Australian Rugby / RA

[Derpus]

^^^^
Id add BR that SA Super sides are historically less succesful than Australian sides.

 

[Dan54]

WOB I invariably concur with your observations about the game, and especially when it comes to the NZ side of things.

But it's starting to wear a bit thin for people to contimually claim that NZ are not interested in a competition with Aus Rugby, or that NZ players wouldn't want to play for an Aus side which by very definition must be underperforming. There is no doubt at all that Aus rugby went through a very low patch around 2016 - 2018, but last year and this has been a different story.

The Brumbies earned their third spot in Super last year and this year were one of the best performing sides, probably the best except for a couple of minutes of brain fart at the end of the game v the Landers until COVID -19 put a stop to proceedings. Remember too, that they had a very interrupted pre and early season, unable to train in Canberra due to bush fire smoke, then had a run of mumps in the playing group and coaching staff that affected their preparations for three matches, one being in the lead up to their excellent and well-deserved win over the NZ leading side at the time (at home for the Chiefs). There is just no way that they are not on a par with any of the NZ sides at this time.

On top of that, even the Rebels came away with a win over a NZ side this year iirc, and there were a few wins for the baddies last year as well. This year, only the Tahs look to be lagging and that might be that they were also under-done by smoke at the beginning.

Then, have a look at the various results against SA sides last year and this. Again, the Brumbies were undefeated I believe against SA sides last year and other results were at least on par. It is not incorrect to say (imo) that the Aus Super sides are stronger currently than the SA sides and that Aus rugby is stronger than SA rugby except at test level (where there is very little difference) and in administration.

If NZ want to play the better teams, they should be looking at playing here rather than in SA. Not that I would personally favour that. I am coming round to the view that a wholly domestic comp based on the Super sides plus Force and perhaps Fiji and/or other PI teams playing out of Sydney/Brisbane etc would be our best option. We desperately need more home games and local derbies to bring back interest in the game here. Playing NZ in a TT comp would just continue the unsatisfactory situation where our teams (and yours) would be playing more games away. Finish with a final series involving the top two teams from each country to establish a TT champion by all means, but lets just get back to having domestic comps that give every country a champion team every year.

To be fair BR ,I understand what you getting at, but WOB is right in his remarks. In now way knocking Aus rugby, and I agree I thought were going pretty well this year, but there is certainly no real incentive or advantage for players to align with them except for big $s that top players will get. It is probably a bit strong to say there no interest in a comp with Aus, and we all know conversations will be taking place all the time, but it is true to say the appetite for a TT comp isn't real strong (and that not to say no interest) in NZ because like I keep saying with all the whining about SA being not good viewing time, well Aus isn't top viewing time for NZ audience, ( Force is midnight or later) and WOB etc will attest to this when even rugby people like him says he finds it hard to stay up and watch games from here. And it not a NZ thing, it was said that one of the problems with Western Force was bad viewing time for rest of Aus and was one of reasons they were dropped (and I not agreeing with that decision either) . I still think in future we will have TT comp of some sort, because I have said repeatedly rugby's strength is the fact it an international game! But also can see a wholly domestic comp wouldn't surprise me either, if someone gets some $s to pay for it, certainly need a fair few if we wanted PI teams in it, and assuming they wouldn't want to align themselves with NZRU which like it or not seems a very much more stable outfit to work with at moment. I really believe it will be domestic for rest of 20 & 21 probably, because of travel restrictions, and SA will probably be gone, for cost as much as anything.

 

[Dan54]

I would also add the other attraction to playing SA teams, is historically they play a much more physical game tham Australian teams, and that has always attracted NZ I think. Although that gap could be closing now.

 

[Derpus]

I would also add the other attraction to playing SA teams, is historically they play a much more physical game tham Australian teams, and that has always attracted NZ I think. Although that gap could be closing now.

This really only applies to the national team. The Lions, who were the most succesful SA team in the last decade, certainly did not rely on overt physicality.

I think an argument that Australia arent 'good enough' to join a TT competition is nonsense. I can see why the finances wouldnt work and free movement seems unnecesary. But not good enough? Rubbish.

As for time slots - the fact that youd rather have a SA - NZ comp makes a mockery of this complaint.

The fact that most teams in the EPL cant compete doesnt seem to stop it from working. Hell the Kiwis have been tolerating the Blues for years. No sporting comp has a particularly balanced spread of talent, except in the states with their (ironically socialist) draft systems.

 

[eastman]

^



"If anyone wants to address the actual questions.."



