• 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.

IRB to become "World Rugby"

Status
Not open for further replies.
waiopehu oldboy

waiopehu oldboy

George Smith (75)
New logo:

image.jpg


New Web address www.worldrugby.org

http://www.planetrugby.com/story/0,25883,3551_9569051,00.html

New trough, same snouts IMO.
 
Dismal Pillock

Dismal Pillock

Michael Lynagh (62)
New Web address www.worldrugby.org
Click to expand...
At the heart of the brand is a distinctive positioning, expressed visually through a modernised and progressive logo that embodies World Rugby's mission statement to grow the game globally, retaining a link to the organisation's heritage through its blue and green colour scheme something about money. Oh shit, everyone's just gonna keep calling it the IRB anyway.


With Rugby continuing to inspire and engage new audiences and players around the world, the launch is the culmination of a rebranding process undertaken with the assistance of FutureBrand oops, the $$ we paid for the swank new logo design was daftly about what it would have cost to buy the proper worldrugby.com URL.
Click to expand...


$10,000 - $30,000 O.N.O for the dot com, coupla bucks from each member here, let7s go into competition with them.
 
Quick Hands

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
Hugh Jarse said:
Needs a culture change as well as a name change if it is to lose its reputation as a bunch of gin soaked old farts.

Most other sports manage quite well with the old FIFA, FINA, NFL style names. Personally it seems to be a rebranding for rebranding sake.

Hope there is cultural change with the name change.
Click to expand...

“We trained hard—but it seemed that every time we were beginning to form up into teams we were reorganized. I was to learn later in life that we tend to meet any new situation by reorganizing, and what a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while actually producing confusion, inefficiency, and demoralization.”


― Petronius Arbiter
 
Quick Hands

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
Pfitzy said:
didnotmakethefinal.edu.au


Another big thing about International Rugby BOARD is that it sounds too corporate. Old school. They're trying to make it hip.


Click to expand...

Well, the World Wrestling Federation changed their name to World Wrestling Entertainment - maybe World Rugby Entertainment would be sufficiently hip.;)
 
TahDan

TahDan

Cyril Towers (30)
Hugh Jarse

Hugh Jarse

Rocky Elsom (76)
Anyone else visited Worldrugby.org website?

First impression is that it is not as user friendly to navigate around as the previous IRB.com website.

It may take some time to get comfortable with the revised website.
 
Quick Hands

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
Good to see World Rugby making sure that ordinary people can't watch rugby. Only the name has changed.

Loved this line from WR (World Rugby):

"We would be interested for example to understand how matches not involving the Fiji Sevens national team could be of national importance in Fiji?"


Who'd have thought that people would be interested in matches not involving their national team - scandalous.:eek:

Go Frank.:)
 
Braveheart81

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
It's a shame for Fijians, but realistically, World Rugby can't do much but try and protect their IP.

Or should they just decide that military dictatorships get the TV rights for free?
 
waiopehu oldboy

waiopehu oldboy

George Smith (75)
^^^^^^^^ reading between the lines a little here but it seems to me that WR (World Rugby) are trying to do a deal with Bananarama's AG & his little bro who just happens to run Fiji's other TV channel.
 
Braveheart81

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
Quick Hands said:
I assume they'll take on China with the same gusto?;)
Click to expand...

I'd assume they would.

All they're doing is not providing the TV feed to a country that has forcibly removed the rights they sold to another TV station.

By all means Fiji can enact legislation to ensure that the public broadcaster has exclusive rights to buy the coverage.
 
Quick Hands

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
Braveheart81 said:
I'd assume they would.

All they're doing is not providing the TV feed to a country that has forcibly removed the rights they sold to another TV station.

By all means Fiji can enact legislation to ensure that the public broadcaster has exclusive rights to buy the coverage.
Click to expand...

But aren't World Rugby being paid TV rights money for Fiji?

The company which paid for the rights is still televising it as per its arrangement with WR (World Rugby).

It's just that the government of Fiji has in effect nationalised the coverage, which one would have thought was a matter between a Fijian television company and the government of Fiji and nothing whatsoever to do with WR (World Rugby). WR (World Rugby) haven't lost a cent, they're still being paid the money aren't they?

I wouldn't imagine that the TV rights deal for Fiji would be worth that much anyway, would it?
 
T

TOCC

Guest
World Rugby would have sold the 'exclusive' rights at a premium to the broadcaster, by the government enacting that legislation they have in effect rendered the previous contract void and the initial broadcaster wouldn't be required to pay the money or World Rugby would be required to pay the money back.

If the Fiji Government wishes to add 7's Rugby to an anti-siphoning list then it should have been done with in-effect from the completion of current broadcast agreements, behaviour like this makes operating in Fiji risky business, no company wants to run a business or sign a contract in a country where the military regime undertakes rogue behaviour like this.

It would be like the Australian Government forcing Foxtel to share its 2016 Super Rugby footage with ABC for no financial remuneration. Yeah fans might celebrate in the short term but it severely devalues the deal and means the next broadcast agreement would be worth barely anything.
 
Quick Hands

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
TOCC said:
World Rugby would have sold the 'exclusive' rights at a premium to the broadcaster, by the government enacting that legislation they have in effect rendered the previous contract void and the initial broadcaster wouldn't be required to pay the money or World Rugby would be required to pay the money back.

If the Fiji Government wishes to add 7's Rugby to an anti-siphoning list then it should have been done with in-effect from the completion of current broadcast agreements, behaviour like this makes operating in Fiji risky business, no company wants to run a business or sign a contract in a country where the military regime undertakes rogue behaviour like this.

It would be like the Australian Government forcing Foxtel to share its 2016 Super Rugby footage with ABC for no zero financial remuneration. Yeah fans might celebrate in the short term but it severely devalues the deal and means the next broadcast agreement would be worth barely anything.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately there are lots of bad governments in the world, but WR (World Rugby) can't control what laws they enact. By cutting off coverage (even to the TV network who have paid) they are cutting off their nose to spite their face for what would be a piddling sum of money. TV rights for 7s rugby in Fiji, I mean seriously, the ARU wine cellar wold be worth more.

The happiest people would be the Fiji rugby league and the NRL who have both been courting the Fiji government.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top