Super Rugby 2022

[mst]

Most talent I have seen in a Tahs squad in ages! Sadly most will be cut as they aren't Shute affiliated players.

 

[dru]

Defiantly shows without doubt and unanimously that the Reds have a few more years yet before they reach the summit.

It's all good - we can do defiant.

 

[RugbyReg]

BBL apparently is establishing a group of club players to act as reserves for the whole comp. Sides in trouble can call on players from that group to cover losses if I understand it properly.

Might add some credence to proposals here to do much the same in Super Rugby.

this is apparently happening. The clubs are identifying about 50 players to act as a pool of players to be drawn on if injuries or illness happen. I don’t believe they will be in a bubble though. It wouldn’t surprise me if they are even just academy players.

So the Force could over here and lose a flanker or two, and someone like Sam Wallis could end up benching for them. In reality he could then turn out for the Rebels the following week too. Or any team that needed him.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

this is apparently happening. The clubs are identifying about 50 players to act as a pool of players to be drawn on if injuries or illness happen. I don’t believe they will be in a bubble though. It wouldn’t surprise me if they are even just academy players.

So the Force could over here and lose a flanker or two, and someone like Sam Wallis could end up benching for them. In reality he could then turn out for the Rebels the following week too. Or any team that needed him.

Interesting and innovative. Makes a lot of sense in these trying times to keep the games going. Props to them for looking at this idea of sharing a pool of players as hard to see Covid not seeing pools of players out at different times due to Covid no matter how careful.

 

[Tomikin]

Brumbies clear favourites. Reds the underdogs.

Clearly.. and results will prove it.

 

[Sully]

It's all good - we can do defiant.

I know it's autocorrect but it's been happening for years with no fix in sight. Such a small thing.

NB: I have no idea how big or small this job is.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

^ I just thought you were chanelling your inner Shiggins again, Sully

 

[Sully]

^ I just thought you were chanelling your inner Shiggins again, Sully

I am defiantly not Shiggins!

 

[Brumby Runner]

I know it's autocorrect but it's been happening for years with no fix in sight. Such a small thing.

NB: I have no idea how big or small this job is.

I've never had any issues with "definitely" being replaced by "defiantly" by auto-correct. My use of it in my post was quite deliberate to reflect the over-the-top comment by Reg claiming favouritism for the Brumbies. Don't fix anything on my account Sully.

 

[Adam84]

I've never had any issues with "definitely" being replaced by "defiantly" by auto-correct. My use of it in my post was quite deliberate to reflect the over-the-top comment by Reg claiming favouritism for the Brumbies. Don't fix anything on my account Sully.

Defiantly a typo

 

[Latts1992]

Seems that the Brumbies have cut ties with Plus 500. The Plus 500 logo is no longer on their kit or anywhere on their website. So I make that all five teams starting the year off without a major sponsor.

 

[mst]

Seems that the Brumbies have cut ties with Plus 500. The Plus 500 logo is no longer on their kit or anywhere on their website. So I make that all five teams starting the year off without a major sponsor.

There were report the Brumbies were in talks and close to a deal in September but is been quiet since.

I still wondered how you sell the TT concept to sponsors? Unless you get lucky with a multi-national that has an interests in the NZ market, the best you can sell is 7 games on home soil, and I am guessing the ratings and low crowd numbers betray your sales pitch as NZ V AU games don't rate. well.

IMHO its the part that Rugby just stubbornly seems to choose to overlook rather than come up with a concept that will produce revenue. Yeah, we all know the arguments about the three pillars of impossibly to AU Rugby success; needs investment, needs agreement and support from all Unions, and the most terrifying of all things - a powershift coupled with change. But I am becoming increasingly concerned that the Pacific concept means we are already on that path to failure that we were on with Super Rugby pre-COVID.

I am still firmly of the view that a combination of the Stan deal and COVID forcing us to play SRAU was in part a blessing, It not only provided a huge friken sign about what AU supporters what to watch, but also we got and evidence via ratings etc! Essentially a test of what a Super Rugby standard (not club) domestic product could yield. TV revenue was possible, sponsors showed up, rating were good and all for a half arsed AU domestic fill-in comp. And it rated better than any TT concept.

 

[Dismal Pillock]

So I make that all five teams starting the year off without a major sponsor.

 

[Dan54]

I am very surprised if the teams haven't got jersey sponsors etc!! Supposedly having the game on free to air was going to be the thing that got them coming in!! I admit I thought it would too.
\I guess the fact that Nine didn't bother showing some tests live says it not as good as we or they were hoping. Doesn't bode well for future tv deals .

 

[PhilClinton]

Yeh I mean let’s be frank - the concept around the tournament and what it will look like in the long term, has been very unsettled. It has even had to change within the last few months because of the NZ border issue. Can’t help that with the circumstances.

