Waratahs 2016

[Train Without a Station]

I'm saying that with zero change to 75% of the senior rugby playing population in Sydney, that rugby would survive.

 

[I like to watch]

Well yeah Rugby would survive.
Just as it would if the Tahs were removed from the Rugby landscape.
It doesn't mean that both the Tahs & SS don't add significant value to the game in NSW.

 

[Quick Hands]

As for rugby not surviving in Sydney without Shute Shield clubs. You do realize of the approximately 10,000 registered senior players in Sydney, only around a quarter are with Shute Shield Clubs, right?

And how many super or test players have the 75% produced?

 

[Quick Hands]

Copy and paste -

Stupid argument Phil Waugh has been asked to write an article on U20's rugby what else is he going to say it's a waste of time and shouldn't exist?

Aussie Dominance, it's typical of those who seek to constantly run down the Shute Shield that they set up straw man arguments, which they can knock down. It shows that they don't really appreciate the point (or through some ingrained prejudice don't want to understand).

 

[Highlander35]

Shute Shield opposition fighting strawmen?

Hehehehe

 

[Braveheart81]

Aussie Dominance, it's typical of those who seek to constantly run down the Shute Shield that they set up straw man arguments, which they can knock down. It shows that they don't really appreciate the point (or through some ingrained prejudice don't want to understand).

And how many super or test players have the 75% produced?

Isn't this the straw man argument?

We all like the Shute Shield and think the rugby is good. We don't want to see it disappear.

The assertion that without it the players would have nowhere to play is not true though.

Ultimately the players are what makes the competition good and the players would still play somewhere.

 

[Quick Hands]

For the record these two posts were my favourite amongst the whole thing and if they had been written by other people I would have totally assumed them to be satirical.

Amazing.

I could say the same thing about the majority of your posts. Unfortunately I'm convinced that you really believe most of the stuff you post about club rugby and you're not just trying to be overly provocative.

Nice to see all the usual suspects turned out for the hate-a-thon though.

 

[Quick Hands]

The assertion that without it the players would have nowhere to play is not true though.

Which I have never said at any point on any thread. They would have to play for vastly inferior clubs in vastly inferior competitions.

 

[Quick Hands]

Shute Shield opposition fighting strawmen?

Hehehehe

From your vast experience in Sydney club rugby? I seem to recall in another thread that you based your views on club rugby from your own experiences in the UK? (Please correct me if I have misrepresented you)

 

[Quick Hands]

Oh and by the way, re Reece Hodge and his player development:

A Manly junior his whole life, Hodge started playing rugby in the Under-7s and is very much a product of the club system. Despite not being able to play a lot of rugby at Manly Selective High School, Hodge still made the Australian Schoolboys side in 2012, one of just three players (Brisbane City’s Jake McIntyre was another) who came from outside the GPS system. He played Australia Under-20s in 2012 and 2013.

http://aru.rugby.com.au/News/NewsAr...-North-Harbour-Rays-fullback-Reece-Hodge.aspx

 

[Train Without a Station]

But if all the players went to play for these vastly inferior clubs in vastly inferior competitions, wouldn't they come close to the same quality that the Shute Shield was? As BH has noted, the quality of it is based on those that play it.

 

[Braveheart81]

I could say the same thing about the majority of your posts. Unfortunately I'm convinced that you really believe most of the stuff you post about club rugby and you're not just trying to be overly provocative.

Nice to see all the usual suspects turned out for the hate-a-thon though.

You misread me if you think I hate the Shute Shield. My posts on the topic are intended to be pragmatic was the perspective that the ARU has a limited amount of money to spend and are trying to achieve the best outcomes for rugby as a whole in Australia and to work out how best to use that money within the constraints they have. There is absolutely no desire on my part that the Shute Shield should fold. I think the Shute Shield (and Premier Rugby) are important but I also don't think they are as vital as some people make out.

The thing I found humorous was the assertion that the Shute Shield was responsible for the entirety of a player's junior rugby career.

Obviously there are village clubs that are the junior versions of Shute Shield clubs and then there are those that aren't. The facilities are generally better at those that are part of Shute Shield clubs as I experienced as a kid.

 

[AussieDominance]

But if all the players went to play for these vastly inferior clubs in vastly inferior competitions, wouldn't they come close to the same quality that the Shute Shield was? As BH has noted, the quality of it is based on those that play it.

No I would say not Shute Shield clubs(bar maybe Penrith) have contacts and resources as well as history beyond what any sub district club could dream of.

Sure if they took over in 20 years time they might have established some of those connections but still I don't think they would be anywhere near where the current clubs are.

 

[fatprop]

Which I have never said at any point on any thread. They would have to play for vastly inferior clubs in vastly inferior competitions.

Well not really, if all the SS clubs disappeared tomorrow the infux of players into those "vastly inferior clubs" would make those "vastly inferior clubs" vastly improved

I love the SS, but it isn't irreplaceable, everything is.

The challenge with the SS is that it can't be a fully or a semi-professional comp in a now fully professional sport at the elite level and it hasn't come to accept it's lessor place in that different world as a amateur feeder to the pro level.

 

[Highlander35]

I deliberately not commented on this one until that comment. It's a discussion in the club rugby threads, NRC threads and heck, specific threads on the general discussion forum. You were rightfully celebrating a qualitaty product of the state/city/system, particularly how it did give him an avenue towards success despite missing out on traditional pathways, both because of circumstances around schooling and injury. I have a specific view, based on a number of things.

