0
![Not allowed!](images/buttons/up_dis.png)
THIS year's Sydney club premiership is set to become the most ruthless and fiercely contested in its 108-year history with places in a mooted 2009 national super-series hinging on performances.
The Australian Rugby Union, having decided to terminate the Australian Rugby Championships just before Christmas after virtually no consultation with the stakeholders, still has not specified what, if anything, will take its place.
But so spectacularly did the ARC fulfil its primary role of exposing fringe Super 14 players to the realities of top-line professional rugby that it seems inevitable the ARU will set up a new, more economically viable competition to fill the void. And the betting, at least in Sydney, is that it will take the form of a super-club series.
NSW Rugby Union boss Arvid Petersen confirmed yesterday that while the status quo of a 12-team Sydney premiership deliberately had been maintained this year to await developments, clubs have been warned that massive change is coming.
"We've put the clubs on notice that there will be a shake-up," said Petersen.
"We're very open-minded about what those changes will be but we accept that some tough decisions have to be made.
"We've told all clubs that they have to demonstrate that they can perform on and off the field."
Several factors, including infrastructure, financing, junior numbers and player development will figure in any evaluation of which clubs might be selected for a super-series. Those clubs left behind will presumably wither in a fourth-tier suburban competition. But the only non-subjective in the equation will be premiership standings.
So desperate will clubs be to claw their way to the top of the ladder, where their survival chances presumably would be better, that incoming Australia coach Robbie Deans is certain to be confronted by a problem his predecessor John Connolly never had to face -- demands from Sydney clubs to release their Wallabies for premiership matches.
Although the NSWRU appears reconciled to the Darwinian realities of professional rugby, with only the strongest clubs surviving, Queensland remains fiercely committed to club rugby. QRU chairman Peter Lewis insists a super-club competition would be the death knell of the game.
"We will defend club rugby to the death," Lewis said.
"Otherwise, if we go down that track, we'll end up like American football, where players leave college and find that only the very best ones have the chance to continue playing with a professional franchise, with the rest dropping out."
But before the battle is fought to determine what will replace the ARC, the ARU is about to discover that the now-defunct competition still could come back to haunt it.
As part of the deal to terminate the competition, the ARU agreed to meet the ARC-related debts of the NSW and Queensland unions. It was obliged to do so anyway under formal agreements entered into when the competition was established under Gary Flowers' regime last year.
To date, however, the ARU has not fully paid those debts, around $135,000 in NSW's case, $150,000 in Queensland's.
And while Petersen and Lewis are holding their fire until senior ARU bosses return to work next week and are able to clarify their intentions, neither state official would rule out the possibility of legal action.
Victoria is in an even worse position, with the ARU having indicated to the VRU that it will have to pick up the non-budgeted debt of $500,000 incurred by the Melbourne Rebels in the ARC.
"Yes, the three states have been short-changed but we're waiting for the top people at the ARU to return to work to fully establish what the situation is," said Lewis.
Petersen also insisted the NSWRU would hold off on legally enforced mediation until the ARU's position was clarified but he said fairness had to be part of the process and it was not fair for a basically amateur union like Victoria to be left in the lurch.
VRU president Gary Grey said the ARU might have had a case for recouping costs from future revenues but, following the shock decision to axe the ARC, there would be no future revenue.
"We had pro rugby, now we don't have pro rugby so we have no way of generating that revenue," Grey said.
The Australian
Dear Lord, if you give us back Johnny Cash, we'll give you Justin Bieber.
Interesting article.
As discussed before, all this is chicken feed dollars for the ARU.
It is big money for you and me and for the Clubs but a drop in the bucket when it comes to the ARU meeting one of its primary objectives, player development.
"Bloody oath we did!"
Nathan Sharpe, Legend.
So the Sydney (& Qld) clubs didn't want a national competition to bridge the gap between club rugby & Super 14........but they're ok with a 'similar' competition that is exclusive to NSW & Qld? Are they scared of travel, timezone changes or the big bad wolf that lives in Perth?! It'd be incredibly ironic if those clubs that fought so hard for the demise of the ARC then became the first ones to fall by the wayside in 2009 with a super-club series!!!!!