But if I’m a major sponsor I’m not looking to commit to something for a long term deal without a clear plan. I imagine the teams have had a number of short term offers and it may end up more prudent to take that and prove the concept, than hold out for the angel investor.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I am very surprised if the teams haven't got jersey sponsors etc!! Supposedly having the game on free to air was going to be the thing that got them coming in!! I admit I thought it would too.
\I guess the fact that Nine didn't bother showing some tests live says it not as good as we or they were hoping. Doesn't bode well for future tv deals .

If we continue to have the fiasco like last years TT then sponsors will become an increasingly shrinking commodity for oz rugby.

 

[mst]

I am very surprised if the teams haven't got jersey sponsors etc!! Supposedly having the game on free to air was going to be the thing that got them coming in!! I admit I thought it would too.
\I guess the fact that Nine didn't bother showing some tests live says it not as good as we or they were hoping. Doesn't bode well for future tv deals .

I am not. I think you need to look each segments of a market and also appreciate the broadcasters marketing tactics / growth plans. Also the audience for internationals would be different to to Super Rugby games etc.

My view be a bit naïve or over simplifying but to me its all about numbers with advertising and regular exposure to build brand etc and when only 5 out of 7 home soil games provide some appeal it limited. If can get exposure via other sports such as other niche that are most stable like Netball, basketball, , W-League now its had its cash injection, W-AFL or move up to thinks like the BBL. So many options, all on TV. Each of those give you about 10+ games ion Aussie soil. Our product give 7 at most.

As mentioned about, they we go ahead. The Pacific thing is already changing, is in doubt in its current form, and who knows if we will get a full product as it was planned.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

There were report the Brumbies were in talks and close to a deal in September but is been quiet since.

I still wondered how you sell the TT concept to sponsors? Unless you get lucky with a multi-national that has an interests in the NZ market, the best you can sell is 7 games on home soil, and I am guessing the ratings and low crowd numbers betray your sales pitch as NZ V AU games don't rate. well.

IMHO its the part that Rugby just stubbornly seems to choose to overlook rather than come up with a concept that will produce revenue. Yeah, we all know the arguments about the three pillars of impossibly to AU Rugby success; needs investment, needs agreement and support from all Unions, and the most terrifying of all things - a powershift coupled with change. But I am becoming increasingly concerned that the Pacific concept means we are already on that path to failure that we were on with Super Rugby pre-COVID.

I am still firmly of the view that a combination of the Stan deal and COVID forcing us to play SRAU was in part a blessing, It not only provided a huge friken sign about what AU supporters what to watch, but also we got and evidence via ratings etc! Essentially a test of what a Super Rugby standard (not club) domestic product could yield. TV revenue was possible, sponsors showed up, rating were good and all for a half arsed AU domestic filleothet -in comp. And it rated better than any TT concept.

I think many are perplexed with the all in on super rugby pacific without addressing the imbalance of teams issue that TT provided and hence a poor rugby product. I think most of us are hoping it is a short term thing with plans to address this either way when have pe investment and hence funding to consider other options. The scary thing would be if there is not a plan b as doing effectively the same thing again (TT) and expecting a different result must be a definition of insanity.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I still have dreams of one day with maybe some world league concept or other catalyst to inject money in our game and push for reform that we can create a good rugby product in this part of the world and stop afl and nrl encroaching and indeed win some fans back.

At this point the above looks like some looney fantasy sadly and not sure something for my lifetime.

 

[Dan54]

I am not. I think you need to look each segments of a market and also appreciate the broadcasters marketing tactics / growth plans. Also the audience for internationals would be different to to Super Rugby games etc.

My view be a bit naïve or over simplifying but to me its all about numbers with advertising and regular exposure to build brand etc and when only 5 out of 7 home soil games provide some appeal it limited. If can get exposure via other sports such as other niche that are most stable like Netball, basketball, , W-League now its had its cash injection, W-AFL or move up to thinks like the BBL. So many options, all on TV. Each of those give you about 10+ games ion Aussie soil. Our product give 7 at most.

As mentioned about, they we go ahead. The Pacific thing is already changing, is in doubt in its current form, and who knows if we will get a full product as it was planned.

Ok, well all teams seemed to have jersey sponsors when the games were on Foxsport, s when was very similar and also had games played in SA, supposedly when noone was watching, so it's got me buggered why they losing sponsors, as nothing adds up. As I said it was never on free to air, and I wonder if it hurta a little with the vast majority of games being streamed only. I remember the talk when NZ cricket went to streaming for games and it was upsetting sponsors, as you missed the casual viewers which made putting up ads etc not as good.
I still hope that teams will all get decent sponsorship money as getting on FTA must make it a little attractive to sponsors.