working with. They compare favourably.

The notion that a club needs to establish a junior club in order to claim it as their own, is problematic. Sure Bob Ellis helped establish West Juniors in the 90's, and he had played for Wests. That doesn't necessarily mean that Wests built the club. Both Hawkesbury Valley and Rooty Hill sit under the Penrith banner- but only a few years ago they were Parramatta clubs. Is Penrith as guilty as Uni in 'pilfering juniors?'

In my lifetime, Hunters Hill has been an Eastwood, Gordon and now a Norths junior club. One of the fathers involved in the establishment of the Beecroft club was a rugby league player from the Eastern suburbs, with no relationship with Eastwood at all.

Balmain is a club in its infancy. What is illegitimate with it sitting under Uni's banner? Have Petersham or Cantebury been affiliated with other clubs? Maybe some one can tell me. Despite being 2kms from Concord Oval, Drummoyne is associated with Norths. How does that happen?

Finally, in the context of making rugby better in Sydney and NSW, equal distribution is needed, absolutely. But don't believe that weakening the club with 'best practice' makes the sport stronger.

Well said, I dont think bringing down the strong will be of benifit to a NSW shake up.
It is all drawing board stuff:
3T
1. Top 3 of the Club Championship for a 3rd tier and stand alone along with;
2. Souths to Kiama - with Southern districts remaining in place in the S Shield.
3. East area - Drawing from Randwick & Easts but have their entity remain in place in the S Shield.
4 West area - Drawing from Parra, Penrith, Wests but have their entity remain in place in the S Shield.

S Shield
Reconfigured, and alot of your points hold value.

 

[Done that]

Andrew B Cox #60

Your post & response indicates that you have missed the thrust of mine.
In your discussion regarding the restructure of the Shute Shield competition above , you suggested that the restructure might possibly include the representation of the inner West by Sydney University ,(thereby
obviously displacing the West Harbour club from the competition as a consequence , & effectively sending it to relative oblivion).

As it's your suggestion , then logically you would find such an outcome acceptable.

This is despite the fact that the West Harbour club is one of the most successful in the competition on most measures , e.g. I note that they have 6 of the 7 teams/grades in the final play offs ,
they have some of the best facilities of any of the competing clubs , they are one of the few financially stable clubs , & actually manage to turn a profit each year.
My remark about the redistribution of the 3 junior clubs was not a suggestion by me that that should in fact happen , but meant to point out to you that such an occurrence would be just as illogical & unreasonable as that suggested by you.
I don't for a moment suggest that attempts should be made to weaken the club with "best practice" , although clearly there are many who would not be terribly upset if this were to occur.
However , the effective absorption of the West Harbour club by the Sydney University club , could only result in the latter becoming stronger than it currently is , & by implication , create an even bigger gap between it
& the other clubs than currently exists, & I don't know how you could possibly suggest that this would be desirable in an already ailing competition as it now clearly is.

Also , for your information , the West Harbour junior club was started from scratch & was in fact built by them from nothing .
Historically , West Harbour (formerly Western Suburbs) has had junior clubs in the past e.g. Ashfield & Homebush .
They also had a relationship with the Canterbury & Petersham clubs in the past.

 

[Andrew B Cox]

Andrew B Cox #60

Your post & response indicates that you have missed the thrust of mine.
In your discussion regarding the restructure of the Shute Shield competition above , you suggested that the restructure might possibly include the representation of the inner West by Sydney University ,(thereby
obviously displacing the West Harbour club from the competition as a consequence , & effectively sending it to relative oblivion).

As it's your suggestion , then logically you would find such an outcome acceptable.

This is despite the fact that the West Harbour club is one of the most successful in the competition on most measures , e.g. I note that they have 6 of the 7 teams/grades in the final play offs ,
they have some of the best facilities of any of the competing clubs , they are one of the few financially stable clubs , & actually manage to turn a profit each year.
My remark about the redistribution of the 3 junior clubs was not a suggestion by me that that should in fact happen , but meant to point out to you that such an occurrence would be just as illogical & unreasonable as that suggested by you.
I don't for a moment suggest that attempts should be made to weaken the club with "best practice" , although clearly there are many who would not be terribly upset if this were to occur.
However , the effective absorption of the West Harbour club by the Sydney University club , could only result in the latter becoming stronger than it currently is , & by implication , create an even bigger gap between it
& the other clubs than currently exists, & I don't know how you could possibly suggest that this would be desirable in an already ailing competition as it now clearly is.

Also , for your information , the West Harbour junior club was started from scratch & was in fact built by them from nothing .
Historically , West Harbour (formerly Western Suburbs) has had junior clubs in the past e.g. Ashfield & Homebush .
They also had a relationship with the Canterbury & Petersham clubs in the past.

