Search results

My point was just that if a NZ team was interested in signing Ben Volavola then there'd be dozens of Australian players good enough to get a gig over there if we opened up the player market to some extent between Australia and NZ.

Assuming the format was home and away within your conference and 3 matches against the other 2 conferences, South African teams would play 3 matches overseas in 2 or 3 of Australia, Japan, NZ or Argentina. The Australian and Kiwi teams would play an away game against the international team in...

Ben Volavola getting a contract with the Crusaders, despite being ineligible for the All Blacks, shows it's possible.

4 or 5 players per team would be just 20-25 players in total and would make a difference. Open it up both ways, 20-25 Australian eligible players in NZ and 20-25 All Blacks eligible players in Australia. Wouldn't be a magic bullet, but doing something like this doesn't mean you can't also...

My speculation would be that as long as they're still eligible for NZ and not defecting to Australia that it wouldn't matter to most people. This could be different among different generations of fans, but my feeling is that most people that have grown up with the internet, and thus in a very...

It wouldn't necessarily have to be core All Blacks that were allowed to play for Australian clubs (though I think it would be good for that sort of flexibility), it could just be guys on the fringes of selection. And I believe Super Rugby players in Australia do make more money than those in NZ...

When I suggested this it was more in the context of a Trans-Tasman league. There's a simple problem here. NZ produces the best players and particularly the most depth, while Australia has the biggest commercial markets and potential for growth. There should be some compromise here for...

I made the same suggestion a few days ago in another thread and people just say it'll never happen because the NZRU would have to change their current model, which has been so successful, and give up some control over some of their players. That seems a pretty small compromise to me...

I think if they go with 3 conferences of 6 it'd make a lot more sense to go with 16 matches per team (3 matches against both other conferences). Would make it easier for each team to have 8 home games per season too (as they did in Super 15).

I think it would depend on getting the right partners on board. But there are pockets of North America where rugby has a footprint. Places like the Bay area, Sacramento, Denver, Utah, Houston (where the US Eagles consistently get pretty good crowds). No less of a footprint than rugby had in...

You're confusing Pro Rugby with the mostly Celtic Pro 12. The latter is looking to set up a couple of teams in North America.

I think the ARU and SANZAAR will be underestimating the loss of goodwill they're going to receive here if they announce plans to cut an Australian team. They'll lose thousands of fans from the team that's cut and piss off many others. There'll be sniping in the media, all sorts of problems. And...

Do you think New Zealand rugby fans would be happy to play the bulk of their season in a competition that is on in the middle of the night half the time? Personally I doubt it. It'd be unsustainable. And you're talking as if the Wallabies would no longer exist. Most of the revenue the ARU...

Well I don't think there's ever been a cross-continental league like Super Rugby before so I assume it hasn't happened yet. But if it's inevitable that we won't be able to keep top players in Australia in the longer term by continuing to compromise our interests for those of NZ and South Africa...

I wasn't talking about a Trans-Tasman league though, which I agree is the best option. I was referring to the status quo (or similar, most likely with the loss of a team or two) vs a primarily domestic competition. If the former is just an ultimately doomed struggle to keep as many top players...

Most of our top players wouldn't stay in Australia. We'd let them leave and have them back for Wallabies games. But do you see this being any different in say 10 years time if we continue with the status quo? How do we stop the widening of the wage gap between Europe and here? Because if we...

It's comparable in the sense that the A League tends to have similar TV ratings to Super Rugby. And I think any competition along these lines would require private investment in individual teams. But I see this as being more likely than attracting private equity in Super Rugby. It'd be...

You have to keep in mind that the ARU would still be able to subsidise such a competition with the substantial revenues it generates from the Wallabies. And while the Super Rugby broadcast revenue the ARU receives would fall it'd be more than countered by not having to centrally contract...

Well I think it'd be a higher quality tournament than the A League is, relative to the best tournaments in either sport (i.e. an Australian based pro comp would be closer in quality to Super Rugby is now than the A League is to the English Premier League or Euro Champions League). And while...

The NRC is essentially a short development competition. It is quite different to what a mostly domestic professional club competition, including our 5 established domestic teams, would be. For one, players could be signed from all over the world. There's no reason why it couldn't be at least as...