waiopehu oldboy
George Smith (75)
NZ Gov removing outdoor crowd-size limits as of midnight Friday & vaccine passes won't be compulsory from 4 April. Mask mandates remain in place, however.
Super Rugby 2022
- Thread starter Dismal Pillock
- Start date
waiopehu oldboy
George Smith (75)
Leaders starting to clear away from the bunch:
Crazy that teams with losing records will almost certainly qualify for QF's.
SUPER RUGBY PACIFIC
| Pos. | P | W | D | L | +/- | Pts | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
| Brumbies | 8 | 7 | 0 | 1 | 83 | 31 |
| 2 |
| Blues | 7 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 88 | 27 |
| 3 |
| Crusaders | 7 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 64 | 27 |
| 4 |
| Queensland Reds | 7 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 62 | 26 |
| 5 |
| NSW Waratahs | 7 | 4 | 0 | 3 | 41 | 20 |
| 6 |
| Chiefs | 7 | 4 | 0 | 3 | 19 | 18 |
| 7 |
| Western Force | 7 | 2 | 0 | 5 | 1 | 13 |
| 8 |
| Hurricanes | 6 | 2 | 0 | 4 | -11 | 11 |
| 9 |
| Melbourne Rebels | 7 | 2 | 0 | 5 | -56 | 10 |
| 10 |
| Highlanders | 7 | 1 | 0 | 6 | -34 | 8 |
| 11 |
| Fijian Drua | 8 | 1 | 0 | 7 | -131 | 6 |
| 12 |
| Moana Pasifika | 6 | 1 | 0 | 5 | -126 | 4 |
Crazy that teams with losing records will almost certainly qualify for QF's.
KOB1987
John Eales (66)
It is but they do it to try to keep as many supporters as possible engaged for as long as possible.
Personally in a 12 team comp I’d go the old amateur model:
week 1
A qualifying semi - 2nd v 3rd
B elimination semi - 4th v 5th
week 2
C major semi - 1st v winner A
D minor semi - loser A v winner B
week 3
E preliminary final - loser C v winner D
week 4
final - winner C v winner E
Personally in a 12 team comp I’d go the old amateur model:
week 1
A qualifying semi - 2nd v 3rd
B elimination semi - 4th v 5th
week 2
C major semi - 1st v winner A
D minor semi - loser A v winner B
week 3
E preliminary final - loser C v winner D
week 4
final - winner C v winner E
Dismal Pillock
Michael Lynagh (62)
Rugbynutter39
Michael Lynagh (62)
Leaders starting to clear away from the bunch:
SUPER RUGBY PACIFIC
Pos. P W D L +/- Pts 1 Brumbies 8 7 0 1 83 31 2 Blues 7 6 0 1 88 27 3 Crusaders 7 6 0 1 64 27 4 Queensland Reds 7 6 0 1 62 26 5 NSW Waratahs 7 4 0 3 41 20 6 Chiefs 7 4 0 3 19 18 7 Western Force 7 2 0 5 1 13 8 Hurricanes 6 2 0 4 -11 11 9 Melbourne Rebels 7 2 0 5 -56 10 10 Highlanders 7 1 0 6 -34 8 11 Fijian Drua 8 1 0 7 -131 6 12 Moana Pasifika 6 1 0 5 -126 4
Crazy that teams with losing records will almost certainly qualify for QF's.
Window dressing as RA and NZRU could not otherwise agree on how to address nz and oz team competitive imbalance so go with something Mickey Mouse to try to say oz teams get to finals. As opposed to risk of go with top 5 go through and risk no oz teams in finals and PR disaster. I think the risks of PR disaster regardless like last years TT still high as token teams that make final 8 but way off the pace won’t hide a lemon. Anyhow we have done this topic to death so I guess let’s see what pans out like we do every year…wonder how many really expect something different after so many years of the same…those few rusted on optimists who do believe remain an endangered species…
waiopehu oldboy
George Smith (75)
They're not going to make the season longer so maybe:
Week 1
3 v 6
4 v 5
Losers eliminated
Week 2 - SF
1 v lower-ranked winner
2 v higher-ranked winner
Week 3 - GF
drewprint
Dick Tooth (41)
Following on from the news that Tom Banks has been offered a quite simply astronomical amount of money to go play in Japan (how can you say no to that?!) I wanted to ask a few questions of the GAGR forum to better understand the dynamics of the current Super Rugby setup. It seems to be we are steadily being blown away by the vast amounts of money offered OS, and Super Rugby is on its way to being reduced to a mickey mouse competition if things don't change. There is plenty of work RA can do in it's own backyard, but I'd like to better grasp what Super Rugby can do to supercharge its own product and get more money coming in. Some of these may be quite obvious to many so sorry in advance!
(I'm not trolling or fishing here - I'd just like to improve my own understand of the lay of the land. So if we can avoid this devolving into a 'yeah but you guys suck' 'nah it's you guys who are shit!' discussion from the usual suspects that'd be great. I however reserve the right to say this myself at the end if I so choose).
Who runs Super Rugby Pacific? SANZAAR? Do we have an independent Super Rugby organizational body making decisions solely focused of the integrity of this competition?
Is there a salary cap for all teams? If so what is it?
RA provides a certain amount of player top ups. Does NZ do the same? Are these top ups exempt from Super Rugby salary caps for both nations?
I read often that NZ see the ABs as the top of their pyramid cash cow (of course, huge brand and nation defining team) - does this mean a reluctance to tinker with Super Rugby as essentially their high performance development program?
Do all Aus and NZ Super teams have academies?
I'm sure I'll have more questions as the convo progresses but am happy to start there!
