The screams turned into roars from anyone familiar with the Argentine story after the Pumas made history with a 3^rd place finish at the 2007 Rugby World Cup in France.

But a quick history lesson from Professor Fly: Argentina’s rugby body UAR has up until very very recently stubbornly resisted following the rest of the 1^st World rugby nations in turning professional. Therefore all professional Argentine players (many of whom are world class) ply their trade in Europe.

The UAR asked to be part of an expanded Six nations for this very reason.

He shoots… REJECTED.

This week SANZAR have invited Argentina to join the Tri-Nations from 2012 onwards.

This is massive news, and were the typical rugby fan not taken with their skim latte and reading the news in the local broadsheet would be dancing in the street at the announcement.

But why or why is it such a big deal?

It’s massive because here you have a country that has a strong middle class rugby union following that could be very competitive but due to the fact the players are usually all together once every four years at World Cup time often haven’t been able to show how good they are (2007 being the year they did and the rest of us were happily gob smacked).

It’s a massive deal because although rugby has several competitive nations the more competitive nations there are, the more interesting Test matches and World Cups are. We need Argentina to be capable of being one of the teams that can hoist the William Web Ellis trophy aloft.

It’s important because this is to borrow the old colonialist phrase, rugby wants its place in the sun; it’s a stake in South America.

From a SA, Aust and NZ perspective its great because instead of the ridiculous schedule of playing each time three times every year, which loses the interest of even the most ardent supporter, they’ll be playing each team twice. This will keeps things interesting: less is sometimes more.

Also, as Scrum.com put it, it will: “Add fresh impetus in the form of the Pumas, who bring a healthy dose of passion and their own individual approach to the game, and you have an exciting new element that is sure to attract broadcasters. Throw in an energised group of fans, yet more colourful destinations and the exposure to a whole new TV audience and there is further cause for celebration.”

Damn right.

It’s been pointed out that SANZAR have set some tough conditions for the Argies to be included such as making them promise that all their best players be available and proving they have financial support and broadcasters onside.

It’s fair enough; it won’t be worthwhile unless the best of the best are playing.

The Argentine television audience is one boost for SANZAR (or will it soon be SAANZAR) but also the fact it’s in the right time zone to showcase the game to the massive US/Canadian market.

So let’s get the Argies into the Super 14/15 as soon as possible, especially for the likely Victorian side. Let’s make sure that any contracts signed in the Northern Hemisphere expressly states that they can play for the season except in August/September.

This is a great leap forward for the game. Rejoice!

After years in the football wilderness Aussie rah-rah fans were desperate for a change in fortune…and still are.

Fans, including yours truly were excited by the prospect of the Wallabies playing Crusaders style football; counter-attack, fast and mobile forwards and ball in hand ‘play what’s in front of you’ style of footy.

Now Australia have lost two games on the trot the halo on Dingo’s head has taken a few beatings. What’s fascinating is the fact that many in the rugby media are drawing swords at the very thought of criticising this guy.

Truth is Dingo has improved the Wallabies no doubt; the scrum is beginning to hold its own instead of being an international joke and perhaps most importantly with sideways glances to 2011 has brought in around a dozen debutants and given the Wallaby side a flash of youth.

But it is fair to say that Dingo has made mistakes when it comes to the style of players and play he is trying to instil. The idea of three openside flankers in Smith, Pocock and Waugh might sound great to ex-full-backs like Deans and plenty of other sports fans but it doesn’t  equate to the toughness you need in a backrow.

Look at South Africa who have a brutal backrow of Berger, Spies and Smith and now looking even more devastating with a genuine ‘fetcher’ (openside flanker for the rest of us) in Brussow.

Australia have been smashed at the breakdown in both games and have seriously lacked the physicality need to win against the best teams in the world.

And the fact we went against the best lineout in the world the other week without a recognised third jumper in the starting side? Let’s not even go there (ok but just for a second, we lost 8 throws to the Yarpies).

