Broadcast options for Australian Rugby
- Thread starter WorkingClassRugger
- Start date
kiap
Steve Williams (59)
USA is too far away to be a regular season club opponent. That would be repeating Super Rugby's mistakes.
If there was a closed "Americas Superleage" and playoffs between [say] top 4-6 teams with Asia-Pacific, then maybe (only maybe).
Otherwise it should really only be touring territory for us.
If there was a closed "Americas Superleage" and playoffs between [say] top 4-6 teams with Asia-Pacific, then maybe (only maybe).
Otherwise it should really only be touring territory for us.
Rugbynutter39
Michael Lynagh (62)
USA does not need to be in Super Rugby as MLR doing just fine - but I disagree with others in that I think in 4 years they could be a candidate for Rugby Championship as I anticipate rapid improvement in USA national team with expectation of MLR going from strength to strength to grow the game and standards.
S
Show-n-go
Guest
Agreed with no USA in a revised comp, I’d even be pretty open to punting Jaguars, make them split in two and play in the American League, tier 1 nations have done their bit in helping develop Argentina into a trier 1 country, time for them to give back and help raise up another nation
5 Aussie teams
5 kiwi teams
2 Japanese teams
1 Islander team (lobby world rugby to fund it)
Rugby Championship - NZ, AUS, JPN, ARG
Rugby Shield - USA, Fiji, Samoa, Tonga
Promotion relegation for above
Open national selection from nz/Aus so long as they are playing in the competition (regardless of what team)
Aus/Japanese/island team to focus on recruiting the large amount of Pacific Islanders in Europe, and it’s time for the islanders to make a stand, similar to what they’ve done in league. If you want your national team to be competitive and to have a super team you may have to take a decrease in salary for the greater good
Aus teams to go and pillage NRL stocks and recruit any former rugby union juniors they’re able to get their hands on
Now that’s a fucking competition I’d watch
5 Aussie teams
5 kiwi teams
2 Japanese teams
1 Islander team (lobby world rugby to fund it)
Rugby Championship - NZ, AUS, JPN, ARG
Rugby Shield - USA, Fiji, Samoa, Tonga
Promotion relegation for above
Open national selection from nz/Aus so long as they are playing in the competition (regardless of what team)
Aus/Japanese/island team to focus on recruiting the large amount of Pacific Islanders in Europe, and it’s time for the islanders to make a stand, similar to what they’ve done in league. If you want your national team to be competitive and to have a super team you may have to take a decrease in salary for the greater good
Aus teams to go and pillage NRL stocks and recruit any former rugby union juniors they’re able to get their hands on
Now that’s a fucking competition I’d watch
WorkingClassRugger
Michael Lynagh (62)
It would depend a lot on whether the proposed Pro League gets up and running. But ideally we'd see 5 teams from Aus, NZ and Japan involved. Plus the a PI squad. So 16 teams. Split them into 4 pools randomly drawn season on season. In which they'll play home and away for 6 game and then one game against each of the other 12 teams. For 18 games each and 9 home games. Top 8 finals series. All in friendly time zones.
Regarding the RC/RS I'd expand them to 5 teams a piece. This way you could inlcude the likes of Canada and Uruguay in the Shield and Fiji in the Championship.
S
Show-n-go
Guest
Conferences/pools are shit, no one likes bastardised comps where there isn’t level peggings, everyone play everyone
Have larger squads if you’re afraid of player burnout or injury
I think 5 Japanese teams is over-reaching, we are already more than likely going to have a drop in quality, no point amplifying that by adding too many teams, start small and grow if necessary
And I left the championship as 4 purposely to limit the amount of games, I think we play too many National games as is, we are killing the aura, plus we’d have an increase in domestic games so trade off is decrease in international games
WorkingClassRugger
Michael Lynagh (62)
Everyone would play everyone. It's just teams would play three of them twice in a season. Regearding the Japanese teams that would depend on recruiting which you'd imagine going from their recent efforts would continue to draw in talent internationally. Either that or you don't engage with Japan outside of the RC and go with 5 Aus, 5 NZ the Jags and a PI squad. Double round robin for 22 games and a 6 team finals series.
