By DAVID HAYWARD
RUGBY league has a strong history of giving the competing codes a leg up as a result of many self-inflicted wounds. Very rarely, if ever, have the other codes returned the favour. Perhaps there have been cases but it is doubtful rugby league has seized the opportunity if there ever was one since 1908.
In 1995 rugby league chose to have a civil war that enhanced the success of the launch of Super Rugby and the AFL’s Sydney Swans and Brisbane Lions relocation clubs. The sport has still not properly realised the potential it had in 1994.
International rugby league was also held hostage during the Super League War, which resulted in it losing credibility and popularity. Ashes Tests were held at Wembley in front of 70,000 fans in the early 1990s. By the time 2003 rolled around rugby league Tests returned to being played in the north of England again in front of 20,000 fans. At the same time, Australia hosted the Rugby World Cup which had grown so much in the meantime that rugby league’s best players were leaving, or threatening to leave, so they could play on a more credible international stage. It gave rugby union a greater story than rugby league when selling their game to generate big business sponsorships and attracting the best athletes.
In 1998 players from the reigning premiers the Newcastle Knights were embroiled in a performance enhancing drug scandal. This was repeated on a greater scale in 2014 by almost the entire Cronulla Sharks roster, although the players claim they didn’t know they were injecting banned substances. In 2002 and 2010 the NRL uncovered serious club salary cap breaches to competition leading sides. These events greatly diminished the legitimacy of a number of premiership seasons in the eyes of the greater public, who in turn have greater reason to not invest themselves in the sport.
Monumental off-field player behaviour scandals also occur year on year at a level that surpasses scandals in the AFL, Super Rugby or A-League.
The delusion of rugby union’s commentariat
Based on these events, rugby union’s elite voices, such as Peter Fitzsimons, have been championing the demise of the rugby league and the bigger, brighter future of rugby union for decades. This is based on the following claims that have been repeated ad nauseam:
1. Rugby union is bigger globally;
2. The Top 14 TV deal in France breaking $1 billion recently will result in rugby being able to lure a vast number of rugby league players;
3. Rugby union is a greater product because there are more dimensions to the game;
4. The character and intelligence of rugby union players are superior to those of rugby league players;
5. The 2003 World Cup will see rugby union surpass rugby league in Australia.
Firstly, of course rugby union is bigger than rugby league globally but this does not mean that it will contribute to the demise of rugby league, or at least see union surpass league in popularity in Australia. The fact remains, if Australian sports fans are interested in global international sporting competitions, there are much bigger and more entertaining options than rugby union, including football (every continent), American Football (NFL and college) and basketball (NBA and Euroleague) just to name a few. All of these can be watched live by Australians on a range of devices which means that not only is rugby union the fourth most popular sport in Australia, it isn’t even a top tier international team sport option for Australian sports fans. In the end, rugby union underestimated technology and overestimated the relevance of its sport internationally. The reality is that rugby union is much closer to rugby league in size globally than it is to football and even basketball.
Secondly, the French rugby union TV deal was never the threat to rugby league as Fitzsimons triumphantly claimed. The NRL already had a similar deal and recently almost doubled that deal meaning the NRL will always compete with French rugby deals. This is yet another example of rugby union pundits playing the man and not the ball. The French TV deal was always going to be a bigger threat to the ARU as they could lure Super Rugby players on better deals and in doing so, diluting the playing talent of the five Australian teams and the Wallabies.
Thirdly, rugby union fans usually claim there is more sophistication and dimensions to their game in comparison to rugby league. This may well be the case, but ultimately the product is slower, rules are difficult to interpret for casual fans and a higher proportion of points come from penalty kicks than tries. This means rugby union is often a less entertaining product and this is reflected in the fact that average pay TV ratings of Super Rugby matches are one-quarter the size of NRL matches (and that excludes free to air TV ratings).
Fourthly, rugby union fans often scoff at the poor behaviour of rugby league players and fans to the point they believe it will mean more people will ultimately come to support rugby union and their way of thinking. This is a bubble culture and is one of the greatest weaknesses of rugby union in Australia. While rugby league players may behave more poorly than rugby union players, they are no worse than NFL players and that continues to be the most popular sport in the United States. Therefore, it will take much more than poor player behaviour for rugby league fans to switch their allegiance to rugby union.
Lastly, the 2003 Rugby World Cup was viewed as the turning point for the sport in Australia where rugby union would surpass rugby league. The ARU stupidly sold the Wallabies to the market place as winners as their way of maximieing the fan base. This was a shortsighted approach as the success of the Wallabies was seen as being vital for rugby’s success in Australia. So when the Wallabies inevitably started losing to the New Zealand All Blacks, sports fans had lost the attachment to continue supporting the side. (continued below)
Rugby elites in Australia have attempted to grow the sport on what they thought were strengths but they were in fact exposing weaknesses of the sport in Australia, mostly because they are completely out of touch with Australian sports fans. What has transpired over the past 15 years is the building of a house of cards.
Recent articles from Fitzsimons and Georgie Robinson have been nothing short of comical for rugby league fans in terms of their respective delusion and desperation.
