http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=104372
The ARU today decided for a National rugby competition to run from July 28 to October 14 2007.
3 teams in NSW, 2 in Qld and 1 each in ACT, WA and Vic.
All I can say is, woohoo, and its about time.
Finally: New national Rugby competition!!!
-
the guy
- Silver
- Posts: 739
- Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 8:41 pm
- Location: Sydney, NSW
-
r3d_c01n
- Bronze
- Posts: 109
- Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 8:37 pm
- Location: Sydney
-
the guy
- Silver
- Posts: 739
- Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 8:41 pm
- Location: Sydney, NSW
What are you talking about. the Super 14 teams will remain as is.r3d_c01n wrote:That's so sh*t, does that mean that the NSW Waratahs and Queensland Reds are going to be broken up into little infidel teams?
This will lower the chance of an Australian team ever winning the Super 14! This will also lower salary payments since there are more teams... I think
But this does mean that instead of having our best players playing club rugby with Sydney University or whoever they will play a higher standard of domestic competition.
If Tier 1 is international test matches
Tier 2 is Internationl provincial comps (super 14)
Tier 3 is domestic comps
and Tier 4 is local club rugby.
All other Rugby powers have Tiers 1-4, however we go from 1-2 straight to 4.
The Reds, Tahs, Brumbies and Force will remain as they are, but they will be more competitive as their entire rosters will be exposed to year round elite competition.
If you look at the dates, it starts in July, Super 14 seasons finish in May.
-
Jeffles
- Platinum
- Posts: 9499
- Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2002 8:44 pm
- Location: The Jet Set Lounge - Henson Park
-
quidgybo
- Silver
- Posts: 831
- Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 9:50 pm
- Location: Dallas
Given the likelihood that the comp is going to run at an initial loss, I think it's a good first stab. In scope and ambition very similar to the birth of the A-League. That said, ignoring the financial questions for the moment, I think the comp is short at least two sides, perhaps more like four. At the minimum I think there should be a second WA side, probably a fourth NSW side (but not at the expense of the VIC side) and then beyond that an Adelaide side and another QLD side.
I think only one side for WA doesn't provide a big enough development base for the Force. With non Wallabies dropping back from the Super 14 to the domestic side, effectively the only positions you'll be developing additional players in are those positions already occupied by Wallabies. If the Force's fullback doesn't get selected for Australia and he drops back to the single domestic there is no opportunity for an alternative fullback to either lay down a challenge or learn the ropes. The first choice can grow complacent knowing he has no real challenger for his position and the S14 team is left with no obvious replacment should he end up on the sidelines either thru injury or retirement.
I'll be interested to see the distribution of sides in the power states. Will the NSWRU build its teams primarily on the Sydney clubs (joint ventures) or go for a wider geographic spread (eg. a Newcastle team and only two Sydney sides)? With only two teams in Queensland will they both be based in Brisbane (Ballymore?) or will one go north to Townsville? If the state unions go for the full court press and compete against League in as many markets as possible then the comp could really make an impact on the rival code.
On the SA side, I think the first one of Union or League that gets a foot into Adelaide will end up owning that city in a Rugby sense for many many years. Were I the ARU, I'd be giving serious thought to putting a team there real soon (ie. year two). Sure it'll run at a loss by so do most expansion sides. The Bears and Swans weren't exactly the hottest ticket in town for many years, now look where they are. Adelaide is an open invitation to jump ahead of the rival code and stake a big claim for a national future.
One thing I am suprised by is the lack of any mention of salary cap. Obvously a lot of players will be getting large salaries from the ARU and S14 sides but that is only going to cover a relative minority of players in a comp with 8 or more teams. While they can certainly bring in a cap later, it'll be a harder sell than if it were there in some form from day one.
Leigh.
I think only one side for WA doesn't provide a big enough development base for the Force. With non Wallabies dropping back from the Super 14 to the domestic side, effectively the only positions you'll be developing additional players in are those positions already occupied by Wallabies. If the Force's fullback doesn't get selected for Australia and he drops back to the single domestic there is no opportunity for an alternative fullback to either lay down a challenge or learn the ropes. The first choice can grow complacent knowing he has no real challenger for his position and the S14 team is left with no obvious replacment should he end up on the sidelines either thru injury or retirement.
