0
![Not allowed!](images/buttons/down_dis.png)
![Not allowed!](images/buttons/up_dis.png)
In terms of Sydney and Brisbane the plan is to use either established clubs or joint ventures while Pulver indicated he'd prefer the ACT, Vic and WA entrants to be rep based squads to ensure competitiveness. If they do mandate that SR franchises have the right to dictate where their contracted players play their post SR Rugby then it will work. The ten team format would be a more even competition when you consider a number of SR players wouldn't be returning to their Sydney/Brisbane clubs.
They'd be hypocritical to do so considering this is the model they argued for prior to the ARC. Won't stop them from doing so, but it would be hypocritical. The danger for the Sydney clubs are from the likes of Balmain RUFC. They play in the 1st Dvision of the Sub-Districts competition and were only resurrected seven or so seasons back after a 90 year hiatus. They are backed by the bloke behind the Fanatics concept and have made it clear they have the ambition to play on a bigger stage. They'll likely bid as well.
I will note that most of the clubs have now gone quiet on the proposal which means a few different things 1) they're trying to figure if they can afford to bid alone 2) they're trying to work out possible joint venture bids or hopefully not the case 3) they're looking at means to scupper it.
Personally, if this falls apart the ARU should just go with the Super B concept. Move it to a September/October schedule with the 5 current SR franchises playing under the banner of the city in which they are based. You could even run a 2nd division for the likes of Adelaide, Darwin, NSW/QLD Country and Tasmania.
They are not an either/or thing, Super B and ARC are aimed at quite different things. If this ARC falls over, they should do it and just leave NSW out altogether...