Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 80

Thread: JO'N - 'This is a long-haul turnaround … there is no short-term fix'

  1. #16
    Veteran TOCC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    QLD
    Posts
    3,597
    vCash
    5000000
    Quote Originally Posted by AndyS View Post
    Yes. You can only compare competitions with similar structures, so the NRL could be compared to the AFL in that they are regional club competitions with a national footprint. You could also compare them with the A-league and the ARC as was, but not a state based competition like the Sheffield Shield. You certainly can't compare the overall structure of an internationally focused sport like Union with that of domestically focused sports. It is a nonsense, as are any supposed comforting conclusions drawn. Might as well compare Australian baseball and Australian cricket.

    Alternatively you can compare within a specific context. How does Union compare on the international stage - pretty much murders the NRL and AFL. How does it compare domestically - piss poor. Not a problem assuming that you don't need a domestic presence, but if you are cash strapped, tied to a single source of income, with no FTA presence, getting hosed at the box office, with mutinous sponsors, limited marketing opportunities and routinely losing young players to competing codes....
    it also needs to be recognised the there are more afl players in victoria then there are rugby players in australia

    its interesting that you listed all those issues, because if you compare them to the reasons why union went professional to start with, its actually doing pretty well

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  2. #17
    Veteran beige's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    4,515
    vCash
    5000000
    Quote Originally Posted by AndyS View Post
    Yes. You can only compare competitions with similar structures, so the NRL could be compared to the AFL in that they are regional club competitions with a national footprint. You could also compare them with the A-league and the ARC as was, but not a state based competition like the Sheffield Shield. You certainly can't compare the overall structure of an internationally focused sport like Union with that of domestically focused sports. It is a nonsense, as are any supposed comforting conclusions drawn. Might as well compare Australian baseball and Australian cricket.
    You're arguing that the ARC had a similar structure to the AFL and NRL? Yeah, good luck with that. In that case, you might as well compare it the NBL and the old Australian Baseball League then - both of which collapsed under their own weight.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  3. #18
    Legend Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    5,259
    vCash
    5100000
    Yes, I am. In fact, many of the same locations as the NRL. The comparison wasn't success, it was structure and each competition was suburban/regional domestic teams playing home and away within Australia. The size and duration of the comps are different, but the structure is basically the same.

    When the NRL creates a competition pitting each of the states against NZ, PNG and any other comers, or the AFL revives and expands the SOO series and introduces some international sides, and both shut down their professional domestic competitions, then we can compare the result with Super Rugby.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  4. #19
    Champion Contributor chook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    NSW
    Posts
    2,042
    vCash
    5000000
    The ARC had merit but spewing cash really sucked. A case of running before learning to walk.

    No use having a legit 3rd tier comp nationally until a critical mass of players is reached. Start small and local and build the interest in city comps, get into the western suburbs of Sydney where there are a heap of talented young kids who now are being hunted by A=FL and NRL and even football are talking about having another Sydney team. The only reason that would happen is because of population.

    Don't know about what areas are growing in Perth......?

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Laura Force Addict v Chook scrabble-off on Facebook: laura & Force Addict 0 | chook 9


    Gigsa made me do it



    "He who conquers others is strong; he who conquers himself is mighty." – Lao Tzu

  5. #20
    Veteran beige's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    4,515
    vCash
    5000000
    When has Australia ever had a professional domestic rugby competition to even shut down? Our professional players have only and will only ever be Super Rugby players, any version of the ARC will only ever be a semi-professional support competition, so any comparison with the NRL and AFL when people are trying to talk it up is quite simply ridiculous.

    I'm all for people arguing the case for the/an ARC but please maintain some perspective when doing so.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  6. #21
    Veteran Sheikh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    4,894
    vCash
    28860136
    Quote Originally Posted by chook View Post
    The ARC had merit but spewing cash really sucked. A case of running before learning to walk.

    No use having a legit 3rd tier comp nationally until a critical mass of players is reached. Start small and local and build the interest in city comps, get into the western suburbs of Sydney where there are a heap of talented young kids who now are being hunted by A=FL and NRL and even football are talking about having another Sydney team. The only reason that would happen is because of population.

    Don't know about what areas are growing in Perth......?
    The ARC was spewing cash because all of the start-up costs were considered against the one year of operation (rather than over three years, which is common), it had very little sponsorship and the teams were acting like Super 14 teams going on extended tours and staying with huge retinues in hotels. If the ARC gets re-started they have to sort out costs.

