Search results

Perhaps it makes me a bit of a dick but if they are surplis tp Super Rugby needs and getting on a bit then let them explore opportunities elsewhere. We cannot afford to give out contracts to players as a form of super for their service. They are taking the spot of someone who could actually add more than...

Would have preferred each Uni hosting a round. But again, better than nothing.

Well, I'm going off someone who is involved in the game in Brazil. He also notes that the CBRU only recognizes 6 states in their Union and thus only gather their official numbers from those states.

Well, Uruguay are integrating more and more with the Argentine system each season. They have their A tram playing in the Compenato structure just earning promotion to the 2nd division and should be competitive. They also have their best 3 or 4 clubs competing in the Nacionales de Clubs. Add to...

Brazil has around 30k players at the moment.

Still could in 2018. I wouldn't mind it goimg to 12 fairly quickly but what I'd prefer would be to see the number of rounds go from 4 to 8. Would even work with 12 teams. Both Nsw and Qld could run combined events or Qld could probably have two while each Uni host one round each.

I personally think Mason needs another season of club and NRC before he's ready. I'd go for Foley, Deegan and Hegarty as 10 cover.

It's actually a positive sign for the circuit. More competition never hurts. Should push our girls harder. An all Nth American final. So there is a positive. NZ won't win it.

Well, what else do you expect. The result of our generous and welcoming refugee program.

Not bad. But if they are getting more than the girls then that's a bloody travesty.

SOS and now Aon. It's been a good week on the sponsorship front. Pulver may not be the favourite of a number of power brokers in the game but boy he has been great for it.

First of all, I'm both surprised that Sydney Uni hasn't managed to get themselves a run and pleased to see squads from both Tasmania and Adelaide involved. Would prefer if each of the Uni's got to host a round each but four is a solid enough start.

I was actually just thinking about this. Wondering when we'd see something considering it is Thursday and we were due an announcement before the 7s.

I definitely think there's an appeal to it. It's just finding the right balance. As for looking internationally. As much as we discuss issues regarding Aus Rugby and their overall importance. And they are important. We often seem to forget that we tend to live in a bit of a bubble when it comes...

The Austin Huns had their first home game of the season. Prevailing over Cal Cup champs OMBAC (featuring the likes of Ben Batger, Jogn Grant and Ged Gillespie) 24-21. The game was broadcast via Time Warner sports to over 2 million Texan homes and was very professionally done. Simulcast on...

That's actually an interesting question. The original agreement was for three seasons.

No one held a gun to the heads of those clubs to fund a team. They all chose to compete and thus provide funding. Truth be told if it were only the Rams and Eagles from day one the NSW teams would be even stronger than they were this season.

The SS hasn't extended the number of actual games. Which is my biggest issue as it was one of the early means to rationalise altering the schedule. All they've done is ensure that the SS now directly conflicts with thr NRC by moving its start date back a fortnight and adding a bye week.

We've discussed this previously. Only 5 clubs contribute anything financially to NRC teams.

The NRC already has 3 NSW teams, 2 Qld teams and a team from Canberra, Melbourne and Perth. So 8 teams playing each other once for a total of 7 rounds. How's that really any different to your suggestion? It will actually feature a Fijian squad in 2017 to add another game. All you are really...