And just while we’re on changes that need to be happening in the Aussie side…

• Barnes proved against the Springboks when Gits was yellow carded that he has the pose, tactical kicking nouse, composure and ability to control the game that you need in a good and reliable first five-eigth. This Fly has been calling for Barnes and Gits to swap the 10 and 12 jerseys for a year. After the South Africa game the small voices saying the same have gained a proper voice.
• Mortlock has a doubtful future. Hard to say for a captain but his play is essential bash and barge and the older he gets the less effective he is. Mortlock is a great player and produces excellent performances that have won Australia and the ACT many games, but the gap between those games are growing. Adam Ashley-Cooper (as has been written here before) is a better outside centre than winger or full-back (although he’s more than accomplished in both) and O’Connor’s counter-attacks from full back the other week against the Yarpies shows he’s ready for a regular starting spot at 15.
• Genia deserved to start. Burgess has had more than enough chances and hasn’t produced the goods. Dingo has showed him a hell of a lot of loyalty but unlike last year we have a young replacement in Genia not a bloke about to retire in Cordingly. If Burgess really is the bloke to take us to the 2011 and let’s hope he is, then being dropped should fire him up and spur him to be a better player…worked for most of our best cricketers…
• The backrow selection for tomorrow nights game were correct; Elsom (no pressure on him at all…), Brown and Smith. Ultimately if Palu picks up some form in club rugby he should be considered a 20 minute impact player and should be touted as the man to replace Brown at about the 60 minute mark.
• Horwill is a player that the Fly rates very highly but whose form hasn’t matched last year’s high yet. We need him to shine while we just have to hope and pray that Dan Vickerman returns in time for the world cup as nobody else really selects themselves.
• Baxter has improved out of sight since Dingo took hold but Alexander deserve to be starting. While Moore’s inclusion of Palautu-Nau is purely due to the latter’s poor lineout throwing. The fact Moore threw so poorly the other week means a change here should also be looked at. 

LOTE TUQIRI shock, horror has been left out two weeks in a row from the Wallabies squad showing a) Dingo Deans doesn’t give a Kiwi bird’s arse how much he’s being paid and b) in all honesty there are better contenders for wing spots that Lote.

 On the subject of players being left out the Tele ran a story last week about Lote and Timana playing club rugby. In this morn’s Herald mentions how Phil Waugh is one of five members of the Wallabies squad and one of 40 Super rugby players running around for their clubs today. Hmmm, can you imagine that instead of these players going to club rugby they were going to a smaller, higher level competition? Wouldn’t it be fantastic to see these guys playing with and against each other while the Test season played out? Instead of some players here and there as well as a few playing in Brissy and Perth comps. Another argument for our national club comp Mr O’Neill.

 THE WALLABIES while they aren’t going to South Africa next year (well they are but not for soccer) they’re performance last week was one of the best season openers in a long while. Gits and Barnes operating as first and second five-eighths makes Australia that much better and their tactical kicking was spot on. O’Connor is truly a freakish talent and alongside Lachie Turner will electrify our backline play. Add in a few injuried forwards and we have a decent shot at the Tri-Nations.

Yes John O’Neill was reported in The Australian as saying that a good broadcast deal for the new Super 15 tournament could mean Australia can get a national club competition up and running again.

The Saviour reckons that this time it needs to be done on the smell of an oily rag (the one and only Australian Rugby Championship (ARC) in 2007 lost $4.7 million bucks. So oily rag is probably a fair call. There were a few things that massively added to the cost of the ARC; the fact the ARU paid the ABC to show it, costs of flying to Perth, setting up a Melbourne side with no real existing rugby infrastructure (no Super franchise or Premier club rugby ‘feeder’ teams like in Sydney and Brissy), and of course general flights and accomodation.

The general murmurs around rugby circles is that a new ARC should disclude any Perth team to save cash. While it will save some dough it would be a step back for developing support in Perth and a kick in the teeth for Perth rugby fans. Rugby has made some headway there with a Test every year and a Super franchise, chopping them out of a new ARC would be insulting. Also what about all the Western Force players that don’t make the Wallabies squad? Some will come back to the East but we can’t expect blokes to live half the year in Perth and half on the eastern seaboard.

Either way, John O’Neill, an avid reader of The Sideline Eye (haha) this is for you. We’re so happy you’re talking about re-introducing the ARC we’ve decided a few ways to do it and get close to breaking even.

Melbourne – placing a Super franchise in Melbourne means that a Melbourne ARC team will not be such a financial burden as it was last time around (the infrastructure will be there). Unlike last time where basically the entire playing roster and coaching staff had to re-locate their costing a heap.

North Sydney team over Central Coast – it was good that the ARC looked after the disenfranchised Central Coast in the form of ARC champions the Central Coast Rays. However this added greatly to the costs, the Rays were a combination side of sides on the north side of the bridge so instead of the Central Coast base them on the North Shore / Northern Beaches. (How you could not have a side properly representing the North Shore / Beaches in the first place is beyond Wally but more on that later).                              

