Australian Rugby / RA

[Braveheart81]

".@RugbyAU CEO Raelene Castle has revealed the national union will conduct a review of the “Giteau Law” and the eligibility policies of Aussie rugby, potentially opening a door for more overseas-based @qantaswallabies."

Rugby Australia forecasting early that they might want to select Samu Kerevi next year?

 

[Mr Wobbly]

The Kerevi Klause set to supercede the Giteau Law!

 

[Slim 293]

Kerevi Klause?

Arnold Arrangement?

 

[formerflanker]

The Springbok Simulation.

 

[formerflanker]

Rugby Australia forecasting early that they might want to select Samu Kerevi next year?

"Never start an enquiry unless you know what it's findings will be".
Sir Humphrey Appleby, GCB, KBE, MVO, MA (Oxon)

 

[Lindommer]

Kerevi Klause? Arnold Arrangement?

Obviously a continuation of the Giteau Gambit.

 

[cyclopath]

Let's just call it the Absentee Allowance.

 

[Strewthcobber]

The domestic rugby deathblow?

 

[Braveheart81]

The domestic rugby deathblow?

Whatever happens it needs to be used intelligently.

The RWC will always be the best time to bring in overseas players. You have them from early June at the latest right through to the RWC.

In non-RWC years you need to be acutely aware of the international windows and when overseas players called in will be available. The classic situation here is Matt To'omua and Tatafu Polota-Nau last year. They certainly miss the camps earlier in the year, generally arrive after camp starts in preparation for the first test match and have to return overseas in bye weeks.

You can deal with a couple of key players missing important training sessions and preparation time but you'd be absolutely stuffed if this was the case with half the squad and you're effectively running training sessions with players you don't intend on picking just because they're the only ones there.

If you make it clear that *most* players playing overseas aren't going to get selected then it shouldn't drive too much of an exodus from players expecting to have the best of both worlds.

 

[Strewthcobber]

If you make it clear that *most* players playing overseas aren't going to get selected then it shouldn't drive too much of an exodus from players expecting to have the best of both worlds.

It might drive the best players to leave though

 

[Braveheart81]

It might drive the best players to leave though

That's a big gamble to take if you actually want to play regularly for the Wallabies though.

 

[Strewthcobber]

That's a big gamble to take if you actually want to play regularly for the Wallabies though.

I reckon the issue will be players who have already played regularly for the Wallabies, and think their spot in the squad is relatively safe.

They are already leaving, but at least we get some of them back in the years before a WC.

And just to be clear, the Wallabies will probably be fine, it's our worst performing Super rugby teams that will be the issue

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Giving this some thought. Looking to move to selecting players based overseas may be the hard reset we need. I know we run the risk of losing a lot of our elite talent but arguably that wouldn't necessarily be the worst thing in the world. Historically the value in the likes of Super Rugby has been rather low to non-existent. With the general implication that the international game is what garners the most money.

Looking at the ratings for Super Rugby that certainly doesn't seem too far from the truth as its hard to imagine that there'd be a whole lot of value in the average ratings for the competition. So, if moving to this structure could ensure a competitive Wallabies long term then it shouldn't really impact that value all that much.

Then there would be the added benefit of not having to directly contract players. At present RA provide top ups for Wallabies squad members. Looking to select overseas based players could allow them to change the player payment regime from one of guaranteed contract amounts with match fee's to just match fee's. So, instead of say paying a Samu Kerevi $800k a season with RA covering $500k of that and then having to cough up another $10k per match on top of that they would only have to pay the match fee's. Meaning RA could save that $500k or redistribute it to development or grassroots.

In terms of the domestic game they could take the money saved and look to resource and build out the NRC. Develop it into a proper competition. Seek outside investment. I'd argument a properly resourced professional NRC would rate similar to Super Rugby does right now.

 

[Jimmy_Crouch]

If I was RA I would form working relationships and exchange/loan programs with teams in each major league around the world. This would be used as a development tool for both players, coaches and support staff looking to expand their knowledge, try a different lifestyle, be paid handsomely but still have an opportunity to play for Australia.

It would ensure the overseas teams don't completely flog out talent to death because we would have people looking over their development, program loads, GPS data etc.

 

[Strewthcobber]

If I was RA I would form working relationships and exchange/loan programs with teams in each major league around the world. This would be used as a development tool for both players, coaches and support staff looking to expand their knowledge, try a different lifestyle, be paid handsomely but still have an opportunity to play for Australia.

