Super Rugby 2022

[Joe King]

Plus the SuperRugbyAU competition was just fun to watch. Even as someone whose team didn't win a single match in AU nor TT.

If we can have that again in 2022 it'll be a great start to the season, even if the whole thing is technically SuperRugbyPacific.

I'm just hoping it still has a Tahs home match on 19th March. -crosses fingers-

Super Rugby AU seemed like such a happy time in the Australian rugby community.

But I really hope they will get to play SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) over the next two years. If it's gonna be bad, which many expect it will be, they need to see this now so that they know with certainty not to renew the idea beyond 2023.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Super Rugby AU seemed like such a happy time in the Australian rugby community.

But I really hope they will get to play SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) over the next two years. If it's gonna be bad, which many expect it will be, they need to see this now so that they know with certainty not to renew the idea beyond 2023.

Yep let’s prove it either way so if we need to revise our pro rugby strategy we do so quickly and avoid the slow death / terminal death spiral of recent super rugby incarnations. We can’t afford to stay the course of a flawed product and just shuffling the deck chairs. To me this is going to test If we have the right leadership at RA to make those courageous decisions. But I am presuming really it is about needing PE investment to have other options to consider. Hence ok if we need to commit to super rugby pacific with the current (less optimal) model for next 2 years if that is the rationale. And hey if after 2 years super rugby pacific working we continue down that course and if not we look at alternatives.

 

[Dan54]

Mate, tv deals will tell us all what our future will be regardless of PE money or anything. It's no good getting a one of drop of PE money and then go 'right we don't need to worry about earnings anymore'. RA would hopefully use PE money for building the grassroots!

 

[Joe King]

Mate, tv deals will tell us all what our future will be regardless of PE money or anything. It's no good getting a one of drop of PE money and then go 'right we don't need to worry about earnings anymore'. RA would hopefully use PE money for building the grassroots!

I think that's correct to an extent. Though, we've also seen the ARU sign up for lucrative tv deals in the past that have been bad for the game in Australia. We don't want them to make that kind of mistake again.

It may come down to a choice between more tv money in the short-term vs slightly less money in the short-term, but better for the game in the long-run.

 

[Dan54]

I think that's correct to an extent. Though, we've also seen the ARU sign up for lucrative tv deals in the past that have been bad for the game in Australia. We don't want them to make that kind of mistake again.

It may come down to a choice between more tv money in the short-term vs slightly less money in the short-term, but better for the game in the long-run.

I kind of agree, but bottom line is it's not likely to change. Unfortunately (same as in NZ) the long run involves getting a good tv deal and a product that they want. And the other thing that comes into play is Aus need Wallabies to be successful for the game to be successful , and so needs players playing a good a standard as possible! It works for everyone, there is a reason that Super is played as much as anything. When SA went from Super rugby, did they play a domestic comp? No you can't do it and be competitive unfortunately (and they have CC which still need a higher standard comp). Best comp around in my opinion is NPC, and I would be more than happy if that was the comp below test rugby, but it's not going to work. If someone can tell me one top tier rugby nation in world that plays just a domestic comp , I would be pleased and say lets follow that.
In the meantime we stuck with Super like it or not.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I kind of agree, but bottom line is it's not likely to change. Unfortunately (same as in NZ) the long run involves getting a good tv deal and a product that they want. And the other thing that comes into play is Aus need Wallabies to be successful for the game to be successful , and so needs players playing a good a standard as possible! It works for everyone, there is a reason that Super is played as much as anything. When SA went from Super rugby, did they play a domestic comp? No you can't do it and be competitive unfortunately (and they have CC which still need a higher standard comp). Best comp around in my opinion is NPC, and I would be more than happy if that was the comp below test rugby, but it's not going to work. If someone can tell me one top tier rugby nation in world that plays just a domestic comp , I would be pleased and say lets follow that.
In the meantime we stuck with Super like it or not.

Top tier rugby nation that just plays domestic comp, - England and France. and if you maybe put Japan now as tier 1 (ok more tier 2 perhaps).

I think most actually favour being in a super rugby competition with NZ if we can create a good product. Last seasons TT was not a good product. I don't want to get into the ins and outs of concerns about ability to make it a good product with current model as we have done that to death on these and other threads. But IF we can create a great super rugby product that cements and grows the footprint, provides enough mix of local content, attractive brand of rugby and uncertainty of outcome by more evenly balanced teams I am sure we will all be happy.

 

[Dan54]

Top tier rugby nation that just plays domestic comp, - England and France. and if you maybe put Japan now as tier 1 (ok more tier 2 perhaps).

