Advertisement

Rugby Union: Australian Rugby Union errs in decision to cull Western Force

In choosing the Rebels over the Force, the ARU has opted to save a team that has been non-competitive since 2011, and averages crowds of only 8,000 a match.

IT was painful, messy and at times looked like a black comedy, but the ARU finally got its way last Friday and culled a Super Rugby team. But did the ARU cut the wrong team? Was the Western Force the team that had to go, or was it just the one that could be axed? And will the decision come back to haunt Australian rugby?

At the beginning of last year, the financially challenged Melbourne Rebels had been taken off the ARU’s hands by private owner Andrew Cox, while the Force had entered into an “alliance” with the ARU after selling its intellectual property for $800,000 as part of a financial rescue package.

The ARU did not need a market research company to tell it which team to cut, but so much has happened since then that the fortunes of the Force and the Rebels had virtually been reversed. When the Force indicated it would fight any attempt to cut it and challenged the ARU’s legal right to do so, the ARU looked to plan B, which was closing down the Rebels or merging them with the Brumbies. But this avenue was blocked when Cox decided against selling the Rebels’ license back to the ARU and instead sold it to the Victorian Rugby Union for $1, which protected the Melbourne team from the chop.

Rugby WA is considering appealing the ARU’s decision to cut the Force in the NSW Supreme Court and mining magnate Andrew “Twiggy” Forrest has vowed to support the team. I am not a sports lawyer, but the arbitrator would have been acutely aware that this decision would be intensely scrutinised by both sides and would have ensured it was watertight. It is also my understanding that the scope for appealing the outcome of the arbitration is limited.

Let’s assume the Force are gone. As a result, Australia has been left with no Super Rugby team in Western Australia, which has the third largest participation numbers in the country behind the traditional rugby heartland states of NSW and Queensland. The Force also would have had the financial backing of a billionaire in Forrest, who had promised to do everything he could to keep the team going. And the Force had the passionate support of their fans, something was which was lacking in Melbourne and even Canberra. The ARU could have had a competitive team with a talented young coach and a wealthy benefactor in the West. Instead, it has the Rebels.

The Rebels have been non-competitive since they entered Super Rugby in 2011 and finished last this year, while their crowds have plummeted to about 8,000 a match. The Rebels’ original private owner - media buyer Harold Mitchell - lost an estimated $9m running the team before gifting his shares to the Victorian Rugby Union, which soon ran into financial difficulty and needed the ARU to step in and fund the team, costing millions of dollars. Now the Rebels are back in the hands of the VRU with no private owner or wealthy benefactor to prop them up.

The Rebels play in a sports mad city of almost four million people. That is why it made sense for the ARU to have a Super Rugby presence in Melbourne, but it could have achieved this objective without cutting the Force. While a merger between the Rebels and the Brumbies may have been a bridge too far, closing down the Rebels would have given the Brumbies an opportunity to play some or even half of their home games in Melbourne, potentially gaining corporate and fan support.

The potential for growth is in Melbourne and Perth, but that growth will now be stunted in the West and possibly Victoria as well. No Australian Super Rugby team is financially secure, but the Rebels and the Brumbies remain particularly vulnerable, while the Force would have had more security with Forrest’s backing. The ARU may think it has solved its problems by cutting the Force, but I suspect Australian rugby’s troubles have only just begun.