I'll be interested to see the distribution of sides in the power states. Will the NSWRU build its teams primarily on the Sydney clubs (joint ventures) or go for a wider geographic spread (eg. a Newcastle team and only two Sydney sides)? With only two teams in Queensland will they both be based in Brisbane (Ballymore?) or will one go north to Townsville? If the state unions go for the full court press and compete against League in as many markets as possible then the comp could really make an impact on the rival code.
On the SA side, I think the first one of Union or League that gets a foot into Adelaide will end up owning that city in a Rugby sense for many many years. Were I the ARU, I'd be giving serious thought to putting a team there real soon (ie. year two). Sure it'll run at a loss by so do most expansion sides. The Bears and Swans weren't exactly the hottest ticket in town for many years, now look where they are. Adelaide is an open invitation to jump ahead of the rival code and stake a big claim for a national future.
One thing I am suprised by is the lack of any mention of salary cap. Obvously a lot of players will be getting large salaries from the ARU and S14 sides but that is only going to cover a relative minority of players in a comp with 8 or more teams. While they can certainly bring in a cap later, it'll be a harder sell than if it were there in some form from day one.
Leigh.
Last edited by quidgybo on Thu Jun 01, 2006 1:53 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
yob
- Platinum
- Posts: 8406
- Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2002 1:26 am
- Location: Czech Republic
In Adelaide, union has always been ahead of league - even before the world cup hype. I don't think a franchise for either code would alter this balance in the short-medium term.quidgybo wrote:On the SA side, I think the first one of Union or League that gets a foot into Adelaide will end up owning that city in a Rugby sense for many many years. Were I the ARU, I'd be giving serious thought to putting a team there real soon (ie. year two). Sure it'll run at a loss by so do most expansion sides. The Bears and Swans weren't exactly the hottest ticket in town for many years, now look where they are. Adelaide is an open invitation to jump ahead of the rival code and stake a big claim for a national future.
It's interesting that the rugby union grass roots funding in Adelaide is going to the outer southern suburbs - an area you'd expect to be targeted by league, owing to its working class demographic. Looks like a pre-emptive strategy to sweep the rug from under league, before league has stepped on it!
-
quidgybo
- Silver
- Posts: 831
- Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 9:50 pm
- Location: Dallas
I think what I'm trying to get at here is that support for both codes in Adelaide as it currently stands is so small as to be largely insignificant to the medium/long term outcome. One may be miles ahead of the other but the overwhelming majority of potential supports are still up for grabs. A team on the ground for one code in the absence of the other is likely to have a dramatic effect on that situation.yob wrote:In Adelaide, union has always been ahead of league - even before the world cup hype. I don't think a franchise for either code would alter this balance in the short-medium term.
So are you saying that League is just sort of leaning over the rug or that somehow it's levitating above it?Looks like a pre-emptive strategy to sweep the rug from under league, before league has stepped on it!
Leigh.
-
Simmo79
- Platinum
- Posts: 4626
- Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:21 pm
- Location: Canberra, at work, wasting your tax dollars...
It’ll be interesting to see how this plays out.
My impression is this league has been designed simply to give players something to do. It’s not been designed to give fans something to watch, which really should be the way that a club or a league should be organised around.
Football only works in Australia if it is a “product” that can be flogged to punters. Unless the players are already being paid by someone else (eg/ ARU, Super 14 contracts) rather than the clubs and RUs involved my prediction is that this will turn out to be a financial drain and won’t be able to survive as a stand alone league. It’ll need long term subsidy from the ARU, NSWRU etc.
My reasons for this impression are that it kind of seems like a half measure league – only 2 ½ months long. That’s the shortest for any professional football competition I’ve ever heard of. An incredibly long off-season – 9 ½ months. It doesn’t seem like maintaing fan interest is a priority.