1. Why would e.g. Boshier WANT to play for NSW?

2. What if he DOESN'T want to?

I don't want to spend too much time on this response but there's various reasons why he would want to move overseas:
Salary Cap - Impacts of the salary cap might mean that it's in his best financial interests to move to NSW, as they could offer a higher contract than what he could earn staying in NZ (obviously only if an Australian franchise valued him as such)
Location - If it was accepted that the move wouldn't impact his career, and he could still be eligible for the All Blacks if his form warranted, then why would you not want to move to Sydney or Brisbane?

 

[eastman]

New Zealand might not be attracted to the quality of competition that we provide, but they would certainly be attracted by the size of our market/ economy. The reality is that New Zealand market/ economy is tiny, and with it looking more likely that any future model may not involve South Africa, if the NZRU want to maintain anything close to their current level of revenue (and thus keep paying their best players)- they will probably need Australia.

 

[Brumby Runner]

To be fair BR ,I understand what you getting at, but WOB is right in his remarks. In now way knocking Aus rugby, and I agree I thought were going pretty well this year, but there is certainly no real incentive or advantage for players to align with them except for big $s that top players will get. It is probably a bit strong to say there no interest in a comp with Aus, and we all know conversations will be taking place all the time, but it is true to say the appetite for a TT comp isn't real strong (and that not to say no interest) in NZ because like I keep saying with all the whining about SA being not good viewing time, well Aus isn't top viewing time for NZ audience, ( Force is midnight or later) and WOB etc will attest to this when even rugby people like him says he finds it hard to stay up and watch games from here. And it not a NZ thing, it was said that one of the problems with Western Force was bad viewing time for rest of Aus and was one of reasons they were dropped (and I not agreeing with that decision either) . I still think in future we will have TT comp of some sort, because I have said repeatedly rugby's strength is the fact it an international game! But also can see a wholly domestic comp wouldn't surprise me either, if someone gets some $s to pay for it, certainly need a fair few if we wanted PI teams in it, and assuming they wouldn't want to align themselves with NZRU which like it or not seems a very much more stable outfit to work with at moment. I really believe it will be domestic for rest of 20 & 21 probably, because of travel restrictions, and SA will probably be gone, for cost as much as anything.

Dan, I don't have many qualms about anything you've written here, but it largely misses my point. I have not commented at all on the question of NZ players opting or not to play for Aus teams. It wouldn't concern me if the status quo continued where some players do opt to come here for whatever their personal reasons are, and similarly some Aussie players opt to go the NZ for their own personal reasons.

I am not advocating a TT competition so the question of acceptable broadcast times is moot. I am now in the corner of distinct domestic competition, and if viable maybe a TT championship at the end. But essentially the replacement for Super should be an all-Aussie affair. NZ can go their own way as they see fit. My main point, however, was that the Aussie conference is now and has been for a year or more, a more competitive level to NZ rugby than South Africa. I am taking umbrage at the posters who continue to peddle the old chestnut that SA offers NZ a more competitive opposition at Super level than our teams.

EDIT : And as succinctly pointed out by Derpus, Aussie teams have generally been stronger than SA teams over the bulk of the Super competitions.

 

[Dan54]

Dan, I don't have many qualms about anything you've written here, but it largely misses my point. I have not commented at all on the question of NZ players opting or not to play for Aus teams. It wouldn't concern me if the status quo continued where some players do opt to come here for whatever their personal reasons are, and similarly some Aussie players opt to go the NZ for their own personal reasons.

I am not advocating a TT competition so the question of acceptable broadcast times is moot. I am now in the corner of distinct domestic competition, and if viable maybe a TT championship at the end. But essentially the replacement for Super should be an all-Aussie affair. NZ can go their own way as they see fit. My main point, however, was that the Aussie conference is now and has been for a year or more, a more competitive level to NZ rugby than South Africa. I am taking umbrage at the posters who continue to peddle the old chestnut that SA offers NZ a more competitive opposition at Super level than our teams.

EDIT : And as succinctly pointed out by Derpus, Aussie teams have generally been stronger than SA teams over the bulk of the Super competitions.

Yep sorry mate I was probably getting long winded in saying I thought the advantage for NZ and Aus teams playing SA was the different style (ie more physical) game played? Just think it adds to everyone's rugby. I certainly wasn't trying to insinuate that Aussie's was inferior. I know it won't be the same again, and international travel will see to that anyway. But I not sure it in Aussie's best interest to go back to just playing each other as I not sure it will strengthen Wallabies, which to get the passion back has to happen I believe. When has rugby been most popular in Aus? When Wallabies do well! Just what I think anyway, hey but who knows, maybe growing it from ground up over 10-15 years is the way to go! I would add I not saying anyone wrong or I right just what I think from my time here, which obviously isn't as long as many.

