Australian Rugby / RA

[LevitatingSocks]

Lot of us just hate losing to kiwis. (Wether that’s the ABs, Blues or Ben O’Keefe)

I think having a dummy spit and taking our ball back home to play by ourselves is the wrong call… but I am open to suggestions

Cutting the salary cap to the point where the financials are sustainable across the competition and shifting toward a more domestic oriented club competition with a couple new teams is one option. Reforming eligibility laws and accepting that elite players with their larger pay demands will head overseas have to accompany that. Coaching staff will have to focus on "aligning" players from around the world like the South Africans do.

Maintaining course with Super Rugby and viewing it as a an expense that's worth the dividends it pays as an incubator for the Wallabies is another option.

Shrinking to glory and then sticking with Super Rugby feels like cutting off our nose to spite our face just for a slight gain in competitive strength. I really dislike the idea of abandoning a presence in Melbourne when the game needs to grow.

 

[Omar Comin']

Honestly don’t think it’s that simple.

french and Japanese rugby just going to let their star players take a quick flight back to Australia for a test match?

South Africa was able to upgrade from super rugby to the northern hemisphere club comp backed by big broadcast deals… our saviour Is Stan sports

The Japanese season doesn't clash with test rugby so less of an issue picking players based there.

I think Super Rugby could be a great competition with open eligibility and a slightly longer season, but without that it's very limiting for Australian rugby. To compete with NZ we have to accept a very small professional footprint, while the NRL and AFL continue to build their scale and swallow everything else.

My preference would be for NZR and RA to become stronger partners and exploit the following 3 facts:
1: The strongest club leagues are more lucrative than international competitions.
2: NZ have better players than Australia (and more of them).
3: Australia has bigger commercial markets, and certainly the markets where there is potential for growth.

 

[Tazzmania]

Cutting the salary cap to the point where the financials are sustainable across the competition and shifting toward a more domestic oriented club competition with a couple new teams is one option. Reforming eligibility laws and accepting that elite players with their larger pay demands will head overseas have to accompany that. Coaching staff will have to focus on "aligning" players from around the world like the South Africans do.

We cannot compare ourselves to South Africa, they have a huge player base so they can afford to let the elite play overseas.

Their "Domestic' teams still have enough players to field competitive sides in the URC, European Championship, European Challenge Cup, the Currie Cup, and they run a varsity competition as well, besides lower level club games.

 

[Strewthcobber]

The other factor is heaps of our elite/pro players will have eligibility for other countries due to immigration.

How much does our pool shrink if we can't offer big enough salaries for them to justify staying here to be captured playing for Australia?

Just a whole series of Mack Hansens

 

[Ignoto]

Hmm seems like the NRL have found a competition model that works in this country. Maybe we should try do something more like that.

Nothing quite like a business model where club rely heavily on the most at risk piss away what little money they have on pokies.

 

[Adam84]

Scrap eligibility laws, look at South Africa

Yeah look at South Africa….. difference between Australia and South African rugby is a bit more then just eligibility laws….

 

[upthereds#!]

cut the policy of selecting limited foreign based players. Frees up funds for Super Rugby teams - sure they may still struggle v NZ teams, but they are doing that anyway!

- Frees up top ends funds locally - allows a greater allocation to contract more younger players/grassroots etc. "but is Super Rugby teams dont have stars, how will they be successful and make money? BECAUSE -->
- allows the best possible wallabies team to be selected no matter water - allows for greater international success which is the REAL money maker
- more income from a successful wallabies program means better funding for the Super Rugby teams, which arent burdened with trying to match japanese and french contracts, so more money can go to development and professional depth

Let's be real, its not the lack of Koroibete and Kerevi etc that are causing Super Rugby teams to struggle, its the lack of meaningful depth (alot of bench positions taken up by clubbies and teenagers)

 

[dru]

& test rugby takes a huge hit because players from Oz and NZ leave in droves.

They’ll need to sort out eligibility laws with wallabies and all blacks to keep the Bledisloe the best of the best spectacle of Tasman Rugby.

Like the Wallabies deserve the game commercials to be entirely focused on them right now. If a domestic comp was pulled together when it should have been, would we have dropped further than we have now? This would none-the-less have been used as evidence of a failed comp. What does that say about Super?

if you take the 5 existing teams add one in NSW & QLD, retain the Drua, you have a workable 8 team competition. Given time that could become 10 teams (5-15 year time frame)

Problem is were broke, so why didn't we do this sometime over the last 10 years when we actually had a couple bucks in the bank and the odd supporter or two.

Yeah, unfortunately the reality here is pretty depressing. Going domestic definitely means expansion. How does that happen on the back of a failed Rebels? Even if a way to hold Rebels or "Rebels Phoenix" happens, a shift to expansion has become vanishingly less likely. As if the chance was strong to start.

I don't know where this takes us, but we wont see a push to step out of Super from RA any year soon.

 

[Omar Comin']

Nothing quite like a business model where club rely heavily on the most at risk piss away what little money they have on pokies.

My comment was in response to the NRL's financial result, and the NRL itself makes very little from pokies (possibly 0 before their recent purchases?). 20 years ago rugby was seen as a genuine threat to the NRL, but we've been left for dead because we never created anything to challenge them.

 

[Rebel man]

There isn't, but you have to start somewhere, 20 years of Super rugby has ensured the game is utterly broke with a rapidly declining supporter base.
You take the existing 5 teams, add the Drua to start with 6 teams. Beg and scrimp over the next 3/4 years to get to 8 teams (add one each in QLD & NSW)
Look at cross over competitions to try and add value, but guess what you live within a budget the code can afford, because reality is a bummer.

