Australian Rugby / RA

[Slim 293]

Having more players doesn't equate to better players. Since expanding the pool of rugby players in 2011 for the Rebels, Australia has dropped from 2nd to 10th and all the Australian Super Rugby teams have become less competitive.

That would only be relevant if Australia had been ranked 10th since 2011...

But they were also ranked 2nd in 2015.

Australian Super Rugby teams also entered one of their most successful periods after the Rebels were introduced.

So maybe one thing doesn't have to do with the other?

 

[dru]

That would only be relevant if Australia had been ranked 10th since 2011...

But they were also ranked 2nd in 2015.

Australian Super Rugby teams also entered one of their most successful periods after the Rebels were introduced.

So maybe one thing doesn't have to do with the other?

There is another possibility. Super Rugby does not support 5x Australian teams, and Australian rugby needs more teams. The problem is...

 

[Froggy]

Japanese rugby is funded by corporations.

 

[Derpus]

France runs on sponsorship to a much greater extent then most other places. Sometimes that's a billionaire.

Who knows in Japan.

All the teams in Japan are corporate owned. Pretty sure the teams themselves lose money hand over fist but its fine because its largely a cultural dick swinging gig for multi-billion dollar corporations.

 

[Bullrush]

That would only be relevant if Australia had been ranked 10th since 2011...

But they were also ranked 2nd in 2015.

Australian Super Rugby teams also entered one of their most successful periods after the Rebels were introduced.

So maybe one thing doesn't have to do with the other?

And perhaps it takes a little time before the effects of expansion are fully felt.

If you don't think expansion had any impact, what do you put the decline in Australian Super Rugby results down to?

How will leaving Super Rugby help produce better players and more competitive teams? 2021 saw Super Rugby structured the way many seem to want a domestic + cross over competition. Is that the kind of results and competition that will drive not just on-field improvements but also fan engagement?

 

[Bullrush]

There is another possibility. Super Rugby does not support 5x Australian teams, and Australian rugby needs more teams. The problem is...

What evidence is there that Australia needs more teams?

 

[Slim 293]

If you don't think expansion had any impact, what do you put the decline in Australian Super Rugby results down to?

Oh boy, there is over 1000 pages in this thread…

 

[LeCheese]

Oh boy, there is over 1000 pages in this thread…

It's just an endless loop of about 30-odd pages worth of content and debate though. I'm sure it could be eloquently captured in one of @Dismal Pillock's flowchart masterpieces.

 

[Slim 293]

What evidence is there that Australia needs more teams?

What evidence is there that reducing teams will improve the quality of the others?

None… and we already have a case study to prove otherwise.

 

[Slim 293]

And perhaps it takes a little time before the effects of expansion are fully felt.

Let me return to this for a moment…

It’s a weak argument.

We can look back at results going back to the Super 12 and Super 14 years to show there is no correlation.

 

[dru]

Oh boy, there is over 1000 pages in this thread…

Of which he has been involved in, sporadically, but across much of it.

 

[Rebel man]

The answer isn’t Waugh pushing the Brumbies to play a token game in Melbourne.

 

[Highlander35]

there's not enough home games for selling one to be reasonable lmao

 

[Rebel man]

there's not enough home games for selling one to be reasonable lmao

Exactly also it’s not like the away fans ever showed up in Melbourne. It was hard enough getting the home fans there

 

[Bullrush]

Let me return to this for a moment…

It’s a weak argument.

We can look back at results going back to the Super 12 and Super 14 years to show there is no correlation.

Yes there is....and a lot of ex-players would tell you the same thing.

What evidence is there that reducing teams will improve the quality of the others?

None… and we already have a case study to prove otherwise.

No you don't.

Just like you don't have any other case study or model that shows another rugby nation that has a domestic competition that is self-funding and doesn't need top down financing.

What we DO know is when Australian teams just play against each other, it doesn't make them better players or produce on-field results that go beyond winning against each other.

Oh boy, there is over 1000 pages in this thread…

Yeah - so I don't know why some people keep claiming dumb things like 'Super Rugby is dead' on this one.

Super Rugby has been a great competition and hopefully will be again if Australian teams can be competitive once again. And as I said before, losing the Rebels and centralisation are steps in the right direction.

 

[Slim 293]

No you don't.

Sorry, I forgot how much better things were after the Force were cut…

 

[Bullrush]

Sorry, I forgot how much better things were after the Force were cut…

Yeah....a whole two seasons..... but sure - let's take a look

In 2017 the last year with the Force, the Brumbies made the Super Rugby Finals based purely on winning the conference with 34 points. If Finals had been based purely on points, no Australian team would have made it with the Brumbies sitting at 9th overall on the ladder.

The Force are cut along with the Southern Kings and Cheetahs.

In 2018, the Waratahs won the Australian conference with 44 points - enough to be 5th on the ladder overall.

In 2019, the Brumbies were again the conference winners with 48 points which put them 4th on the overall ladder.

So apparently, just going by the overall standings, there was improvement after the Force were cut. Tell me about your 'case study' that proves otherwise.

 

[Rebel man]

Yeah....a whole two seasons..... but sure - let's take a look

In 2017 the last year with the Force, the Brumbies made the Super Rugby Finals based purely on winning the conference with 34 points. If Finals had been based purely on points, no Australian team would have made it with the Brumbies sitting at 9th overall on the ladder.

The Force are cut along with the Southern Kings and Cheetahs.

In 2018, the Waratahs won the Australian conference with 44 points - enough to be 5th on the ladder overall.

In 2019, the Brumbies were again the conference winners with 48 points which put them 4th on the overall ladder.

So apparently, just going by the overall standings, there was improvement after the Force were cut. Tell me about your 'case study' that proves otherwise.

Lol

 

[Tomikin]

@Bullrush , here's the crust of it quality might go down in the short term but fan engagement will go up. Proven in super au. Fan engagement going up gets more players in rugby. This drives better quality..

More teams more players more engagement better talent.

Now will this work for Australia maybe, there's an educated guess that we get more Ozzie's playing in a talked about comp we will be better.

You know what Oz leaving super rugby will do.. fuck New Zealand... Which is why you're so tethered to it. Maybe it won't work for us... I think we have to do it as currently we are fucked

 

[Bullrush]

If you guys really want a laugh, let's look at what happened when Australia played domestic competition only and then we had cross-over games with NZ in 2021.

Super Rugby AU had the 5 Australian teams with the Force being brought back. The Reds won winning 7 out of 8 games with the Brumbies coming in second with 6 wins. (The Rebels were shit in that comp too with just 3 wins.)

Super Rugby Trans-Tasman kicked off and in 25 games, Australian teams were able to get 2 wins. The Super Rugby Au Champs Reds were beaten by 21 points against the Highlanders, 35 points by the Crusaders, 7 points to the Blues and 29 points to the Hurricanes but managed to snag one of those 2 wins with a 6 point thumping of the Chiefs.

The Brumbies jagged the other victory with a 2-point win over the Hurricanes to go with a 2-point loss to the Crusaders, a 21-point loss to the Chiefs, a 28-point loss to the Blues and a 21-point defeat to the Highlanders.

This is how you guys think Australian rugby players will get better?

Hilarious stuff alright. And I'm not alone in thinking that Australia needs to continue playing the best competition available to improve but what would Laurie Fisher know....

Never mind matching New Zealand, Australia has to accelerate its own rugby evolution

Even as results remain dire, Australian Super Rugby clubs insist a trans-Tasman competition is essential for their future development, writes Brett McKay.

www.abc.net.au