(I'm not trolling or fishing here - I'd just like to improve my own understand of the lay of the land. So if we can avoid this devolving into a 'yeah but you guys suck' 'nah it's you guys who are shit!' discussion from the usual suspects that'd be great. I however reserve the right to say this myself at the end if I so choose).
Who runs Super Rugby Pacific? SANZAAR? Do we have an independent Super Rugby organizational body making decisions solely focused of the integrity of this competition?
Is there a salary cap for all teams? If so what is it?
RA provides a certain amount of player top ups. Does NZ do the same? Are these top ups exempt from Super Rugby salary caps for both nations?
I read often that NZ see the ABs as the top of their pyramid cash cow (of course, huge brand and nation defining team) - does this mean a reluctance to tinker with Super Rugby as essentially their high performance development program?
Do all Aus and NZ Super teams have academies?
I'm sure I'll have more questions as the convo progresses but am happy to start there!
LeCheese
Greg Davis (50)
Can't help directly with any of the specifics, but just want to comment on this.
Obviously the Tom Banks offer is a monumental, life-changing sum of cash (particularly for a guy who many view as solid but not a star), but crazy money from overseas isn't a new thing, and I don't think this in particular changes the landscape much. Contract prices naturally creep up over time (as with everything) - it just happens to be that we've hit the million dollar mark and it's an eye catcher.
When the French and Japanese teams first started paying silly money over a decade ago, it of course started drawing many internationals, but Super has remained a relatively solid (globally-speaking) competition, with a core group of AU/NZ/SA internationals leading the charge. I'm not sure a handful of million-dollar+ offers to solid players here and there are going to impact that much more than it has in the past.
PhilClinton
Mark Loane (55)
I agree Cheesey, but in saying that, if Banks is getting $1.4M it changes the landscape for players who are both above and below his skill level.
Guys who are genuinely better (in all positions) will likely be looking for $1.4M+ to make a move. That could work in Super Rugby favour, as maybe overseas teams aren't willing to throw that cash around all the time, although it seems weird they picked Banks to do it.
The main problem is probably going to be those fringe Wallabies/guys yet to debut, we've already had a number of guys announce to be leaving Super Rugby after this year, FLW (Fergus Lee-Warner), ASY (Angus Scott-Young), LSL (Lukhan Salakaia-Loto) to name a few. If overseas sides are willing to pay Banks $1.4M, it means those fringe blokes value may be increasing as well, thus making them harder to retain in Super Rugby.
Guys who are genuinely better (in all positions) will likely be looking for $1.4M+ to make a move. That could work in Super Rugby favour, as maybe overseas teams aren't willing to throw that cash around all the time, although it seems weird they picked Banks to do it.
The main problem is probably going to be those fringe Wallabies/guys yet to debut, we've already had a number of guys announce to be leaving Super Rugby after this year, FLW (Fergus Lee-Warner), ASY (Angus Scott-Young), LSL (Lukhan Salakaia-Loto) to name a few. If overseas sides are willing to pay Banks $1.4M, it means those fringe blokes value may be increasing as well, thus making them harder to retain in Super Rugby.
LeCheese
Greg Davis (50)
Could just be a case of the club being desperate for a quality fullback, and someone high up just really rates Banks
LeCheese
Greg Davis (50)
SANZAAR are still the governing body - manage the judicial process etc. Not sure of their input over and above general governance, if any
SANZAAR is run out of Sydney.
I assume that pretty much all Super Rugby Pacific decisions are made between RA/NZRU. The SANZAAR committee are execs or board members from the various unions involved. Given the lack of SA and Argentina involvement in the current competition, I doubt they'd have any input there.
I am guessing Moana and Fiji don't really get much input on competition decisions.
There's definitely an argument that Super Rugby or whatever competition is in place should have its own independent governing body but I don't see that as ever being likely. The national unions own the competition and own or quasi-own the bulk of the teams involved. They are absolutely running it to suit their overall calendar and needs.
If the competition had to sign broadcasting contracts that only included Super Rugby games it is highly unlikely they'd generate more income than they do now getting distributed an allocation from the overall broadcast rights that includes test rugby.
I assume that pretty much all Super Rugby Pacific decisions are made between RA/NZRU. The SANZAAR committee are execs or board members from the various unions involved. Given the lack of SA and Argentina involvement in the current competition, I doubt they'd have any input there.
I am guessing Moana and Fiji don't really get much input on competition decisions.
There's definitely an argument that Super Rugby or whatever competition is in place should have its own independent governing body but I don't see that as ever being likely. The national unions own the competition and own or quasi-own the bulk of the teams involved. They are absolutely running it to suit their overall calendar and needs.
If the competition had to sign broadcasting contracts that only included Super Rugby games it is highly unlikely they'd generate more income than they do now getting distributed an allocation from the overall broadcast rights that includes test rugby.
Come on, admit it, you've got a semi...
LeCheese
Greg Davis (50)
One of the major benefits, at least on the surface, to have SANZAAR providing oversight is a level of independence from Super Rugby (the organisation)
LeCheese
Greg Davis (50)
Cancelled Account
Desmond Connor (43)
Drewprint
$1.4 per annum in NRL for an above average player is not uncommon.
RA and NZR will need to find a way to generate cashflow in the coming couple of years. I think we’ll see more contracts like this coming through hard and fast.
$1.4 per annum in NRL for an above average player is not uncommon.
RA and NZR will need to find a way to generate cashflow in the coming couple of years. I think we’ll see more contracts like this coming through hard and fast.
Drew
Bob Davidson (42)
My thoughts exactly