I think most actually favour being in a super rugby competition with NZ if we can create a good product. Last seasons TT was not a good product. I don't want to get into the ins and outs of concerns about ability to make it a good product with current model as we have done that to death on these and other threads. But IF we can create a great super rugby product that cements and grows the footprint, provides enough mix of local content, attractive brand of rugby and uncertainty of outcome by more evenly balanced teams I am sure we will all be happy.

Geez RN , I was going to say Japan , but not sure I consider them top tier. But I really thought you followed rugby more than you obviously do, or you would have heard of Heineken/Champion's Cup , a comp I watching at moment that involves teams from England, France, Ireland , Scotland etc etc . They have a domestic comp below that, which I think is a great idea.
But I understand what you saying mate, and not suggesting that Super can't make improvements by any means.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Geez RN , I was going to say Japan , but not sure I consider them top tier. But I really thought you followed rugby more than you obviously do, or you would have heard of Heineken/Champion's Cup , a comp I watching at moment that involves teams from England, France, Ireland , Scotland etc etc . They have a domestic comp below that, which I think is a great idea.
But I understand what you saying mate, and not suggesting that Super can't make improvements by any means.

Dan you said countries that don’t have a domestic comp as heinkin cup etc not the main game. And yes doing a domestic competition and champions league with nz and Japan long been mooted on here but you specifically asked about tier 1 having domestic comp.

Anyhow we are aligned that IF they can make super rugby a suitable product it would be the desirable option to have on the mix. But as they (nz and RA) can’t seem to align on creating a suitable super rugby product (based on evidence and results so far), it does become a moot point when to enact a fallback option. Anyhow I reckon we have super rugby pacific for a couple of years until at least RA gets PE investment as too broke to look at other options and hence beholden to nz. As you say maybe domestic competition with champions league format (with Japan and nz) like France and England have is where long term we will end up. Works for me. Anyhow I digress.

 

[Dan54]

Dan you said countries that don’t have a domestic comp as heinkin cup etc not the main game. And yes doing a domestic competition and champions league with nz and Japan long been mooted on here but you specifically asked about tier 1 having domestic comp.

Anyhow we are aligned that IF they can make super rugby a suitable product it would be the desirable option to have on the mix. But as they (nz and RA) can’t seem to align on creating a suitable super rugby product (based on evidence and results so far), it does become a moot point when to enact a fallback option. Anyhow I reckon we have super rugby pacific for a couple of years until at least RA gets PE investment as too broke to look at other options and hence beholden to nz. As you say maybe domestic competition with champions league format (with Japan and nz) like France and England have is where long term we will end up. Works for me. Anyhow I digress.

Ok mate I think you misunderstood I said quote: If someone can tell me one top tier rugby nation in world that plays just a domestic comp , I would be pleased and say lets follow that.
In my opinion Super isn't main comp in NZ anyway, NPC is, but that just an opinion.
I realise they have a seperate domestic comp as do NZ and SA etc etc. But none of them feel they can survive with that alone. And that is with populations of 56 and 65 mill. But as you know I fully agree with you and everyone else that Aus should have a domestic comp below Super level, just that we stuck with comp we got because of financial reasons, so we got to make best of it we can. We kind of stuck where we are because of no international season too I think.
But anyway we all still waiting to hear how comp will go this year, as I suspect that we will see goal posts move again for all winter sports the way yhings are tracking!

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Ok mate I think you misunderstood I said quote: If someone can tell me one top tier rugby nation in world that plays just a domestic comp , I would be pleased and say lets follow that.
In my opinion Super isn't main comp in NZ anyway, NPC is, but that just an opinion.
I realise they have a seperate domestic comp as do NZ and SA etc etc. But none of them feel they can survive with that alone. And that is with populations of 56 and 65 mill. But as you know I fully agree with you and everyone else that Aus should have a domestic comp below Super level, just that we stuck with comp we got because of financial reasons, so we got to make best of it we can. We kind of stuck where we are because of no international season too I think.
But anyway we all still waiting to hear how comp will go this year, as I suspect that we will see goal posts move again for all winter sports the way yhings are tracking!

Seriously? Or are you trying to suggest that the Champions Cup is the same thing as a organised league structure?

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Ok mate I think you misunderstood I said quote: If someone can tell me one top tier rugby nation in world that plays just a domestic comp , I would be pleased and say lets follow that.
In my opinion Super isn't main comp in NZ anyway, NPC is, but that just an opinion.
I realise they have a seperate domestic comp as do NZ and SA etc etc. But none of them feel they can survive with that alone. And that is with populations of 56 and 65 mill. But as you know I fully agree with you and everyone else that Aus should have a domestic comp below Super level, just that we stuck with comp we got because of financial reasons, so we got to make best of it we can. We kind of stuck where we are because of no international season too I think.
But anyway we all still waiting to hear how comp will go this year, as I suspect that we will see goal posts move again for all winter sports the way yhings are tracking!

