The ARU imposing "solutions" doesn't work if the solution goes against the self interests of the affected parties.
The ARC was against the self interests of the clubs and was therefore not supported.
The centralisation of the National Academy was against the self interests of the Super Rugby franchises and has therefore not been supported.
There is a risk many grass roots supporters will see this idea as the ARU disregarding the club they are a member/supporter of.
That is the way the politics of Australian rugby works.
Hopefully the ARU realises that they have to take an inclusive approach or there will be diminished support for whatever 3rd tier solution they come up with (and we need it to be a success for the good of Australian rugby).
I really cant stress how much I agree with what Scott is saying here, the issue is that those with vested interests will always pose a significant threat to the viability of these sorts of concepts.
With that in mind I want to suggest that maybe we stop the fighting and embrace the clubs, if we cannot develop a competition without their support then why not embrace? This does not mean giving them the keys to the kingdom however I believe that their are viable options.
Why look to the ITM cup as a model when it will NEVER work in Australia, geography being the major difference!! Why cant we adopt a model whereby we have a 3rd tier that consists of all the clubs as they currently are? Before I explain its important to note that my approach to a 3rd tier is not to have a competition that is a fully 'professional' standalone comp, I see the 3rd tier as a feeder to SuperRugby that is 'semi-pro' and is very much a development comp. Its not meant to make money, merely operate so as to break even. Anything else is gravy!!
Sydney and Brisbane comps wont want their comps making way for brand new 'teams' like occurred in the ARC so in order to ensure their co-operation guarantee them that it wont happen, the existing clubs will be the 'product'. The tradition and existing supporter bases are maintained so it wont start from scratch and will draw from decades of history.
It will require sacrifice from both sides, from the ARU in the sense that they dont have a brand new product to market but also from the respective club competitions with regards their current competitions.
I propose that each current comp, the Hospital, Shute Shield, John Dent etc move away from their current models whereby they have a regular season and a finals series too a systems similar to the EPL - first past the post. Each comp still has a winner in their respective states that rewards the most consistent, so Syd Uni and UQ etc can still win the SS and Hospital Cup. This would require another commitment from each comp which would be to co-ordinate their start dates so that they all finish at the completion of the SuperRugby season.
Once this is complete the top 4 teams from Brisbane and Sydney, top 2 from Canberra, Melbourne and Perth and one each from the Adelaide and Darwin comps move into a 16 team Australian Rugby Club Championships. This would involve a 16 team tournament where their would be 4 pools with 4 teams that would each play each other and then the top 2 teams in each pool would move through to the Quarter Finals and so on. The funding is another issue altogether but would not be insurmountable if their was a broadcast partner and competition advertisers etc. Ideally the ARU would be required to tip in minimal amounts of money.
I really think that this would appease all parties, with each stakeholder having to compromise but not to a level where it puts them too far out of joint. In terms of funding I foresee that each club would nominate 15 players who would receive approximately $300 per week for the season which would supplement players looking for a professional contract to the tune of perhaps 2 full days of training per week. Although it wont feed a family they still have 3 days a week in which they can work to make some extra money. The players will more than likely be happy given they have the opportunity to showcase their talents and will benefit from 2 full days of training on top of their two nights a week. I did some rough figures and it comes to about 5.5 million per year, which when spread amongst the clubs, club sponsors, ARU, broadcast sponsor, competition sponsors, respective state unions and private ownership. I also think that this might facilitate the abolition of the national academy programs etc as they can ply their skills in this 'professional(ish)' environment which would also free up funding from the ARU.
Thats my proposal, it might seem costly BUT when you sit down and do the figures it becomes quite reasonable, considering airline and hotel partners would not be needed for the majority of the ARCC, only the commencement of the finals series.
Thoughts??
