Is radical National Rugby Union option best way to make Australian rugby great again?

COULD the radical solution to Australia’s rugby woes be an exit from Super Rugby and the creation of a National Rugby Union competition? It’s worth a look.

NSW celebrate winning the recent Super Rugby game over the Queensland Reds. Picture: Darren England

PICTURE the scene. It’s a crisp autumn Saturday in 2023 and buzz is building for the Sydney derby between the Waratahs v Western Sydney Wasps, which should pull 25,000 at Parramatta Stadium on the back of new Wasps marquee star Julian Savea.

Elsewhere in the National Rugby Union, the Rebels are hosting the Brumbies, league leaders the Force are on the road to play Tokyo and up north is the Battle of Brisbane at Suncorp: the Reds hosting the George Gregan-owned South Brisbane and their stable of stars, including Josua Tuisova and Billy Vunipola.

PODCAST: Iain Payten discusses the ongoing mess of the Super Rugby restructure with Fox Sports rugby commentator Nick McArdle

In its third season — after a slow start — the NRU is now enjoying solid ratings and building crowds, the Wallabies are maintaining a top five world ranking and New Zealand media are calling for peace talks with Australia as their teams tire of flying to South Africa.

Does all of this sound far-fetched? Crazy, even?

Respected thinkers in Australian rugby say no, and indeed, some hold a firm belief that restructuring outside Super Rugby and around a new national rugby competition is the radical direction needed to avoid a slow — but inevitable — slide into obscurity.

The five Australian franchises at the start of the 2017 season.

Since SANZAR began plotting a course of rapid Super Rugby expansion around five years ago, warnings of dire consequences were issued to the ARU and other partners: there’ll be dwindling crowds, ratings and finances.

SANZAR backed the forecast boost in broadcast revenue and went ahead.

That it was a bad mistake is now admitted by all, and the return to a Super 15 is SANZAR’s attempt to fix the problem. The ARU is cutting a team and the ugly mess of picking one — amid Australia’s worst Super Rugby season — now has rugby suffering on many fronts.

Some say the debate about which Australian team misses the point.

In any future iteration of Super Rugby, teams will still disappear from their city for weeks to play in the middle of the night, SANZAAR still limits franchises to control their business and there are still only occasional bursts of tribalism.

The alternative option proposed for a decade is a trans-Tasman competition, but the New Zealanders have knocked it back several times, as recently as a few months ago.

The Kiwis are motivated by what’s best for the All Blacks, and have made it known they would prefer to play South African teams than their Australian rivals.

So could Australia withdraw from Super Rugby and, with patience, make an NRU work?

Opinions are firmly divided.

The no way camp says without the huge scale and allure of SANZAAR’s teams — particularly in Europe — broadcasting revenue for an NRU would be so paltry Australian rugby would collapse. Wallabies stars would leave the country in droves.

Rebels centre Tom English and his teammates are unsure if their franchise will exist next year. Picture: Getty Images

Those who believe it could work say an NRU — modelled on something like the A-League and with marquee signings — would tick all sorts of boxes: tribalism, full competition control, consistent prime-time content and an overall boost in positivity. Australian teams would win every week, after all.

If huge Super Rugby travel costs were eliminated, private ownership explored and Rugby Championship revenues were still available, the finances may work. Derbies have long been the games most watched and most attended.

The Daily Telegraph has seen a blunt state-of-the-game document written by a respected former official that argues a national competition must be the future.

RUPA boss Ross Xenos believes a trans-Tasman model is still the best option but a national solution is worth exploring.

“We very much need to be working on alternative competition models which give us greater control of our business than we currently have,” Xenos said.

“If this current saga has shown us anything it’s as long as we need to comply with the interests of our SANZAAR partners, we are forever undermining the key success factors for our market.

“We’ve seen the success in other codes of creating genuine local derbies, where it is a cross-town clash, while also leveraging old, existing state rivalries.”

How good would it be if the Waratahs had a western Sydney rival? Picture: Darren England.

Xenos said clearly the valuation from broadcasters would be “very significant” but added players would contemplate “cutting our cloth in line with the revenue we receive” if it was a strong growth vision for rugby long-term.

“Players are very mindful they want leave the game in a better shape for the next generation,’ Xenos said.

But drastically cutting back ARU revenue would not just affect player wages. Funding for most other things, like community rugby, sevens and women’s programs, come from the same broadcast pot.

“If the goal was to secure Australian rugby financially, the worst thing you could do is run a national competition,” ARU chairman Cameron Clyne said.

“The interest in that is virtually zero. The reality is this is a professional game and it costs money, and you have to find ways to generate revenue. A national competition is not one of those ways.

“There was some (broadcast) interest in a trans-Tasman competition but our performance in a credible competition with the Kiwis would need to be at a much higher threshold.

“We’ve shown the stats: our performances deteriorated when we went from three to four, and deteriorated further when we went to five. That is why we are on the path we’re on and are determined to return to four teams.”

Originally published as Is radical National Rugby Union option best way to make Australian rugby great again?