• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Broadcast options for Australian Rugby

Strewthcobber

Strewthcobber

Simon Poidevin (60)
half said:
Strew

Astute post, and in my mind opens up for debate the often asked question regarding what is the best system to develop future test players.

In very nay overly simple terms do we fund Super Rugby or fund say 30+ club teams in various competitions.

The marketing spread of 30+ clubs IMO is much greater than 4 Super Rugby.

Bar TV, broadcast a lot of secondary sports and is in many pubs.

Suggestion only, but have test matches on 9 / Stan, with the 30+ teams on Bar TV.

As I said it's an overly simplistic overview but as the Rebels saga drags on it's obvious Super Rugby does not bring in the cash it's the test matches.
Click to expand...
I always think about this stuff as funding players, not teams. - although assuming we can continue to fund things at Super Rugby level - that's around $1m per team. $1m across 30 players = $30k each.

It means we have no international standard players remaining in Australia, and probably no full-time rugby players as you need to spread that across the group.

Rugby in Australia becomes semi-pro and the Wallabies most likely become even less competitive than we are now (ha!), which results in less funding for those teams
 
half

half

Dick Tooth (41)
Strewthcobber said:
I always think about this stuff as funding players, not teams. - although assuming we can continue to fund things at Super Rugby level - that's around $1m per team. $1m across 30 players = $30k each.

It means we have no international standard players remaining in Australia, and probably no full-time rugby players as you need to spread that across the group.

Rugby in Australia becomes semi-pro and the Wallabies most likely become even less competitive than we are now (ha!), which results in less funding for those teams
Click to expand...
That makes sense, and as I have posted more recently roughly 18 months ago now I said although we need a national domestic competition, there was no funding in place so we needed Super Rugby. However we need to use this period to determine how to move away from Super Rugby.

The concern rather one of my key concerns, with so few teams, is fan replacement. I recently posted a very detailed article on US Baseball. Its in no real trouble, however its in step decline, and one of the key reasons is they are not replacing fans as they leave, i.e. so if 1000 folk leave only 500 new fans come in.

For me we have somewhat of an aging fan base and fan replacement from when we had hhhhhmmmmm more robust club rugby competitions as opposed to somewhat of a capital city franchises today is a concern.

As I see it Super Rugby has not reengaged with younger people in numbers to maintain support levels, it shows in rating and crowds especially if you compare say the late 90's and early 00's to now. Whether an expanded club system or a National Domestic Competition solves this is debatable. However what can't be denied is the effect on local communities when local teams win, and the goodwill created seems seems to spread.

But to your overall point, I can see where your coming from and agree. Still think we need a plan to move away and use this time to develop one.
 
Mr Pilfer

Mr Pilfer

Alex Ross (28)
So what are the main reasons everyone is jumping on the Matilda's bandwagon?

Is it just a fad and because soccer is a much easier game for a neutral to pick up and support? Or just better marketting.

How many people that went would even know that China are only ranked number 19 in the world? (we are 12).

If Matilda's played a 3 test series against Spain or England and got flogged 3 times would the crowds stop coming?

Therefore, would the Wallabies be better off playing more games against Fiji, Tonga, Samoa, Georgia, Portugal etc and winning all of these and scoring a lot of tries. Would that attract more neutral supporters?

I think the above proves that the crowd don't really care who the opposition is, they wouldn't know any of the China players.

Or maybe RugbyAU should be promoting the sevens more, I had 10 people watching the Aus women vs kiwis and they were not rugby supporters and were all on the edge of their seats. Could they try something different and have both mens and womens sevens play a curtain raiser against the kiwis before a test match? You know think outside the square
 
Rob42

Rob42

Nicholas Shehadie (39)
Mr Pilfer said:
So what are the main reasons everyone is jumping on the Matilda's bandwagon?

Is it just a fad and because soccer is a much easier game for a neutral to pick up and support? Or just better marketting.

How many people that went would even know that China are only ranked number 19 in the world? (we are 12).

If Matilda's played a 3 test series against Spain or England and got flogged 3 times would the crowds stop coming?

Therefore, would the Wallabies be better off playing more games against Fiji, Tonga, Samoa, Georgia, Portugal etc and winning all of these and scoring a lot of tries. Would that attract more neutral supporters?

I think the above proves that the crowd don't really care who the opposition is, they wouldn't know any of the China players.

Or maybe RugbyAU should be promoting the sevens more, I had 10 people watching the Aus women vs kiwis and they were not rugby supporters and were all on the edge of their seats. Could they try something different and have both mens and womens sevens play a curtain raiser against the kiwis before a test match? You know think outside the square
Click to expand...
Never discount the appeal of novelty - Super Rugby and the Wallabies had a big moment in the late 90s, early 2000s, BBL was massive then dwindled (but might be coming back), the A-League was initially big then fizzled, Western Sydney Wanderers looked like they might sell out an entire season at Parramatta Stadium, but now pull maybe 5000 people, the Socceroos were huge around 2006, but now not. The Matildas will remain huge at least until the home World Cup, I'll guess we'll see after that.
 