Yeh missed that Dan but I don’t think anyone advocating just a domestic comp as not seen any of the domestic comp advocates anti champions league concept but rather domestic main game (the cake) and champions league as the icing - just like France and England. Anyhow we are really in alignment that oz needs a domestic comp (heck let’s at least get nrc back up for starters) , but yeh as you say we understand reasons why not happening. Like you mate I really hope we see a better super rugby product even with these known constraints in 2022, but see how we go. At least there seems to be some positive reforms led by RA. And hey our recent improvement in sevens has also been an unexpected bonus.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Yeh missed that Dan but I don’t think anyone advocating just a domestic comp as not seen any of the domestic comp advocates anti champions league concept but rather domestic main game (the cake) and champions league as the icing - just like France and England. Anyhow we are really in alignment that oz needs a domestic comp (heck let’s at least get nrc back up for starters) , but yeh as you say we understand reasons why not happening. Like you mate I really hope we see a better super rugby product even with these known constraints in 2022, but see how we go. At least there seems to be some positive reforms led by RA. And hey our recent improvement in sevens has also been an unexpected bonus.

I know I certainly haven't. I want a domestic competition as our primary structure with a Cup comp involving NZ and Japan aswell to add more to the schedule both in terms of interest and revenue.

We've seen via ratings not only this season but over several years that from an Australian perspective we prefer domestic games played between Australian first and foremost. This is what informs my opinions and my preferences.

 

[Dan54]

Seriously? Or are you trying to suggest that the Champions Cup is the same thing as a organised league structure?

No did I say that? I said simply that no country only plays a domestic comp? What part of that is hard to follow. England and France have Domestic comps, but ALSO play in Heineken cup don't they? Or was that not Northampton Saints from England I have just watched Ulster from Ireland?

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I know I certainly haven't. I want a domestic competition as our primary structure with a Cup comp involving NZ and Japan aswell to add more to the schedule both in terms of interest and revenue.

We've seen via ratings not only this season but over several years that from an Australian perspective we prefer domestic games played between Australian first and foremost. This is what informs my opinions and my preferences.

To me whatever the primary product it has to have enough local content (oz teams), uncertainty of outcome and of ‘sufficient’ quality of rugby. Increasingly as can’t seem to get that with super rugby product as the primary pro product yeh agree RA should be looking harder at domestic pro product as main product. Regardless of that though we definitely need a nrc mark 3.0 to help as pathway to help develop the next level of talent coming through. Reds in particular shown how that can be leveraged effectively for that. I assume by maybe more hope RA has 5 year plan around this leveraging PE investment, governance reform and lions tour / RWC 2027 windfall as key part of this.

 

[hifflepiff]

Seriously? Or are you trying to suggest that the Champions Cup is the same thing as a organised league structure?

This point - that those advocating a domestic league also want a Champions Cup structure as well, not just a domestic comp - has been made over and over on this forum.

I'm unsure why those arguing against Super AU constantly misrepresent this argument.

To be clear

1. The structure that the vast majority are advocating is Super AU as the main competion with an Asia-Pacific Champions League on top of that - ala Top 14/Premiership & Champions Cup

2. No, NRC & Super Rugby is not an equivalent structure to this.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

No did I say that? I said simply that no country only plays a domestic comp? What part of that is hard to follow. England and France have Domestic comps, but ALSO play in Heineken cup don't they? Or was that not Northampton Saints from England I have just watched Ulster from Ireland?

So you are trying to equate those Cup comps as primary structures. Which they most certainly aren't. And they aren't true trans-national leagues. Both the Premiership and Top 14 are clearly their primary domestic structures.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

This point - that those advocating a domestic league also want a Champions Cup structure as well, not just a domestic comp - has been made over and over on this forum.

I'm unsure why those arguing against Super AU constantly misrepresent this argument.

To be clear

1. The structure that the vast majority are advocating is Super AU as the main competion with an Asia-Pacific Champions League on top of that - ala Top 14/Premiership & Champions Cup

2. No, NRC & Super Rugby is not an equivalent structure to this.

And really the above and every other option under the sun been considered and not much more to say that hasn’t been said…

 

[Dan54]

So you are trying to equate those Cup comps as primary structures. Which they most certainly aren't. And they aren't true trans-national leagues. Both the Premiership and Top 14 are clearly their primary domestic structures.

