Aussie Player Exodus

[Derpus]

I know Boris wants a Free Trade Agreement with Australia, but we just seem to be sending them stuff (Rugby players and Tim Tams) without getting anything back.

'free' trade

 

[molman]

I’ll have another go at upsetting Upthereds - Blake Enever and Harry Potter have signed for Leicester Tigers.

Did Potter even end up pulling on a Rebels jersey? I can't recall seeing him outside of NRC. Shame, showed some promise at Uni in the SS. I was keen to see how he went at SuperRugby level. Enever is a loss, starting to loose a few too many of these players a tad earlier than you'd like... mid to late 30's.

 

[The Honey Badger]

Did Potter even end up pulling on a Rebels jersey? I can't recall seeing him outside of NRC. Shame, showed some promise at Uni in the SS. I was keen to see how he went at SuperRugby level. Enever is a loss, starting to loose a few too many of these players a tad earlier than you'd like. mid to late 30's.

Obviously RT rates him. I certainly do

 

[Quick Hands]

It's behind the paywall, here is an article written by Jamie Pandaram for today's papers.

While a threat to strike ahead of the revamped Super Rugby AU competition has eased, Rugby Australia’s latest pay cut demands are set to have even greater consequences.

Some of Australia’s top players are set to request early releases from their contracts after Rugby Australia made clear they would need to accept a pay cut of 40 per cent from October through to the end of the year. A call between RA and players’ union RUPA on Thursday made clear the governing body does not have a cent to spare, which means the players who had already accepted an average 60 per cent pay cut from May to September 30 will now have to swallow an additional 40 per cent cut from October 1 to December 31.

Players had been united behind the idea of boycotting the Super Rugby AU tournament, starting July 3, on Wednesday, however it seems cooler heads have prevailed and they will take the field next weekend. However, the caveat will be that some stars ask RA to release them from their contracts on September 30 so they can take up more lucrative offers overseas.

That will leave the organisation in a pickle, as they hope to play at least four Bledisloe Cup Tests against the All Blacks this year and are already light on selection depth. Leading players held a late-night conference call with RUPA on Thursday, and it is expected that a counter-proposal to RA’s 40 per cent wage cut will be presented on Friday.

That is set to include requests for early releases from some, but not all players. RA will likely resist this because not only do they need their strongest possible Wallabies team for 2020, they need their biggest names locked in for next year in order to get a broadcast deal signed for 2021.

An exodus of Australia’s brightest talent could kill any deal, which as of now is looking uncertain. It creates the potential for another stalemate a week before the Super Rugby AU tournament is to kick off and revitalise the struggling code. The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in 77 redundancies at RA – 47 full-time and 30 contractors. Some at Super Rugby franchises have been forced to take pay cuts of more than 70 per cent while still working full-time hours, while others remained stood down on JobKeeper and will continue to do as long as the Federal Government retains the scheme.

Adding to RA’s financial woes is the unexpected early relocation of the Melbourne Rebels to Canberra – they’ll fly to the nation’s capital on Friday morning. Because of Victoria’s spike of coronavirus cases, the team is being forced to get out of the state early, and the extra time in Canberra is estimated to cost up to $200,000. And if Victoria imposes increased lockdown measures and travel restrictions as predicted, the Rebels will be forced to remain away from home for an extended period, adding to costs.

 

[KOB1987]

I just think that most rational players will be focussed on the bigger picture than the $2-5k (the 10% difference between 30 and 40) they are missing out on in the last 3 months of the year. They can do this by playing good footy over the nearer 3 months to assist in generating higher appeal for the game and thus push up the value of the broadcast rights for next year. The ones that leave on the basis of this amount of money we’re leaving anyway.

 

[molman]

What an unfortuante mess. A real chicken and egg situation.

