• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Australian Rugby / RA

The Ghost of Raelene

Steve Williams (59)
I think NSW, Qld and a 3rd ’barbarians’ team works fine in the context of representative teams that play each other as Wallabies selection trials and/or a shortened SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) (Super Rugby Pacific) format. However, there needs to be a pro tier below this. I suspect a model something along these lines is what RA is going to work towards, possibly allowing a lot of senior players to ply their trade o/s and still be eligible for selection while it is built up.
I would say a "barbarians" side is the Brumbies in all honesty. Why re create a team of perceived 'unwanteds' by the big 2 states that ends up probably the best of the lot. That's the Brumbies.

How Pro are we talking? If we potentially had 3 squads of 30-40 players there isn't a chance we have the ability to pay much to a a 5 side lower tier.

Everyway I think of it, it hits a wall.

Thank God Twiggy seems to have a sense of duty to community.
 

KOB1987

John Eales (66)
i think I will just buy woolies out of popcorn and watch it play out. as we saw in the ‘where to’ thread many people can come up with umpteen models of what could/should happen and none of them will be close to the reality. However, I am using PWs proposed national club model as a bit of a guide.
 

Wilson

Michael Lynagh (62)
It shows you how hard it is though. Force losing millions with no real results as a reward. Not many Twiggys out there to support that type of business case.
It's a larger scale but he should've just bought HBF park as the key to the long term rescue package for the Force. Far and away the biggest indicator for long term financial viability for sides around the world seems to be owning their stadiums and being able to both offset the costs of hosting and generate revenue in the off season from other tenants. It's obviously an expensive and difficult asset to get a hold of, but if you can with a long enough runway it's hard not to see it paying off. Particularly for owners who are relatively well connected in the local/state political environment.
 

The Ghost of Raelene

Steve Williams (59)
It's a larger scale but he should've just bought HBF park as the key to the long term rescue package for the Force. Far and away the biggest indicator for long term financial viability for sides around the world seems to be owning their stadiums and being able to both offset the costs of hosting and generate revenue in the off season from other tenants. It's obviously an expensive and difficult asset to get a hold of, but if you can with a long enough runway it's hard not to see it paying off. Particularly for owners who are relatively well connected in the local/state political environment.
Feel even better to own the ground the future Perth NRL team would use....

Will suck worse it if they end up buying it since the NRL are in that frame of mind these days.
 

Highlander35

Steve Williams (59)
To put another twist on the doom and gloom, since Wessels was in my head from the Tahs thread late last week, this has been lurking in my mind over the weekend.

Towards the end of his tenure, I heard Wessels argue, a couple of times, that a combination of:

- The rules around import players meaning the majority of non-starters in a squad do not have serious competition to retain their positions &
- The largely domestic selection model for the Wallabies meaning that for a European side, signing an Australian player more or less guarantees their full time availability

Results in Australian Rugby players (other than the genuine top 20-30) being over-remunerated for their ability.

I don't agree with it 100%: I think his longest experiences being Perth and Melbourne perhaps underestimates the influence of the Mungo Machine in setting floors, but I don't necessarily think it's as "wrong" as I did a couple of years ago. It certainly feels like the kind of outsider thinking that should at least be formally listened to and rejected by the establishment, rather than it being not considered at all as the case currently seems to be.
 

kiap

Steve Williams (59)
Can someone get in Nicola's ear and tell her the best way to piss her Ex off is bankroll the Rebels?
Sounds like plan. If peak net worth was twenty five king kongs then round it down now to say ten.

Compared to the average punter, a million dollars is still lke 25 bucks.
 

The_Brown_Hornet

John Eales (66)
To put another twist on the doom and gloom, since Wessels was in my head from the Tahs thread late last week, this has been lurking in my mind over the weekend.

Towards the end of his tenure, I heard Wessels argue, a couple of times, that a combination of:

- The rules around import players meaning the majority of non-starters in a squad do not have serious competition to retain their positions &
- The largely domestic selection model for the Wallabies meaning that for a European side, signing an Australian player more or less guarantees their full time availability

Results in Australian Rugby players (other than the genuine top 20-30) being over-remunerated for their ability.

I don't agree with it 100%: I think his longest experiences being Perth and Melbourne perhaps underestimates the influence of the Mungo Machine in setting floors, but I don't necessarily think it's as "wrong" as I did a couple of years ago. It certainly feels like the kind of outsider thinking that should at least be formally listened to and rejected by the establishment, rather than it being not considered at all as the case currently seems to be.

Perhaps this is an argument to allow open slather selection from overseas-based players. We're a bit half way at the moment with the Giteau rule.

Maybe we should either stop all overseas selections and punt on building our own thing or go the opposite and do like the Saffers have done, but keep the domestic teams around as a feeder if nothing else. I'm leaning towards the latter these days.
 

KOB1987

John Eales (66)
Perhaps this is an argument to allow open slather selection from overseas-based players. We're a bit half way at the moment with the Giteau rule.

Maybe we should either stop all overseas selections and punt on building our own thing or go the opposite and do like the Saffers have done, but keep the domestic teams around as a feeder if nothing else. I'm leaning towards the latter these days.
That’s kind of what I was alluding to as well. Let the senior players (say anyone over 23) go off and earn what they can elsewhere and still be eligible for Wallaby selection, and focus on better pathways and retaining the younger talent to develop the domestic pro model. Provincial teams become representative teams as a stepping stone to the Wallabies, in whatever competition format that allows.
 

Dctarget

Tim Horan (67)
Is there a way we could direct Aussie players to certain OS clubs for cohesion and ease of administration? Like Rebels do with Wests.
 

Wilson

Michael Lynagh (62)
Is there a way we could direct Aussie players to certain OS clubs for cohesion and ease of administration? Like Rebels do with Wests.
I'd love to see the OS club partnerships grow (ideally with some sort of ownership stake) as a way of managing this. It'd probably have to be in the lesser club comps, but say there were a few sides around MLR, maybe Japan 2nd division or Pro D2, etc. that had partnerships with RA or the specific super sides. You can then organise for players and coaches to do gap years or sort out lone arrangements back and forth to boost game time and development while keeping them in the system. Arguably this is even more important for coaches who really don't have any way to bridge the gap between club and super without going overseas.
 

Dctarget

Tim Horan (67)
I'd love to see the OS club partnerships grow (ideally with some sort of ownership stake) as a way of managing this. It'd probably have to be in the lesser club comps, but say there were a few sides around MLR, maybe Japan 2nd division or Pro D2, etc. that had partnerships with RA or the specific super sides. You can then organise for players and coaches to do gap years or sort out lone arrangements back and forth to boost game time and development while keeping them in the system. Arguably this is even more important for coaches who really don't have any way to bridge the gap between club and super without going overseas.
I guess we can look at Argentina, do they do anything like this? Argentina are surely what Aus will become.
 

Wilson

Michael Lynagh (62)
I guess we can look at Argentina, do they do anything like this? Argentina are surely what Aus will become.
I think it happens on an ad hoc basis for them as the Spanish speaking players tend to congregate around a few clubs (maybe because of coaches?), but I'm not sure we can expect that to go quite the same way for us. It has happened a bit with the South Africans at places like Sale too, but I'm not sure if that will hold long term.
 
Top