Exactly what I said, they the countries top league, but they can't survive on them alone. I don't consider Super rugby as NZ's primary structure, NPC is that!! All I simply said is NZ and Aus can't really survive without Super rugby as neither of our markets are big enough to handle it. For christ sake if markets of 56 and 65 mill need a combined comp of any sort to survive how do you think NZ and Aus will get on. Even south Africa have Currie Cup , but still got teams playing up north, and look at their population! If anyone thinks either country can survive on a 5-6 team comp they are dreaming. How many teams in these stand alone comps (which can't survive without champion's cup) is there? In France 14 teams and England have 13 teams!!! And you suggesting I trying to equate different structures!! Wales ,Scotland,Ireland have combined to have a reasonable comp, and had SA teams join. These are the facts of rugby comps! Even Japan's new comp has 12 teams!!
As I said I pretty happy with NPC (14 teams) , but I can assure everyone that you will not get a long term comp with 5-6 teams!!
All I saying is what we want and what we get is controlled by what TV wants, and that is what will get people paying , not a few of us on a rugby forum!!!

 

[Adam84]

Exactly what I said, they the countries top league, but they can't survive on them alone. I don't consider Super rugby as NZ's primary structure, NPC is that!! All I simply said is NZ and Aus can't really survive without Super rugby as neither of our markets are big enough to handle it. For christ sake if markets of 56 and 65 mill need a combined comp of any sort to survive how do you think NZ and Aus will get on. Even south Africa have Currie Cup , but still got teams playing up north, and look at their population! If anyone thinks either country can survive on a 5-6 team comp they are dreaming. How many teams in these stand alone comps (which can't survive without champion's cup) is there? In France 14 teams and England have 13 teams!!! And you suggesting I trying to equate different structures!! Wales ,Scotland,Ireland have combined to have a reasonable comp, and had SA teams join. These are the facts of rugby comps! Even Japan's new comp has 12 teams!!
As I said I pretty happy with NPC (14 teams) , but I can assure everyone that you will not get a long term comp with 5-6 teams!!
All I saying is what we want and what we get is controlled by what TV wants, and that is what will get people paying , not a few of us on a rugby forum!!!

I think it’s semantics at this point.

i don’t consider the NPC as the primary structure, It’s not in the same league of commercial viability as other tournaments like the premier league and top 14. NPC is a 3rd tier feeder competition, a very good one but not a lucrative commercial product on its own.

super rugby is New Zealand’s primary structure just like Australia, all 5 teams. Maybe if super rugby was scrapped the commercial value of NPC would increase.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Exactly what I said, they the countries top league, but they can't survive on them alone. I don't consider Super rugby as NZ's primary structure, NPC is that!! All I simply said is NZ and Aus can't really survive without Super rugby as neither of our markets are big enough to handle it. For christ sake if markets of 56 and 65 mill need a combined comp of any sort to survive how do you think NZ and Aus will get on. Even south Africa have Currie Cup , but still got teams playing up north, and look at their population! If anyone thinks either country can survive on a 5-6 team comp they are dreaming. How many teams in these stand alone comps (which can't survive without champion's cup) is there? In France 14 teams and England have 13 teams!!! And you suggesting I trying to equate different structures!! Wales ,Scotland,Ireland have combined to have a reasonable comp, and had SA teams join. These are the facts of rugby comps! Even Japan's new comp has 12 teams!!
As I said I pretty happy with NPC (14 teams) , but I can assure everyone that you will not get a long term comp with 5-6 teams!!
All I saying is what we want and what we get is controlled by what TV wants, and that is what will get people paying , not a few of us on a rugby forum!!!

Dan, broadcasters want quality product and content and on the latter also a decent amount of content that appeals to fans. Yeh we probably need at the right time a domestic product as well as super rugby cross border product. Debate will be on prominence of each though.
Taking an oz view the challenges are:
1. We don’t have a domestic semi pro product as key part of our path ways and development (having scrapped nrc whilst nz has npc and heartlands)
2. We don’t have a domestic pro product (Having scrapped super rugby au which to me was a mistake as could have short form super rugby au as well as super rugby pacific)
3. We have a flawed super rugby product that does not offer the flexibility to support a wider footprint of evenly matched teams. To me long term this has to be addressed and I think RA shown to be more flexible on this but also starting to see NZRU be at least be more open to consider different options as eventually I think long term there will be no choice with the threat of league and expansion of other pro comps and demand for players. As best defence against the latter is creating quality product with decent footprint in Asia pacific. If anything with league expansion we need to expand the footprint and create more pathway opportunities for players.