Continued decline in Sydney Junior Rugby

[Kenny Powers]

can someone tell me are the schools teams paying the $200 levy ?

If you are not a member of an organisation you have no obligation to support it.

Likewise the schools look after their own insurance not such an issue for private schools. I imagine its a substantial issue for the public system.

Extract from the ARU website


The Australian Rugby Union does not provide sports accident insurance coverage for any individuals participating in rugby for their school. Such insurance coverage is the sole responsibility of the individual school through their school accident policy.

Optional sports accident coverage can usually be arranged through the ARU national insurance scheme on application. For further information, please contact Gow-Gates insurance brokers.

[Note: Several schools play within State Union sanctioned club competitions, and thus are required to take out compulsory coverage under the ARU national insurance scheme].

The Australian Rugby Union does provide public liability coverage and professional indemnity coverage for ARU and State Union staff delivering programs in schools through the ARU National Insurance Scheme.

 

[Fat Cat]

If you are not a member of an organisation you have no obligation to support it.
wow !

 

[Quick Hands]

I've commented on the levy on one of the other threads - The ARU Financial Position thread I think.

The $200 levy is wrong in principle as it essentially involves 6 year olds and volunteers subsidising professionals and highly paid administrators, it is not applied across the board as the ARU have no power to levy schools (this demolishes the flawed argument put forward by Pulver that those participating and obtaining enjoyment should pay), neither the NRL or AFL apply a levy of this type, in fact both those organisations subsidise their juniors, so that rego fees are either small or in some cases it's free

The fact that those in the rugby community with the least ability to pay are being forced to do so, while those members of the rugby community who possess international standard facilities and can afford to pay Directors of Rugby and Sports Scientists pay nothing says much about rugby in Australia.

But while the rugby experience those in authority is through private school sport, nothing much will change I suspect.

 

[beserker]

The Sydney Swans (AFL) Academy was set up to attract and keep some good juniors in the game. I think it starts at the U15's and could be earlier. Is there anything in this model that could be used to bridge the gap where a lot of club sides die off at this age group? If so, couldn't the $200 be best spent recreating this type of structure. Parents could then see some bang for their buck.

 

[Kenny Powers]

If you are not a member of an organisation you have no obligation to support it.
wow !

Look at it this way if the schools were to pay the $200 then they become a direct shareholder / stakeholder who will expected a say in decision making.

This would give the schools direct power up against clubs, rather than the indifference towards clubs that exists given the stock standard background of your average Australian Rugby Administrator as QH mentioned above.

As the saying goes be careful about what you wish for.

The one thing I am confident of is that Rugby in Australia isn't going to be improved by attacking the schools. Pushing for a complete overhaul in how grass roots rugby works with the ARU, with appropriate structural / personnel changes will bring big improvement to Rugby.

 

[Quick Hands]

The point is, no-one should have to pay it.

But, if you are going to adopt a user pays principle, then everyone pays or receives less support. A levy is a particularly lazy and unfair way to raise money from rugby land. IMO it discredits those who introduce it.

The only reason that there isn't a huge outcry is that it affects so few people and they're that demoralised most have lost the energy to fight.

 

[Fat Cat]

Look at it this way if the schools were to pay the $200 then they become a direct shareholder / stakeholder who will expected a say in decision making

This would give the schools direct power up against clubs, rather than the indifference towards clubs that exists given the stock standard background of your average Australian Rugby Administrator as QH mentioned above.


Who do you think controls Australian rugby now ? schools have been an integral part of the ARU pathway for ever.

 

[I like to watch]

Look at it this way if the schools were to pay the $200 then they become a direct shareholder / stakeholder who will expected a say in decision making.

This would give the schools direct power up against clubs, rather than the indifference towards clubs that exists given the stock standard background of your average Australian Rugby Administrator as QH mentioned above.

As the saying goes be careful about what you wish for.

The one thing I am confident of is that Rugby in Australia isn't going to be improved by attacking the schools. Pushing for a complete overhaul in how grass roots rugby works with the ARU, with appropriate structural / personnel changes will bring big improvement to Rugby.

Hang on,the junior clubs levy is budgeted to bring in $800k
The ARU grant to the Scoolboy affiliate is $500k.
Individual Schools have budgets in many cases in the high tens of millions.
Junior rugby clubs have budgets in the low tens of thousands.
They have it arse about. No private School parent would even notice it,if the full team levy was billed to individual students with their School fees.
Club land is more price sensitive.

 

[Fat Cat]

It aint really rocket science is it ?

 

[Kenny Powers]

Hang on,the junior clubs levy is budgeted to bring in $800k
The ARU grant to the Scoolboy affiliate is $500k.
The Schools have budgets in many cases in the high tens of millions.
Junior rugby clubs have budgets in the low tens of thousands.
They have it arse about. No private School parent would even notice it,if the full team levy was billed to individual students with their School fees.
Club land is more price sensitive.

By the schoolboy affiliate I take it you mean the Australian Schools Rugby Union.

It deals in a representative program at a state and national level according to its website. So the $500k is only for an elite few.

It is not for the wider benefit of all school players.

Whether $500k it is appropriate or not is another debate.

 

[I like to watch]

So why are they subsidised at all,when the other,poorer pathway is being levied?
That's the point.
And in any case, why would the Schools become direct stakeholders,with a say in the decision making,in the event that they were levied?
The Village clubs are not afforded that right,despite the fact the alternative pathway has been heavily subsidised for years.

 

[Kenny Powers]

So why are they subsidised at all,when the other,poorer pathway is being levied?
That's the point.
And in any case, why would the Schools become direct stakeholders,with a say in the decision making,in the event that they were levied?
The Village clubs are not afforded that right,despite the fact the alternative pathway has been heavily subsidised for years.

