Search results

We do have a competition. It's just a very recent development.

At least it's something which is more than the SARU showed up with.

The Perth developed players, well are number of them, could be considered superior to many of their imports.

Did I say I supported that argument? It's professional sport. You source talent where you can. Just highlighting the train of thought behind that angle.

How about this. Cut the Saffers loose. Go with two conferences of 6 over 16 rounds. Hell, if the Japanese and Argentines want another team each then fine. Two 7 team conferences. Bonus. Most of the games would be in our time zones. They knew this meeting was coming up but are such a basketcase...

The argument is that other franchises produce their own without the need to import them. The Force currently have 10 in their main squad. NSW has over 80%. The Rebels actually have a bunch of young guys emerging.

That's not a bad idea. Often wondered why they didn't go ahead with a variation of that to start with. The Currie Cup operated with just 6 squads for several years and it was arguably the best quality competition it has been. I think if they could manage a 6th squad they could run it over 10...

You also have to take into account the overall running costs of these teams as well. If we were to lose a franchise I would hope that the ARU would use any savings tp better resource and expand the NRC. Double its length and a greater level of promotion would go a long way.

In order to initiate the bargainning process you have to first issue some demands and then start from there.

We already have the mechanism. Match fee's.

If the franchises were to achieve independence and negotiate their own deal the monies they would otherwise recieve from the ARU be replaced by their share of the deal. The match fee's for international duty would be a bonus.

Then eliminate direct contract top ups. English players aren't centrally contracted. They recieve match payments. Lucrative ones at that. It's also how it works in League as well.

I guess in theory if an independent commission were to occur a 'licencing' agreement could be agreed to where the clubs pay an annual fee to the ARU. But, yes. The ARU's major focus should be developing the game and in order to achieve this focus on growing the Wallabies brand.

Yep. We're all aware of his comments. But there's also a conflicting tweet from a Rugby journo saying that's bullshit.

That's the big difference. In theory all the monies gained via any TV deal would flow directly to the clubs. This would likely put them all in significantly better financial positions.

I've previously talked about the need for Super Rugby to be independent of their national Unions on other forums. I think it's well overdue. Super Rugby needs to break the whole developmental mindset.

And I wouldn't rule out further interest in the Asian market. I think it could become quitevan important market for Super Rugby going forward.

It's called bargainning.

Which is why we should be demanding that the competition runs for 18 rounds with no byes so we can have both home and away derby matches. Nothing less.

That's the only workable way for 16 teams. Though, if I were the ARU I'd be pushing hard to move they number of games to 18 so we can get our derbies as compensation for cutting a franchise. As for the NRC. That becomes vitally important now. Particularly for the location of the franchise that...