Aussie Player Exodus

[Omar Comin']

So play the Rugby Championship in Feb/ March and we can do the tours in October/ November.

Elite European club rugby is played through all of these months.

 

[Bardon]

Elite European club rugby is played through those months but the 6 nations still happens in Feb/March. The European club rugby season is too long to not have an overlap between the the International and club seasons.

The European club rugby season is not going to get any shorter. No one's going to suggest to the Top14 that maybe they should be the top 12. The club game in Europe may actually see more, not less, games in the future. I'd be very surprised if the Pro12 don't have a long term plan for a second divison and their own cup competition.

Having two International windows does raise some interesting points though. It will probably lead to a reduction in the number of test matches. The first window would probably be for the 6 nations, TRC and PNC (Pacific Nations Cup). The second window would then have to cover the TRC nations heading north and the 6 nations teams heading south in the second month. The RWC would then slot into this window every 4 years.

The NH clubs would probably lobby for only 3 tests in each month. So 6 nations teams would ideally host 2 TRC teams and 1 other tier 1 or a tier 2 nation. The second month would then be the usual 3 game tour of 1 of the TRC nations.

The clubs will probably lobby to have the Babarians scrapped but the B&I Lions will be retained as currently they seem to be the only thing keeping the ARU, SRU and WRU afloat and the other unions involved certainly would miss the revenue.

The B&I Lions would tour in the 2nd window so there would be no games between those nations and TRC teams that year, with Argentina being the exception. Instead development squads would tour NA, Japan, Argentina and possibly eastern Europe. France would host & tour as normal against one the SANZAR nations.

Whichever way I look at it, harmonizing the global seasons would mean less test matches. That's not good news for any union that relies on test matches to make ends meet.

 

[Quick Hands]

So play the Rugby Championship in Feb/ March and we can do the tours in October/ November.

I think you've demonstrated admirably with this post that it does matter when matches are played. Summer rugby isn't going to happen.

 

[Quick Hands]

Elite European club rugby is played through all of these months.

It's impossible to avoid clashing with European club rugby. No matter when you play.

 

[Quick Hands]

E

Having two International windows does raise some interesting points though. It will probably lead to a reduction in the number of test matches. The first window would probably be for the 6 nations, TRC and PNC (Pacific Nations Cup). The second window would then have to cover the TRC nations heading north and the 6 nations teams heading south in the second month. The RWC would then slot into this window every 4 years.

Although the suggestion for international windows only relates to inter-hemisphere tours. The current inbound tours to the SH would move from June to September and the current EOY tours to the NH would move from November to October. There would be no more or less tests just tests played at slightly different times.

6N would stay exactly where it is and TRC would move a month earlier and be played in July/Aug instead of Aug /September.

RWC years would be exactly the same as 2015 - no inter-hemsphere tours and 6N and TRC played as usual.

 

[Omar Comin']

It's impossible to avoid clashing with European club rugby. No matter when you play.

In the existing calendar, yes. I was referring to a theoretical globally aligned February-November schedule where it would be possible to separate them. I know you don't believe this would ever happen, and you're probably right - so no need to repeat yourself on this point.

To tie this back to the thread topic it's my opinion that it would be highly advantageous for SANZAR to include the US and Canada (along with Japan) in the Rugby Championship in the near future. I think it's a strategic move that would help drive SANZAR's and thus the ARU's revenues significantly in the long term. Ultimately it would help lessen the Aussie player exodus. With the existing calendar it would be difficult as all the best American players play for European clubs. We've seen the trouble Argentina and their players have had with this reality. However, with ongoing expansion of Super Rugby and perhaps an American professional league not far away, these barriers might fall anyway.

 

[Quick Hands]

In the existing calendar, yes. I was referring to a theoretical globally aligned February-November schedule where it would be possible to separate them. I know you don't believe this would ever happen, and you're probably right - so no need to repeat yourself on this point.

To tie this back to the thread topic it's my opinion that it would be highly advantageous for SANZAR to include the US and Canada (along with Japan) in the Rugby Championship in the near future. I think it's a strategic move that would help drive SANZAR's and thus the ARU's revenues significantly in the long term. Ultimately it would help lessen the Aussie player exodus. With the existing calendar it would be difficult as all the best American players play for European clubs. We've seen the trouble Argentina and their players have had with this reality. However, with ongoing expansion of Super Rugby and perhaps an American professional league not far away, these barriers might fall anyway.

