• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Super Rugby Expansion in Australia. Success or failure?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bowside

Bowside

Peter Johnson (47)
James Buchanan said:
That's ridiculous. All this provincial parochialism recently has been complete nonsense. As long as there are enough players in Australia to support 5 Super Rugby teams, then there is a place for those 5 Rugby teams. This is not State of Origin, but playing for a professional team. Yes, it would be desirable to have further players being injected from Victoria, WA and even SA but ultimately there is one large pool which all the teams draw upon.
Click to expand...

I agree to an extent, but I dont think you can say a province has been properly successful until they win using mostly players they developed. The Brumbies have been successful in the past, and have done so with a mix of local stars, and unwanted expats from QLD and NSW. In the short to medium term I think this is the best situation the expansion teams can hope for. The local players add to the spirit of the contest, and give the team legitimacy.

Sure I want them to be successful, but at the end of the day the rebels and force (and the ARU) need to remember they are expansion teams first and foremost, and they can not simply be propped up with imports forever, especially if their success comes at the cost of QLD or NSW who developed the players in the first place. But my 'provincial parochialism' only go's so far, I still like to see the 5 best players in the country all having a starting spot.
 
Finsbury Girl

Finsbury Girl

Trevor Allan (34)
James Buchanan said:
That's ridiculous. All this provincial parochialism recently has been complete nonsense. As long as there are enough players in Australia to support 5 Super Rugby teams, then there is a place for those 5 Rugby teams. This is not State of Origin, but playing for a professional team. Yes, it would be desirable to have further players being injected from Victoria, WA and even SA but ultimately there is one large pool which all the teams draw upon.
Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree. If we take a very basic premise that what the ARU is trying to do is spread the game of rugby, then we should expect more player participation and an expansion of club rugby, not only in player numbers but in quality. An expanded pool of players should provide at the very least, the basis of a representative/professional team and with time, be able to stand on its own two feet in terms of player development.

Now, how many local products are on offer in these 'growth' areas of the ACT and WA, bearing in mind the ACT has had a "super" team since 1996, WA since 2006 ? (Let's ignore Victoria for a moment, they've just started so let's give the VRU the benefit of the doubt).

I will give the ACT some leeway in that their population is reasonably small and at least some players have come through the ranks, though nowhere near enough to sustain a local rep side. However Perth has what, 1.5m compared to about 2 in the BrisVegas connurbation? What are the returns from this generous investment from the ARU? What has been the cost per capita?

Let's also consider the fact that Qld is a MUNGO state and rugby is a minority sport. By any comparble factors vis a vis the underdog minority sport vs entrenched majority sport (as with WA with aerial ping pong), Qld (and NSW for that matter) has fared significantly better in terms of not only general player participation but producing a sufficient quantity of professional players. Indeeed their ranks have been continually decimated by the expansion.

So until this siuation has changed, the experiments conducted by the ARU can only ever be considered failures and expensive ones at that.
 
Bowside

Bowside

Peter Johnson (47)
I dont think that is a fair assessment. ACT had some great success and has produced a solid stream of wallabies since its inception.

WARU has only really been at it for a few years, add to that the fact that their rugby culture was no where near what ACT's was back in 1996, I think its fair to say that while the production line has not really started ticking over just yet, it will come in the future. To be fair on the force they have been instrumental in developing a few players who might not have got a run had it not been for their existence.

I do think that in the interest of growing the game in the west, if a player signs with the force they should have to play all their club rugby in WA comp. Ditto the Rebels and Brumbies. 5 Strong club comps is crucial to the establishment of a national code.
 
Brumbies Guy

Brumbies Guy

John Solomon (38)
Matt Giteau, Peter Kimlin, Julian Salvi, Jack Lam, Tyrone Smith, Anthony Fainga'a, Saia Fainga'a, Colby Fainga'a, Robbie Coleman, Phoenix Battye.. there's 10 current Super players who are ACT juniors off the top of my head, I'm sure there might be a couple more around. I don't think that's too bad considering our relative population and junior participation numbers. A school like Joey's in Sydney would go close to having more teams in a school aged division than we'd have teams in the our equivalent competition combined.
 
Scotty

Scotty

David Codey (61)
FG,

NSW and Qld have a 100 year start on WA. You can't compare them.

I would expect the criticism is more fairly directed to the ARU. Perhaps they should be spending more on grass roots in developing areas (like we all know the AFL does very well).
 
Aussie D

Aussie D

Dick Tooth (41)
Brumbies Guy said:
Matt Giteau, Peter Kimlin, Julian Salvi, Jack Lam, Tyrone Smith, Anthony Fainga'a, Saia Fainga'a, Colby Fainga'a, Robbie Coleman, Phoenix Battye.. there's 10 current Super players who are ACT juniors off the top of my head, I'm sure there might be a couple more around. I don't think that's too bad considering our relative population and junior participation numbers. A school like Joey's in Sydney would go close to having more teams in a school aged division than we'd have teams in the our equivalent competition combined.
Click to expand...
Since when has Manly been a part of the ACT? The rest of them are definitely ACT produced.
 