Adding a 5th team would only extend the number of games to 4 in a single round robin format. Which would be my preference.
S
Show-n-go
Guest
Fair I didn’t articulate myself well
Not having everyone playing everyone an equal amount of times is a real killer, it’s one of the main drawbacks of super rugby. Keep it simple either everyone play everyone home and away or play everyone once with alternating home team every year
Conferences and pools are not popular in a domestic competition
kiap
Steve Williams (59)
I dunno about that -- but either way, TRC should be played as a single round-robin IMO.
South Africa leaving, should it happen, will put a bigger dent in TRC than Super Rugby (which is cooked anyway).
USA/Japan/Fiji won't match the Springbok level for a long time (if ever). I just don't think it's warranted for the ABs to play the likes of USA, Japan or Fiji TWICE a year EVERY YEAR for the next 5-10 years. -- Too many floggings. Even the Wobs, who aren't top notch anymore, will hand out some big scores.
A single-round robin doesn't seem like enough games - but it can free other options for T1 competition + revenue:
- add a return Bledisloe game (or two) each year; or a return Puma Cup game; or
- make a 2 or 3 test tour against the ABs/Pumas (inbound or outbound) once per 4-year cycle; or
- have a 2 or 3 test tour against the Boks (inbound or outbound) once per 4-year cycle. Possibly stretch it across end of July window into the start of a TRC bye week or something (?)
Tweaking the earlier illustration for more focus on test matches:
kiap
Steve Williams (59)
^I think that's right, Slim - which is why I put them in the frame the previous post.
Could be some difficulty getting their best players released, though, for an extra load of Tests. In fairness, that will probably apply to an extent this year anyway because TRC is not RWC.
In saying that, even a Bok team not at absolute best could still be strong and worthy test opposition.
Could be some difficulty getting their best players released, though, for an extra load of Tests. In fairness, that will probably apply to an extent this year anyway because TRC is not RWC.
In saying that, even a Bok team not at absolute best could still be strong and worthy test opposition.
Lorenzo
Colin Windon (37)
Er, horseshit. All 4 major American competitions employ some combination of divisions and conferences and they enjoy success and rivalries the likes of which we will never even dream of having. Clearly they have major structural advantages but divisions and conferences don't seem to hurt them.
Rugbynutter39
Michael Lynagh (62)
what I find funny about reports of SA going to join 6 Nations is it was always on the cards yet NZ has always given Oz rugby the finger in terms of really working with us to get a better product (read - then current Super Rugby dross)...now suddenly we become so much important but yet NZ has done bugger all working within SANZAAR to look at better options.
Wonder when NZRU going to get its wake up call....
Wonder when NZRU going to get its wake up call....
Rugbynutter39
Michael Lynagh (62)
I dunno about that -- but either way, TRC should be played as a single round-robin IMO.
South Africa leaving, should it happen, will put a bigger dent in TRC than Super Rugby (which is cooked anyway).
USA/Japan/Fiji won't match the Springbok level for a long time (if ever). I just don't think it's warranted for the ABs to play the likes of USA, Japan or Fiji TWICE a year EVERY YEAR for the next 5-10 years. -- Too many floggings. Even the Wobs, who aren't top notch anymore, will hand out some big scores.
A single-round robin doesn't seem like enough games - but it can free other options for T1 competition + revenue:
- add a return Bledisloe game (or two) each year; or a return Puma Cup game; or
- make a 2 or 3 test tour against the ABs/Pumas (inbound or outbound) once per 4-year cycle; or
That last one might seem too hard if RSA are in the 7N, but I reckon they could still be interested in a tour to/from either Aus/NZ once every four years.
