Now our Brumby friends... about the name?

Gundaroo Jack, you’re right – they do have to raise the money. And if they don’t well, that’s just the way of the world. The Brumbies, or the Raiders, or whatever the A-League bid is calling itself, don’t have a god-given access to the public purse when times are tough. I’m seeing a lot of posts about how much cash the Brumbies franchise (and remember it’s just that – a franchise, moveable at the whim of the ARU) generates for the region as a result of playing its home games in Canberra – maybe they should look at increasing their slice of that pie before taling the public’s money.

As an adjunct – what a lot of ‘newbies’ joining in this discussion…

S4anta said :

A majority of this money will go to ensuring that the local junior and senior comps stay afloat and do not lose funding from the collapse of a sponsor of the games flagship in the area.

Before there was the Brumbies there was senior and junior Rugby Union played it Canberra so why should Rugby in the ACT be dependent on Brumbies funding.

Hello ! Does anybody out there understand sport or do we all have to read dribble about “boo hoo it’s not fair”, or “give me the money”. I have never read anywhere the Brumbies are ashamed of being from the ACT. Naming rights are exactly that – NAMING RIGHTS. If you dont want the Brumbies to get naming rights fees from sponsors – do you want the govt to pay more ? or for us to pay more for membership or mercahndise ? No thanks. They have to raise the money somehow ! Remember they dont have the licenced club network the raiders have. Johnboy – whats next on your Brumbies bashing list? The Brumbies moving to the Gold Coast? Heaven forbid if Melbourne is the 15th franchise and the Brumbies bashers can’t use that old chestnut anymore.

OK fair enough, if they say that is where the money is going. But surely your development budget isn’t beholdent to the money you get from your jersey supplier. Development of local Rugby isn’t a line on a sponsorship agreement its encumbant on the Brumbies to undertake regardless of the financial position.

MrMagoo said :

S4anta said :

“Sport and Recreation is for everyone not the chosen few”

A majority of this money will go to ensuring that the local junior and senior comps stay afloat and do not lose funding from the collapse of a sponsor of the games flagship in the area.

Well that’s the spin they’ve put on it anyway. Sorry I’m not buying. The Brumbies first role should be the development of local rugby and that shouldn’t be contingent on funding from the jersey provider.

It is. The Brumibes are the flagship of the ACTRU. Without the Brumbies being at the top of tree alot of the rugby player coming thorugh the ACT system would be still playing for the Reds, or worse the pooftahs

While I dont mean to bring up a contentious issue in this topic, part of me wonders how much of this missing money, is due to loss of income in the clubs/pokies due to non-smoking. Ive seen a figure somewhere that clubs have lost approx 20% of their income due to lack of smokers pumping their pensions into the pokies. Is this a case of regulation coming back to cost the government cold hard cash? I also wonder, if the brumbies are struggling for cash, how must the loss of income affected junior rugby? I presume when the board sits down and realises the loss of income, they’ll start cutting the non money-making parts, such as junior sport in favour of the higher profile Brumbies and ACT rugby.

On the flip-side, with the failure of The Comets, The Raiders and The Cannons over previous years, maybe theyre just looking for any remaining ACT sports to throw some budgeted money at.

According to the Chronicle I got the other day, the Brumbies training ground (at Griffith?) is getting $1m plus for re-turfing and landscaping despite the Brumbie players being quoted as saying they thought the turf was pretty good as it is.

Now, I know the oval gets used by many other teams and for ACT Rugby, and probably isn’t perfect. But given the state of ovals around Canberra, especially at schools, what is the justification for spending so much money on an oval that is already one of the best in Canberra. Surely fixing up the dust/mud bowls that most schools now have could be a better use of the funds.

Some might say the Brumbies were a factor in the decision … got to keep them happy. Or, I don’t know, they could fund their own training facilities like other professional teams

(yes, I realise the Brumbies probably hire the oval and thus contribute to the cost, but the point remains)

S4anta said :

“Sport and Recreation is for everyone not the chosen few”

A majority of this money will go to ensuring that the local junior and senior comps stay afloat and do not lose funding from the collapse of a sponsor of the games flagship in the area.

Well that’s the spin they’ve put on it anyway. Sorry I’m not buying. The Brumbies first role should be the development of local rugby and that shouldn’t be contingent on funding from the jersey provider.

“Sport and Recreation is for everyone not the chosen few”

A majority of this money will go to ensuring that the local junior and senior comps stay afloat and do not lose funding from the collapse of a sponsor of the games flagship in the area.

Shouldn’t the funding be allocated to provide the most benefit to the most people in the region, and wouldn’t the most benefit be to get the maximum people active in some kind of sport? In which case, funding lots of little groups that get subsets of the population getting out and getting fit would be better than keeping a couple of super teams thriving and a lot of the population sedentary?