It would ensure the overseas teams don't completely flog out talent to death because we would have people looking over their development, program loads, GPS data etc.

Why would the (assuming you mean elite) players agree to that? They want competition for their services so they can get paid as much as possible

 

[Jimmy_Crouch]

Why would the (assuming you mean elite) players agree to that? They want competition for their services so they can get paid as much as possible

For players it gives them the opportunity to potentially be paid more, experience a different environment (living and rugby) and also still be in the frame to play for the Wallabies.

It isnt going to solve all the problems but I think it would be an interesting approach.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Got to give huge wraps to RA today as seeing all the u20 talent perform so strongly in 4 nrc games today is no doubt partly due to how RA made Super Rugby teams ensure u20 players had to be available within rules set down....plus making efforts to lock those players down contract wise....plus equally impressive is getting good mix of top performing club rugby players involved in nrc vs balance of Super Rugby players...seem to have found a better balance with NRC this year and indeed evident everyone (finally - cough NSW teams) taking competition seriously which can only aid development. Plus streaming all games on rugby.com.au without doubt proved a winner today (even with streaming issues with force vs qld country game).

 

[Sir Arthur Higgins]

Perhaps not the right thread but with the NH countries blocking the world league and "going on their own" in a sense, should the SH not look to do the same? they could easily accommodate a mini world league of their own
7-8 teams in the tier 1
NZ, SA, Au, Arg, Japan, Fiji, USA in tier 1 initially
Canada, Uruguay, Tonga, Samoa, Brazil in tier 2

top tier 2 has a playoff with bottom tier 1 to move up/down.

you now have Japan and USA broadcast rights in the mix and Brazil and Canada to growth the game in.

strong mail that the pending new japanese fully professional league is going to be in the super rugby off season and will enable many of the wallabies, all blacks and spring boks, islanders and argentinians to top up their salaries. in fact this is what NZRU is banking on to continue to compete with offshore capital (heard it from the mouth of a senior kiwi administrator).

MLR continues to grow and maybe eventually provides a good base platform and a way to make low 6 figures playing rugby in north america.

could do home and away matches or could just do one offs like the six nations.

 

[Omar Comin']

Perhaps not the right thread but with the NH countries blocking the world league and "going on their own" in a sense, should the SH not look to do the same? they could easily accommodate a mini world league of their own
7-8 teams in the tier 1
NZ, SA, Au, Arg, Japan, Fiji, USA in tier 1 initially
Canada, Uruguay, Tonga, Samoa, Brazil in tier 2

top tier 2 has a playoff with bottom tier 1 to move up/down.

you now have Japan and USA broadcast rights in the mix and Brazil and Canada to growth the game in.

strong mail that the pending new japanese fully professional league is going to be in the super rugby off season and will enable many of the wallabies, all blacks and spring boks, islanders and argentinians to top up their salaries. in fact this is what NZRU is banking on to continue to compete with offshore capital (heard it from the mouth of a senior kiwi administrator).

MLR continues to grow and maybe eventually provides a good base platform and a way to make low 6 figures playing rugby in north america.

could do home and away matches or could just do one offs like the six nations.

I'd love to see something like this happen, basically an expansion of the Rugby Championship. One limiting factor is that the top Pacific Islander players in particular tend to play for European clubs, and so it'd be hard to see the Island nations being anywhere near full strength outside the July and November windows. A tournament like this would probably have to be played in the current Rugby Championship window, so the top PI players would need to have more opportunities to play in Super Rugby or other competitions that don't clash with that window.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I'd love to see something like this happen, basically an expansion of the Rugby Championship. One limiting factor is that the top Pacific Islander players in particular tend to play for European clubs, and so it'd be hard to see the Island nations being anywhere near full strength outside the July and November windows. A tournament like this would probably have to be played in the current Rugby Championship window, so the top PI players would need to have more opportunities to play in Super Rugby or other competitions that don't clash with that window.

A solution to that could be playing it in the same window as the 6Ns. We've seen the Rebels form a partnership with a Japanese club that will likely feature in the proposed league. The other 4 (I'm including the Force) could form similar partnerships and send players to Japan to play. The respective national unions from the PIs could look to do similar.

Once that season is done the national squad players can assemble and play a 5 or so game schedule.

After that. A 14 team AP centric competition could be formed featuring our 5, NZ 5 plus the Jaguars, a Fijian squad, a combined Islander team plus one more. Single round robin. Finishing by June.

The key will be managing player loads. If the Aus franchises form partnerships they could mandate set rest periods for national squad members as not to overload them. Manage their minutes etc.