 

[Dan54]

This really only applies to the national team. The Lions, who were the most succesful SA team in the last decade, certainly did not rely on overt physicality.

I think an argument that Australia arent 'good enough' to join a TT competition is nonsense. I can see why the finances wouldnt work and free movement seems unnecesary. But not good enough? Rubbish.

As for time slots - the fact that youd rather have a SA - NZ comp makes a mockery of this complaint.

The fact that most teams in the EPL cant compete doesnt seem to stop it from working. Hell the Kiwis have been tolerating the Blues for years. No sporting comp has a particularly balanced spread of talent, except in the states with their (ironically socialist) draft systems.

Mate as I said to BR, I not saying and never would say they not good enough. And I take your point about the Lions, although they were successful for a few years, not sure it last decade, but beside point it's style of rugby that is different generally I think strengthens all 3 countries. I just pointing out the other side of the points being made.

 

[KOB1987]

To be fair BR ,I understand what you getting at, but WOB is right in his remarks. In now way knocking Aus rugby, and I agree I thought were going pretty well this year, but there is certainly no real incentive or advantage for players to align with them except for big $s that top players will get. It is probably a bit strong to say there no interest in a comp with Aus, and we all know conversations will be taking place all the time, but it is true to say the appetite for a TT comp isn't real strong (and that not to say no interest) in NZ because like I keep saying with all the whining about SA being not good viewing time, well Aus isn't top viewing time for NZ audience, ( Force is midnight or later) and WOB etc will attest to this when even rugby people like him says he finds it hard to stay up and watch games from here. And it not a NZ thing, it was said that one of the problems with Western Force was bad viewing time for rest of Aus and was one of reasons they were dropped (and I not agreeing with that decision either) . I still think in future we will have TT comp of some sort, because I have said repeatedly rugby's strength is the fact it an international game! But also can see a wholly domestic comp wouldn't surprise me either, if someone gets some $s to pay for it, certainly need a fair few if we wanted PI teams in it, and assuming they wouldn't want to align themselves with NZRU which like it or not seems a very much more stable outfit to work with at moment. I really believe it will be domestic for rest of 20 & 21 probably, because of travel restrictions, and SA will probably be gone, for cost as much as anything.

I’m only focusing on one part of this, that being that games in WA were at unpalatable viewing times in NZ. They were here over in the east too, because they were scheduled for daytime viewing in SA. If it’s a TT comp then games in Perth involving Kiwi teams could easily be scheduled as day games Eg 3pm in Perth = 7pm for you , that’s a win-win for everyone.

 

[Derpus]

Mate as I said to BR, I not saying and never would say they not good enough. And I take your point about the Lions, although they were successful for a few years, not sure it last decade, but beside point it's style of rugby that is different generally I think strengthens all 3 countries. I just pointing out the other side of the points being made.

Yeah, because other than the Lions, only the Sharks have made a final (once) since the Bulls won it in 2010. African sides have otherwise been pretty average over that time, Australian sides winning it twice and Kiwi sides otherwise dominating.

I don't really agree with your assessment of their style at Super Rugby level. I agree that the Springboks bring something different and if you were arguing for the retention of the RC on that basis i would agree. Super Rugby sides? nah.

 

[The Honey Badger]

Have you actually read any other posts in this thread addressing this issue? Because you're posting the same proposition to which others, including me, have replied previously, answering the very question you have asked. Again.
Beats me.

yes I have read all the posts and agree that there are some rules of Rugby that should be looked at to evolve the game from both a spectator and a player welfare objective. But of course this has to be done with WR (World Rugby) as a whole, as you say. (BTW the rules do change frequently and the game does evolve, it is very different to the game I played 30 + years ago)

But there is nothing stopping any of the Unions advocating rule change as France are actively pursuing tackle height and GRR had modified rules approved for their comp.

I actually didn't post any question in my last post, just a couple of sentences of statements of opinion. 5 points actually. The fifth point being the one I suspect you and Derpus seem to take issue with. I said:

"Perhaps its time we had an open mind about the things holding back the game, the rules of the game being 1."


I dont think there is anything in that that makes my post arrogant. But feel free to climb into me and tell me otherwise.

 

[The Honey Badger]

A-League is doing worse than rugby. Do you think they've ever thought about changing the rules?

Well I have. Make the goal posts wider, give 3 points for a goal,

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

A TT competition doesn't exclusively have to be just Aus and NZ eligible players. Next year actually offers an interesting opportunity in regards to international travel restrictions. Super Rugby in its current guise is unlikely so that rules out flying teams internationally. But that doesn't exclude players. We could look to combine for a TT competition but take in players from the Jaguares and SA teams into not only our but NZ 5 teams but possibly even set up another team or two to test the waters and run a 12 team competition based here.