It would probably work better on the frontiers (Adelaide, Melbourne) where the rugby supporter base is pretty much untapped, but in Sydney and Brisbane they’re trying to get more out of a supporter base that already has a 4 month Super 14 season, 4 months of Wallabies matches and existing loyalties to their clubs. The rugby fan base isn’t enormous (big, but not enormous), they’re typically more of the “event-going” AB demographic who aren’t going to be impressed by this half-measure league.
It’ll be starved for attention because the Rugby press will be concentrating on blowing the Wallabies successes or failures out of proportion at the time this competition’s season is running.
Plus of course every other football code is on at the same time (the last month of the NRL and AFL regular seasons plus their finals as well as the start of the A-League season) – honestly, they really couldn’t have picked the worst 2 months to run a 2 1/2 month season. Another reason to think fan interest is not a priority.
I just don’t see adding a 4th layer of Rugby being a success in Sydney or Brisbane. It’ll have novelty factor in the frontier states but that won’t stop it developing into a low key football league. And as a former fan of the NSL, I can categorically state that a low key national football league is destined for nothing more than to die a slow death.
So assuming that the Unions aren't about trying to establish a proper football league but just want to keep the second string players fit and in form, this is still a poor strategic move from Rugby. The money that will probably be sucked in by this comp would be better spent developing junior talent.
RU's long term problem is that they just don't have the same talent pool of the other football codes. Success depends on talent and in such a competitive environment the success of Australian S14 sides and the Wallabies will play a pretty strong role in keeping the game in the spotlight and keeping kids playing RU instead of RL, soccer or aussie rules.
My impression is this league has been designed simply to give players something to do. It’s not been designed to give fans something to watch, which really should be the way that a club or a league should be organised around.
Football only works in Australia if it is a “product” that can be flogged to punters. Unless the players are already being paid by someone else (eg/ ARU, Super 14 contracts) rather than the clubs and RUs involved my prediction is that this will turn out to be a financial drain and won’t be able to survive as a stand alone league. It’ll need long term subsidy from the ARU, NSWRU etc.
My reasons for this impression are that it kind of seems like a half measure league – only 2 ½ months long. That’s the shortest for any professional football competition I’ve ever heard of. An incredibly long off-season – 9 ½ months. It doesn’t seem like maintaing fan interest is a priority.
It would probably work better on the frontiers (Adelaide, Melbourne) where the rugby supporter base is pretty much untapped, but in Sydney and Brisbane they’re trying to get more out of a supporter base that already has a 4 month Super 14 season, 4 months of Wallabies matches and existing loyalties to their clubs. The rugby fan base isn’t enormous (big, but not enormous), they’re typically more of the “event-going” AB demographic who aren’t going to be impressed by this half-measure league.
It’ll be starved for attention because the Rugby press will be concentrating on blowing the Wallabies successes or failures out of proportion at the time this competition’s season is running.
Plus of course every other football code is on at the same time (the last month of the NRL and AFL regular seasons plus their finals as well as the start of the A-League season) – honestly, they really couldn’t have picked the worst 2 months to run a 2 1/2 month season. Another reason to think fan interest is not a priority.
I just don’t see adding a 4th layer of Rugby being a success in Sydney or Brisbane. It’ll have novelty factor in the frontier states but that won’t stop it developing into a low key football league. And as a former fan of the NSL, I can categorically state that a low key national football league is destined for nothing more than to die a slow death.
So assuming that the Unions aren't about trying to establish a proper football league but just want to keep the second string players fit and in form, this is still a poor strategic move from Rugby. The money that will probably be sucked in by this comp would be better spent developing junior talent.
RU's long term problem is that they just don't have the same talent pool of the other football codes. Success depends on talent and in such a competitive environment the success of Australian S14 sides and the Wallabies will play a pretty strong role in keeping the game in the spotlight and keeping kids playing RU instead of RL, soccer or aussie rules.