TV deal – the standard of the last ARC was good and good enough for a broadcaster to want to show it (and not pay them to show it). This will be helped by making the scheduling of matches more TV friendly; Friday night game on FoxSports (to run against Nine’s Friday night footy), the usual Saturday afternoon game but on FoxSports (no league on Sat arvo so they’d like something to show live) and Sunday afternoon on ABC or OneHD, Channel 10. The final game wouldn’t be televised and the game can be played whenever the home side wants.

Accomodation – sorry but this has to be semi-professional and as far as possible the players are going to have to fly to and from interstate games on the day.

Flights – can QANTAS be pushed into being a top line sponsor? Even if the only contribution is paying flights it’ll be worth it.

Payment – Super rugby players and those on ARU contracts already get plenty of cash and would be playing club rugby for next to nothing anyway so do they need to be getting a heap of money for playing in the ARC? At least for the first few seasons they’d have to be pretty tight on paying players. Guys making the jump from first grade to this level would surely be more than happy enough just to get a slight better match fee than they get at club rugby along with the team kit!

Grounds – The Sideline Eye has written previously about playing quality rugby league grounds that would encourage the crowds and corporates. But if it is a matter of having a national comp or not (i.e. to save cash) nobody would care if games were being played at smaller venues. (i.e. Rat park instead of Brookvale oval, TG Milner or Granville park instead of Parramatta Stadium).

It CAN be done and as stated to death on this site, it needs to be done. More so now we have to fill out a 5^th side.

Cricket has its Sheffield Shield (and that don’t make no money) and to survive and prosper on provincial Super rugby level and at International level Australia needs its ARC.

1.      16 rounds

2.      Teams to be split into three conferences (RSA, NZ, AUS) with teams playing teams in their own conference home and away as well as playing four of the five teams in the other two conferences.

3.      A 15^th team will be introduced playing in the Australian conference (yet to be named).

4.      A six-team three week semi-finals system whereby the top team from each country is guaranteed a possie.

5.      Three week bye during the June Tests

6.      Begins in Feb and ends around August

This is great news. While the Yarpies basically got everything they demanded (they have superior leverage thanks to having the biggest TV market) from an Aussie point of view it makes some important leaps forward.

Firstly it means that instead of having a ridiculously short competition it finally runs for a decent length of time allowing people to get into the tournament.

Having eight guaranteed home games (including 4 against sides in the Australian conference) means more gate revenue and more games on tele to watch.

The fact we’re guaranteed one spot in the semi’s means is obviously a huge plus!

The next question is the 5^th team to play in the Aussie conference which is no means decided. South Africa’s bizare request for it to be a South African team aside, it is coming down to Gold Coast, Western Sydney and Victoria.

Victoria is of course the only answer:

·         Super rugby is a provincial competition

·         GC or WS would pillage Reds and Waratahs support and forever ruin the fantastic century old rivalry between Queensland and NSW state rugby sides.

·         Melbourne = 4 million people, Western Sydney = 2 million people Gold Coast = 500,000 people (roughly)

·         There are plenty of ex-pat Kiwis and northern state refugees in Melbourne to support the side

·         If rugby leaves it any longer the Storm will finally cement a spot and the ship will have sailed

·         New rectangular stadium in Melbourne to be ready by 2011.

·         Victoria actually has a strong history of rugby going back decades and have produced many Wallabies such as Weary Dunlop and Rocky Elsom

·         Having a Victorian side means that rugby has a solid national pressence (WA, NSW, QLD, VIC, ACT)

·         GC and WS have teams, the Reds and the Waratahs, as The Sideline Eye has been banging on about for yonks, both sides need to be playing games outside Ballymore and SFS and show people they are the State teams.

It scares many a folk that John O’Neill is even talking about putting the team in GC or WS but The Sideline Eye strongly suspects Messiah John is playing the game. Subtly saying to Melbournians ‘don’t take the team for granted’ and to the GC and Western Sydney ‘we haven’t forgotten you’.

Let’s bloody well hope so.

The value of the NSW ‘trial’ game to one side, its clear the rep season still make no sense.

You have a 40 team NSW squad selected before the City/Country origin team is named and before the Test is played (even though Origin is after the Test!).

Then you got the fact that thanks to Channel 9’s demand last Friday’s ‘trial’ game was played at the same time as the Test. (Just how bad this was has already been disected so we’ll move on).

Firstly there needs to be a progression in rep footy, from smaller to bigger; City/Country (if it has to be played) then State of Origin (June/July) and finally Tests or whatever after the regular season.