Gnostic

Gnostic

Mark Ella (57)
In this as in most other things in Oz it is ridiculous that we expect a single province to produce and support itself with players. The majority of the population lives on the east coast with an inordinate amount in the Sydney basin. Along with the 'Rugby Schools', the majority of which are in NSW and Qld metro areas.

My point is that due to these facts statistics most of the player will come from these areas, regardless of where the Super Teams are based. I differ on this point from many of my friends but I believe that Oz needs 5 teams to achieve the critical mass of professional players needed to support the Wallabies at a high enough level. The days when we could make a RWC team from the 50 odd high standard players at two provinces such as NSW or Qld are gone. As proof of the benefits of having more teams lets look at the Lock position. Last year we had Sharpe as the only really test class forward and Deans returned to Chisholm, yet again. Last year we saw the emergence of Simmons and Douglas as contenders. They have continued and this year Wykes has finally stepped up. In addition the Melbourne outlet has allowed the emergence of Hugh Pyle, along with the development of Al Campbell. If we didn't have the Force and Melbourne Oz Rugby would only have Douglas, Mumm, Horwill, Simmons, Chisholm and one or two others to choose from. I doubt that Wykes, Pyle or Campbell would be there with sufficient exposure to top flight Rugby to step up to test level.
 
darkhorse

darkhorse

Darby Loudon (17)
There's no doubt the reds have suffered at the hands of expansion. Although this time round it seems the tahs and the force will have it worse.

However, if we don't expand the only prospect is a continued shrinkage of market share and therefore less quality players in super rugby. More teams means more supporters which equals higher participation numbers and also more money for development of the grassroots.
 
qwerty51

qwerty51

Stirling Mortlock (74)
The thing is, imo for the Tahs and Force it was anyone but Beale and JOC (James O'Connor). I wouldn't have cared if they took anyone else but they took the most important players to each franchise.
 
Gnostic

Gnostic

Mark Ella (57)
qwerty51 said:
The thing is, imo for the Tahs and Force it was anyone but Beale and JOC (James O'Connor). I wouldn't have cared if they took anyone else but they took the most important players to each franchise.
Click to expand...

QWERTY, even as an ex-back that is bullshit. Without the pigs the backs have no ball to do anything. Pocock is the most important player in the Force equal with Sharpe. England showed for many years you can play without backs quite effectively if you have the right coaching and tactics. I am yet to see a team that is able to play without a pack that can get at least parity no matter how good their backs are.
 
qwerty51

qwerty51

Stirling Mortlock (74)
Gnostic said:
I am yet to see a team that is able to play without a pack that can get at least parity no matter how good their backs are.
Click to expand...

Wallabies...

I fully understand how important forwards are, in fact I was going to say not including Pocock, Sharpe, TPN etc. but I meant it in the play-making sense, that those two players are so critical to each of their teams that just about everything is run through them - as well as goal kicking.
 
Gnostic

Gnostic

Mark Ella (57)
qwerty51 said:
Wallabies...

I fully understand how important forwards are, in fact I was going to say not including Pocock, Sharpe, TPN etc. but I meant it in the play-making sense, that those two players are so critical to each of their teams that just about everything is run through them - as well as goal kicking.
Click to expand...


That is a myth QWERTY. Whenever the Wallabies have been successful the Wallabies have had a dominant or at least comparable forward pack with the best sides in the world. The 1991 RWC side was the best forward pack in the World for four years until the end of 1994. The 1998-2002 pack was able to dominate in a few games against the ABs and regularly beat the Bok and England. Since then we haven't had an effective forward pack and even with some truly gifted backs have struggled.
 
Slim 293

Slim 293

Stirling Mortlock (74)
Finsbury Girl...

I believe the Reds alone have three Canberra juniors...

There were also 3 last year and the Reds have traded one Canberra prop for another...

There's also a Fijian who came via Canberra...

They also have one WA lock...

Geez... Can't they produce their own talent?!
 
Aussie D

Aussie D

Dick Tooth (41)
Slim 293 said:
Finsbury Girl...

I believe the Reds alone have three Canberra juniors...

There were also 3 last year and the Reds have traded one Canberra prop for another...

There's also a Fijian who came via Canberra...

They also have one WA lock...

Geez... Can't they produce their own talent?!
Click to expand...

Radike Samo went to Canberra from the Brisbane club competition. How many players from Queensland are in the Brumbies squad?
 
Slim 293

Slim 293

Stirling Mortlock (74)
Aussie D said:
Radike Samo went to Canberra from the Brisbane club competition. How many players from Queensland are in the Brumbies squad?
Click to expand...

My bad...

Point being...

ACT produces a significantamount of players... Players move around...

Big deal...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top