dru
David Wilson (68)
Where this discussion stemmed from was the significant financial issues at the Rebels and what were to happen if they can’t sort out that mess and turned to RA for a rescue and RA cant fund them, and what the grim reality and implications would be.
Maybe it’s a bit premature to be talking about that, but from all accounts there’s some significant financial pressure across all Super Rugby teams and RA over the next 2 years and there absolutely no guarantee all teams will survive, and we need to be discussing this Issue. It’s another reason centralisation was so critical, and frustrating that the model was shot down by QLD and ACT powerbrokers.
So I'd suggest that although highly related, the financial survival of the Rebels and the importance of a pro rugby team in Melbourne are not necessarily the same issue. Also, in the situation where RA compare the justifiablility of the effort required for the survival of a State Super franchise, not all States are equal. Melbourne has some specifics that pushes it's case up the priority list. For obvious reasons NSW and Qld top the list. Perth has it's own reasoning given my suggestion of the importance of "National" to the game - and of course we understand that they are financially supported.
A coin toss between Canberra and Melbourne would get interesting. And the result imo is not at all clear. For me a reduction to 3 is completely unacceptable, in fact from my perspective any reduction is an anathema. Back in "the real world" both the Rebels and the Brumbies are having financial issues. The Brumbies possibly are the least able to ride that storm, short of the politics of it, and I can completely understand the fans concerns.
I'd suggest that RA need to find a way on both counts.