    And you can't wait for enough players in each area before starting the ARC because you need the ARC to generate the interest to get the players. At the moment, WA or NSW school-boys can watch AFL or NRL on FTA. There are local teams playing in the national competition and they can see a progression from playing in school to local clubs, academies and the NRL/AFL. In rugby the progression is broken because there are spots for 10-20 players each year in the Super 14 academies. But give them the opportunity with a 8-10 team national competition and the chance to then go on to play internationally (which AFL lacks and NRL only does laughably) and watch them sign up.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  7. #22
    Legend Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    5,259
    vCash
    5100000
    You are missing the point, beige. What JO'N said is that the AFL and NRL (with their competition structures) are supported by state based semi-pro/amateur comps, and Super Rugby (with its competition structure) is supported by state based amateur rugby, therefore we must be on the right track. I just don't think you can compare an international professional competition with a domestic professional competition. If you could, then the ACB has clearly got it all wrong and the Test team should be underpinned by District Cricket (putting Jargs on the brink of selection).

    If he is right and the AFL/NRL structure (and associated success) can apply to Rugby, then logically the Super structure could equally work for the other codes. So if the NRL or AFL made the changes as above with only the VFA/WAFL to support them, would it all be good? If not, how are the structures, pros and cons in any way comparable?

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  8. #23
    Veteran beige's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    4,515
    vCash
    5000000
    And I don't think you can compare the ARC with a domestic professional competition either.

    See Sheik's arguments I can live with because they're actually based on reality and genuine concerns about the development of the game rather than spurious analogies, unrealistic assumptions and anti-John O'Neill invective.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  9. #24
    Legend Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    5,259
    vCash
    5100000
    Quote Originally Posted by beige View Post
    And I don't think you can compare the ARC with a domestic professional competition either.
    And I think you can. They are at least like-for-like in terms of structure and objective, even if the AFL/NRL are nothing more than the example of how it can be done successfully. Doesn't mean the ARC can emulate the size and reach, but there would have to be lessons that could be learnt. At even the most superficial level, things I would take out of a comparison would be:
    - the importance of a FTA broadcasting deal in terms of brand recognition, attracting supporters, media coverage, sponsors etc
    - the importance of effective and constant promotion
    - the need to connect to the underpinning amateur competitions (so much easier for a domestic competition than an international one)
    - the opportunity to attempt an administrative structure to suit Australian conditions alone, without also having to accommodate international partners
    - the advantages offered by being able to adopt whatever governing laws desired, without being hostage to endless trials and veto by others

    There would doubtless be many others, and some may also have passing relevance to Super Rugby, but there is direct relevance to any domestic competition at whatever level.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  10. #25
    Veteran TOCC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    QLD
    Posts
    3,597
    vCash
    5000000
    the ARC was a example of the ARU spending beyond there means, why not progressively develop the competition rather then diving in the deep end, minimise the initial costs whilst developing a profile for the compeition which is only going help attract sponsors and fans further dow the track.

    The ARC was a good idea, but Gary Flowers went about the wrong way of setting it up, he completely alienated the Brisbane and Sydney rugby communities by setting up new teams with no historical or tribal links. Now, its easy to sit over there in Perth and say 'tough luck', but its the Brisbane and Sydney rugby communities carry the game in Australia, by alienating them they were only ever going to head down the path of failure.

    The concept of providing a semi-professional rugby tournament was a good one, the way they went about setting it up wreaked of amateurism and bad management.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  11. #26
    Veteran beige's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    4,515
    vCash
    5000000
    Quote Originally Posted by AndyS View Post
    And I think you can. They are at least like-for-like in terms of structure
    I still don't agree with that statement but I actually agree with the rest of that post.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  12. #27
    Legend Court Reporter
    Contributor
    James's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Bridgetown, WA
    Posts
    6,103
    vCash
    20000
    Quote Originally Posted by AndyS View Post
    Provided SA isn't that attached to the $100M they get for the CC and NZ decides the ANZ cup is surplus to requirements.
    Yeah so S18 vs S15 = 4 extra games. If you look at the Currie Cup there are only 5 competitive teams and those are the 5 with Super 14 franchises. If rugby's fortunes have a bit of a turn around I'd be surprised if SA wouldn't allow a bit of overlap. It would ensure competitiveness from all of the Currie Cup sides (and surely a competitive comp is better than one thats is constantly a blow out against the likes of the Griquas or the Cavaliers or whoever).

