Search results

Pfitzy, I don't understand your logic on SOO. It's a representative series. Most NRL players qualify to play in it and selection comes down to talent. No different to the Wallabies or Kangaroos. And what the Reds and Waratahs were in the past. Of course it's the 2nd tier in Australian rugby...

The levels below the NRL don't involve NRL players. They are completely separate tiers. More comparable to shute shield etc. On the other hand the NRC involves the vast majority of super rugby players. Rugby is structured differently due to the long international season. There is really...

The NRL is the third highest level of rugby league in Australia. Why don't you consider it 3rd tier? Seriously, everyone involved in rugby needs to stop calling the NRC the third tier. It's the worst branding for a competition that has ever existed. It is THE national championship, involving...

Spartan women used to say that last bit to their men when they went off to battle. They had shields like this:

Almost all the players are eligible to play for the Wallabies. This competition isn't just about development. It's a national championship involving all but the top 25 or so players in the country. The aim for the teams should be to win the title, not simply to develop players for higher levels.

Can we all agree it should look more like the restored shield of some ancient warrior, than something found on the wall of a lawn bowls club dining room or school hall?

No one has said they should be forking out millions in advertising. You're absolutely right that word of mouth is the most important element. But people have to see it to speak about it. The number 1 imperative is to have all the games shown live in some format. The cheapest and most...

Another thing is that there may be a fair bit of backlash about picking the Singapore team over Japan. People would death-ride Singapore from the beginning and see it as a bit of a joke. It also may alienate the Japanese to a certain extent, and the relationship with Japanese rugby is a lot more...

This is a great idea. My first thought is that it should be bigger and heavier than the Ranfurly shield! And a different shape. Completely round in the Greek style or massive and squarish like an ancient roman shield. Needs a cool rugby image (including Shawn Mackay obviously) that can be...

Super Rugby costs more money for the ARU every year. You've said to me in the past that you can't look at it in isolation as Super Rugby underpins the Wallabies and the Wallabies bring in the cash. Why do you have a different view of the ARC / NRC? (In the long term I disagree with this...

Going to Singapore first would be such a big risk IMO. A team of expats in a market with non-existent local interest. And it's not like the potential reward is greater either. Japan is a much bigger market.

The Australian is reporting that Singapore are the favourites for the 18th team. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/rugby-union/singapore-favourites-over-japan-to-win-super-rugby-18th-franchise/story-e6frg7o6-1227043089398

Club rugby hasn't grown beyond a small base so why will the NRC? The ARU needs to broaden and increase its revenue base and it needs the NRC to become valuable to broadcasters and sponsors. It's simply not going to happen without investing in it - beyond the level of the initial return.

I'm not talking about starting any bigger in terms of player salaries or bigger venues etc, I'm talking purely about promotion and broadcasting. The biggest thing holding the NRC back is that most of it can't be seen. This needs to change for the competition to grow in future.

It's more accurate to say the loss was about $2 million more than forecast. And the next years loss was going to be significantly less. Perhaps by year 3 or 4 it would have broken even. At the time the ARU had money too. It's not really ideal to start this competition now needing it to just...

Which would be the worst decision ever.

The painting of the ARC as a 'financial basket case' is rubbish because it was never supposed to come close to breaking even in the first season. It was an investment in the game and I think it would have paid off in the long run had club land not got their way. The biggest difference in terms...

The Stars have also been quite inactive on social media compared to pretty much all the other teams. Hopefully they've been promoting the game in the local area because otherwise I doubt they'll get more than a few hundred people to their games.

The issue is cost. $5k per match or thereabouts for it to be done with 3 cameras, commentary etc (though that would be offset somewhat through advertising/sponsorship). Personally I think it'd be worth the investment. Only way the competition will grow is if people can see it.

Yeah at least someone's doing something. The Reds Rugby stream is better than nothing but it'd be so much better with commentary. I think the ARU should be contracting someone to stream every match all on the one platform, not leaving it up to the individual clubs.