As you know, I'm an expansionist at all levels of the game. I'm quite confident about the game growing and becoming strong in the US. Canada as ever will follow.

Rugby needs the Pacific Nations Cup 6 (US, Can, Jap, Ton, Sam and Fij) to step up to the next level. If super rugby is the vehicle for that, I'm on board.

Short term my idea for the June and November test windows to September and October gives those 6 countries the chance to run the PNC (Pacific Nations Cup) over 6 weeks with each country playing each other once and possibly a final of top 2.

The only way to stop the exodus of talent to European clubs is to bring more money into other parts of the rugby world. If a Manly 1st grader and NH Rays player can earn $140,000 in France there's simply nothing else which will stop the exodus - which will in fact increase IMO.

The 4 TRC countries in alliance with the 6 PNC (Pacific Nations Cup) countries have a reasonable chance of rivalling the money on offer, but it's medium term at best I suspect.

 

[wamberal]

Tonga and Samoa have neither the facilities (stadia in particular) nor the financial backing to be part of a Soup type competition, Fiji might, just, but they would need an awful lot of financial support in perpetuity.

 

[Bronzewhaler]

Hunt VC for Reds - without even playing a game for them.
Samo at the Rebels - would like one more crack at Super 15. That's the future?

What great incentives for our young talent to stay around - NOT!

 

[wamberal]

Who should have been VC for the Reds?


Whose place is Samo taking? Frankly, if Samo manages to draw a few more thousand supporters through the gates, that's enough incentive for younger players - it might mean that the Rebels can survive a bit longer.

 

[Quick Hands]

Tonga and Samoa have neither the facilities (stadia in particular) nor the financial backing to be part of a Soup type competition, Fiji might, just, but they would need an awful lot of financial support in perpetuity.

Well they would have the stadia big enough for their size of population. Just as some of the NZ teams play games at small venues sometimes.

They only way those 3 countries will ever be competitive is for them to be in a competition where they can generate some money. The status quo just means that they will never be any better than they are now - and probably will be worse as they are targets of European recruiters.

 

[Pfitzy]

No top ups
Provinces spend their salary cap as they see fit
ARU funds Wallaby squad selection top up
Stipend for squad trainers who aren't part of the squad
Fee for match day appearance
Bonus for wins

Simples.

Sure, the odd Folau is going to pop up who demands more, but can we afford it? Not the next few years - that money is extremely limited by the lack of FTA coverage and the fact that few fucks are given outside Brisbane and Sydney about rugby.

Rebuild the heartland, make sure the foundations are solid, THEN spend the money when you've got it.

Any backs want to go to the NRL, then fine. Fuck off.

 

[wamberal]

I have never been to Samoa, but I worked as a volunteer in Tonga for a while.


Tonga is a third world country with a very weak economy. Last time I saw the data, over half the national income came from overseas remittances.

Yes, they do have a ground, but they cannot support a professional team at any level.

I doubt that Samoa is much better off.

Of course both countries could put together pretty good squads, but who would pay for them? Certainly not sponsors, and there is no pay for view, or very little, in these countries. Very few spectators would be willing to pay to go to the games. Or, rather, could afford to pay. Food and clothing are more important, for some reason.

Plus the venues are not suitable for televison, not to mention the time zones.

 

[TOCC]

Well they would have the stadia big enough for their size of population. Just as some of the NZ teams play games at small venues sometimes.

They only way those 3 countries will ever be competitive is for them to be in a competition where they can generate some money. The status quo just means that they will never be any better than they are now - and probably will be worse as they are targets of European recruiters.

Unfortunately the economies of those countries would struggle to provide the corporate support required to fund a team.. In addition to that the TV rights aren't exactly a lucrative market, more so since the Fiji government hijacked the IRB 7's rights and gave them to the state run FTA station for no remuneration.