Fair enough.

I think the Uni v West thing has grown a life of its own. Whether one or both deserve there remains up for conjecture. However the main argument is that Shute Shield has antiquated boundaries. You can't fit 2 teams in the inner west, just like 2 on the north Shore, northern beaches and eastern suburbs. Wests and Parramatta are rarely strong at the same time, mainly because the players drift between the two, and perhaps there is not enough quality for both. All I'm saying is that if we were to re-cast these boundaries, we'd have to settle on a number of criteria (which if this thread is any indication, will be up for plenty of debate!), and make clubs tender for their spot within any given geographical area.

And then we need to consider how we can get a national club comp happening

 

[Inside Shoulder]

But UN\ni is not and never has been - despite their efforts - a district club so why does it matter?
You need the demographics from the whole metropolitan area to divide it up properyl and to do so you would lose whatever little club tribalism there is - not saying thats a deal breaker.
But once you take vested interest out of it you need hard data about population, age distribution, maybe ethnicity, player participation rates, projected growth.
You also need colour consultants so you can get good jerseys - most are pretty good already, i think.

 

[Andrew B Cox]

But UN\ni is not and never has been - despite their efforts - a district club so why does it matter?
You need the demographics from the whole metropolitan area to divide it up properyl and to do so you would lose whatever little club tribalism there is - not saying thats a deal breaker.
But once you take vested interest out of it you need hard data about population, age distribution, maybe ethnicity, player participation rates, projected growth.
You also need colour consultants so you can get good jerseys - most are pretty good already, i think.

I agree completely with everything you say here. Perhaps simple demographics is too narrow a criteria. You'd have to factor in all the factors you describe.

The tribalism is a tough one. Volunteers do so because they love the club- probably more than the game. It's always the first casualty of a merger. The other thing is that mergers are never equal - you always have a dominant partner - Maybe you carry their volunteers and hope to not lose to many of the weaker club. Always tough.

 

[Blackers13]

The whole thing is moot until a full restructure of Australian Rugby takes place. We need a central administration like the AFL to manage everything from the National team to Try Rugby. There are too many vested interests, agendas, petty rivalries and old school ties to allow Rugby to ever be anything other than the 4th football code in this country.

 

[It is what it is]

Can't support district boundaries, it's seemingly irrelevant these days.
Apart from qualification for schools, local councils and electoral purposes, what else in our lives is governed this way?
Clubs are struggling to stay afloat without much if any support from SRU and NSWRU, so are we going to have district boundary police and who will pay for them?
The ARU will, if they haven't already, soon have to employ a salary cap auditor the way things are going and these costs result in less money for grass roots.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

The whole thing is moot until a full restructure of Australian Rugby takes place. We need a central administration like the AFL to manage everything from the National team to Try Rugby. There are too many vested interests, agendas, petty rivalries and old school ties to allow Rugby to ever be anything other than the 4th football code in this country.

Agree with one qualification: we need an Adnrew Demetriou not a JON at the top if thats going to work.
The other thing I see coming is a revenue squeeze for Oz when the TV contract is up again.

 

[Mr Magoo]

Agree District boundaries begin to get ignored by players once we get to colts age and I would suspect that this has not been a recent phenomenon. Players will willingly spend hours traveling each week to a club that they perceive is giving them a better deal.
Uni have and will continue to attract players from other districts because of their perceived benefits. They have set a bench mark and it's up to the other clubs to lift their game. I feel that many of our clubs are run by dinasours that are too slow to move and constantly procrastinate and hold back development. Changing boundaries is going to do nothing get rid of the leather patches in the clubs and you'll have positive change.

 

[Andrew B Cox]

Agree District boundaries begin to get ignored by players once we get to colts age and I would suspect that this has not been a recent phenomenon. Players will willingly spend hours traveling each week to a club that they perceive is giving them a better deal.
Uni have and will continue to attract players from other districts because of their perceived benefits. They have set a bench mark and it's up to the other clubs to lift their game. I feel that many of our clubs are run by dinasours that are too slow to move and constantly procrastinate and hold back development. Changing boundaries is going to do nothing get rid of the leather patches in the clubs and you'll have positive change.

The arguments about not worrying about districts at all are pretty convincing. I also agree that the clubs protect their own turf at the expense of the game as a whole - which is natural I suppose.

A strong central admin such as IS suggests is one solution.

Another problem is TV. How much longer will the ABC be showing Shute Shield? and other broadcasters would have little interest given it isn't national.

No TV, less Sponsorship revenue.

Toyota Cup gets some good numbers on Fox. If we don't go national, rugby may lose a domestic presence below Super Rugby on TV.

 

[Rugby Central]

Forget Boundries etc. I saw to shining examples of why rugby in Sydney is in decline.