This is where you almost need some external income for those players identified as strategic or essential to the quality of the future comp outside of their normal contract salaries... or some form of profit sharing (which from memory RA already do, do somewhat?)... I think the top exec really should be matching the 40% cut if they are asking that of the players... I know they have taken 30%.. but the optics of it don't look particularly great.

 

[KOB1987]

 

[Ignoto]

If we play out the 'strike' option with the players walking away in mass, where do they all think they're going to land a job in this environment? Do the leagues overseas really have 'space' both in their roster and financial capacity to mass hire 60-100+ blokes in one season?

Hell, if they go on strike and RA and Rugby in Australia goes under, how does that help their cause of getting paid?

I really don't see the leverage the players and RUPA think they have in this situation. If they flood the market with Rugby talent, most blokes are going to be left out in the cold and will find themselves applying for Job Seeker.

If I was RUPA, I'd be looking to get an arrangement where the players are paid 100% salary + a % of lost salary over the coming year/s as RA gets their cash flow back.

 

[RugbyReg]

Who are our top players that will walk away and miss so much?
Hooper probably number 1 and a wonderful player and captain, but we have talent coming through in Wright and McReight at least (Tizzano for the Tahs). Quite possibly a new captain this year anyway.

Kuridrani?
To'omua?
DHP?
Simmons?
Sio/Ala'alatoa?

Of these its only the Brumbies props I think we would really miss and it would impact the Brumbies more that the Wallabies. But we don't have these irreplaceable stars at the moment. Sure it will impact depth, but we'll find new players keen to represent their country. We probably need to sweep clean a bit from recent years. So those Wallabies thinking about leaving - go for it. Enjoy. I hear England is lovely this time of the year. Beaches a bit crowded though...

 

[KevinO]

Retain the top 20 players and take chances on supporting talent.

Sounds like Rennie is going to have a tough job,

I'd let Hooper go, his wage will keep 5 players around. His not worth a Million a year in the current climate, he also won't go cause he wouldn't get a million a year any where else.

 

[Silverado]

Retain the top 20 players and take chances on supporting talent.

Sounds like Rennie is going to have a tough job,

I'd let Hooper go, his wage will keep 5 players around. His not worth a Million a year in the current climate, he also won't go cause he wouldn't get a million a year any where else.

You're missing the point on Hooper. He won't get a million here by the looks of it

 

[KevinO]

You're missing the point on Hooper. He won't get a million here by the looks of it

No he will get somewhere between 600-800k which is still enough to retain 5 players.

 

[Derpus]

Retain the top 20 players and take chances on supporting talent.

Sounds like Rennie is going to have a tough job,

I'd let Hooper go, his wage will keep 5 players around. His not worth a Million a year in the current climate, he also won't go cause he wouldn't get a million a year any where else.

Assuming he wants to be let go?

I'd be surprised if he turned out to be in the Rodda vein of players more interested in cash than playing for his country. A bit sad, too.

 

[Quick Hands]

I just think that most rational players will be focussed on the bigger picture than the $2-5k the 10% difference between 30 and 40) they are missing out on in the last 3 months of the year. They can do this by playing good footy over the nearer 3 months to assist in generating higher appeal for the game and thus push up the value of the broadcast rights for next year. The ones that leave on the basis of this amount of money we’re leaving anyway.

Except that the money isn't coming back in the next 4-5 years. RA is unlikely to be in a financial position to offer the wages that the players have been used to until after BIL 2025 - except for the top level Wallaby players. There's almost no chance of full-time professional wages for the rest.

RA have choices, but none of them will generate enough money through either broadcast rights or sponsorships or ticket sales to pay the wages that the players expect.

The main problem being that the whole basis of professional rugby in the southern hemisphere has been based on money from broadcast rights. That's been fine as long as the money paid for the rights has risen, but those days are gone.

Super Rugby in more or less it's current form - most likely to get the highest broadcast deal because of the addition of the SA audience but this form of competition isn't viable or sustainable because the money from TV just isn't there anymore.

