• 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.

Reds 2020

dru

dru

David Wilson (68)
Roberts Rugby said:
If I had to pick between Tom and JOC (James O'Connor), it would be Tom everyday. Both can play 10 and 12, at a level above Stewart. Gordon is only 18 or 19 and needs his days as an apprentice. I have closely watched Gordon over the last few years and I still think his skill level counts way above his years.
Click to expand...

We already have JOC (James O'Connor). And Hegarty. Which means we don’t require Tom. All the best to the guy - somewhere that needs him.
 
dru

dru

David Wilson (68)
Roberts Rugby said:
Agree. But in all honesty Tom plays a far superior game at both 10 and 12.
Click to expand...

We’re getting circular here. TBH I don’t have an opinion on it but am happy to accept your assessment. It’s not my issue though. You have to choose how you invest within the player group. Three things need to be covered at 10 in the Reds.

First an operational 10 for right now: JOC (James O'Connor) and Hegarty ticks the box.

Second an operational 10 for between season(s) as we build a new one. Would Tom stay any longer than The immediate, would be fill that role? JOC (James O'Connor) does.

Thirdly we need to build the future 10. Not only is Tom not that player but his appearance would likely interrupt any planning we have.

Tom is an interesting opportunity but balance probably says “no”. If there was a world renowned second row floating around the thinking might be different.

I am really disappointed in the Lucas situation and hopeful that hole is plugged quickly. I think Tom gets in the road of that.
 
RedsHappy

RedsHappy

Tony Shaw (54)
Adam84 said:
As t the end of the day. the reds don’t have any money to pay him or positions in their squad anyway
Click to expand...

Correct. Unless, for example, the Rebels are culled this year (a real possibility), on every data point we have today it's inconceivable that RA will provide anything like its typical media-rights-derived annual $ grant to the QRU for 2021. Further, key 2021 QRU income lines for gate and sponsorship will be under pressure, possibly severe. Only a large boost in 2021 Govt grants could make up the various differences, and that seems unlikely.

Accordingly, heading into 2021 the QRU's only option will be to (a) induce a really major cut in its operating overhead and (b) ditto total player squad size (and/or average player salaries) and (probably) coaching staff at all levels.
 
Adam84

Adam84

Rod McCall (65)
QLD Govt have renegotiated the terms of agreement for Suncorp Stadium, I believe that has cut back one of their big expenditures. Not sure if that were just for the remainder of 2020 though
 
RedsHappy

RedsHappy

Tony Shaw (54)
dru said:
Why would a cull help Red finance? We have seen that less local content means a smaller pie. Lose both ways.
Click to expand...

dru, get your point but I honestly think the 2021 media rights picture for rugby is more complex than that and that the 2021 'rugby media rights $ pie size' heavily depends upon the pro comp model design for 2021 (assuming we all get there) that any candidate broadcasters insist upon. (And btw as you know it's far from clear if we will find a motivated broadcaster for a 2021-dated traditional media rights deal, hence my and others' ideas re a radical new RA-owned streaming service as potentially the only way forward.)

Back to the Reds 2021 situation:

1. My principal point is that if the Rebels are culled - their circumstances are extremely fragile and RA is definitely considering this, in part that is the reason why all RA CEOs post COVID have said 'we cannot give any assurances as to what teams there will be in pro rugby in 2021' - then that nominally allocated RA grants-to-local-RUs money would be distributed in 2021 3 ways and not 4.

2. RA simply may not be able to convince a broadcaster that 4 (or 3) 2021 'Super' state/territory based teams here solely playing each other with, say, no TT element, is economically viable. Any funding broadcaster may well insist that a TT element to (a) give a greater number of teams playing each weekend and _crucially_ (b) to hold on to Kiwi expats' viewership here that it is known prop up Foxtel's rugby viewing nos big time, is absolutely essential.
 
Finsbury Girl

Finsbury Girl

Trevor Allan (34)
RedsHappy said:
dru, get your point but I honestly think the 2021 media rights picture for rugby is more complex than that and that the 2021 'rugby media rights $ pie size' heavily depends upon the pro comp model design for 2021 (assuming we all get there) that any candidate broadcasters insist upon. (And btw as you know it's far from clear if we will find a motivated broadcaster for a 2021-dated traditional media rights deal, hence my and others' ideas re a radical new RA-owned streaming service as potentially the only way forward.)



Back to the Reds 2021 situation:



1. My principal point is that if the Rebels are culled - their circumstances are extremely fragile and RA is definitely considering this, in part that is the reason why all RA CEOs post COVID have said 'we cannot give any assurances as to what teams there will be in pro rugby in 2021' - then that nominally allocated RA grants-to-local-RUs money would be distributed in 2021 3 ways and not 4.



2. RA simply may not be able to convince a broadcaster that 4 (or 3) 2021 'Super' state/territory based teams here solely playing each other with, say, no TT element, is economically viable. Any funding broadcaster may well insist that a TT element to (a) give a greater number of teams playing each weekend and _crucially_ (b) to hold on to Kiwi expats' viewership here that it is known prop up Foxtel's rugby viewing nos big time, is absolutely essential.
Click to expand...


Indeed, that's because it's not.
 
RugbyReg

RugbyReg

Rocky Elsom (76)
Staff member
some good video footage of team rehab on the Reds facebook page.

Wilson and Paisami back to full contact.

Big Feao and Petaia looked really good - mobile and seemed to be moving free.

Jack Hardy on his feet but still looked a bit limited.
 
C

Cancelled Account

Desmond Connor (43)
Is there a draw yet? My guess for the first round to kick off.

1. Smith
2. Mafi
3. Tupou
4. LSL (Lukhan Salakaia-Loto)
5. Blythe
6. ASY (Angus Scott-Young)
7. Wright
8. Wilson
9. McDermott
10. JOC (James O'Connor)
11. Dangunu
12. Stewart
13. Petaia
14. Speight
15. Hegarty - kicker

16. BPA
17. Hoopert
18. Feao
19. Wood
20. McReight
21. Sorovi
22. Paisami
23. CFS / Campbell
 
TSR

TSR

Andrew Slack (58)
Good team - but why no Scott Malolua? I’d have him clearly in front of Sorovi.

Also reckon Campbell will be in the side - although I concede that leaves us with a problem regarding the kicker.

I did see someone comment previously that Harry Wilson was going to do an Eales and kick. Was that a joke or can he actually kick?
 
dru

dru

David Wilson (68)
I’d definitely take Jock at 15 and trust they have been working on kicking. Hegarty to bench.

Interesting take here on what Rennie will be looking for https://www.theroar.com.au/2020/06/...ve-to-build-his-wallabies-from-the-ground-up/

Considering To'omua gets wraps based on ruck work at 10, I was wondering where this places Stewart. I definitely prefer a game plan that keeps the playmakers out of the rucks, but if this is apparently not modern thinking it must open opportunity for Stewart. This sort of logic might swap JOC (James O'Connor) and Stewart, and reduce my unease at future 10.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top