After reading from afar i would lke to throw my comments/ observations here- and no doubt some will be very strong with the attacks- so be it- sometimes the truth hurts.
In regards to the funding, band one got $12,000, Band two, $8,000, Band three, Nil. In regards to a post about the ladder positions and the funding, someone ask what Eastwood got- it wasnt band 1.They were a top 4 club in all grades ALL year- so there goes that theory.
In regards to clubs not knowing what the PRSP included- Crap or poor communication from front office to coaches and players. Information on this occured prior to the start of the comp or at worst the 1st couple of rounds. Clubs were informed in writing what the criteria is and had ample time to address any areas of concern. I understand that all clubs were visited by the ARU and had ample opportunity to ask questions of the process and the criteria regarding additional funding.Clubs need to look at themselves before blaming the ARU for all their misfortunes and lack of success. Simply pointing the bone at Uni , Manly etc just isnt a defence to why some clubs are poor on and off the field.
In regards to ARU not attending training or when they would turn up- clubs were given 21 days notice, if the date fell on the week of the bye then ask for the date to be moved.Not a defence sorry. With 12 clubs i am sure they would have been flexible. I know of at least 7 clubs where the ARU attended.
in regards to the ARC- has anyone asked the players what they thought? I know of one player who had to join RUPA( taken out of match payments-not a huge fee but still a fee) which essentially covered bugger all, lost 8 weeks of work as a tradesmen, got paid $6500 for the series( most tradies get more than that in the same period) got injured- RUPA did nothing to assist him and needles to say he no longer playing and the guy had ability. He isnt playing not because of the injury but because of the way he was treated by the keepers of the game at the time. When the player(s) were given a survey about the ARC, RUPA provided answers like- Slightly agree, agree, strongly agree. This left very little room for negative comments now does it. again ask the players. RUPA didnt represent these guys at all, just took the funds. 8 teams at 30 per squad , not big bucks but its a principle. BTW i support an ARC style system but would leave it to clubs and not the ridiculous Sydney Fleet Western Rams etc.
I mention the Fleet as a classic as to why the ARC failed. Uni, Randwick, Easts and i think 1 South's player having home games out of North Sydney Oval and they wonder why no one turned up. Transperecy also was questionable in the selection of players , coaches and management. I would use this as a promotion and relegation and have 8 teams , being the top 4 from Shute Shield the top 2 from QLD rugby, NSW country and a team from National Academy. The NSW Country and National Academy would be the only sides that will stay while the others would depend on results of the 1st grade side. run it a week after the competitions finish and at least the Academy kids will play rugby instead of holding tackle bags. NSW Country has a great history and should be showcased more, as long as they play home matches out of Newcatle( airport that can cater for travellers from intersate)
I would not support anything from the ACT as a stand alone as they currently do not support the national interests by making elite players run around in the local comp. Not in the best for the development of the game, especially when they do not develop a great deal anymore( no more Larkhams, Gregans, Roffs et al on the radar)
I know this sound all very negative but some of the contributors need to wake up and realise that for clubs to propser and survive they need to not only work friggin hard but friggin smart. They need to get out to the community and grab sponsors, members. If the sponsors and members are not there then realise that the area is not a rugby heartland- quite simple but sadly true.They need to be patient and grow the club- not try and focus solely on 1st grade. They need to be realistic about match payments, live within their means, meet the basic standards set out by the governing bodies( ARU- SRU- competition rules) but most of all be accountable to themselves and stop relying on hand outs, bail outs just to get out.
If you want a Shute Shield to be considered 3rd tier then the standards across some of the 12 clubs needs to be lifted but sadly that will not happen
