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

[Sheikh]

I agree any new comp should consider the Sydney/Brisbane heartland of rugby, especially as most of the players will come from there. The locations of teams should probably be 40-50% from Sydney and Brisbane, and hopefully the clubs there can co-operate to own/run the 'new ARC' clubs.

But if you want to grow rugby into a national sport there should also be clubs in Perth, Adelaide, Melbourne, North Qld, etc, probably with the ability to add more clubs if the competition is successful.

[beige]

With regards to Adelaide and North Queensland - it needs to be a smarter competition, not an even more bloated one. Start where the players already are first.

[James]

The principle of the ARC divide areas seemed sound people just needed time to warm to it. In an ideal world every club in a given area would have an input and everyone would be happy but there are dickheads with agendas and what the ARU chose to do in dividing the teams was the right decision at the time because the right decision was a definitive one that didn't dissolve into too much squabbling. Given time regardless of where the boundaries are people will get on board. Although being overseas I didn't get a chance to see it, I'd have loved to get the chance to see the players from the Force playing more often. Surely if the rugby was that important in the 'heartlands' people would go out to watch their favourite players. Most of the people on this site were Wallabies fans before the Force came along and are now hardcore Force fans regardless of the fact there is no history or anything Super 14 wise before the Force and only one original player was from WA. Is it that hard to believe that Tahs or Reds fans would support a new team that represented their area once there is some form of stability to it?

[beige]

And what about the supporters from the southern suburbs of Brisbane and the north coast of Sydney who had their teams whisked away to the Gold Coast and Gosford respectively? Did they get much choice? And it's nice to use the Western Force as an example of people supporting a new team - why not use the Perth Spirit that had average home crowds less than 1/6 of the Force's that same year?

[jargan83]

why not use the Perth Spirit that had average home crowds less than 1/6 of the Force's that same year?

The corwds weren't too bad considering the lack of promotion the ARC had. The only advertisements on TV I saw were after midnight and I saw one billboard, heard nothing on the Radio. You had to have some idea about Rugby just to know the ARC was on.

The conspiracy theorist in me thinks sometimes the ARC was set up to fail by the ARU so they could then just say "hey we tried"

[beige]

Oh no doubt - Perth Spirit actually did pretty well considering. I just thought the comparison made it seem like it would be a-fait-accompli that Sydney fans would just jump on the ARC bandwagon. The Force built up a remarkable following from scratch but the Spirit clearly had a harder time doing so.

[James]

And what about the supporters from the southern suburbs of Brisbane and the north coast of Sydney who had their teams whisked away to the Gold Coast and Gosford respectively? Did they get much choice? And it's nice to use the Western Force as an example of people supporting a new team - why not use the Perth Spirit that had average home crowds less than 1/6 of the Force's that same year?

The divisions weren't perfect but it was a start. Maybe the lines could have been better planned but they weren't. With time and careful planning those issues would be resolved. Hell they could have had the Gold Coast team play half its games in Southern Brisbane and half on the Gold Coast it's only about an hour or two down the road isn't it? Maybe once the ARC was established they could have varied games between a couple of Sydney club venues so that everything was fair. If it was that big an issue they would've got a choice if they had been a little bit patient.

---------- Post added at 12:23 ---------- Previous post was at 12:16 ----------

The conspiracy theorist in me thinks sometimes the ARC was set up to fail by the ARU so they could then just say "hey we tried"

It was Gary Flowers in charge of the ARU at the time of the ARC wasn't it? I reckon you aren't too far off Jargs except that it was the people around him and those in the Sydney Club rugby scene who figured they could kill two birds with one stone. Get rid of Flowers who by all accounts wasn't a brilliant leader by sinking his flagship the ARC and making sure it didn't rear its ugly head for a long time.

The Sydney Club rugby scene didn't want an ARC and a lot more could have been done there to make it work. I respect the fact that Australian rugby's past was built on the back of Sydney/Brisbane club rugby but the future will be very short lived if Australian rugby continues the slide its been going down. Some people need to except that without some form of ARC we could all end up with nothing.

[beige]

I think you'll find that most people on here wouldn't mind seeing an ARC - they just thought the ARC was c*cked up.