-
quidgybo
- Silver
- Posts: 831
- Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 9:50 pm
- Location: Dallas
Rugby's problem of course is it doesn't have another window. They have a issue in that they need somewhere to play the non-Wallaby players once the S14 has finished. Now either that can be in the Sydney and Brisbane club comps or it can be in some new comp but either way you'd want to keep professional players playing 25-30 quality matches per year. That means at least 12 weeks on top of a minimum 13 match S14 program. The S14 players become available at the end of May at the earliest and given the international scheduling commitments that really isn't possible for the ARU to change. Even with 12 weeks starting from the beginning of June whichever comp is used is always going to be fighting in the shadow of NRL/AFL finals countdown and the Wallabies local season.
If they play these S14 players in the existing comps then the national expansion and growth of the game in centres like Perth is hampered, if in a new comp then there's all the funding problems. I suppose the ARU's view is that although it knows it will probably run at a loss (at least until the second or third year when they strike a $60m seven year deal with Fox Sports), the benefits for the game in terms of national exposure and player development are worth it. Yes, it'll still live in the shadow of the other codes but the national league has a better chance of taking at least some of the limelight than does the Sydney comp or Brisbane comp. As for the season length, 12 weeks is only one week shy of the old S12 and three weeks short of the S14. They both seem to be accepted as real professional football comps.
For the ARU I really think it's all a case of dammed if you do, dammed if you don't. I find it hard to criticise them in that situation.
Leigh
If they play these S14 players in the existing comps then the national expansion and growth of the game in centres like Perth is hampered, if in a new comp then there's all the funding problems. I suppose the ARU's view is that although it knows it will probably run at a loss (at least until the second or third year when they strike a $60m seven year deal with Fox Sports), the benefits for the game in terms of national exposure and player development are worth it. Yes, it'll still live in the shadow of the other codes but the national league has a better chance of taking at least some of the limelight than does the Sydney comp or Brisbane comp. As for the season length, 12 weeks is only one week shy of the old S12 and three weeks short of the S14. They both seem to be accepted as real professional football comps.
For the ARU I really think it's all a case of dammed if you do, dammed if you don't. I find it hard to criticise them in that situation.
Leigh
-
quidgybo
- Silver
- Posts: 831
- Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 9:50 pm
- Location: Dallas
Rugby's problem of course is it doesn't have another window. They have a issue in that they need somewhere to play the non-Wallaby players once the S14 has finished. Now either that can be in the Sydney and Brisbane club comps or it can be in some new comp but either way you'd want to keep professional players playing 25-30 quality matches per year. That means at least 12 weeks on top of a minimum 13 match S14 program. The S14 players become available at the end of May at the earliest and given the international scheduling commitments that really isn't possible for the ARU to change. Even with 12 weeks starting from the beginning of June whichever comp is used is always going to be fighting in the shadow of NRL/AFL finals countdown and the Wallabies local season.
If they play these S14 players in the existing comps then the national expansion and growth of the game in centres like Perth is hampered, if in a new comp then there's all the funding problems. I suppose the ARU's view is that although it knows it will probably run at a loss (at least until the second or third year when they strike a $60m seven year deal with Fox Sports), the benefits for the game in terms of national exposure and player development are worth it. Yes, it'll still live in the shadow of the other codes but the national league has a better chance of taking at least some of the limelight than does the Sydney comp or Brisbane comp. As for the season length, 12 weeks is only one week shy of the old S12 and three weeks short of the S14. They both seem to be accepted as real professional football comps.
For the ARU I really think it's all a case of dammed if you do, dammed if you don't. I find it hard to criticise them in that situation.
Leigh
If they play these S14 players in the existing comps then the national expansion and growth of the game in centres like Perth is hampered, if in a new comp then there's all the funding problems. I suppose the ARU's view is that although it knows it will probably run at a loss (at least until the second or third year when they strike a $60m seven year deal with Fox Sports), the benefits for the game in terms of national exposure and player development are worth it. Yes, it'll still live in the shadow of the other codes but the national league has a better chance of taking at least some of the limelight than does the Sydney comp or Brisbane comp. As for the season length, 12 weeks is only one week shy of the old S12 and three weeks short of the S14. They both seem to be accepted as real professional football comps.
