A familiar line echoed through Wallaby media channels and press conferences during the Lions Series that they "just can’t compete with other sports.”
A familiar line echoed through Wallaby media channels and press conferences during the Lions Series that they "just can’t compete with other sports.”
Yes, rugby union in Australia faces stiff competition from other sports like Aussie rules, rugby league, cricket and soccer. But here's the truth: so does almost every successful rugby nation on the planet. And most of them still manage to field competitive, coherent teams — with far fewer resources than Australia has at its disposal.
Let’s put things into context. In New Zealand, rugby is the undisputed king. It’s deeply embedded in the national identity. But outside of New Zealand, Wales and the Pacific Island countries, rugby union is not the number one sport anywhere else — and yet the top teams still thrive.
In France, rugby plays second fiddle to football. Yet the French have built a world-class domestic competition in the Top 14, developed incredible depth through their youth systems, and now boast a national side that competes with the very best.
England? Rugby’s arguably the fourth most popular sport, behind football, cricket, and perhaps even Formula One. That hasn’t stopped them from building a professional structure that can produce global stars and a World Cup-winning pedigree.
Ireland shares the same fate — rugby’s not even close to topping the popularity charts with gaelic football, hurling and soccer more popular — but through smart central contracting and aligned systems, the Irish have built a program admired worldwide for its consistency and cohesion.
Even in South Africa, rugby trails football in terms of national support, particularly in urban and township areas. But they’ve won four World Cups — more than anyone else — and continue to develop world-class players despite financial challenges and talent drains overseas.
Why can’t the Wallabies cope like the rest?
In 2020, Australia ranked as having the fourth most registered players behind only England, South Africa and France meaning their talent pool shouldn't be as thin as people claim.
The issue isn’t about competition from other codes. Every rugby nation has to deal with crowded sporting landscapes. The real problem is how Australian rugby has responded to that challenge.
For too long, there’s been a reliance on nostalgia — the glory days of Eales, Gregan and Larkham packed stadiums at club and country level — without a clear, sustainable plan for how to evolve.
Meanwhile, AFL and NRL have eaten rugby’s lunch not just because they’re popular, but because they’re professional, coherent, and relentlessly well-organised. They know who they are and what they’re selling. Rugby still feels like it’s trying to remember.
Even when success has come — like the Queensland Reds’ 2011 Super Rugby title, the Brumbies’ recent consistency or reaching the 2015 World Cup final — Rugby Australia has failed to build on those foundations. No one recalls mentioning competition with other sports when England toured Australia in 2016 or 2022 or during recent World Cups.
The Lions Series exposed a brutal truth that blaming external factors like the popularity of other sports is not only lazy, it’s misleading.
What needs to change?
Australian rugby must stop pretending its challenges are unique. They’re not. What’s missing is strategic alignment, smarter governance, and a cultural reset that rewards long-term planning over short-term fixes.
Under Joe Schmidt, the Wallabies delivered a solid showing and enough to illustrate positive foundations for his successor, Les Kiss, to work with. It’s now time for Rugby Australia to ditch the excuses and start building the structures that have made other Tier 1 nations successful, despite their own sporting disadvantages.