There's a reason that the Singapore Dragons was seen as a viable alternative to the pacific island team, and that's because Singapore at least offers more viable corporate support despite having minuscule rugby union support.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Quick Hands]

Those three nations need to be subsidised for the greater good. At the moment their young talent is just used by Tier 1 countries to prop up super sides, test sides and European club sides. Their national teams are made up of whoever is left.

One of the purposes of forming an association is that there is a degree of cross subsidy by the strong of the weak. Or have such altruistic thoughts been banished from rugby? None of the football codes in Australia would have expanded nationally without the idea that certain teams had to be subsidised to be viable.

Maybe being part of a professional rugby competition might bring economic advantages to each of the country's economies as well?

IMO it does rugby no credit the way PI players are poached without any investment back into those countries.

No wonder Samoa and Fiji are listening to what the NRL have to say.

 

[wamberal]

Australian, New Zealand, and South African players are also being poached. Why aren't we being subsidised?


In this professional era, we are all economic rationalists. We are flat out surviving as a serious sport here, how on earth can we be expected to subsidise other nations?

There isn't much point talking about the other codes. They have expanded because they have been supported by poker machines (not now, but for many, many years, in the case of rugby league) and/or by the popularity of their game.


There's nothing we can learn from them. They are totally self-governing, they make up their own rules, their games have been designed over many years to appeal to Australians. They can afford to expand.

 

[TOCC]

I wish Fiji, Samoa and Tonga had competitive professional 'domestic' sides, but the reality is that SANZAR can't afford it, NZRU were forecasting a loss in 2014 until the U.S. Test brought a windfall, and the ARU's financial problems has been well documented.. I don't think either Union has a spare $1.5 - $2.5million to give to the pacific islands each year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Quick Hands]

A


In this professional era, we are all economic rationalists. We are flat out surviving as a serious sport here, how on earth can we be expected to subsidise other nations?

Speak for yourself, I am certainly not an economic rationalist.

We don't subsidise, the competition does if it can generate enough money. You've latched on to one part of the suggestion without considering the rest of what I said. You see, the point of expansion is to grow the game, not think of new ways to divide what we already have. Strengthening international competition is in everyone's interest (including ours) and in the end more competitive teams means more competitive matches which means more for the TV rights (not TV rights from the 3 island nations, but more in TV rights in the 1st world nations as there is more being televised and the product is better.

There isn't much point talking about the other codes. They have expanded because they have been supported by poker machines (not now, but for many, many years, in the case of rugby league) and/or by the popularity of their game.

Well, let's not talk about other codes then, let's talk about the Force and the Rebels. I'm not sure about the Force, but the Rebels lose millions, but the rest of Australian rugby subsidises them for the greater good. More matches, more matches to televise and presence in the 2nd biggest city in the country.

There a very few, if any, professional clubs supported by leagues club poker machine revenue and haven't been for almost 20 years. Qld never had the pokie palaces so RL expansion there had absolutely nothing to do with it.

Unfortunately I don't think you have read what I have been saying or suggesting very closely. The inclusion of the islands is medium to long term (at least 10 years away). I realise this is a new concept to rugby, but the lack of medium to long term thinking is a big reason why we are in the state we are in at the moment.

 

[Quick Hands]

I wish Fiji, Samoa and Tonga had competitive professional 'domestic' sides, but the reality is that SANZAR can't afford it, NZRU were forecasting a loss in 2014 until the U.S. Test brought a windfall, and the ARU's financial problems has been well documented.. I don't think either Union has a spare $1.5 - $2.5million to give to the pacific islands each year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's a medium to long term thing and only if the inclusion of countries such as the US, Canada and Japan can generate the revenue to support expansion. It's never been entertained by me that Aus, NZ or SAF could or should subsidise the islands.

 

[wamberal]

Quick Hands,


There is a simple and unpalatable truth. Young PI kids actually prefer to play loig.


I used to believe that the huge increase in migration from the Islands would automatically result in a huge increase in playing numbers and support for our code.


It hasn't.

There is a reason why the PI countries are far better at Sevens than they are at 15s. Can you guess what it is?

It's nice to hear that you are doing some long term thinking. However, our problems, our challenges as a sport in the Pacific region will not wait for long- term solutions.

Unless and until the IRB overhauls the Laws of the Game in an effort to make the game more appealing to the PI nations in particular, but more widely, planning is irrelevant.