Secondly, you need to allow these games to be played separately from clubs. Lockyear tomorrow night will be playing his third game in a week and this physical drain on players is unacceptable.

If City/Country has a place then it has to be as stand alone game or not at all.

State of Origin should be three consecutive weeks where the club season stops. It means its easier on players attempting to back up but also gives the other players a break and puts 100% of the focus onto Origin.

Finally after the club season is complete then we can see the Tests, tournaments and tours.

(Exactly what post-NRL season tournaments should be played The Sideline Eye covered last year).

Sydney teams struggling to stay in the black (and battling the fact that there are too many games in the season) whore themselves off for a game or two in Gosford; Easts, Bulldogs, Souths and Manly. Now Cronulla want five games up there.

The problem with this is that the clubs aren’t trying to become the Central Coast club but rather just do it for a cash grab.

This SMH article covering the Storm’s victory over Easts last night starts off by saying ‘empty seats dotted Bluetongue Stadium. Will they really support an NRL team on the Central Coast?’ 

It totally misses the point, the people of the Central Coast WILL NOT go to ad hoc games played by teams that don’t represent their area.

That’s why none of them get huge crowds and that’s why the Northern Eagles failed.

With all due respect to the journo who wrote that, haven’t you learnt anything from the last eight or so years of league failure in that region?

Besides having over 8,000 for a Monday night game isn’t that much different to what Manly or Easts or most Sydney clubs would get for ‘Monday night football.’

BUT BACK to the main point here, the clubs going up there aren’t trying to become a Central Coast club, but rather just get a bit of cash.

This is totally against the long term interests of growing (or sustaining the interest) in the Central Coast.

The only team that are totally committed to playing in the area are playing in the NSW Cup; the Bears.

They also happen to be the only team that should be granted the ‘licence’ to play up there.

Here’s why:

v     It would reawaken the lost supporters on the North Shore who will a) attend the games at North Sydney Oval and b) probably watch it    games on tele. For some in that area hopping onto the F1 is quite easy and means going to games insn’t totally out of the question.

v     Finally give a strong rugby league area a team of their own, solidifying league’s stronghold on the area.

v     Give a lot of league fans, whatever their stripes the ‘feel good’ sense that a traditional club (albeit rebranded) is back in the game. Similar to how people felt when Souths were brought back in (no matter how quickly that seemed to have evapourated!)

v     Before the dreadful Northern Eagles experiment there was plenty of support for the Bears on the Coast. My sources tell me most people up on the Coast support a whole heap of different sides now but the ship hasn’t yet sailed into the sunset. The NRL must act immediately in getting a side up there.

For those playing at home the Sharks are planning to play five games in Gosford and one in Adelaide for the next five years starting next year. This is due to the terrible financial state of the struggling Sydney club.

Ah but Cronulla are not relocating, no, their CEO says. Although that didn’t stop them putting the hat out to the NRL for the RELOCATION money. Common sense prevailed and the NRL knocked back the Cronulla’s request for the sizeable cash on offer (a few hundred G’s of the $8-11 million on offer for a proper relocation).

Cronulla aren’t interested in relocating and integrating their side in the Central Coast community. As Florimo said, it’s a short term money making exercise to keep them alive for the next couple of years.

And now they’re talking about playing home games against the Warriors in Auckland or Wellington, playing Brisbane at Lang Park and Nth Queensland in Townsville.

A travelling circus.

The plan reeks of desperation. The Sharks and the NRL should be focusing on long term and permanent relocation of the Sharks.

Why? Coz they not nothing going for them; they have had poor crowds for years, never won a premiership and now geographically make very little sense with St George and Illawarra sandwhiching them. Not to mention of course, their terrible financial situation. (And like all clubs in Sydney there’s the issue of there being too many around).

Relocation is exactly what they should be doing but not on the current model (five games at CC, one in Adelaide and now it seems games in NZ and Queensland). They need to relocate but relocate properly with a minium of 10 home games at the new location.

Fair enough if they follow the proposed Central Coast Bears model of playing most of their games at Gosford with one or two games a year at North Sydney Oval to keep that part of the supporter base alive.

But wherever they go they have to be the X Sharks and totally imerse themselves in the new community they’re in.

The NRL should offer the $8-$11 million they’re offering up for CC move for the team committed to going to Perth, Adelaide, a 4^th Queensland team or Wellington.

These options are really where the Sharks should be heading, as for the Coast there is only one option: the Bears. More on that soon.

Big call but it’s true.

