Perth side seeks ARU assistance in becoming Super Force to be reckoned with

[travelling_gerry]

[Santwyk]

Pretty damning information there.

[PerthChicka]

Pretty much as Bison said then!

Can't argue with those figures if they're in the audited financial statements, but I'm sure TOCC will try!

[sittingbison]

of real interest is WA gets the same amount of funding (with its S15 franchise to help support) as rugby powerhouses and nurseries NT and SA

[beige]

of real interest is WA gets the same amount of funding (with its S15 franchise to help support) as rugby powerhouses and nurseries NT and SA

That's one that's always puzzled me - I'm not sure why that's the case.

With regards to Queensland and NSW, they will always get significantly more funding than us when you take the Super Rugby franchises out of the equations because they have a far greater number of clubs and players. No use people bleating about that because it's just common sense. Of course if you have issues with proportionality and accountability that's a different matter.

Now, for f***'s sake...

To account for the greater resources that QLD and NSW have I think it is important that we get that academy funding back and the foreigners concession and get us and the Rebels (who should also get their academy back) on an equivalent footing.

[shasta]

That's one that's always puzzled me - I'm not sure why that's the case.

With regards to Queensland and NSW, they will always get significantly more funding than us when you take the Super Rugby franchises out of the equations because they have a far greater number of clubs and players

Now, for f***'s sake...y

- in a minute. Because a strong community Rugby environment is the foundation stone needed to build a Rugby future. One capable of producing Super Rugby quality West Australians. So those figures might still bear a bit more exploration. Eventually the aim must be to field the team without needing concessions.

We'll leave out ACT and NSW, which provides 44 per ent of registered participants, including the ACT Brumbies catchment, because the ARU has taken over the area of junior Rugby development there. We'll just look at the other State Unions who have a Super Rugby franchise.

Queensland provides 30% of registered players and receives 40% of the ARU funding.
Victoria. '' 5.7% '' '' '' '' 6.2% '' '' ''
WA. '' 6.7% '' '' '' '' 3.8% '' '' ''

I'd like to see anyone defend that position and say they are in favour of developing and expanding the game of Rugby. WA is the only state that gets proportionately less, almost half per capita, than it's participation rate. Over to you TOCC.

[TOCC]

- in a minute. Because a strong community Rugby environment is the foundation stone needed to build a Rugby future. One capable of producing Super Rugby quality West Australians. So those figures might still bear a bit more exploration. Eventually the aim must be to field the team without needing concessions.

We'll leave out ACT and NSW, which provides 44 per ent of registered participants, including the ACT Brumbies catchment, because the ARU has taken over the area of junior Rugby development there. We'll just look at the other State Unions who have a Super Rugby franchise.

Queensland provides 30% of registered players and receives 40% of the ARU funding.
Victoria. '' 5.7% '' '' '' '' 6.2% '' '' ''
WA. '' 6.7% '' '' '' '' 3.8% '' '' ''

I'd like to see anyone defend that position and say they are in favour of developing and expanding the game of Rugby. WA is the only state that gets proportionately less, almost half per capita, than it's participation rate. Over to you TOCC.

You know what they say, its easy to paint a picture when we select the statistics and figures that we want to use.. Below is a % of the overall ARU contribution to each union/team(including Super Rugby and Community Rugby grants)
Note that the Rebels and Vic Rugby are obviously separate entities, and the ARU has control of certain aspects of NSW Community Rugby, thus the figure isn't a true reflection of rugby investment in that state.


QRU 24%
NSWRU 21%
RugbyWA 17.3%
ACT & Southern NSW 17.6%
Rebels 14.7%
Vic Rugby 1.1%

So now what we have is RugbyWA with 6.7% of registered players receiving 17.3% of ARU funding, yet the QRU with around 30% of registered players receives 24% of ARU funding.

[shasta]

You have included the allocations made to the Super Rugby franchises. That is not valid & you know that. Where'd you get them any way? I know this is going on a tangent to the topic. Apologies.
Posted via Mobile Device

[The InnFORCEr]

67.398% of statistics are made up

[jargan83]

67.398% of statistics are made up

I reckon you made that up

[TOCC]

You have included the allocations made to the Super Rugby franchises. That is not valid & you know that. Where'd you get them any way? I know this is going on a tangent to the topic. Apologies.
Posted via Mobile Device

Of course its valid, funding for Super Rugby sides is a investment in rugby in those respective states, the ability to showcase top rugby to fans, also to use the flow over effects of promotional and professional expertise to help the community rugby game. Not to mention having professional players play within the community competition, which has financial implications as sponsors and fans are likely to support these clubs further as well as providing a development boost through having players from a higher level passing on their experience.

[shasta]

Bullshit.
Posted via Mobile Device

[TOCC]

Bullshit.
Posted via Mobile Device

not entirely constructive but ok....

If you don't believe that having the Western Force in Perth benefits the community game then i guess there is no point in this discussion continuing.

[shasta]

Didn't say that. It's obvious and doesn't need saying. It's your inclusion of their running costs in your figures that is bullshit. So we'll just leave it at that and let the thread get back on topic.
Posted via Mobile Device

[beige]

Man we always get so shirty when Super Rugby goes on hiatus...