Rebels 2018

[GoMelbRebels]

Perhaps, but it is still a team they were forced to go to. Also, who is to say the money will last that long? Still no clear indication how to turn that black hole around.

Forced? Gun to head? No, they did have choices. They are adults, they could have said “no”.

 

[BLR]

Forced? Gun to head? No, they did have choices. They are adults, they could have said “no”.

And go where? Riddle me that, the timing was off for international contracts. The other alternative was to quit the game more or less.

 

[GoMelbRebels]

And go where? Riddle me that, the timing was off for international contracts. The other alternative was to quit the game more or less.

Still, not forced.

 

[BLR]

Still, not forced.

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

 

[GoMelbRebels]

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

Takes one to know one.

I think I just won that.

 

[BLR]

Takes one to know one.

I think I just won that.

Hah, I liked that, so yes you did.

 

[TSR]

TSR and others. It's not just a matter of wanting the Brumbies to get their hands on some of the ex-Force players, but what is best for the four remaining Super Rugby teams. There really should have been a more equal sharing of talent across the four teams imo, and while the Brumbies will be well served by Pocock and Lealiifano coming back in next year and with Naisarani who looks to be a test player in waiting, I'm sure both the Reds and the Tahs would be improved with a few more of the excess players next year. It should not be all about the Rebels. With the way they've had squillions spent on them in past years and the appearance at least of getting favourable treatment again with the ex-Force players, a person could be forgiven for thinking that from the ARU's perspective it is all about the Rebels. For the Brumbies, though, I certainly wouldn't be unhappy if one or two of Meakes, Rona or Peni were to come here.

Sorry BR - I wasn’t having a crack at you, although I can see how it may have come across that way.

I agree to the extent that the ARU should have made sure every team emerged stronger. I thought that was the whole point. I do think the Brumbies are in the best place squad wise, but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t have picked up a couple of players. Clearly every Australian team needs to improve to be competing for the final.

I personally don’t have an issue with the Rebels getting favourable treatment with regards to the roster though.

I look at the assistance that the AFL gave to the Brisbane Lions for a period of time and the real shot in the arm it gave AFL in Qld. I don’t follow AFL enough to be able to talk with authority as to why the Lions subsequently fell to a rabble when that support was withdrawn but AFL continues to expand enviously in Qld.

I’m not sure if that can be replicated in Victoria but I assume it is very little chance of happening if they don’t have a competitive Super team.

 

[amirite]

Perhaps, but it is still a team they were forced to go to. Also, who is to say the money will last that long? Still no clear indication how to turn that black hole around.

Firstly, it was not the team they were forced to go to. They were forced out of a team, they were forced into nothing.

Secondly, the Rebels will be gone in 1-2 years? Right mate.

The combination of sour grapes and tin foil hats of some Force fans has to be witnessed to be believed. There's an obsessive need to manufacture the Rebels as the villain, I see it every day on facebook updates, the Roar, or even this forum. It beggars belief.

 

[amirite]

And go where? Riddle me that, the timing was off for international contracts. The other alternative was to quit the game more or less.

Timing of international contracts? People get signed mid-season all of the time in Europe, not to mention there's lucrative Japanese contracts.

That's completely ignoring the fact that the Rebels are one of many Super rugby teams.

 

[amirite]

To change the subject, It'll be very interesting to see the Rebels back row make-up next year.

Obviously, we have a number of decent players of similar talent levels. Selection will be very much preference driven, and how much the lads put in in preseason.

Interesting to see what the coaches come up with, they could field 2-3 different combinations that nobody could conclusively say was incorrect.

 

[Mr Wobbly]

Forced? Gun to head? No, they did have choices. They are adults, they could have said “no”.

According to rugby.com.au, as of last week up to ten more Force players are being forced to come to melbourne

 

[andrewM]

Firstly, it was not the team they were forced to go to. They were forced out of a team, they were forced into nothing.

Secondly, the Rebels will be gone in 1-2 years? Right mate.

The combination of sour grapes and tin foil hats of some Force fans has to be witnessed to be believed. There's an obsessive need to manufacture the Rebels as the villain, I see it every day on facebook updates, the Roar, or even this forum. It beggars belief.

Much more than sour grapes. Vitriolic come to mind. There are over 20 millions reasons why that is the case. the Rebels cost the ARU money that caused the whole shebang. The Rebels got preferential treatment from day 1. These are facts. It won't change and it's not a tin foil conspiracy. If you can't see that then you must be TWAS's brother.

It only stands to logic that WA Rugby supporters will direct their resentment at the cause of it all.

Cox's first statement when he heard the ARU say the Rebels were in the firing line still rings in my ears "But last week you were asking which Force players I wanted'. Everything that has played out since then - Rebels not filling their roster, Wessels and majority of Force players transferring to the Rebels may be tin foil conspiracy theory stuff, but with the evidence coming out of the Senate enquiry, even this is not far fetched.

