Australian Rugby / RA

[Bullrush]

No its just that we can never have a genuine discussion about the game here because as soon as it is mentioned we get

".keep your quaint little, 3-rate domestic competition"

Bullshit. I wrote a genuine post making reference to rugby experts and the needs they see in rugby - players including keeping 5 Australian teams.

I have no problem with how many professional teams Australia wants to have so long as we have the talent to fill them.

The issue isn't so much having enough teams, it's having proper talent ID to try and retain the best talent early.

Personally, I've become rather indifferent to how many Super Rugby teams Australia has. After reading articles with Steve Anderson and David Nucifora who think that 5 teams are sustainable, I'm happy to listen to people who have way more experience and knowledge about these things. But what those guys also stress is the coaching ability that has to improve in the grades below Super.

Perhaps the focus on how many Super Rugby teams Australia has is a little misguided and 'apple cart before the horse' type of thinking?

The hatred for anything NZ is so strong that the reply was

‘Cool story bro…’

So please don’t give me this bullshit about ‘genuine discussion.’

If you want genuine, show me which of the top countries have their professional teams play only domestically? Point me in the direction of the rugby experts who say this is the best way to make Australian rugby better.

 

[hoggy]

Bullshit. I wrote a genuine post making reference to rugby experts and the needs they see in rugby - players including keeping 5 Australian teams.

The hatred for anything NZ is so strong that the reply was

‘Cool story bro…’

So please don’t give me this bullshit about ‘genuine discussion.’

If you want genuine, show me which of the top countries have their professional teams play only domestically? Point me in the direction of the rugby experts who say this is the best way to make Australian rugby better.

Of course, we have suggested we only play domestically. That means the wallabies will not play 14/15 Tests a year.

And of course that means we will ban our domestic teams from playing other countries domestic teams, because we will only play domestically, we will retreat to our great North Korean kingdom and wallow in our brilliance.

 

[HooperPocockSmith]

Are any Japanese fans in the forum? What the fk do the JRFU see in the 2023 version of Jones? Isn't honour supposed to be a big aspect of Japanese business culture?

 

[noscrumnolife]

Darwin's work never seemed that amazing to me. It's basically - if you have two great players that play together regularly they will be better than two great players that don't. It's not exactly revolutionary.

I've never come across someone so sure of his opinion. The conviction with which he states some things that comes out of his mouth is a little absurd.

 

[wamberal99]

Are any Japanese fans in the forum? What the fk do the JRFU see in the 2023 version of Jones? Isn't honour supposed to be a big aspect of Japanese business culture?

We have no idea of the background. For all we know Eddie had negotiations with the JRU prior to RA signing him?

 

[Running_rugby_1954]

Are any Japanese fans in the forum? What the fk do the JRFU see in the 2023 version of Jones? Isn't honour supposed to be a big aspect of Japanese business culture?

He will live off that SA win forever there.

The whole country trains at 5am now because that’s what Eddie did when he led that team to beat SA.

 

[Dctarget]

Simon Raiwalui is still based in Aus yeah? I imagine Fiji will be keen to extend his contract past this year.

 

[Bullrush]

Of course, we have suggested we only play domestically. That means the wallabies will not play 14/15 Tests a year.

And of course that means we will ban our domestic teams from playing other countries domestic teams, because we will only play domestically, we will retreat to our great North Korean kingdom and wallow in our brilliance.

You guys have absolutely nothing. On one hand you guys want to get rid of NZ, the closest international playing partner you have, but on the other hand, you still want your pro teams playing internationally?

Before pointing out that having your pro teams play internationally is exactly what Super Rugby is, who will you play? Just the teams you’re confident of beating? Or is it your contention that the current Australian Super sides just need to play each other more - in fact, spread the talent out to make more teams to play against- that will make your teams better contenders for some kind of cross-over competition against Super Rugby Aotearoa teams?

It is forever being trotted out that Super Rugby is terrible for Australia, NZ are only in it for themselves (as if RA has only ever had the greater good of rugby at heart LOL) and the path forward includes the absolute need to dump Aotearoa.

For what? This 3rd rate domestic comp that is apparently so appealing and high quality that broadcasters will be falling over each other trying to rain money on rugby?

You can’t name one country in the Top 5 rugby nations who do this and you cannot point to any notable rugby expert who can provide a plan of shrinking rugby to a mainly domestic game and still producing a Wallaby side that is a realistic RWC contender.

 

[NoName]

One could argue this Super Rugby comp has brought us to 10th, as I don't remember Super Rugby being a thing when we won the World Cup in 1991

It did, it just wasn't called super rugby.

SPC, followed by super 6, then super 10.

Absolutely was the very pinnacle of rugby outside of tests and super rugby would have taken longer to start if those weren't already in place.

 

[Penriff_boy]

Could Australian Rugby play hardball with Jones and not release him from his contract without some sort of payout?

 

[Penriff_boy]

Call the lawyers in

 

[sunnyboys]

i've been trying to think of some more unique ways of dealing with our pro teams/SRP (Super Rugby Pacific)/cohesion/wage costs/attractive tv product etc....

Now i'm walking into some murky areas here so no blowing up at me. this whole topic is full of landmines and emotions.

so Aus should only have two teams in SRP (Super Rugby Pacific). its the concentration of talent we need to build successful Super Rugby teams that can re-energise the two key rugby markets. and it means more of our test players are spending far more time playing together. the pay for players in these teams will be a separate "pay grade" to the next level down. this can assist with managing wages. The teams are Reds and Tahs. These two teams will be largely overseen by RA for high performance matters - S&C, coaching appointments etc.