On Saturday I watched a Subbies side stacked with Shute Shield players. If that wasn't bad enough, the ref let high shot after high shot go. As some spectators said, "Why would anybody want to play rugby if this is what happens?"

Completely separate, the next day when watching an under 11 final for 5th place, one team was short a player. The opposition, using the rules, then tried to have the match forfeit to guarantee their team a win.

Not only does this stupidity flourish in Sydney Rugby Union, it's actively encouraged by the administration. Until this crap is dealt with rugby will continue to die in Sydney and subsequently effect the Wallabies for years to come.

A small piece of justice prevailed however with the team short a player winning by one try....appeal pending

 

[Mr Magoo]

Thanks RC, unfortunately this exists in other sports soccer cricket etc and it the over competitiveness of the parents. Maybe worth another discussion thread.

Yep and agree on considering the central admin. It has lots of merits.

 

[Dave Beat]

Another problem is TV. How much longer will the ABC be showing Shute Shield? and other broadcasters would have little interest given it isn't national.

No TV, less Sponsorship revenue.

There are so many Fox Sport stations, some of the crap that gets shown on there.
Surely a 3T & a Shute Shield could generate better viewing???
Live or Delayed???
Looking at feedback on various threads, Fox are showing and people are watching the NZ ITM (it is shown live and also delayed).

 

[Andrew B Cox]

There are so many Fox Sport stations, some of the crap that gets shown on there.
Surely a 3T & a Shute Shield could generate better viewing???
Live or Delayed???
Looking at feedback on various threads, Fox are showing and people are watching the NZ ITM (it is shown live and also delayed).

No dice unless it's national.

People are watching ITM Cup on Fox - that's true. And Heineken Cup.

But the additional cost of production means that a Sydney-centric comp just isn't worth the money.

And who would buy Shute Shield for overseas consumption? Full tilt 3rd tier possibly.

 

[the coach]

Good to see the ARU promoting the Shute Shield finals series on their website --- NOT!
Not a mention of it.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe it was the ARU who wanted the SS season reduced in length?
If they've taken such an interest (?) you'd think the finals series would at least get a mention.
Or is it a fact that they couldn't give a stuff about club rugby?

 

[Blackers13]

No dice unless it's national.

People are watching ITM Cup on Fox - that's true. And Heineken Cup.

But the additional cost of production means that a Sydney-centric comp just isn't worth the money.

And who would buy Shute Shield for overseas consumption? Full tilt 3rd tier possibly.

They cover Queensland Cup Rugby League

 

[Dave Beat]

They cover Queensland Cup Rugby League

Ryan - I think it also comes down to the effort people want to put in. I flicked through the page and half of Fox Sport Channels last night and there was all sorts of sports. I.e. An under 12 Baseball game Japan V Some one I can't remember.

 

[Andrew B Cox]

Fox buy plenty of stuff 'off the shelf'. It's quite another thing to fund the production once you've bought the rights.

 

[Ozzie Bob]

Forget Boundries etc. I saw to shining examples of why rugby in Sydney is in decline.

On Saturday I watched a Subbies side stacked with Shute Shield players. If that wasn't bad enough, the ref let high shot after high shot go. As some spectators said, "Why would anybody want to play rugby if this is what happens?"

Completely separate, the next day when watching an under 11 final for 5th place, one team was short a player. The opposition, using the rules, then tried to have the match forfeit to guarantee their team a win.

Not only does this stupidity flourish in Sydney Rugby Union, it's actively encouraged by the administration. Until this crap is dealt with rugby will continue to die in Sydney and subsequently effect the Wallabies for years to come.

A small piece of justice prevailed however with the team short a player winning by one try..appeal pending

I take it you were at Hassel Park then on Saturday?

I think the ARC did some good things by creating 3 teams in Sydney. I will always understand why the SS clubs want to protect their own interests but it would be great to start from scratch!

 

[Blackers13]

If we need further proof that Australian Rugby needs a complete restructure, read the email that went out to all clubs today.

Dear All

It is with regret that I have to inform you all that after 89 years the last edition of Rugby News will be published for Grand Final Day.



It will be very sad that Club Rugby won’t have a program anymore. The hierarchy should be concerned about this but they don’t care about Club Rugby as they only care about the elite overpaid player.



If Club Rugby is not supported the game will diminish, it is struggling enough now and is nowhere near as what it was in the past. Club Rugby people keep the great game going in Sydney throughout Australia and all over the world



Other sports are laughing especially the AFL and the late great Eric Spilstead would be turning in his grave despite the great efforts of Jim Davis and others to keep Rugby News alive.



A very sad day for our great game



Regards,





Bob Wilson

0438-416222 Mobile

bobw@wireless2way.com.au