• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Australian Rugby / RA

John S

Chilla Wilson (44)
The quality will become signifcantly higher with wallabies and super players playing. I don't this hypothetical comp would include every SS or QRU team either.

Only teams who could find enough financial backing would be admitted.
Why would they be playing this though? Surely they'd want to be earning what they're currently on in Super Rugby - so probably playing o'seas to get anywhere near that.
 

Derpus

Nathan Sharpe (72)
The quality will become signifcantly higher with wallabies and super players playing. I don't this hypothetical comp would include every SS or QRU team either.

Only teams who could find enough financial backing would be admitted.
Coverage seems a little... lacking. Don't suppose many people in Sydney (or the rest of the state) give too many fucks about Randwick, Manly or Eastwood.
 

Slim 293

Stirling Mortlock (74)
Our revenue is almost entirely generated by the Wallabies. If you took all that revenue and invested it in a club competition, and let Ikitau, Tupou, Kellaway, Bell, Petaia, Marky Mark (Nawaqanitawase) (Nawaqanitawase), Frost, Valetini

So Queanbeyan, Wests, and Vikings will all be admitted?

I assume Gungahlin as well because they won the John I Dent Cup this year?

There's going to be so many Canberra teams!
 

KentwellCup>ShuteShield

Ted Thorn (20)
Coverage seems a little... lacking. Don't suppose many people in Sydney (or the rest of the state) give too many fucks about Randwick, Manly or Eastwood.
People in the rest of the state don't really care anyway. People will find teams. Country NSW apart from NEwcastle and the Gong dont have teams in league.
Why would they be playing this though? Surely they'd want to be earning what they're currently on in Super Rugby - so probably playing o'seas to get anywhere near that.
The top players would be earning that. I'd say that rugby australia would provide wallaby top ups like they do now.

Re people saying the quality wouldn't be high enough, players get plucked out of the SS every year to go play in england and france. Cause the oppotunities arent here. If you are in a position with wallaby in it, you pretty much have no luck.
 

LeCheese

Greg Davis (50)
The quality will become signifcantly higher with wallabies and super players playing. I don't this hypothetical comp would include every SS or QRU team either.

Only teams who could find enough financial backing would be admitted.
So then you're not even capturing the whole of the SS and QPR fanbase - in fact, you're likely to disillusion supporters of clubs who either cease to exist or get 'relegated' to a lower-tier competition.
 

Derpus

Nathan Sharpe (72)
Part of the reason we have no crowds at Super games is because on a Saturday, rugby people would prefer to be on the lash at their clubhouse then go watch a dross uncompetitive product. Who are these vast vast majorities of people you know who attend Super Rugby in the first place?
No it isn't. We have no crowds because both we and the competition suck a giant bag of dicks.
 

Derpus

Nathan Sharpe (72)
People in the rest of the state don't really care anyway. People will find teams. Country NSW apart from NEwcastle and the Gong dont have teams in league.

The top players would be earning that. I'd say that rugby australia would provide wallaby top ups like they do now.

Re people saying the quality wouldn't be high enough, players get plucked out of the SS every year to go play in england and france. Cause the oppotunities arent here. If you are in a position with wallaby in it, you pretty much have no luck.
So we only support rugby in the 3 or 4 suburbs of NSW that have some shitty club? Fuck that off. That's some mouth breather reasoning right there god damn.

If that actually happened id finally tap out for good.
 

KentwellCup>ShuteShield

Ted Thorn (20)
So then you're not even capturing the whole of the SS and QPR fanbase - in fact, you're likely to disillusion supporters of clubs who either cease to exist or get 'relegated' to a lower-tier competition.
As I said it would be painful at first but it will have too happen. Some teams can merge, some will have to drop down into subbies which will would replace the level of SS.
 

Slim 293

Stirling Mortlock (74)
I reckon Canberra could supply.... 18 teams.

Phil Thomson gets onto the phone with Apple, asks for $100,000,000 and creates the EPL of rugby within the ACT.
 

Derpus

Nathan Sharpe (72)
No but those are the heartlands. WHere the majority of the support and talent comes from.
No it isn't? They generate next to no talent at all. They are, in fact, quite bad at rugby.

The talent comes from schools. The interest is more broadly dispersed than fucken Manly and Randwick (much to the displeasure of the Mosman crew).
 

noscrumnolife

Bill Watson (15)
I just find it baffling why so many people are so negative towards this idea. For years, the biggest problems identified by all the independent reviews we have commissioned have been:
- Don't play enough games
- Lose top end talent to League
- Lack of identity in the Super teams failing to mobilise fanbases
- Lack of investment in the grassroots.

A club based professional model delivers more games, is built around club identities which have been around for 100+ yrs and directly invests in the grassroots. Allowing our best players to play under the best coaches, with the best talent and access the biggest salaries overseas solves the top-end talent problem.

I am all ears for arguments against based on sound economic principles as to why it may not be feasible. But the vast majority of responses I'm hearing aren't that. It's just hand-waving whataboutism.

Again, I keep coming back to this point: if Rugby Union had not kept itself in a state of amateurism for most of its existence, club-based competition would be the model around which it was built (see: AFL & NRL).
 

Derpus

Nathan Sharpe (72)
I just find it baffling why so many people are so negative towards this idea. For years, the biggest problems identified by all the independent reviews we have commissioned have been:
- Don't play enough games
- Lose top end talent to League
- Lack of identity in the Super teams failing to mobilise fanbases
- Lack of investment in the grassroots.

I am all ears for arguments against based on sound economic principles as to why it may not be feasible. But the vast majority of responses I'm hearing aren't that. It's just hand-waving whataboutism.

Again, I keep coming back to this point: if Rugby Union had not kept itself in a state of amateurism for most of its existence, club-based competition would be the model around which it was built (see: AFL & NRL).
I fundamentally agree that we need a new competition but relying on the thoroughly amateur and unwatchable club game aint it.
 

KentwellCup>ShuteShield

Ted Thorn (20)
No it isn't? They generate next to no talent at all. They are, in fact, quite bad at rugby.

The talent comes from schools. The interest is more broadly dispersed than fucken Manly and Randwick (much to the displeasure of the Mosman crew).

You're quite demonstrably an idiot.
wow no need for the name calling mate. Thought this was forum to discuss our ideas and plans to move forward rugby in this country.

Where is rugby the most popular in this country? Which parts of the country have highest rugby participation rates?
 
Top