Next step down - SRAu if you want to call it that - teams are QLD, NSW, Brumbies, Rebels, Force. and maybe a sixth from somewhere if it makes sense. pro contracts at a lower pay grade. but still enough jobs to keep our talent in the country. of course they wont be paid like OS but it will mean there's a clear separation between remuneration at this level and the very elite international teams in SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) and the Wallabies. These teams will have strong support from RA for high performance matters, but will be largely run by the state bodies. as will the U16 and U19 Super Rugby teams. these comps are all clearly development comps with the top level teams still having a level of prestige in winning an Australian GF. But its undoubtedly about building a player for the two international levels of the game. This comp can also be the right size for its market. smaller stadiums if need be etc... more community based than big stadium sheep stations stuff.

I dont think we can have success in SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) with 5 teams. but neither do i think we can cut pro rugby jobs. this is an attempt at navigating that.

Timing of the SRAu, U19, and U16 can then be decided. but SRAu should be during the traditional "footy season" - and you'd hope it would get a decent amount of eyeballs on it.

 

[Members Section]

Could Australian Rugby play hardball with Jones and not release him from his contract without some sort of payout?

I would imagine we wouldn't have to pay him out if he is choosing to take a job with an opposition union

 

[Slim 293]

i've been trying to think of some more unique ways of dealing with our pro teams/SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) (Super Rugby Pacific)/cohesion/wage costs/attractive tv product etc....

Now i'm walking into some murky areas here so no blowing up at me. this whole topic is full of landmines and emotions.

so Aus should only have two teams in SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) (Super Rugby Pacific). its the concentration of talent we need to build successful Super Rugby teams that can re-energise the two key rugby markets. and it means more of our test players are spending far more time playing together. the pay for players in these teams will be a separate "pay grade" to the next level down. this can assist with managing wages. The teams are Reds and Tahs. These two teams will be largely overseen by Rugby Australia for high performance matters - S&C, coaching appointments etc.

Next step down - SRAu if you want to call it that - teams are QLD, NSW, Brumbies, Rebels, Force. and maybe a sixth from somewhere if it makes sense. pro contracts at a lower pay grade. but still enough jobs to keep our talent in the country. of course they wont be paid like OS but it will mean there's a clear separation between remuneration at this level and the very elite international teams in SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) (Super Rugby Pacific) and the Wallabies. These teams will have strong support from Rugby Australia for high performance matters, but will be largely run by the state bodies. as will the U16 and U19 Super Rugby teams. these comps are all clearly development comps with the top level teams still having a level of prestige in winning an Australian GF. But its undoubtedly about building a player for the two international levels of the game. This comp can also be the right size for its market. smaller stadiums if need be etc... more community based than big stadium sheep stations stuff.

I dont think we can have success in SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) (Super Rugby Pacific) with 5 teams. but neither do i think we can cut pro rugby jobs. this is an attempt at navigating that.

Timing of the SRAu, U19, and U16 can then be decided. but SRAu should be during the traditional "footy season" - and you'd hope it would get a decent amount of eyeballs on it.

No...

 

[Penriff_boy]

I would imagine we wouldn't have to pay him out if he is choosing to take a job with an opposition union

Can we get any money from him or the Japanese team though?

 

[Slim 293]

Can we get any money from him or the Japanese team though?

I wouldn't imagine so...

Eddie will only receive pay for this year.

 

[Derpus]

Could Australian Rugby play hardball with Jones and not release him from his contract without some sort of payout?

Why on earth would we keep a four million dollar liability on the books when its offering to deal with itself?

 

[HogansHeros]

You guys have absolutely nothing. On one hand you guys want to get rid of NZ, the closest international playing partner you have, but on the other hand, you still want your pro teams playing internationally?

Before pointing out that having your pro teams play internationally is exactly what Super Rugby is, who will you play? Just the teams you’re confident of beating? Or is it your contention that the current Australian Super sides just need to play each other more - in fact, spread the talent out to make more teams to play against- that will make your teams better contenders for some kind of cross-over competition against Super Rugby Aotearoa teams?

It is forever being trotted out that Super Rugby is terrible for Australia, NZ are only in it for themselves (as if Rugby Australia has only ever had the greater good of rugby at heart LOL) and the path forward includes the absolute need to dump Aotearoa.

For what? This 3rd rate domestic comp that is apparently so appealing and high quality that broadcasters will be falling over each other trying to rain money on rugby?

You can’t name one country in the Top 5 rugby nations who do this and you cannot point to any notable rugby expert who can provide a plan of shrinking rugby to a mainly domestic game and still producing a Wallaby side that is a realistic RWC contender.

Take it down a notch.

I'm sure you're aware that no one is completely ruling out our teams ever playing NZ or other overseas clubs.

I have replied to you in the past, almost all the successful nationas also run a successful domestic comp along side an intermational comp. Currie Cup, T14, Premiership Rugby, your own NPC.

Australia is in a different position as we don't have a domestic comp but only an international comp, which currently we are struggling in.

I am genuinely interested what your idea is to get Aussie teams to perform better, for the good of Rugby in NZ and Aus, instead of just shitting on people who are trying to discuss the pros and cons of leaving super rugby.

It makes sense to me that using existing brands and building a domestic comp where Australian teams are competitive will sell better than a comp where Australian teams are currently not competitive. Might be a quick fix but I havent really heard anything else that adds up.

 

[Penriff_boy]

Why on earth would we keep a four million dollar liability on the books when its offering to deal with itself?

Force Japanese Rugby to pay for some of it. At least try get something out of this mess.

 

[Pfitzy]

One could argue this Super Rugby comp has brought us to 10th, as I don't remember Super Rugby being a thing when we won the World Cup in 1991