0
John Connolly | May 31, 2009
No matter where the new Super rugby franchise ends up in Australia, the big question is whether or not the Australian Rugby Union should in fact have a stake in it, as has been suggested.
The four existing Australian Super rugby teams are run by their respective state or territory bodies, and supported financially to some extent by the ARU courtesy of the Fox Sports agreement.
It's something that works well because it keeps rugby a community-run game and all teams on an equal footing, but a team funded by the national rugby authority would be perceived to have a far greater advantage in snaring high-profile and marquee players. It could create many conflicts of interest, with the ARU in control of one team yet the governing body for its four opponents.
All Australian Super franchises control both the amateur and professional games in their respective backyards, making each responsible for its own player development. It's the system that works with great success in South Africa and New Zealand, Ireland and Wales, and now Scotland is looking to adopt the same concept in which the grassroots tier of rugby feeds into the professional realm.
The challenges for rugby with the extra team is with more games there's a requirement for more players, and the responsibility to produce them will fall strongly on the people in clubland.
By cutting them off at the knees with private ownership, breaking their bond with the top tier, those people, I would suggest, might not feel a part of a team that is privately owned or run by the ARU. And the rugby community needs to feel a part of the team because the game thrives on tribalism.
Getting away from that type of structure, I think, is crazy.
The advantage for the rugby people of each province is that they have ownership from the grassroots to the top.
And having the ARU own half the 15th team means it will be competing for players with the other provinces. And just who approves third-party agreements for marquee players for the new club? I'm all for change but not just for the sake of it.
For rugby to be successful, the game has to be built on a strong relationships between the ARU and its five provinces. And one thinks the relationship could become strained should the ARU also become a competitor with the teams. There's a huge onus on the ARU board here that it remains a level playing field. We know at the moment the states are talking behind closed doors of their concerns.
Of the three possible Australian franchises - the Gold Coast, western Sydney and Melbourne - I believe Melbourne is the best fit. It enables us to keep the state versus state tribalism. Either way, it needs to be announced sooner rather than later.
The QRU has already stated it doesn't want the new team on the Gold Coast because it believes it can't sustain it. And I understand the Waratahs aren't too comfortable with the idea of another team in Sydney - the Waratahs are the NSW Waratahs, a state team; where would that leave a Penrith team?
So obviously Melbourne's the real option. It has the support of the Victorian Government, and even AFL commentator Brian Taylor last week pointed out the strong foothold of rugby in Melbourne.
There's been talk that we can't afford another Western Force, but short of being one of many Australian sporting organisations conned by fraudulent sponsor Firepower, the Force had a remarkable first few seasons. They had to make do on a makeshift AFL field, had no gym yet averaged 28,000 fans a game, and this year supplied 10 players to the 29-man Wallabies squad.
So with Melbourne already having the infrastructure and fan base in place, it can become as successful as any team in the competition.
They'll have a new stadium courtesy of the Melbourne Storm's efforts in petitioning the State Government, and with that comes a world-class gym and training facilities - the perfect breeding ground for success. So they're already a lot further down the track than the Force were.
The team needs to be named now to give officials enough time to scout players and build a successful organisation before a ball is even kicked. Let's not forget the ARU in 2006 promised Melbourne they'd be the next team in the competition.
No matter what the outcome over the next few months, for the sake of the development of Australian rugby, let's hope common sense prevails.
http://www.rugbyheaven.com.au/news/n...e#contentSwap1