Rugby is going backwards in Oz; crowds are down and TV audience is down. The standard of Super 14 this year is the worst it has ever been and the side with the biggest market share, NSW Waratahs, are a horrible team to watch.

All rugby fans would know that there is a big debate going on now between the SANZAR nations over what to do with an expanded series.

The South Africans are being portrayed as the recalcitrant side because they insist on keeping their Currie Cup. They want the competition to start in early Feb and end in time for their domestic competition to commence in July.

At least the Yarpies have a domestic competition to protect and good on them for doing it.

BUT getting back to the Super rugby restructure for a minute. Here are the principle issues; people seem to prefer watching their team play teams from the same country Australian crowds tend to be much better when Aussie sides play Kiwis rather than the Saffas.

Also, we need the Saffas more than they need us. Why? Because Super Sport television in South Africa provides a heap of money into the SANZAR coffers as they operate in the biggest market (there are around 50 million South Africans and they’re in the right time zone for Europe too).

O’Neill is talking about a Japanese club because he wants to tap into the potential Asian honey pot.

How can all these things be brought together?

Enter Wally’s grand proposal:

South Africa commence their Currie Cup in February (RSA Conference)

• Australia and New Zealand commence ‘Asia-Pacific’ tournament in March.
• In Asia-Pacific there are two conferences consisting of;
  • NSW, QLD, ACT, WA, VIC (no foreign player restrictions, focus on getting Argentineans and perhaps Pacific Islanders) and Tokyo (no Aussie players just Japanese players but also try and get American and Canadians.)
  • Auckland, Wellington, Crusaders, Highlanders, Chiefs and either a Pacific Islands team or a sixth New Zealand team.

• They play each other once in this conference
• They then play every other team once (including teams that were in their own conference again). This is a total of 16 games (8 home and 8 away).
• Then in late July early August a six or eight team finals series that includes the top two/three/four South African sides against the top Asia-Pacific sides.

Why it could work:

v     Hopefully keep the South Africans on board which means the TV rights will be worth a LOT more.

v     More local derbies (keep up the crowd numbers).

v     Very limited games against South African sides which aren’t as popular but when we do play them hopefully it’ll be rare enough to grab attention anyway.

v     Most regular season games will be within prime time or a couple of hours out either way. It’s hard to follow your team when they’re playing at 3am in the RSA.

v     Brings in a new market in Asia which could develop into a big earner in the long term.

v     Could bring in Argentineans and Pacific Island players from Europe thereby making it easier to eventually get them playing in an expanded Tri-Nations.

I said it could make or break rugby in Oz because rugby is looking poor at the moment, if officials don’t get this right, if we can’t give rugby a new lease of life and get more people tuning in and going through the gate we’ll be swamped by the other codes. 

The next missoin for the FFA? Getting good games for the national team between now and heading to Africa.

We have signed up to play the Republic of Ireland in Limerick in August and have Asian Cup qualifiers in November but have four more FIFA dates to fill in September and October.

The FFA have two things on their mind; firstly getting good sides that we’re not used to playing against (i.e. non-Asian) that we may come up against in the WC and secondly to get big enough sides to generate enough interest to get punters through the turnstiles.

There’s talk of the Dutch coming over which would be huge but who else should be on the hit list? The Sideline Eye has one name on the list: ENGLAND.

Australia playing England at home at football would surely get the media into a frenzy and sports lovers of all codes would have at least one eye on the contest.

Is this being pursued at all by the FFA? It definitely should be. The only other side that would turn the heads of non-soccer infidel here would be Brazil, which would be another huge coup for the FFA.

Both matches would tick both critera for the national body; its in the Socceroos interest to play against them and their style of football and it will get plenty of attention from the public.

Ok ok this might be pie in the sky stuff but its worth a shot.

Why would they want to come over here you say? Tell them Australian conditions are similar to South Africa and teams like England and the Netherlands should get out here to get used to it.

The next thing is getting decent World Cup warm up games in May 2010 which will be a lot tougher. Firstly, we won’t have a snow balls chance in hell in getting European teams over here because they’ll want to stay in the similar time zone that Africa shares with Western Europe.

Asian teams as I said above aren’t really in our interest to play against.

While South American sides could come over to base themselves in Australia where weather conditions are similar to South Africa and it is a more ’comfortable’ environment. It’s the long way to South Africa but you never know, its worth a shot! 

So get busy FFA, get us Joe Public some serious opposition. Let’s bring out some heavy weights and bring on the World Cup!