TT is superficially attractive for some, but when analysed in depth there are many problems. From a point of view of providing the best prepared Wallabies then this needs to be the current NZ 5 Super Rugby teams, plus 3 Aus Super Rugby teams. However, it's hard to see how this can generate enough revenue (and we would only get three fifths of the money anyway). Not enough games and not enough games with Australian teams playing for an Australian broadcaster to pay the money required. 4 or 5 Aussie teams increases the number of games and the value of the broadcast rights, but there's also an increase in costs associated with this option. 25 years of Super Rugby suggests that 1 of the Aust teams in this scenario would be contenders each year, sometimes a 2nd being competitive but the rest making up the numbers. People just aren't going to watch these teams lose every week in sufficient numbers to make it viable.

National domestic league of 8-10 teams will initially dilute talent and funds BUT it's the only option with a hope in hell of increasing the appeal of the game long term and thereby also provide long term enough for a situation where the players are paid anything comparable to the recent past.

I suspect, however, that RA will pull out all stops for TT because it is in the interest of the vested interests - State RUs to do so. And in 5 years time we'll be having the same discussion.

So, we then get to the Rugby Reg scenario - Wallabies and club rugby with nothing in between. That then allows a process of natural selection whereby clubs or groups of clubs come together to start a national domestic club competition. It's the long way around but we arrive at the same destination and probably end up with the best product.

 

[Brumby Runner]

If money is a problem (and I agree it is) then find a gimmick to allow RA to fill their coffers like the NZRU was willing to do with the game v the Kangaroos. And imo, if there was ever any intent in the discussions between NZRU and NRL, then I reckon that game would still be on the table. Just cannot believe that "because the possibility of a game became public knowledge, we'll can it" will be the end of the matter.

Maybe RA should start a conversation with a suitable American Football entity to stage a hybrid rugby/gridiron match. Pick a location that would see a 100,000 spectators and laugh all the way to the bank. Failing that, maybe a similar hybrid rugby/league game against a selection of players from the SOO matches to rival the ABs/Kangaroos game.

Not that I'd want to see this happen, but desperate times might require desperate measures.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

If money is a problem (and I agree it is) then find a gimmick to allow RA to fill their coffers like the NZRU was willing to do with the game v the Kangaroos. And imo, if there was ever any intent in the discussions between NZRU and NRL, then I reckon that game would still be on the table. Just cannot believe that "because the possibility of a game became public knowledge, we'll can it" will be the end of the matter.

Maybe RA should start a conversation with a suitable American Football entity to stage a hybrid rugby/gridiron match. Pick a location that would see a 100,000 spectators and laugh all the way to the bank. Failing that, maybe a similar hybrid rugby/league game against a selection of players from the SOO matches to rival the ABs/Kangaroos game.

Not that I'd want to see this happen, but desperate times might require desperate measures.

WTF BR - NFL? Are you for real - COVID out of touch! To even condone what NZRU considering with league Kangaroos is so out of touch

 

[Quick Hands]

Reading between the lines, it would seem that NZRU and NRL are both keen on the ABs v Kangaroos and only agreement on the finer details of laws/rules stand in the way.

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/al...-but-rules-all-important-20200626-p556ip.html

 

[Quick Hands]

I just think that most rational players will be focussed on the bigger picture than the $2-5k (the 10% difference between 30 and 40) they are missing out on in the last 3 months of the year. They can do this by playing good footy over the nearer 3 months to assist in generating higher appeal for the game and thus push up the value of the broadcast rights for next year. The ones that leave on the basis of this amount of money we’re leaving anyway.

It would seem that reality is starting to hit regarding the likely income for RA and it's ability to only pay a limited number of players anything like they are on now.