- have a 2 or 3 test tour against the Boks (inbound or outbound) once per 4-year cycle. Possibly stretch it across end of July window into the start of a TRC bye week or something (?)
Tweaking the earlier illustration for more focus on test matches:
The success of 6 nations is fact it is a single round robin. I think expand the Rugby Championship but with 2 strict conditions.
1. Make it only 1 single round robin competition like 6 Nations
2. Have relegation / promotion (this would create more interest in the lower placed teams in the Rugby Championship and avoid the Italy scenario in 6 nations where you end up with no interest in watching a protected species regularly and predictably get flogged).
S
Show-n-go
Guest
No sorry but that’s horeshit.....
They have divisions and conferences because of the amount of teams they have, and the logistics around it
And even from Americans it’s a criticism of their competitions, they don’t enjoy success because of a conference system, they enjoy success in spite of it
Why in the absolute fuckery would we subject ourselves to that if we don’t need to? It’s repeating the same mistakes of the past
S
Show-n-go
Guest
That’s a lot of rugby for their top tier players, they’d either have to tank one of the comps or probably forego an end of year tour
Lorenzo
Colin Windon (37)
So the Americans, who only play others in the continental USA, have the necessary logistical challenges to warrant splitting up the comp, but our Asian / NZ / Aus comp wouldn't? Ok. Also take issue with your claim that american fans dont like it. I only follow the NFL keenly, but it's ridiculous to suggest that they would want their divisional system disolved. Try suggesting on an NY giants board that they should get rid of the nfc east and just have two conferences of 16. Let us know that goes.
Casual rugby fans dont give two shits about divisions or not.The reason super has failed is that that the games arent reliably broadcast at a consistent time each week, so it's almost impossible to remain consistently engaged unless you have absolutely nothing else to do with your time.
Simply put, if a 15 team competition has tv slots at 5,7 and 9 AEST on Friday and Saturday and either a game on Sunday or a 3pm game on Saturday, then people will watch it because it's consistently available. Games at 2am just make it too easy to lose interest.
I don't particularly want divisions but I can see the appeal, particularly given the operational expense savings.
S
Show-n-go
Guest
Well yea, nfl has too many teams so you can’t do anything but a conference system and a NBA team has like 3-4 games in a week, it’s not really practical for them to do anything but. Costs between travelling internally in NZ and AUS are very similar to travelling overseas to each country so no problem there, and you can travel from AUS to NZ quicker than travelling from one side of America to the other. If you only have two Japanese teams it’s not that great of an expense anyway, you’re not breaking the bank. We need as much competition against kiwis as possible and kiwis don’t want to play against themselves because they have Mitre10 for that
And by avoiding conferences you have more tv viewership, sure you might snag a couple of aussies or kiwis watching a “Japanese conference” especially if there are players from these countries playing, but you’re going to get a hell of a lot more viewers and more consistent numbers if the Japanese are playing regularly against overseas opposition
yes casual rugby fans will give a shit, why complicate something, people want easy to understand. Nobody wants to try follow a comp and have to figure out how the conferences work etc it’s just an unnecessary clusterfuck
hoggy
Nev Cottrell (35)
" We need as much competition against kiwis as possible and kiwis don’t want to play against themselves because they have Mitre10 for that"
Jesus, we play against the Kiwis from January to October. 3 tests a year against the All Blacks our main domestic competition has more kiwi than Aussie teams, what part of playing more against NZ could we possibly fit in.
May i suggest part of the issue in Australia is the over reliance on any overseas market to try and solve our rugby problems, in fact a good dose of insular thinking may do the game here wonders.
Jesus, we play against the Kiwis from January to October. 3 tests a year against the All Blacks our main domestic competition has more kiwi than Aussie teams, what part of playing more against NZ could we possibly fit in.
May i suggest part of the issue in Australia is the over reliance on any overseas market to try and solve our rugby problems, in fact a good dose of insular thinking may do the game here wonders.