That would be one of my three ideal scenarios. The second would be a revised NRC involving a mix of the current NRC teams and clubs sides. A 10 team club comp with the Force, Rebels, a ACT based squad be it the Brumbies or Vikings and Fiji. With the other 7 places taken up by the top 3 from the Sydney and top 3 from Brisbane.

For the sake of parity. The Force, Rebels and Brums/Vikes would have to draw 50% of their squad from local sources. While the Tahs and Reds players for the qualifying clubs would be joined by players from other clubs including those from the Brums and Rebels (depending on where the originated .i.e. NSW or Queensland) in a player draft to ensure it's at the best possible standard. Two full rounds for 18 games.

The 3rd is the most ambitious. We talk about private equity in individual teams. Perhaps we should look at it in a league as a whole. Take the basis of the NRC and add two more teams for 10. Using the NRC as a basis We could have Sydney, Newcastle (NSW Country come Newcastle), Western Sydney, Canberra, Melbourne, Force, Brisbane, Qld Country, Fiji plus one other.

While this would be a domestic league like my first their wouldn't be a restriction on sourcing of talent to a point. Being 60-65% of each squad would need to be eligible for Australia or Fiji but from there its open. Again, with the exception of Fiji who get first pick of their best available talent. All players would go into a player draft both domestic and international alike with players being allowed to preference teams 1-9.

I'm not sure as to how much would be required on an annual basis. But one set in stone shareholder would be RA. So say they via some kind of TV deal put in $20-30m a year then they PE involved be it via funds or individual investment would match it. This would then help cover salaries and other operational expenses.

 

[Gnostic]

Why not try to achieve something doable, like World Peace? Rugby Australia Limited (sic) is a corporation, and the voting rights of members are clearly laid out in its constitution.

Alright, lets make it achievable. Its a Corporation. Lets let it go broke, actively lobby to make it happen and lets re-constitute it after that as something that is actually functional.

 

[grievous]

A-League is doing worse than rugby. Do you think they've ever thought about changing the rules?

Are they though? Sure broadcast troubles but I wish we had a coast to coast national club competition with the crowds they get. Provincial rugby term comes back with the 5 sure sides playing on top of that but not competing with Wallabies games the cherry.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Are they though? Sure broadcast troubles but I wish we had a coast to coast national club competition with the crowds they get. Provincial rugby term comes back with the 5 sure sides playing on top of that but not competing with Wallabies games the cherry.

They are. Crowds are great but ratings are king and their ratings have been making ours look amazing. I know a few people connected to the Sydney clubs and their sentiment is that the league is completely fucked.

 

[Dan54]

Yeah, because other than the Lions, only the Sharks have made a final (once) since the Bulls won it in 2010. African sides have otherwise been pretty average over that time, Australian sides winning it twice and Kiwi sides otherwise dominating.

I don't really agree with your assessment of their style at Super Rugby level. I agree that the Springboks bring something different and if you were arguing for the retention of the RC on that basis i would agree. Super Rugby sides? nah.

That's ok mate we can agree to disagree, but I will always think that all 3 countries bring different things to the table in style. I will say with the law changes a lot of the differences are getting removed as we seem to be moving to almost League style of taking a lot of the competition for the ball out of the game, and that's because we trying to make it to easy for teams to retain ball in ruck/maul, so teams everywhere are changing how they play ie don't get stuck in and win ball, when someone gets tackled just all fan out and set up defence!!

 

[Derpus]

That's ok mate we can agree to disagree, but I will always think that all 3 countries bring different things to the table in style. I will say with the law changes a lot of the differences are getting removed as we seem to be moving to almost League style of taking a lot of the competition for the ball out of the game, and that's because we trying to make it to easy for teams to retain ball in ruck/maul, so teams everywhere are changing how they play ie don't get stuck in and win ball, when someone gets tackled just all fan out and set up defence!!

I agree with you on the second part. Tis a northern conspiracy to undermine the pooper.

 

[Derpus]

They are. Crowds are great but ratings are king and their ratings have been making ours look amazing. I know a few people connected to the Sydney clubs and their sentiment is that the league is completely fucked.

I always thought the a-league failed because it didnt serve the broader game. No youth teams or local player development, did very little for the national team and generally failed to help progress the game. It also destroyed all our best player development which came from clubs based on ethnicity (Viduka, Bosnic etc Croatian)

I digress.