Both sides appear to be arguing slightly different things.

Supporters seem to be arguing that, for reasons detailed elsewhere by others, that the Shute Shield is the best developmental pathway and self contained "non - professional" competition in Australia.

Detractors by contrast, again for reason better detailed elsewhere by others, that the Shield is insufficient in being a developmental pathway, particularly over the long term.

Neither of these seems objectively, or subjectively incorrect. But they overlap to enough of an extent that people will debate vigorously over the subject (as we've so clearly seen on this forum), and, particularly if people enter with strong positive or negative views on the subject it devolves into shit shows.

For my own viewpoint, it is clearly the best club competition in Australia, both from a cultural POV, an establishment point of view and a level of competition. The number of players that go there, from both country areas and nontraditional states is a clear testament to that, as is the number of players currently in Super Rugby and overseas that have played between some, and significant amounts of time in the Shield.

But I think both it, and Australian Rugby in general can be better than it currently is. The NRC is an important step towards this because of the National aspect, but more importantly, the smaller number of sides means a concentration of talent. Independently of that I believe that a smaller Shute Shield (say 2-3 grades and 1 or 2 colts) would serve to provide a more elite closed competition, with the remaining grades being well served to play within the Suburban competition pyramid under the same identity, but as different organisations.

Regardless, Hodge is worth celebrating as a victory for club rugby, and Matthew 7:3

 

[I like to watch]

Well not really, if all the SS clubs disappeared tomorrow the infux of players into those "vastly inferior clubs" would make those "vastly inferior clubs" vastly improved

I love the SS, but it isn't irreplaceable, everything is.

The challenge with the SS is that it can't be a fully or a semi-professional comp in a now fully professional sport at the elite level and it hasn't come to accept it's lessor place in that different world as a amateur feeder to the pro level.

No, if all the SS disappeared, they could not be replaced by what are currently weaker clubs.
It would mean that the current structure was no longer viable.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I've said this previously but perhaps the ARU should redirect the funds they are allocating to ensure the Shute Shield continuing broadcast (some $300,000) directly to the clubs if they are so desperate for it. Of course the offset of that is the potential for the SS not being broadcast. So, decisions.

I've given this a little thought recently and have somewhat changed my thinking. In that I'd be willing to see the ARU fund the clubs to the tune of $100,000 as a meams of establishing a dedicated youth wing. Where by, each club will be given funds as a means toward building the junior club base within their area. This would still come with certain key targets. Say with these funds each club had to ensure that by the end of the next 5 years they all had a minimum of 12 junior clubs within their catchment fielding at least 1 team in each age group from U6-18s. On top of that they had to have dedicated girls programs as well. Would the clubs agree to this?

 

[fatprop]

No, if all the SS disappeared, they could not be replaced by what are currently weaker clubs.
It would mean that the current structure was no longer viable.

They said the same after Australian Rugby Championship died and then we find National Rugby Championship grew out of the land salted by the SS clubs

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I deliberately not commented on this one until that comment. It's a discussion in the club rugby threads, NRC threads and heck, specific threads on the general discussion forum. You were rightfully celebrating a qualitaty product of the state/city/system, particularly how it did give him an avenue towards success despite missing out on traditional pathways, both because of circumstances around schooling and injury. I have a specific view, based on a number of things.

Both sides appear to be arguing slightly different things.

Supporters seem to be arguing that, for reasons detailed elsewhere by others, that the Shute Shield is the best developmental pathway and self contained "non - professional" competition in Australia.

Detractors by contrast, again for reason better detailed elsewhere by others, that the Shield is insufficient in being a developmental pathway, particularly over the long term.

Neither of these seems objectively, or subjectively incorrect. But they overlap to enough of an extent that people will debate vigorously over the subject (as we've so clearly seen on this forum), and, particularly if people enter with strong positive or negative views on the subject it devolves into shit shows.

For my own viewpoint, it is clearly the best club competition in Australia, both from a cultural POV, an establishment point of view and a level of competition. The number of players that go there, from both country areas and nontraditional states is a clear testament to that, as is the number of players currently in Super Rugby and overseas that have played between some, and significant amounts of time in the Shield.

But I think both it, and Australian Rugby in general can be better than it currently is. The NRC is an important step towards this because of the National aspect, but more importantly, the smaller number of sides means a concentration of talent. Independently of that I believe that a smaller Shute Shield (say 2-3 grades and 1 or 2 colts) would serve to provide a more elite closed competition, with the remaining grades being well served to play within the Suburban competition pyramid under the same identity, but as different organisations.

Regardless, Hodge is worth celebrating as a victory for club rugby, and Matthew 7:3

I think the Sydney Grade structure needs to 1) Become more streamlined and 2) More inclusive. This can wither be done in a number of ways. The first one that comes to mind is as Braveheart suggests and cut the number of grades. I'd go as far as to suggest it is cut down to just two elite squads of 35-40 at both the Colts and Grade levels.

The second one could be cutting the number of teams back from 12 to 8 and creating a Championship division below for the four cut to be joined by four new squads be it either ambitious Subbies clubs, new regions or nearby Country regions.

 

[I like to watch]

They said the same after Australian Rugby Championship died and then we find National Rugby Championship grew out of the land salted by the SS clubs

Not an accurate analogy at all.
The funding for NRC franchises, the player costs,and the ownership models are completely different to those of the ARC.
Without the support of SS,the NRC would be much weaker than it is.