And if the Eastern States had got behind the ARC & marketed it properly in their respective states maybe they wouldn't have such a shortfall for the ARC to make up!!!
CHEERLEADERS ROCK!!!
Unfortunately it won't be the same ones JK, well not the leaders of the fight anyway.
To be fair, having supplied around twenty five or more players to last years ARC you can understand Australia's oldest Club, Sydney University, wanting to compete under their own banner.
Unfortunately it will be the Clubs in the development areas such as Penrith, Parramatta, Gordon and Southern Districts that will fall by the wayside.
"Bloody oath we did!"
Nathan Sharpe, Legend.
And the primary tenet of the ARC 'development of the game' falls by the wayside so Sydney Uni can improve it's branding.
This 'Super Series' if it ever has a chance of succeeding must include at least one team from each province which plays super rugby. Otherwise it's a farce. THey can't expect RugbyWA to develop home grown players if the only leadup competition to the Super 14 is run on the other side of the country using players from 4 sydney clubs and 2 QLD clubs. Imagine the stink when all WA does is send 3 or 4 players a year to the eastern states, but completely fills it's playing ranks with players from East. That is an economically viable option for us, it costs just as much to hire a player whether you've developed them or not, all you have to do is win the bidding war. But if WA is not involved in the comp. We save all the development money for players from Academy level upwards. Club Rugby in WA dies, but the Force would probably do OK, because they have been forced into a position, where economic rationalism might work in their favour.
Shame my son plays junior rugby in WA.
C'mon the![]()
![]()
Whatever the format, I can't see how they'll be able to exclude Canberra and Perth. If the comp isn't national, then it is still just club rugby under a different name and there is no improvement in level. So, Sydney U v the Vikings or Spirit - messy.
I also wonder if the situation has been made clear to the first grade players in teams like Sydney U and Randwick. Any higher level comp has to be at least semi-pro, so if the club gets it's wish there will be no amateurs involved and all players will have to give up work for several months a year or go elsewhere.
It seems to me that some of the sydney clubs missed the point of the ARC in 'developing' rugby AND preserving the club rugby scene.
Now it looks like they want to chop up the club rugby scene for the sake of a few 'progressing' to a new level. Club rugby in WA will continue, whatever the easterners do.
Simon Poideven and the 'self-interest' brigade will likely be asking the ARU (and all S14 franchises) to subsidise any new super club comp as their piddling 2-300 spectators don't draw sufficient sponsorship.
As for the VRU - I'd being looking for a good QC to sue the Sydney clubs and NSWRU who destroyed the pro-comp they need to operate in order to recoup a first year loss. There has to something in a restraint of trade provision doesn't there?
WA Club rugby won't be affected by the ARU because they get shit from the ARU. Club rugby won't be affected much by RugbyWA cutting funding, because I think very little funding actually goes to the clubs. The difficulty is if RugbyWA (being the administrator of the comp) decides to monkey with the format. They could do some damage then. But I think they get more than they give in that area, so It's unlikely!
C'mon the![]()
![]()
I hate emus and the Galloping Greens are the best in the world
No comment!
Search for my previous posts, you'll be able to write my response yourself!
C'mon the![]()
![]()
I'm assuming the ARU publishes it's books, does anybody know where I can get a squiz at them?
Just happy to be here
rugby.com.au | ARU Annual Reports
only up to 2006 at this stage TEF
I just read on Crikey that O'Neill has said this week that the ARU is virtually bankrupt. If this is the case it explains a lot, and a number of people on the board have some explaining to do . Does anyone have any info on this?
I would have to say that would be the only possible way I could forgive some of the decisions that have been made at this point. I am not yet trusting enough to believe the ARU CFO I would want to hear it from an independent auditor. However, I think if bakruptcy IS the reason for a lot of this stuff....I'd be OK...Not happy, but OK.
Maybe this will prompt somebody to take the silver spoon out of NSW's mouth!
C'mon the![]()
![]()