• 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

hoggy

hoggy

Nev Cottrell (35)
Sir Arthur Higgins said:
FTA was maybe a past problem but I personally don’t believe it. Fans weren’t lost cause you had to pay for it, fans were lost cause the grass roots were neglected under the strategy that a winning wallabies is what we need and there is an element of truth there. Fans will get behind the wallabies if they are winning but that doesn’t necessarily translate to the rebels and tahs and if clubs aren’t funded then it’s not easy for a kid to go play and build a life long connection. You’re left w fleeting connections tied to wallabies success which can never be permanent.
Click to expand...
I would also suggest by Grassroots that is also the failure to grow the domestic product, rugby maybe different that the NRL/AFL but it specifically chose a structure different than those two opposing codes, and quite clearly this was a bad decision 20 years after they had that option.

The Rebels are a case in point of a club stuck in no mans land, they were set up to ultimately fail as the winning Wallabies strategy started to unravel.
 
Mick The Munch

Mick The Munch

Bill McLean (32)
Plus look at the maths - RA offer 1.6 for 3 years (400k per year) , Roosters offer 1.8 for 2 years (900k per year).

No matter your love for the Green and Gold - that's a life changing difference
 
Mick The Munch

Mick The Munch

Bill McLean (32)
Dctarget said:
don't know what maths you're looking at
Click to expand...
"With the Roosters reportedly tabling a two-year, $1.8 million offer to lure Jorgensen across Anzac Parade, The Roar can exclusively reveal RA has offered Jorgensen a three-year, $1.6m deal to keep him at the Waratahs"

Oh yeah.
 
stillmissit

stillmissit

Peter Johnson (47)
Wilson said:
Yeah, mostly play on unless the ball is trapped, then sometimes resets. There is still plenty of room for the refs interpretation there and some have gone penalties to that leading side and occasionally against it when the dominant prop tries to press his advantage too far.

Just to be clear because my original post was a bit ambiguous "the whole front row progressing" is more "none of the front row retreating". In practice that might just be a loosehead holding their end up while a tight head dominates, but that loosehead needs to not cede ground.
Click to expand...
My problem is that it is too easy for a front row to collapse the scrum and nobody knows who caused it, this is particularly annoying in the last 10 mins. I would like an interpretation that if the scrum goes down twice in the opposition's 22 then free kick, if the attacking team ask for another scrum ie dominant team and it goes down again with no obvious lprop at fault, then penalty to the attacking team.
I would also like to have the touch ref to move infield slightly to see better what is going on on the refs blind side or give them a small set of binoculars but that is most probably a thought too far.....
 
Derpus

Derpus

Nathan Sharpe (72)
SouthernX said:
something is real rotten with this game when we seem to only throw money at Waratah players top ups.

The Tahs already have massive amount of money invested in JS - do they need another outside back signing in Max Jorgensen?
Click to expand...
Didn't realise Vunivalu played for the Waratahs...

In all seriousness though - I'd take Petaia over Jorgo but certainly not Campbell.
 
Braveheart81

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
The Wallabies are the driving force behind these contracts. It's intriguing that Petaia doesn't seem to be further up the chain in terms of retention for Rugby Australia though.

His injury history is pretty patchy (although he's been far healthier lately than in his first few seasons which is definitely more important).

The question might be what position Petaia is viewed by Joe Schmidt and co as being best suited for and where he stands in that pecking order. It could also just be a case that an offer of around $500k a season from Rugby Australia for Petaia simply isn't enough money now. It was difficult to retain him last contract negotiation and he's now better and far more robust. Petaia has been to two RWCs and played a bunch of tests now. The carrot to stay in Australian rugby probably isn't nearly as big if we're talking a big disparity in money.
 
Strewthcobber

Strewthcobber

Simon Poidevin (60)
Braveheart81 said:
The Wallabies are the driving force behind these contracts. It's intriguing that Petaia doesn't seem to be further up the chain in terms of retention for Rugby Australia though.
Click to expand...
It's possibly not fair to boil Petaia's career down like this, but ultimately he's started just 12 matches in the last world cup cycle across three positions without being an automatic starter in any of them.

He offers unrivaled utility value, but that obviously isn't worth much
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top