Quade Cooper?

[Scotty]

Also I am sure the aru would have pushed for an 18 week plus finals season, but the Saru poo pooed it.

 

[Ignoto]

Unfortunately that's not enough

I don't think thats the case at all, here's some rudimentary figures about games in the two codes;

NRL
Regular Season weeks: 26
Finals: 4
State of Origins: 3
Four Nations: 3 (but this has only been held twice)
ANZAC Match: 1

Total: 37

Union
Regular Season Weeks: 18
Finals: 3
Pre Tri-Nations Games: 6
Tri-Nations: 6
Token Bledisloe: 1
Spring Tour: 5

Total: 39

Thats a pretty rough schedule where I daresay the more international games you play, the more battered and bruised a body will be than a standard Super Game or NRL Game.

 

[Tahfan]

You don't think 8-9 months of the year is enough?

This is a high impact/high collision sport. More than that and our guys will be dropping dead.....

No I don't. They play more rugby in the northern hemisphere and I don't see guys losing years off their careers. A longer season means more money in the game which means bigger squads which actually means more rest for players longer term and the young talent also gets a chance to develop at the best sides.

Although I do admit that the calendar makes it problematic. In order to accomodate a longer Super Rugby season Tri Nations would prob need to become straight home and away and not 3x vs each team, not that I think this would be a bad thing....

 

[Gnostic]

You have obviously forgotten that from next year the 3N becomes the 4N and is just a home & away series.

 

[Sully]

So 18 weeks of super rugby plus 3 weeks of finals and 8-10 internationals is not enough?

 

[Tahfan]

I don't think thats the case at all, here's some rudimentary figures about games in the two codes;



Union
Regular Season Weeks: 18
Pre Tri-Nations Games: 6

It's 16 regular season games (home & away v other 4 conf + 4 from NZ & SA)

Wallabies only played 4 test matches in the lead up to the Tri nations last year (1 v Fiji, 2 v England, 1 v Ireland) the other games were Aus Ba-ba's and not test matches.

Last year Wallabies played 4 not 5 on the spring tour. It's only once in a blue moon that it is a 5 game tour. Leicester game does not count as again it was a midweek game for the touring players.

Token Bledisloe is there as a money spinner and would be scrapped immediately if season was extended. Also Tri N could be reduced to 4 tests and not 6 (which is overkill and runs out of steam IMO) if season was extended so you could go to 20 or 22 reg season games easily in Super Rugby and not extend the season all that much (between 1 and 3 weeks)

 

[Sully]

So you want to scrap internationals, Rugbies point of difference, to extend the season!

 

[Tahfan]

So 18 weeks of super rugby plus 3 weeks of finals and 8-10 internationals is not enough?

Financially speaking no it clearly is not. If the ARU can't afford to keep pace with the NRL they need more content or a better negotiating team. or probably both....

 

[Tahfan]

So you want to scrap internationals, Rugbies point of difference, to extend the season!

I only proposed getting rid of the pointless gimmick that is bledisloe 4. Tri Nations will stay as 6 games, I did forget about Argentina who will be a breath of fresh air into that tourny...

And yeah I'd scrap games against the likes of Samoa, Fiji & Italy in a heartbeat. Don't see that as a selling point for the game or make them barbarians games and play the up and coming players.

2 extra round robin games in Super rugby means 30 more games that can be sold to TV and that could be done nearly without extending the season at all. 4 and it's 60 and you could probably do that with another 3 weeks maybe, the numbers make the call.

 

[daz]

I only proposed getting rid of the pointless gimmick that is bledisloe 4. And yeah I'd scrap games against the likes of Samoa, Fiji & Italy in a heartbeat. Don't see that as a selling point for the game or make them barbarians games and play the up and coming players.

So to grow the cash in Oz, you are willing to jettision the lower Asia/Pacific tests against teams which help make our game a global brand, as well as the "pointless gimmick" of Bled 4 which showcases the top 2 teams our game to lesser rugby areas?

Remarkably short sighted.

 

[Tahfan]

So to grow the cash in Oz, you are willing to jettision the lower Asia/Pacific tests against teams which help make our game a global brand, as well as the "pointless gimmick" of Bled 4 which showcases the top 2 teams our game to lesser rugby areas?

Remarkably short sighted.

Bled 4 was done to make money no other reason and it's a pretty naive point if you honestly think that it was done to grow rugby in Japan.

Surely if they want to grow Rugby there bring them into a southern hemipshere 6 nations with the pacific side? And I dont see handing Fiji 40+ point thrashings cos none of their players will make themselves avaialable as helping grow the brand nor losing our best players to NRL or French Rugby....

It's not short sighted it's pragmatic.

 

[da_grubster]

Scotty, you are being a pedant. I nominate 3 players & you quote one that is on the cusp. Mehrtens did finish in the pro era, however was an amateur when first playing for Cantebury & the all blacks,you might recall that many of those playing at that time admit that at the commencement of the pro era, it was professional in name only.
Campo coached in todays environment would still be a class Test player. Campo playing in todays environment with the tackling style he used to employ?
My original point that you can't compare the defensive obligations of a 10 today with the attitude that was acceptable in the amateur days, is still valid.

rugby went pro about 3 months after Merhtens made his test debut! The idea to move a tackle shy no.10 was first used to hide Mehrts I believe?