Strewthcobber

Strewthcobber

Simon Poidevin (60)
They are probably Australia's most popular team at the moment. But the Wallaroos and then Wallabies will have their turn in the sun if they can perform at the home World Cups while non-fans briefly pay attention

Under-rated component of this - the Matildas have been playing their games on weekdays with a lot less competition for viewers. Twice as many people watched last night's game v Friday night's game.

I've always thought we should get some clear air by playing Wallaby test matches on Wednesday nights.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: dru
PhilClinton

PhilClinton

Mark Loane (55)
I attended a couple of the Roar grand finals at Suncorp back in the day. They were sellouts and really fun. In fact I remember during those initial seasons radio stations would run comps to get tickets to the game and I actually won some and was really pumped. Never played soccer or watched soccer before that in my life.

I even recall the whole conversation around the Roar changing from QLD to Brisbane as other teams entered the comp.

Couldn’t even tell you if the Roar still exist now.
 
KentwellCup>ShuteShield

KentwellCup>ShuteShield

Ted Thorn (20)
Mr Pilfer said:
So what are the main reasons everyone is jumping on the Matilda's bandwagon?

Is it just a fad and because soccer is a much easier game for a neutral to pick up and support? Or just better marketting.

How many people that went would even know that China are only ranked number 19 in the world? (we are 12).

If Matilda's played a 3 test series against Spain or England and got flogged 3 times would the crowds stop coming?

Therefore, would the Wallabies be better off playing more games against Fiji, Tonga, Samoa, Georgia, Portugal etc and winning all of these and scoring a lot of tries. Would that attract more neutral supporters?

I think the above proves that the crowd don't really care who the opposition is, they wouldn't know any of the China players.

Or maybe RugbyAU should be promoting the sevens more, I had 10 people watching the Aus women vs kiwis and they were not rugby supporters and were all on the edge of their seats. Could they try something different and have both mens and womens sevens play a curtain raiser against the kiwis before a test match? You know think outside the square
Click to expand...
I don't think so, because as you said I dont think the public has as wide of a knowledge of how international womens soccer teams are compared to Rugby.

You can see this when we beat Georgia in the WC no one was really that excited over it, or casual fans and fans alike would say "Its only Georgia". Also the Wallabies never really get big crowds for smaller games ever really. However, we sold out every crowd against England, South Africa and New Zealand.

Maybe if we go into such a rutt that beating Georgia is a victory for us, then people will turn out.
 
dillyboy

dillyboy

Colin Windon (37)
Strewthcobber said:
They are probably Australia's most popular team at the moment. But the Wallaroos and then Wallabies will have their turn in the sun if they can perform at the home World Cups while non-fans briefly pay attention

Under-rated component of this - the Matildas have been playing their games on weekdays with a lot less competition for viewers. Twice as many people watched last night's game v Friday night's game.

I've always thought we should get some clear air by playing Wallaby test matches on Wednesday nights.
Click to expand...

Pricing will play a big part in this too!

I took the family to the third place final (bought before we knew the Matilda's were in it) and it was $120 for two adults and two kids in good seats.

Wallabies games you pay that each for average seats....
 
Rebel man

Rebel man

John Thornett (49)
Mr Pilfer said:
So what are the main reasons everyone is jumping on the Matilda's bandwagon?

Is it just a fad and because soccer is a much easier game for a neutral to pick up and support? Or just better marketting.

How many people that went would even know that China are only ranked number 19 in the world? (we are 12).

If Matilda's played a 3 test series against Spain or England and got flogged 3 times would the crowds stop coming?

Therefore, would the Wallabies be better off playing more games against Fiji, Tonga, Samoa, Georgia, Portugal etc and winning all of these and scoring a lot of tries. Would that attract more neutral supporters?

I think the above proves that the crowd don't really care who the opposition is, they wouldn't know any of the China players.

Or maybe RugbyAU should be promoting the sevens more, I had 10 people watching the Aus women vs kiwis and they were not rugby supporters and were all on the edge of their seats. Could they try something different and have both mens and womens sevens play a curtain raiser against the kiwis before a test match? You know think outside the square
Click to expand...
A lot is feminists jumping on it because they are women. I know heaps of women who never watched sport get on it. Hopefully for the sake of female sport they remain committed
 
liquor box

liquor box

Peter Sullivan (51)
I love watching the Matildas and I generally love watching football. I dont think losing to big teams will reduce their crowds much. I think their biggest danger is a run of 0-0 scorelines.
 
Strewthcobber

Strewthcobber

Simon Poidevin (60)
It is interesting how we have made the women's sevens team so inaccessible.

Their Rio gold medal match is probably the most watched rugby match in Australia in the last 20 years, since the WC final, probably the second most watched game here ever, and there are probably fewer people watching the 7s team here now than there were then
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top