[Burgs]

Personally I didn't have any problem with the ARC format as a starting point, at least there was momentum to work off rather than now having to start again.
I believe that the teams need to be rep XV's of existing Unions or stand alone clubs, ego's will never allow it to work if a handful of existing clubs are able to host a team (such as Sydney Uni, Randwick, Sunnybank, Gold Coast, Vikings etc) while the rest of that comp cannot and while other teams in the comp are representing whole states (Melbourne, Perth, Adelaide etc).
All teams have to have a level playing field.

[TOCC]

The divisions weren't perfect but it was a start. Maybe the lines could have been better planned but they weren't. With time and careful planning those issues would be resolved. Hell they could have had the Gold Coast team play half its games in Southern Brisbane and half on the Gold Coast it's only about an hour or two down the road isn't it? Maybe once the ARC was established they could have varied games between a couple of Sydney club venues so that everything was fair. If it was that big an issue they would've got a choice if they had been a little bit patient.
---------- Post added at 12:23 ---------- Previous post was at 12:16 ----------

the divisions werent even close to been perfect, in fact in QLD they couldnt have possibly been worse. Souths, Sunnybank and Easts were all Brisbane southside clubs who had no representation in the ARC, ironic that these 3 teams have also been involved in the last 3 finals, go figure.

It was Gary Flowers in charge of the ARU at the time of the ARC wasn't it? I reckon you aren't too far off Jargs except that it was the people around him and those in the Sydney Club rugby scene who figured they could kill two birds with one stone. Get rid of Flowers who by all accounts wasn't a brilliant leader by sinking his flagship the ARC and making sure it didn't rear its ugly head for a long time.

The Sydney Club rugby scene didn't want an ARC and a lot more could have been done there to make it work. I respect the fact that Australian rugby's past was built on the back of Sydney/Brisbane club rugby but the future will be very short lived if Australian rugby continues the slide its been going down. Some people need to except that without some form of ARC we could all end up with nothing

So you identify that people around him could have raised the ARC concept in a attempt to overthrow Flowers knowing it was a flawed concept?

Do you honestly think the NRL or AFL would have been succesful today if it werent for the original clubs in the heartlands of Sydney and Melbourne respectively, AFL would be nothing without the Melbourne clubs likewise Sydney and the NRL.

No one is denying some kind of third tier competition is needed, that is a given, what we are arguing is that makeup of the competition and how the ARC was the completely wrong model.



Its ironic that you mention some people need to accept that rugby needs a ARC, because in all respect the best chance for a club championship to be started would be without a Perth Spirit side to save costs. A competition involving only Brisbane, Sydney and Canberra would be the best format that a comp could be kicked off, from there they would expand.

Realistically WA contributes very little to broardcast revenue, so expanding to Perth so early doesnt really achieve anything but increase costs, some of you say that Sydney and Brisbane people should make some sacrafices, well its my opinion that Perth people should probably sacrafice the chance of having a ARC team to maximise the chance of its success in the early years.

[Burgs]

Good luck trying to get that concept to float on here TOCC, not to say you are probably a bit to close to being correct for comfort.

[Darren]

Perhaps a Perth team could raise the finds to cover the extra travel costs themselves...

[James]

the divisions werent even close to been perfect, in fact in QLD they couldnt have possibly been worse. Souths, Sunnybank and Easts were all Brisbane southside clubs who had no representation in the ARC, ironic that these 3 teams have also been involved in the last 3 finals, go figure.

Like I said not perfect but a start. Perhaps Queensland should have been more proactive in the organisation of the ARC.

So you identify that people around him could have raised the ARC concept in a attempt to overthrow Flowers knowing it was a flawed concept?

Do you honestly think the NRL or AFL would have been succesful today if it werent for the original clubs in the heartlands of Sydney and Melbourne respectively, AFL would be nothing without the Melbourne clubs likewise Sydney and the NRL.

No one is denying some kind of third tier competition is needed, that is a given, what we are arguing is that makeup of the competition and how the ARC was the completely wrong model.

Everyone knows TOCC that huge sectors of the Australian rugby community thought Flowers was a wet blanket. I'm not saying that the people around him raised the concept I'm saying I wouldn't be surprised if the people around him who wanted him out intentionally caused as much fuss and havoc as they could.

Then tell me TOCC, definitively, what should the make up be?