For the ARU I really think it's all a case of dammed if you do, dammed if you don't. I find it hard to criticise them in that situation.
Leigh
-
Egan
- Platinum
- Posts: 14959
- Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2002 1:14 am
- Location: Perth
- Contact:
Some brief points
The three NSW teams have been rumoured on ABC News to be representing Western Sydney - Parramatta Stadium seems the obvious contender, Northern Sydney(Probably Gosford I reckon will get that gig), Southern Sydney - Kogarah's upgrade puts that in contention I reckon...well the obvious choice. .
The Two QLD teams
Brisbane and the Gold Coast.
Suncorp and Carrara (then new Gold Coast Stadium when built)
Its also rumoured that ABC have sought the rights to telecast all games of this new Rugby Competition.
Looking forward to more information...
Will be happy to watch more Rugby in the Force off-season
The three NSW teams have been rumoured on ABC News to be representing Western Sydney - Parramatta Stadium seems the obvious contender, Northern Sydney(Probably Gosford I reckon will get that gig), Southern Sydney - Kogarah's upgrade puts that in contention I reckon...well the obvious choice. .
The Two QLD teams
Brisbane and the Gold Coast.
Suncorp and Carrara (then new Gold Coast Stadium when built)
Its also rumoured that ABC have sought the rights to telecast all games of this new Rugby Competition.
Looking forward to more information...
Will be happy to watch more Rugby in the Force off-season
-
Egan
- Platinum
- Posts: 14959
- Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2002 1:14 am
- Location: Perth
- Contact:
-
AndrewM
- Bronze
- Posts: 351
- Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 1:59 am
I find this all very confusing.
I assume that the WA team will consist of members of the Force squad..fair enough.
The WA Rugby calendar will now look like this
Super 14 (Feb-May) - Western Force
Perth Home Building Society Comp (Apr - Sept)(amateur)
Australian Rugby Shield (Apr-May) - Perth Gold (amateur, but includes WF Acadamy members?)
This National Competition (Jul-Oct)(professional, semi-professional??)
I would have thought that two WA teams - nominally North and South would have been a reasonable proposition, drawn from Western Force, Academy and Perth Gold players (hmm would 60 odd players be enough?), although I guess that for the Amateur players, the travel required would probably be too demanding. Following this train of thought, it would be reasonable to expect Qld to have 3 teams given their much larger player base?
What puzzles me from a WA perspective is if this is supposed to be 'the missing link' then there is really very little avenue to introduce new talent into this higher standard comp as surely most talent will come from the WF and associated Acadamy?
I assume that the WA team will consist of members of the Force squad..fair enough.
The WA Rugby calendar will now look like this
Super 14 (Feb-May) - Western Force
Perth Home Building Society Comp (Apr - Sept)(amateur)
Australian Rugby Shield (Apr-May) - Perth Gold (amateur, but includes WF Acadamy members?)
This National Competition (Jul-Oct)(professional, semi-professional??)
I would have thought that two WA teams - nominally North and South would have been a reasonable proposition, drawn from Western Force, Academy and Perth Gold players (hmm would 60 odd players be enough?), although I guess that for the Amateur players, the travel required would probably be too demanding. Following this train of thought, it would be reasonable to expect Qld to have 3 teams given their much larger player base?
What puzzles me from a WA perspective is if this is supposed to be 'the missing link' then there is really very little avenue to introduce new talent into this higher standard comp as surely most talent will come from the WF and associated Acadamy?
-
AndrewM
- Bronze
- Posts: 351
- Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 1:59 am
From the WA Rugby Union weekly newsletter..
NEW NATIONAL (POST SUPER 14) RUGBY COMPETITION FOR 2007
The Australian Rugby Union has announced plans for a new national eight-team competition designed to improve the Wallabies and Super 14 teams and provide more opportunities for outstanding club rugby players.