    Its worth thinking about anyway.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast.

  13. #28
    Champion Contributor chook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    NSW
    Posts
    2,042
    vCash
    5000000
    Quote Originally Posted by Sheikh View Post

    And you can't wait for enough players in each area before starting the ARC because you need the ARC to generate the interest to get the players. At the moment, WA or NSW school-boys can watch AFL or NRL on FTA. There are local teams playing in the national competition and they can see a progression from playing in school to local clubs, academies and the NRL/AFL. In rugby the progression is broken because there are spots for 10-20 players each year in the Super 14 academies. But give them the opportunity with a 8-10 team national competition and the chance to then go on to play internationally (which AFL lacks and NRL only does laughably) and watch them sign up.
    Well that makes no sense at all, its a chicken/ egg scenario. You need the player base surely, the foundations, if you will. As good as the ARC was ( despite the rockstar lifestyle they led) put that aside until later. Get the district teams stronger and promoted highly in growth areas.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Laura Force Addict v Chook scrabble-off on Facebook: laura & Force Addict 0 | chook 9


    Gigsa made me do it



    "He who conquers others is strong; he who conquers himself is mighty." – Lao Tzu

  14. #29
    Veteran Sheikh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    4,894
    vCash
    28860136
    I disagree, Chook.

    There are enough players currently playing in state-based competitions to fill the spots on 8-10 teams. That was shown by the ARC. The level of play in the ARC wasn't Super 14 level, and might not have been much better than Shute Shield level, but that was because you were building teams from scratch of players unfamiliar with each other. Any new competition would undergo the same problems. But the second year would be better - players/combinations become more familiar, unsuccessful players are dropped back to state comps and new talents brought in.

    The problem with Rugby in Australia isn't the number of players (well not the main problem), it's that so few players regularly play to a high standard.

    If there were an ARC-type comp with 10 starting hookers, would the Wallabies have to experiment with converting Pek during a tour?

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  15. #30
    Veteran TOCC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    QLD
    Posts
    3,597
    vCash
    5000000
    Quote Originally Posted by Sheikh View Post
    I disagree, Chook.

    There are enough players currently playing in state-based competitions to fill the spots on 8-10 teams. That was shown by the ARC. The level of play in the ARC wasn't Super 14 level, and might not have been much better than Shute Shield level, but that was because you were building teams from scratch of players unfamiliar with each other. Any new competition would undergo the same problems. But the second year would be better - players/combinations become more familiar, unsuccessful players are dropped back to state comps and new talents brought in.

    The problem with Rugby in Australia isn't the number of players (well not the main problem), it's that so few players regularly play to a high standard.

    If there were an ARC-type comp with 10 starting hookers, would the Wallabies have to experiment with converting Pek during a tour?
    that still doesnt solve the issue that these teams have no foundations in the Sydney/Brisbane regions, which i believe is one of the points that Chook was getting at, correct me if im wrong chook but i believe that we see the whole 'ARC' issue from a brisbane/sydney view point where most rugby fans have close affiliations to there current clubs.

    I have said it before and il say it again, you cant alienate the clubs in Brisbane and Sydney, especially Sydney because they are larger and better established. Australia Rugby has such a small base that by smiting one part of that landscape you are inexplicably damaging your chance to suceed.

    Imagine how the ARC would have alternatively gone if we had of seen the sydney teams given the license as to how they were to proceed, something along the lines of giving each club a vote as to how they should proceed, not everyone would be happy but at least there would have been a majority split. We could have had clubs agreeing to cooperate rather then been forced to offer up there players.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. TWF Wear - Part 2
    By Darren in forum Site News, Suggestions and Troubles
    Replies: 112
    Last Post: 08-09-10, 19:39
  2. Rising Star Brown in for long haul
    By jargan83 in forum Western Force
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 01-02-09, 07:40
  3. Turner now a long term Waratah
    By Burgs in forum NSW Waratahs
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 08-12-07, 02:56
  4. TWF Wear - Now Accepting Payments!
    By Darren in forum Site News, Suggestions and Troubles
    Replies: 87
    Last Post: 07-09-07, 12:16
  5. ARU Long Term Player Development Conference - Schools
    By Burgs in forum Western Australian Metro Rugby
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 22-03-06, 22:30

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •