The cost of development

Having read the last few threads it is fairly evident that poaching of youth rugby players is rife in W.A. Rugby, specifically from those clubs that are trying to enter the top flight , Mr Sammut has come up with several methods to assist the development of the clubs but has not addressed two areas that prevents the junior clubs from becoming Senior clubs, nor has he taken to task the obvious anomolies in what is supposed to be a competitive environment.

Lets look only at two or three areas: Area One - Poaching
(and yes players do have the right to leave a club - and make a choice, however we are talking deliberate poaching of players with false and incorrect statements and promises)

1. Players who started as junior with a club and who have achieved representation at state or the force academy do so based on parents assistance and coaching. They are a valuable commodity and yet they can be co-erced into leaving their club by false promises or embittered coaches

If there was a price to pay for those kids I wonder if the clubs would be so fast to recruit them.

Lets start with a base figure of $1000 for a player who has been with a club for a period of 5 years as a junior , then add a further $1,000 for his having represented WA at under 15, then another if he reaches under 16 state, then another if he reaches schoolboys, then another of he reaches the WF Academy and on to the gold.

That would help fund a clubs junior ranks and allow it to continue its development . lets face it they must be doing something right if the player achieves at that level.
It would also make the so called top clubs whose recruitment is at best costly consider whether poaching is worthwhile.

The cost of coaching and development is huge, getting a local players into your first grade is one in a eight at best - to get that one we have to develop 8 players. That gives us 2 out of a team at best 3 out of your under 16 will make it - to lose 1 is bad to lose 2 is a waste of 8 years coaching (under 8 to 16)


Point 2:

If promotion and relegation came back there would be no easy years , no hiding at the bottom of the ladder, no time for poor management, no time for lack of sponsors and the pressure would be on at all times , possibly forcing the improvement of the game at all levels.

Clubs may well find their level and possibly stay there , the current system does not allow for the growth of this city and allows for stagnation in some of the so called senior clubs.

Whether there was a play off between the clubs at the bottom of one level and the top of the other, whether they had to be graded as to the criteria set down by the WARU ( and right now some clubs would fail in some areas of the criteria that has been set for clubs like Joondalup and Mandurah) before that play off occurred,

At least allow the junior clubs the right to challenge!


Point 3:

On another note - why not consider an 8 team 3 round premier competition, dropping the last 2 clubs at the end of this year , making all other clubs divisions 1-2-3 and possibly 4 - with colts and 18's

Promotion relegation if you win division one and do not have a team in that division
and fit all of the criteria, (3 grades plus u20 and u18 and minimum level of juniors of 400 below age 16)

Then add point 1 into the mix


The Scot

There is some merit in what you say about promotion relegation, Scot, but the current gap between third grade, even top third grade, and bottom first grade is huge, as Joondalup found out against Wests a few years ago. Maybe a challenge at third/second grade level would be more appropriate, with a later challenge at second/first grade level in subsequent years if successful in second grade.

There would still have to be some challenge match or series of matches at the end of the season, involving only players registered with the clubs the season just passed, to ensure that the integrity and competitiveness of the first grade competition is maintained to a level at least as high as it was the previous season.

If it was automatic relegation, a reasonably competent first grade wooden spooner could be replaced by a totally uncompetitive second grade outfit.

Just a thought. I'm no guru, just been around WA club rugby a long time.

And I agree, a transfer fee between clubs for players developed within WA or recruited by a particular club from outside WA, would be appropriate. And that includes the Force, who have taken some club players from their clubs, never to be seen again.

I would like standard player contracts on the website - so if X is promised , he or she gets it in writing before they leave - there could be appropriate get out clause like non attendance at training or injuries etc...

Lets start with a code of ethics. No club official - including coaches - to poach players from within the WA Comp. State coaches must abide by this or get sacked.

Players that leave one club for another need to be a reason for the two club presidents or coaches to have a chat.

If clubs pay money for interstate or international recruits, even more reason for club presidents to have a chat if such a mercenary changes clubs.

It's the big picture that counts....developing local players for the Force.

Agree with all of the comments gents - however if you want the growth then you have to be prepared to allow the newer/junior clubs to do what you have been doing for the 30 years that fulvio and I have been here for - Lets face it when Wanneroo amalgamated with Sorrento to become the District team it was envisaged that they would start a small feeder club in the north

That did not happen instead they have 2 clubs in the north one small and developing juniors and the other trying to do both - working together

Lets face it in the 70's and 80's all of the major clubs bought players and I say bought and not brought players in from NZ and the UK now we have SA to add to the mix - why should the junior clubs looking to go forward be prevented from doing the same as Wanneroo, Kalamunda, Nedlands, Cott, Associates and Fulvias own club Palmyra did for years - recruit while they grow and now charge for their losses when players leave or are poached.

The big picture is the city is not shrinking and as distances get wider and it takes longer to get home - people will look to work further out or even from home, and as that happens people will not drive into the city to work - in fact they will not need to and will they want to play sport, train in the city ? I doubt that !

If not where will they go and how do we keep developing the game - we need premier and top level teams in the outer area and by outer lets be realistic - if palmyra move to mosman they move into a larger capture area - they cut off Cottesloe - then the next team to them is Rocky - then Mandurah - Go west beyond Nedlands and what do you have - Kalamunda in the south east and Perth in the north east - each of those has an area of aprox 30 sq kms - Now go north of the city - Wanneroo has everything from the wanneroo road to the air force base (50kms sq) - and Joondalup have it from north beach to Yanchep and beyond - Where is the development - and who can catch it?

Failing to give them a go ensures that we fail to develop the force - if we do not control the catchment areas we lose what is there to be caught - between North coast and Joondalup they have over 450 kids in that corridor - where do they go

Based on the normal standards at least 50 of those over the next 5 - 10 years will make a senior premier player - where do they go ? Who coaches them and what will that be worth - never mind the number that play seconds and thirds.

Or do we let them fade away because they did not travel into the city to play - got married and found it to far and to hard to get to training etc etc.

Look at Sydney - living 1 hr out out of town ensures that players change clubs - are we going the same way - the answer is Yes

Public transport is crap, traveling is getting harder - who wants to commute

The big picture is - widen the base and get more into the pinnacle of the pyramid

The Scot