0
ARU finances leave players unclear on future
Wayne Smith
The Australian
April 29, 2014 12:00AM
THE Australian Rugby Union’s contracting process has effect*ively stalled, with a dozen players *offered Wallabies contracts making no move to sign them, despite the lure of playing in the World Cup next year.
The harsh realities of Australian rugby’s dire financial position are starting to hit home, with players being made offers in some cases up to $100,000 lower than when they previously negotiated their existing contracts.
Although under the terms of the collective bargaining agreement, players are entitled to 26 per cent of player-generated revenue, the ARU at one point was overpaying on players’ salaries to the tune of 32 per cent. Such largesse is out of the question now, with the ARU battling to stay afloat for another 18 months until the new and hopefully improved SANZAR broadcast deal kicks in.
“The players are at the point where they can’t get their heads around what is being offered,” one Super Rugby coach told The Australian. “Do I think they’re all going to leave? No, because the lure of playing for the Wallabies, especially in a World Cup, is still a very strong (one).”
There is also the added uncertainty from the players’ perspective of not knowing precisely what manner of competition they will be playing in from 2016 or whether their Australian franchises will actually be able to pay them if SANZAR goes ahead with its plans to expand to a 17- or 18-team competition.
Research conducted for the Rugby Union Players Association by external consultants Global Media and Sports paints a gloomy picture of the financial impact of such a competition, most especially on the damage that would be caused to Australian franchises if they lost one local derby match every two seasons. That would entail a financial hit of about $1 million, which one Super Rugby chief executive yesterday estimated would make the difference between survival and bankruptcy.
However, RUPA chief executive Greg Harris believes players are not looking so far down the track at this point.
“That might form a small part of their thinking but mostly they’re saying to themselves, ‘there’s not enough money here … the money is better offshore’.”
Opportunities overseas, however, might not be as plentiful as many players believe. British clubs have a limit of two foreign players and even then to qualify they must have played Test football within the preceding 18 months. And most clubs have filled their rosters for next season.
The fear is that once the World Cup is over, there will be a stampede for the door if Australian rugby still is not in a position to match the European contract offers. Harris claimed the ARU might have no alternative, if it wants to field a competitive Test side, to taking “a more flexible approach” by abandoning its long-held position that only players who have competed in Super Rugby are eligible for Wallabies selection.
“At the end of the day, if they (the ARU) haven't got the money, they can't pay it,” said Harris.
“Maybe the solution is to set a quota of allowing, say, five overseas-based Australian players to be selected in the Wallabies at any one time.
“That way Australia gets to use these players at virtually no cost to itself. Instead of paying them hundreds of thousands of dollars, they only have to pay them the $10,000 Test match fee.
“The other battle Australian rugby has to brace itself for is if the NRL raises its salary cap to $7m, although at the moment we’re losing players to league not at the Test level but at schoolboy level.”
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spor...-1226898837554
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by The InnFORCEr