 

[amirite]

Much more than sour grapes. Vitriolic come to mind. There are over 20 millions reasons why that is the case. the Rebels cost the ARU money that caused the whole shebang. The Rebels got preferential treatment from day 1. These are facts. It won't change and it's not a tin foil conspiracy. If you can't see that then you must be TWAS's brother.

It only stands to logic that WA Rugby supporters will direct their resentment at the cause of it all.

Cox's first statement when he heard the ARU say the Rebels were in the firing line still rings in my ears "But last week you were asking which Force players I wanted'. Everything that has played out since then - Rebels not filling their roster, Wessels and majority of Force players transferring to the Rebels may be tin foil conspiracy theory stuff, but with the evidence coming out of the Senate enquiry, even this is not far fetched.

Absurd mate.

Firstly, I googled that Cox quote (because I certainly don't remember it) and donuts. Where is it from?

Secondly, the reason a team got cut is because 5 teams were unsustainable, unfortunately.

Thirdly, the Rebels didn't fill their roster because they mightn't go cut! Who would sign to that?

Not bagging Force fans that feel hurt, and not saying I wanted 5 teams. But this is exactly the problem, revisionist history.

 

[amirite]

As an aside, it's only logical that those employed in rugby understand what went on with this debacle more than any of us.

If the Rebels did fuck over these staff members' beloved Force, why are they turning to a new team in such great numbers? Wessel even described the Rebels as a kindred spirit throughout the ordeal.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Sorry BR - I wasn’t having a crack at you, although I can see how it may have come across that way.

I agree to the extent that the ARU should have made sure every team emerged stronger. I thought that was the whole point. I do think the Brumbies are in the best place squad wise, but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t have picked up a couple of players. Clearly every Australian team needs to improve to be competing for the final.

I personally don’t have an issue with the Rebels getting favourable treatment with regards to the roster though.

I look at the assistance that the AFL gave to the Brisbane Lions for a period of time and the real shot in the arm it gave AFL in Qld. I don’t follow AFL enough to be able to talk with authority as to why the Lions subsequently fell to a rabble when that support was withdrawn but AFL continues to expand enviously in Qld.

I’m not sure if that can be replicated in Victoria but I assume it is very little chance of happening if they don’t have a competitive Super team.

I think that is precisely the brick wall that rugby is up against in Melbourne, and it has little chance of being able to scale the wall regardless of the strength of the roster. My feeling is that Melbourne will always fail as a rugby centre no matter how much money and how many top line players are sent there. And yes, the justification for axing the Force was to make all of the remaining four teams stronger and more competitive at Super level. I'm afraid the ARU is failing in its objective at the very first hurdle.

 

[lou75]

Absurd mate.

Firstly, I googled that Cox quote (because I certainly don't remember it) and donuts. Where is it from?

Secondly, the reason a team got cut is because 5 teams were unsustainable, unfortunately.

Thirdly, the Rebels didn't fill their roster because they mightn't go cut! Who would sign to that?

Not bagging Force fans that feel hurt, and not saying I wanted 5 teams. But this is exactly the problem, revisionist history.

I'm only going to respond to point two - the ARU say that 5 teams were unsustainable however, decent management of players and administration IMO would have made 5 teams sustainable . SA still have their teams, just not in the Super Rugby comp. NZ still have five teams . Only Aust couldn't sustain five teams and switched between blaming financials and performance for the reason - not believable IMO

 

[amirite]

I'm only going to respond to point two - the ARU say that 5 teams were unsustainable however, decent management of players and administration IMO would have made 5 teams sustainable . SA still have their teams, just not in the Super Rugby comp. NZ still have five teams . Only Aust couldn't sustain five teams and switched between blaming financials and performance for the reason - not believable IMO

I don't disagree that if good decisions were made from day 1 we'd still have 5 teams, was always going to be difficult but was possible.

This doesn't really cut against any of what I'm saying though.

 

[amirite]

I think that is precisely the brick wall that rugby is up against in Melbourne, and it has little chance of being able to scale the wall regardless of the strength of the roster. My feeling is that Melbourne will always fail as a rugby centre no matter how much money and how many top line players are sent there. And yes, the justification for axing the Force was to make all of the remaining four teams stronger and more competitive at Super level. I'm afraid the ARU is failing in its objective at the very first hurdle.

The primary justification was financial, not performance.

 

[BLR]

The primary justification was financial, not performance.

Was which the Rebels had an inferior case......choosing to ignore the past financial performance is negligent, pure as simple.

 

[Brumby Runner]

The primary justification was financial, not performance.

Depends who you were listening to and when.