Don't disagree with Schools funding / digging deeper / finding sponsors etc for their own rep program.

If you mix the schools and clubs together the influence that clubs can (or more correctly should) exert would be greatly reduced.

Lindfield Juniors I believe is the largest junior club in the country with 500 players (from u6 to u18). There would be a least 10 to 20 schools in Australia with more than 500 players, and that would be before they started to form factions along religious lines to exert influence.

 

[Quick Hands]

I agree with your general point which is along the "no taxation with representation" line.

But, the thing in question is the $200 levy being applied per team to every community club in the country. It's not only wrong, but it's also unfair.

It's wrong because according to Pulver, the principle behind it is; "those who participate and thus gain enjoyment must pay". I don't agree with the principle.

It's unfair because at least one group of people who participate and thus gain enjoyment (schools) won't be paying, and because it doesn't recognise the ability of some clubs to raise funds reasonably easily because of the socio-economic status of its parents/members, while not all clubs have the same fund-raising ability.

A flat levy is a lazy and unfair way to raise money and while I generally applaud most of what Pulver is doing, he is completely wrong on this and the unfairness of it is a black mark against his name.

 

[Kenny Powers]

because it doesn't recognise the ability of some clubs to raise funds reasonably easily because of the socio-economic status of its parents/members, while not all clubs have the same fund-raising ability.

A flat levy is a lazy and unfair way to raise money and while I generally applaud most of what Pulver is doing, he is completely wrong on this and the unfairness of it is a black mark against his name.

Agree a bad idea to start with even poorer justification.

Also greater support for clubs outside the rugby heartlands is a good idea, would happily pay a bit extra on rego (even if it is an optional tick the box thing) if I was assured the money was going straight to these clubs and not disappearing into one of the many black holes that exist in the Australian rugby environment.

How rugby has fallen off in Western Sydney is disappointing when you consider Parramatta won the Shute Shield in 85 & 86 against Randwick sides chock full of Wallabies.

 

[Gary Owen III]

Lindfield Juniors I believe is the largest junior club in the country with 500 players (from u6 to u18). There would be a least 10 to 20 schools in Australia with more than 500 players, and that would be before they started to form factions along religious lines to exert influence.

Mosman juniors had over 700 regos last year and Newport had over 600 regos. But I think some Qld clubs may be bigger.

 

[Fat Cat]

The discussion on this thread is starting to go around in circles now. Some of the ideas on the way forward seems to be agreed on by a number of people.

1. To progress we need to canvass people you know in the rugby hierarchy,
2. send submissions to the SJRU executive
3. get a majority number of like minded people on the SJRU executive

Although members the SJRU are extremely hard working and should be applauded for the time they put in, some of their personal agendas may differ from some of the people's on this thread, for example the executive member and his/her family may have come from a particular school system. Or 90% of the executive, who knows ?. So it would quite possibly not be in theirs or their kids best interests that they be excluded from village club rugby and the associated rep programs.

So if you really do want to impart change its time for us to put our hands up and get involved in numbers

PS big crowd at the Tahs, not ! we need to fix this.

 

[S'UP]

The discussion on this thread is starting to go around in circles now. Some of the ideas on the way forward seems to be agreed on by a number of people.

1. To progress we need to canvass people you know in the rugby hierarchy,
2. send submissions to the SJRU executive
3. get a majority number of like minded people on the SJRU executive

Although members the SJRU are extremely hard working and should be applauded for the time they put in, some of their personal agendas may differ from some of the people's on this thread, for example the executive member and his/her family may have come from a particular school system. Or 90% of the executive, who knows ?. So it would quite possibly not be in theirs or their kids best interests that they be excluded from village club rugby and the associated rep programs.


So if you really do want to impart change its time for us to put our hands up and get involved in numbers

PS big crowd at the Tahs, not ! we need to fix this.

All you need to do is tell me how we get involved, I've been on club (9 years) and district (4 years) committees, I've also been a manager at district level and at every turn you get blocked by the same people who you talk of above. I've stood for president and got blocked when 50 people turned up to vote, they hadn't been to a AGM in the 8 years at the club. But when their mate was challenged they came from everywhere.
It isn't as simple as just expressing your opinion and canvassing people, walls need to be broken down and you need massive support for that and a massive amount of time and unfortunately both of those are hard to come by. I do however think that everyone involved is very well intentioned. At club land most clubs are just fighting to stay open for business.

 

[Gary Owen III]

All you need to do is tell me how we get involved, I've been on club (9 years) and district (4 years) committees, I've also been a manager at district level and at every turn you get blocked by the same people who you talk of above. I've stood for president and got blocked when 50 people turned up to vote, they hadn't been to a AGM in the 8 years at the club. But when their mate was challenged they came from everywhere.
It isn't as simple as just expressing your opinion and canvassing people, walls need to be broken down and you need massive support for that and a massive amount of time and unfortunately both of those are hard to come by. I do however think that everyone involved is very well intentioned. At club land most clubs are just fighting to stay open for business.

S'UP, from what i hear you may get your chance. Word is that the current SJRU President has declared this his last year and no one has stepped forward to put their name in the hat as his successor.

Put your name down and you may yet be the Grand Poobah!!!

You could even join the committee this year as i know there are current 2014 vacancies (although the website still shows 2013 committee).

 

[Fat Cat]

I have had the same issue with being blocked and shut down years ago.

 

[beserker]

Mosman juniors had over 700 regos last year and Newport had over 600 regos. But I think some Qld clubs may be bigger.

So why penalise them? Mosman, with all that membership peters out at U16 normally 2 teams to U17 no team because of GPS. The $200 is a slap in the face. The club can get all the money it wants from The Duck (pub) and the BV (pub). Why doesn't the ARU support Mosman to help ensure a team in the U17's? Why not a reward system instead of a tax?