The competition, to run next year from July 28 to October 14, will comprise three teams from NSW, two from Queensland and one each from ACT, Victoria and Western Australia .
The decision was taken at the end of a three-day workshop in Sydney by the game's national stakeholders, including players, administrators, coaches and referees.
Representing RugbyWA and the Emirates Western Force were RugbyWA Chairman Geoff Stooke, Chief Executive Peter O’Meara, EWF Head Coach John Mitchell and, on behalf of the players, John Welborn.
Please find below an extract from an email sent by Geoff Stooke to the RugbyWA Board and Management.
Dear All,
The workshop had a fairly demanding schedule working from 8.00am – 8.00pm on Monday and 8.00am – 6.00pm on Tuesday and Wednesday. There were no breaks and lunch, morning tea and afternoon tea were taken while continuing to work. Mobile phones had to be surrendered at the door!
After two days I had grave doubts anything would be achieved. The process had seemed to have been hijacked by the Sydney and Brisbane clubs and much of the discussion surrounded their needs rather than the Wallabies, Super 14 teams and elite players.
I am not sure if some were just worn out by the process but on the last day consensus on most issues was reached. Concessions were given by most stakeholders and the end result was a very workable competition that we are sure will serve Australian and Western Australia rugby well.
Interestingly, for years RugbyWA has had major concerns regarding the provision of Premier rugby funding to NSW and QLD. What became apparent during the workshop was that if this funding was withdrawn club rugby in Sydney and Brisbane would collapse. This would be a disaster for Australian rugby and would also not assist RugbyWA. Accordingly, we supported the continuation of the funding to those states. In reality it is ‘rugby heartland’ funding and not simply Premier rugby funding.
RugbyWA now has a team in a competition that will provide elite rugby opportunities to contracted players who secure minimal game time in Super 14 and it will also provide a pathway for the ‘aspirational’ players from our academy and club rugby.
Hmm..still got a few questions
NEW NATIONAL (POST SUPER 14) RUGBY COMPETITION FOR 2007
The Australian Rugby Union has announced plans for a new national eight-team competition designed to improve the Wallabies and Super 14 teams and provide more opportunities for outstanding club rugby players.
The competition, to run next year from July 28 to October 14, will comprise three teams from NSW, two from Queensland and one each from ACT, Victoria and Western Australia .
The decision was taken at the end of a three-day workshop in Sydney by the game's national stakeholders, including players, administrators, coaches and referees.
Representing RugbyWA and the Emirates Western Force were RugbyWA Chairman Geoff Stooke, Chief Executive Peter O’Meara, EWF Head Coach John Mitchell and, on behalf of the players, John Welborn.
Please find below an extract from an email sent by Geoff Stooke to the RugbyWA Board and Management.
Dear All,
The workshop had a fairly demanding schedule working from 8.00am – 8.00pm on Monday and 8.00am – 6.00pm on Tuesday and Wednesday. There were no breaks and lunch, morning tea and afternoon tea were taken while continuing to work. Mobile phones had to be surrendered at the door!
After two days I had grave doubts anything would be achieved. The process had seemed to have been hijacked by the Sydney and Brisbane clubs and much of the discussion surrounded their needs rather than the Wallabies, Super 14 teams and elite players.
I am not sure if some were just worn out by the process but on the last day consensus on most issues was reached. Concessions were given by most stakeholders and the end result was a very workable competition that we are sure will serve Australian and Western Australia rugby well.
Interestingly, for years RugbyWA has had major concerns regarding the provision of Premier rugby funding to NSW and QLD. What became apparent during the workshop was that if this funding was withdrawn club rugby in Sydney and Brisbane would collapse. This would be a disaster for Australian rugby and would also not assist RugbyWA. Accordingly, we supported the continuation of the funding to those states. In reality it is ‘rugby heartland’ funding and not simply Premier rugby funding.
RugbyWA now has a team in a competition that will provide elite rugby opportunities to contracted players who secure minimal game time in Super 14 and it will also provide a pathway for the ‘aspirational’ players from our academy and club rugby.
Hmm..still got a few questions