Melbourne Rebels 2024
- Thread starter RugbyReg
- Start date
Tex
Greg Davis (50)
Even better, this time it's surrounded by 22,000 pissed red-faced English lads, rather than the usual 19 seagulls and one mascot.
Should be renamed Melbourne Mercenaries.
Slim 293
Stirling Mortlock (74)
fish59
Frank Nicholson (4)
Reds tickets were on sale this morning
Ignoto
Peter Sullivan (51)
Bugger all seats and absolutely no bloody way I'm forming out $250 for a seat in the upper tiers to watch a game of rugby.
No not the Force, they're mostly rejects. It's something that worked out great for the Brumbies though.
Mick The Munch
Vay Wilson (31)
Explains Melbouren Pasifika - https://wwos.nine.com.au/rugby/aust...tnership/8f418df8-a6c2-4d1d-b4a2-688baeef965f
Tomikin
David Codey (61)
I don't think it really explains anything other than the government putting in money to the islands and RA riding the coattails of it as a 'Joint' venture.
Mick The Munch
Vay Wilson (31)
let me explain - RA take over Rebels, close down Rebels, replace with Melbourne Pasifika, pathways for this new Super Rugby partnership
Wilson
Phil Kearns (64)
It's a nice thought but I'm not sure the Aus Government funding would've been there for Melbourne Pasifika, the vast majority of it has been directed to teams based on island, which is the whole point of the exercise. Otherwise there would be a lot more talk about Aus government funding for Moana Pasifika, instead of just Fiji Drua.
Mick The Munch
Vay Wilson (31)
60% of Rugby Union participants in Vic are of Pasifika hertitage so making that connection makes total sense, maybe one or two on island throughout the year. Hence, RAs continued underfunding of the Rebels hastens their closure.
The spanner in the works is, if the Rebels can prove RA had ulterior motives, the Judge might rule RA have acted maliciously and have to pay their commitments - I expect Tim North with be getting into the detail of this deal.
Wilson
Phil Kearns (64)
I was specifically speaking about the Australian Government funding there, not whether or not a Pasifika team in Melbourne makes sense. Given that government funding has overwhelmingly been directed to on island initiatives so far, and (as far as I'm aware) they don't already fund Moana Pasifika, it's unlikely the Australian Government would turn around and fund Melbourne Pasifika under the PacificAus program.
Tomikin
David Codey (61)
Thats a pretty big reach. The money isn't going to fund a team in Melbourne....
Proud Pig
Tom Lawton (22)
I agree the money is not going to be coming anywhere near Melbourne I would suspect. However, as Rugby Australia are heavily involved in this funding strategy major questions will be asked on how they can help fund the Pacific Islands when they have been shown to at least be partially responsible for the underfunding of the Rebels.
How does Rugby Australia explain their actively pushing Rugby expansion in another country when they won't even commit to supporting the existing Rugby structures within Australia?
This just screams that Rugby Australia has already decided to shrink to greatness again and is too myopic to see what the impact will be outside of Moore Park. If they had any interest in securing Melbourne's future they would be talking to the Government about funding here not in the Pacific Islands. They think getting rid of a club means larger shares of the pie for the remaining sides but fail to understand that the pie is going to shrink by more than the amount saved. If you don't think cutting the Victorian market out of the broadcasting deal won't severely cut the amount being offered I don't think you are living in the real world.
Wilson
Phil Kearns (64)
This is money the government had ear marked for Rugby that has been sent to the Pacific, it's money earmarked for the Pacific that is getting there via rugby. Rugby Australia's involvement looks to be largely in a service delivery capacity - hosting tournaments, providing opposition, staff training and sharing knowledge and expertise. Nothing about this involvement with the Pacific is about cutting the Rebels, nor is it taking away money that could have gone to them. If anything this is a positive for Rugby Australia's bottom line that puts them in a (slightly) better position to support the Rebels
Tomikin
David Codey (61)
The mental gymnastics in this thread is extraordinary... This money is a mechanism for the government to carry goodwill to the Pacific and using rugby as the mechanism to do this. This money isn't about rugby and is about geo political favor.
As far as I've read and know, RA has been talking with the Rebels and the Victorian Government (it's a state team) and trying to find a solution to saving the Rebels.
No matter if RA underfunded or Rebels overspent, money was spent which the Rebels didn't have, and a 20 million bill has been racked up. It should never have got that far where they had nothing left before raising the alarm bells.
Bagging the Pacific Island fund, saying it's a slit at the Rebels or is going to put a Pacific team in Melbourne, is just untrue and has nothing to do with Melbourne or any Australian team and all to do with the government.
Dctarget
Tim Horan (67)
I thought Super teams had a mandated minimum spend of the salary cap.