But bigger problems loom for the game, which does not yet have a competition structure for Super Rugby - or whatever takes its place - next year. Without that model, RA cannot sign a broadcast deal, which means it is impossible to make projections about player contracts and Super Rugby funding arrangements for 2021.
Whatever happens, the tight balance sheet of current broadcaster Foxtel means it is highly unlikely the code will be able to maintain its current player contracting and funding levels.

That could leave Johnson, Clarke and the RA board with a stark choice: ask all players to take a cut on the value on their contracts in 2021 or ring-fence a group of 25 to 30 Wallabies and a second group of elite juniors, pay them full freight and allow market forces to dictate what happens to Australia's middle tier.
https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-...super-rugby-opening-week-20200626-p556ki.html

 

[KOB1987]

It would seem that reality is starting to hit regarding the likely income for RA and it's ability to only pay a limited number of players anything like they are on now.

But bigger problems loom for the game, which does not yet have a competition structure for Super Rugby - or whatever takes its place - next year. Without that model, RA cannot sign a broadcast deal, which means it is impossible to make projections about player contracts and Super Rugby funding arrangements for 2021.
Whatever happens, the tight balance sheet of current broadcaster Foxtel means it is highly unlikely the code will be able to maintain its current player contracting and funding levels.

That could leave Johnson, Clarke and the RA board with a stark choice: ask all players to take a cut on the value on their contracts in 2021 or ring-fence a group of 25 to 30 Wallabies and a second group of elite juniors, pay them full freight and allow market forces to dictate what happens to Australia's middle tier.
https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-...super-rugby-opening-week-20200626-p556ki.html

Again, Fox (or anyone else) can't bid for the rights for next years' comp because no-one knows what it looks like. And the viewership numbers of SRAu amalgamated with the FoxKayo ones for SRA will provide a good guide as to how a TT comp which is played in user friendly times will go down with the public. They will then know what it's worth and how much they can sell the rights for to the NH as well. And whatever that is is still likely to be only for one year till international travel resumes.

All that said, some restructuring of player salaries will no doubt happen, and the highlighted option above actually isn't a bad one, because there is fuck all chance of 50-60 mid-tier Australian players picking up an overseas or NRL contract. Some will, but the majority will need to make a choice between playing for less money here, or playing amateur and getting a new job. I maintain that an option which will likely be considered is a number of these mid-tier players becoming semi-pro/sponsored. This is in the absence of PE involvement, which is also highly possible.

 

[Quick Hands]

Again, Fox (or anyone else) can't bid for the rights for next years' comp because no-one knows what it looks like. And the viewership numbers of SRAu amalgamated with the FoxKayo ones for SRA will provide a good guide as to how a TT comp which is played in user friendly times will go down with the public. They will then know what it's worth and how much they can sell the rights for to the NH as well. And whatever that is is still likely to be only for one year till international travel resumes.

All that said, some restructuring of player salaries will no doubt happen, and the highlighted option above actually isn't a bad one, because there is fuck all chance of 50-60 mid-tier Australian players picking up an overseas or NRL contract. Some will, but the majority will need to make a choice between playing for less money here, or playing amateur and getting a new job. I maintain that an option which will likely be considered is a number of these mid-tier players becoming semi-pro/sponsored. This is in the absence of PE involvement, which is also highly possible.

Well we know that SRA games rated in Australia at about the same level that Kiwi derbies did in Super Rugby, which is much less that former Super Rugby games involving an Australian team. IMO a TT doesn't allow for enough Australian games, particularly Aus v Aus games for an Australian audience. This significantly reduces its value to broadcasters in Australia.

I agree with your second paragraph in broad terms, which is why I've been fairly consistent in saying that a domestic league is the way to go because the wages are going to fall regardless of the format and we might as well use it to build for the future. TT just puts us back in the same place in 5 years time.


EDIT: And I would add that if the 2nd level i.e. the current Super Rugby level, ends up being semi-pro as seems increasingly likely how can it possibly include flying teams to and from NZ? Any semi-pro competition can only be viable if it's purely a domestic Australian product.