Balmain Rugby Revolution

[Invictus]

At least they are aware that parts of Australia exist outside of Sydney...

[beige]

A story broke yesterday about Balmain Rugby Club’s involvement in a $1 million rugby revolution currently being developed. With that in mind here is some clarification on our plans and its ‘wrinkles’.

No mention of my beloved Chatswood Oval? But seriously, now that we know what they're actually proposing, it sounds pretty good. Assuming the ownership interest is actually there as they say it is of course.

[GIGS20]

I feel pretty upbeat about the idea, it seems to have a focus on getting something started and expanding it into the rugby states, didn't seem too patronizing of Melbourne and Perth and looked to build a product that's viable. All three better than what we have now, so let 'em run it I say!

[shasta]

I'm pretty lukewarm on this idea. One of the biggest problems with the ARC was that there was no connection of the franchises with the traditional club supporters in Sydney and Brisbane. This will still be a problem, unless it's going to be simply an exercise of awarding "franchises'' to the powerful Sydney and Brisbane clubs (+ one from Sydney Subbies I'd imagine) and leaving the rest of the premier clubs in the country struggling.

I firmly believe the way forward should include second xv matches at conference matches. One of the criticisms of that idea has been that it doesn't provide enough matches - 8 plus two semis and a final. This provides even less, unless or until it expands.

[Invictus]

I'm pretty lukewarm on this idea. One of the biggest problems with the ARC was that there was no connection of the franchises with the traditional club supporters in Sydney and Brisbane. This will still be a problem, unless it's going to be simply an exercise of awarding "franchises'' to the powerful Sydney and Brisbane clubs (+ one from Sydney Subbies I'd imagine) and leaving the rest of the premier clubs in the country struggling.

I firmly believe the way forward should include second xv matches at conference matches. One of the criticisms of that idea has been that it doesn't provide enough matches - 8 plus two semis and a final. This provides even less, unless or until it expands.

You are quite correct. The proposal is woefully inadequate from a player development perspective. At least someone from outside the blogsphere is thinking about the problem, I suppose. The "club rugby is fine" line from the ARU doesn't count as thought IMHO.

Some posters on G&GR were pretty scathing.

[Sheikh]

I'm pretty lukewarm on this idea. One of the biggest problems with the ARC was that there was no connection of the franchises with the traditional club supporters in Sydney and Brisbane. This will still be a problem, unless it's going to be simply an exercise of awarding "franchises'' to the powerful Sydney and Brisbane clubs (+ one from Sydney Subbies I'd imagine) and leaving the rest of the premier clubs in the country struggling.

I firmly believe the way forward should include second xv matches at conference matches. One of the criticisms of that idea has been that it doesn't provide enough matches - 8 plus two semis and a final. This provides even less, unless or until it expands.

What about not just at conference matches, but when the Force are in South Africa, why can't those players not on tour play another Australian Super 2nd XV? Of course, with 5 teams there will be one team to miss out each week, but with proper scheduling you should easily get 12 games in, maybe 16 if they over-run into pre-season or the finals.

Of course, needing a minimum of 44 players (plus injury cover) would require the ARU to abandon the 30-man squad list; maybe we can have our academy back?