In his weekly Fitz Files column, Fitzsimons subtly added an observation that the first round of the AFL season attracted 400,000 fans, while noting that the biggest NRL crowd in Sydney this year is 17,000 meaning that outside of the NRL Grand Final and State of Origin, Sydney fans do not turn up to rugby league matches. Never mind the fact it is not a like-for-like comparison, and the fact that Sydney fans do also turn up to finals, Anzac Day, Good Friday and Easter Monday NRL matches. Is it not worth mentioning the equivalent stats for rugby union in Sydney in terms of TV ratings and attendances? Of course not. Now in Fitzsimons’ latest rugby union diagnosis, he discovers what the sport needs is love from ‘Mummy’ to lift itself from its dire state, still completely unaware that their collective heads are still in the sand.
In a recent article from Robinson, the greatest sign for the sports future in Australia is the fact the IRB announced a fixed annual calendar for provincial and international matches globally. Apparently, this will make some difference to general interest (or lack there of) of rugby union in Australia.
Never before have rugby union pundits been more delusional and desperate about the state of their sport in Australia.
Responding to the rugby union retreat
The significance of this event cannot be understated. The introduction of the ACT Brumbies in 1996, Western Force in 2006 and Melbourne Rebels in 2011 has held back the growth of the NRL to varying degrees.
The Brumbies had a big impact on the decline in the presence of the Canberra Raiders in the nation’s capital and surrounding areas. There was almost a seamless overlap between the end of the Raiders golden era and the start of the Brumbies golden era which magnified the extent to which the popularity of the Brumbies increased. It is only now, some 20 years after the introduction of the Brumbies, that the Raiders are re-establishing the mantle of Canberra’s most popular team. If the ARU kill off the Brumbies or send them to Melbourne, the Raiders may well return to the peak popularity levels of 1989-1994.
The introduction of the Force effectively kept the NRL at bay from re-introducing a side in Perth after they abandoned the Western Reds for Melbourne Storm in 1998. The Force had star players and strong crowds in their early years, even stronger than what the Reds achieved but the club’s financial trouble has led to the departure of their star players, poor results and lower attendances.
The timing of the Rebels’ introduction to Super Rugby in 2011 was perfectly aligned to further destabilise the Storm who were in the recovery phase of salary cap breaches and subsequent penalties. It gave the founder of the Rebels at the time, Harold Mathews, a great level of confidence to surpass the Storm in the Melbourne marketplace, proclaiming at the time that rugby union is a better sport to attend for families and had a stronger presence in Melbourne compared to rugby league with private school competitions. The fact the Storm have kept the Rebels at bay has to be considered the greatest achievement for the NRL this decade.
NRL commentator Paul Kent and coach Ricky Stuart recently stated on Triple M that the NRL shouldn’t respond to this potential rugby retreat by expanding the NRL into Perth based on the financial instability of most clubs and there aren’t enough quality first graders to field another NRL side. Acknowledging these concerns, outside of the planned introduction of capping club management expenditure, there is actually no clear plan expressed by the clubs or NRL that will realistically stabilise the financial position of the struggling NRL clubs. With declining TV ratings and steady attendances it is unlikely the main revenue streams will increase in the future with the current 16 NRL club arrangement.
Disturbingly the NRL clubs’ solution to their financial woes is to pillage as much money from TV revenue as possible, which is an act of self-interest and holds the potential for the NRL to be held hostage. What right do NRL clubs have to dictate to rugby league fans that their club comes ahead of the growth of the game if they operate at a financial loss year upon year even if they win a premiership? Especially clubs who consistently draw low crowds and do not rate highly on television…..
The main options for the NRL to increase revenue for clubs are as follows:
1. Private investors with strong business connections to take control of struggling financial clubs such as the Gold Coast, Newcastle, St George Illawarra etc.
2. Establish new or relocate clubs in the other capital cities of Australian, New Zealand or Papua New Guinea to increase the sports revenue from TV deals, sponsorships and attendances which can be distributed across the game
The first option is not a reliable option given all clubs operate at a loss (excluding the Broncos), there will be limited investors whom the NRL can rely on. However, the second option, while challenging due to the political structures of the ARL Commission, presents the greatest opportunity for the game to grow and improve the financial position of the existing clubs at the same time.
The best option available to the NRL is for a Sydney club to relocate to Perth. This will have the desired effect of increasing TV revenue for increased TV revenue can be re-distributed back to clubs. This will in turn introduce more business investment from WA, decrease the saturation and competition for Sydney fans at remaining NRL clubs, and increase overall NRL attendances. The NRL could even incentivise clubs to vote for a Sydney club relocation if Channel Nine and Fox Sports proportionally increase the TV deal with the promise of increased NRL grants to all clubs in the deal that is currently being negotiated.
If the ARU goes through with culling one of its Super Rugby franchises it will represent the first golden opportunity gifted by a competing code in recent memory and one that may not come again for a long time to come. Given the challenges and turmoil it has survived through over the past 20 years and the money it now has to work with, the time has come to stop being conservative and make bold moves in challenging other codes in new markets. A business as usual approach is potentially riskier as it could easily send the sport in the wrong direction domestically and internationally.
How the NRL responds over the next year to rugby union’s retreat will dictate how successful the code will be over the next decade.