We have been going on about this shit for 20 years now, the narrative never changes, every second day we come up with another option or country that will pay for our rugby, its the Japanese or American broadcast money. We've lived of a credit card for 20 years now and there's no money in the bank left, hell they just spent $50 million of the $80 Million they borrowed.

The top down structure of the game here is collapsing as there is not enough people following the game to pay or follow it to support something that simply does not engage enough supporters.

You can no longer fund the code through the Wallabies, when you long ago turned that option from Wallaby gold into Pizza & six Pack.

Super Rugby starts this Friday and this like every other year, were still talking about the same shit, the narrative never changes.

Standing on the deck of Super Rugby Titanic saying we have no other options is just bullshit to me.

Scrap the Reds and Tahs. I get the history but look at the BBL. Got rid of the state teams as they saw the need for more than one team in Vic and NSW. You will never effectively be able to have a second team in either state when they are the Qld Reds and NSW Waratahs.

With only one side in those key markets the market presence is too small. The Tahs have 13 home games over 2 years so 6.5 a year the NRL can have 6 games in Sydney in a weekend

 

[LevitatingSocks]

Scrap the Reds and Tahs. I get the history but look at the BBL. Got rid of the state teams as they saw the need for more than one team in Vic and NSW. You will never effectively be able to have a second team in either state when they are the Qld Reds and NSW Waratahs.

With only one side in those key markets the market presence is too small. The Tahs have 13 home games over 2 years so 6.5 a year the NRL can have 6 games in Sydney in a weekend

Scrap the two teams that actually have recognition from non-rugby people?

The Khmer Rouge is probably not the best case study for revitalizing a commercial brand.

 

[Slim 293]

Makes sense, to be fair...

 

[KOB1987]

The Reds and Tahs wouldn't be scrapped per se. They would revert back to being the primary rep teams. Rebal Man's other points are valid.

 

[Rebel man]

How do you have the Queensland Reds and a second Queensland team unless you rename them the Brisbane Reds as the A League did with the Roar?

We need more professional rugby in NSW and Queensland.

 

[Dan54]

Scrap the Reds and Tahs. I get the history but look at the BBL. Got rid of the state teams as they saw the need for more than one team in Vic and NSW. You will never effectively be able to have a second team in either state when they are the Qld Reds and NSW Waratahs.

With only one side in those key markets the market presence is too small. The Tahs have 13 home games over 2 years so 6.5 a year the NRL can have 6 games in Sydney in a weekend

You make great points Rebel, but surely there are close to 6 games in Sydney (and Brisbane) in club season? I know the level isn't quite as high, but the markets are I think getting as high as you can get with the number of games.

 

[Dan54]

Mate you've got it back to front.

Super Rugby was successful when it started because it began at the absolute peak of Union's popularity in Aus.

But Super Rugby has done nothing to build on that popularity. In fact I would argue it's one of the major reasons Union has fallen off a cliff in this country over the past two decades.

I would say I am very very surprised if you think super was bad for rugby in Aus. I can genuinely say I moved there in Nov 97, was involved with rugby, and almost all my mates were part of rugby . in all the games I went to whether super , club, college, I can honestly say I never heard (or read in papers) that super rugby was anything but pretty bloody good. I will admit to of seen a few (and only a few) say now on line that it was not good from start. Still even here in NZ since I been back (for 3 years) haven't actually heard it said. Have heard plenty say it gone of rails with aditional teams being added etc, but not it was wrong from start.

 

[molman]

I think this article about the coaching situation in AU illuminates another element of some of the systemic issues we have as a sport.

Link: https://www.theroar.com.au/2024/02/...-rugby-and-the-crucified-coach-that-shows-it/

It seems rather clear that we have a very scattershot approach with some questions around those responsible for the management of coaches having the required acumen and nous to lead this aspect of the game. I've always wondered at the use of the word high performance being bandied about when you hear of where many of the franchise/club facilities and coaching setups sit in relation to other countries and sports. Both Cron and Kiss made comments about either how facilities have just finally improved (in Kiss' case) or how they still have a ways to go (in Crons case).

 

[Strewthcobber]

I think this article about the coaching situation in AU illuminates another element of some of the systemic issues we have as a sport.

Link: https://www.theroar.com.au/2024/02/...-rugby-and-the-crucified-coach-that-shows-it/

It seems rather clear that we have a very scattershot approach with some questions around those responsible for the management of coaches having the required acumen and nous to lead this aspect of the game. I've always wondered at the use of the word high performance being bandied about when you hear of where many of the franchise/club facilities and coaching setups sit in relation to other countries and sports. Both Cron and Kiss made comments about either how facilities have just finally improved (in Kiss' case) or how they still have a ways to go (in Crons case).

That's a great article and good to see the plight of Mick Heenan is highlighted.

We have to get better at this development. We can't just chuck out all the assistants too when there is a HC change, especially at Super Rugby level.

Highlights once again the disconnect between RA and the Super Rugby team's objectives

 

[Pfitzy]

Our system is failing​

Very misleading headline. There isn't a "system"; there are a bunch of individuals or organisations who are up to the eyes in overweening self-confidence and -interest, perpetuating a state of dissolute incompetence.

What we need is the national body to step in and tell everyone - Schools, Clubs, Unions - how things are going to be, in order to streamline our limited resources into something that can help feed the professional arm of the game and the absolutely critical fanbase (including amateur sport) around and supporting it.

 

[Derpus]

Feel like weve had this conversation before...