Its ironic that you mention some people need to accept that rugby needs a ARC, because in all respect the best chance for a club championship to be started would be without a Perth Spirit side to save costs. A competition involving only Brisbane, Sydney and Canberra would be the best format that a comp could be kicked off, from there they would expand.

Realistically WA contributes very little to broardcast revenue, so expanding to Perth so early doesnt really achieve anything but increase costs, some of you say that Sydney and Brisbane people should make some sacrafices, well its my opinion that Perth people should probably sacrafice the chance of having a ARC team to maximise the chance of its success in the early years.

If having an ARC without a Perth team is necessary then I can cope with that. I would like to explore other options first, like Coach's suggestion, but if it has to be it has to be. I actually rather enjoyed watching the Shute Shield matches on ABCHD when the Force players were playing. The point isn't where the teams are its that there is a competition. Hell maybe in formative years you could have a half Force/half Rebels team playing out of Melbourne. Whatever it takes.

But you argument about broadcast revenue is weak as piss because in the first ARC the ARU paid the ABC to play the games so there was no broadcast revenue and it isn't likely there would be much in the early years of a new competition.

[GIGS20]

I guess the issue that many of the ARC supporters have is that the third tier needs to sit between club rugby and professional rugby the third tier cannot BE club rugby.

I don't think anybody who is arguing FOR the format particularly cares how NSW and Qld manage the entry of their sides to the competition, but I don't see how the same side could compete in a third tier comp and a club comp. Surely the intention of the third tier is to increase the quality of the games over that of club rugby, so to include a club in both tiers would introduce inequities to one or both comps.

I think there should be districts identified which clubs feed their players into. I can't identify districts in NSW or Qld, but if Perth had enough players North and South would be logical districts. I know there would be players and supporters from clubs aligned in those districts that would have traditional rivalries, but surely that wouldn't matter. We all hate the 'Tahs passionately, but as soon as Benn Robinson pulls on a Wallaby jersey he's ours. I think the same thing would occur over time with the districts for a third tier.

I think the ARU is naieve to expect that the competition will be well financed and well attended in it's first year. I agree that the expenditure of the ARC was problematic, and unsustainable is something I wouldn't necessarily argue with, but that doesn't justify throwing the baby out with the bathwater!

[TOCC]

Like I said not perfect but a start. Perhaps Queensland should have been more proactive in the organisation of the ARC. .

perhaps, maybe they werent really given much room to work with

Everyone knows TOCC that huge sectors of the Australian rugby community thought Flowers was a wet blanket. I'm not saying that the people around him raised the concept I'm saying I wouldn't be surprised if the people around him who wanted him out intentionally caused as much fuss and havoc as they could.

Then tell me TOCC, definitively, what should the make up be?

as ive said previously, a comp should be created based on the input of current clubs, i cant speak for the clubs.

If having an ARC without a Perth team is necessary then I can cope with that. I would like to explore other options first, like Coach's suggestion, but if it has to be it has to be. I actually rather enjoyed watching the Shute Shield matches on ABCHD when the Force players were playing. The point isn't where the teams are its that there is a competition. Hell maybe in formative years you could have a half Force/half Rebels team playing out of Melbourne. Whatever it takes.

I wouldnt even bother including Melbourne for the first two years, for the first two years i would keep it at strictly Brisbane, Canberra and Sydney.

But you argument about broadcast revenue is weak as piss because in the first ARC the ARU paid the ABC to play the games so there was no broadcast revenue and it isn't likely there would be much in the early years of a new competition

for the game to be professional it needs a product to sell, the broadcast enviroment has changed dramatically in the past two years alone, we have seen 5 new channels added to FTA TV, one of which is based purely on sport, also Foxsports have added another foxsports channel, with increased channels the demand for product has also increased. Club rugby has also proven itself to be a marketable product due to the quite good ratings on ABC.

For a new rugby comp I doubt the initial broadcast contract would be very substantial at all, it is however imperative to get it out on TV to boost the value for the sponsors, after the first two years and if the comp proves itself to be a marketable product they sign a new and larger contract, at which point the inclusion of Melbourne and Perth could be made.

---------- Post added at 18:31 ---------- Previous post was at 18:28 ----------

I guess the issue that many of the ARC supporters have is that the third tier needs to sit between club rugby and professional rugby the third tier cannot BE club rugby.

NRL and AFL are both based on club competitions, theres no reason why rugby couldnt follow a similar path