eastman
John Solomon (38)
Focus has to be on the competition, not the strength of the national team. Fans care about players who can win them games, not about who they’re qualified for.
Wallabies 2023
- Thread starter RugbyReg
- Start date
Marce
John Hipwell (52)
That would be the fastest way. Aussie sides mixed by Aussies and Kiwis 50/50 percent. And with the new pahtway of Australian citizenships for Kiwis, that would create the mighty Walla-Blacks.
A 6th Australian side right now is a total madness. You only have one consistent team ATM, the Ponies. NSW and QLD have to become powerfull sides again before any move forward
Last edited:
stillmissit
Peter Johnson (47)
never heard that idea QWERTY, are you sure it is financially viable?
stillmissit
Peter Johnson (47)
dru
David Wilson (68)
Would have been a supporter of the idea in the past. These days I simply have no faith in NZRU working collaboratively. No that's not it. I have an expectation that NZRU would see themselves as more important than the sport and to work against it unless they could bake in advantages for NZ whatever the consequences for the sport.
Note as well that more teams does not mean more games for the comp. We have shorter comp periods, largely due, I think because of the international season. That is the period where more game time would be particularly useful. And if it was also providing transition opportunity to the clubland players then great.
In terms of a Super future we can do a lot worse than thinking about integrating with Japan. In terms of parallel comp to the international season, we already had it, It was a good one. All that needs to happen is funds and waking up the dissenting NSW club administration to reality. Whoosh, there goes that pink elephant again, unfortunately.
stillmissit
Peter Johnson (47)
Dru, Just read this by a guy I follow, and thought it was pertinent to our discussion.
The internet promised so much, but delivered so little.
Communication-wise, it succeeds about as well as a bar filled with drunks.
LeCheese
Greg Davis (50)
If this is your experience, it's operator error.
stillmissit
Peter Johnson (47)
LC: If it is so good at communication why are there so many fearful people in the world who were brought up on this trash?
My first internet connection was in 1993! a limited group but the same stuff basically.
I recognised the problem as soon as Facebook took off and decided to never have a social media account.
At the post office last week a family of 4 were looking at their phones when I went in and doing the same when I walked out, I asked them if they were having a family meeting. This stuff is destroying communication at most levels.
QED back to the rugby....
I think NZ are authoring their own decline with their protectionist attitudes towards Super Rugby. As the league diminishes, so do revenues, then you have more players leaving NZ and becoming ineligible for ABs duty, along with a lower standard of play in Super Rugby.
If 25 years from now half of potential ABs are in Japan/France because Super Rugby doesn't make enough, even with top ups for national duty, they'll have themselves to blame.
Super Rugby is idiotic in its current state. You don't even need to watch to know the outcome of each game, even without following the league closely. People want hope for their side and to see competitive matches.
They need to share players across the competition. I doubt Callum Clarke or Beauden Barrett are suddenly going to forget how to play Rugby if they suit up for the Tahs, despite whatever nonsense spewed by Kiwis.
Ensure a certain minimum number of spots for Aussies/Kiwis in the entire competition, allow a certain few marquee players to stay in Aussie/NZ, then let clubs sign any player or even have a draft.
Works brilliantly in North America and we have the highest revenue generating sports leagues on Earth, soccer aside.
Ice hockey players get paid $10m/year. Even a 3rd tier American football league in Canada, with only 7 teams, gets crowds of 20,000+ people.
There's no reason that Super Rugby couldn't be far more compelling as a product and get crowds of 10,000 - 20,000 for each game. Even with smaller populations in NZ/Aus.
If 25 years from now half of potential ABs are in Japan/France because Super Rugby doesn't make enough, even with top ups for national duty, they'll have themselves to blame.
Super Rugby is idiotic in its current state. You don't even need to watch to know the outcome of each game, even without following the league closely. People want hope for their side and to see competitive matches.
They need to share players across the competition. I doubt Callum Clarke or Beauden Barrett are suddenly going to forget how to play Rugby if they suit up for the Tahs, despite whatever nonsense spewed by Kiwis.
Ensure a certain minimum number of spots for Aussies/Kiwis in the entire competition, allow a certain few marquee players to stay in Aussie/NZ, then let clubs sign any player or even have a draft.
Works brilliantly in North America and we have the highest revenue generating sports leagues on Earth, soccer aside.
Ice hockey players get paid $10m/year. Even a 3rd tier American football league in Canada, with only 7 teams, gets crowds of 20,000+ people.
There's no reason that Super Rugby couldn't be far more compelling as a product and get crowds of 10,000 - 20,000 for each game. Even with smaller populations in NZ/Aus.
Marce
John Hipwell (52)
NZ Rugby has to see the complete film. Super Rugby needs to be the answer for a long term. NZ is a small country, they already reached their ceiling in terms of professional rugby. 14 professional NPC teams and 5 Super Rugby franchises, that's all for a 4 million inhabitants country.
If you want to compete against the big money coming from France, Japan and even, the NRL poaching the school boys, you need to stablish a strategic alliance with Australia, the largest market in Oceania. It's the ideal partner and there are to much potential for rugby expansion.
For that you need an entertaining Super Rugby, not only the Kiwis punishing the Aussies every weekend. A competitive Bledisloe Cup that can match State of Origin and the best players staying in the competition.
RA has to do their part too, a draft system could be a good first step for that
That's not the point. If you watch the Heineken Champions Cup, the winners are always the same: Leinster, Toulouse, Saracens. The point is competitive rugby games, NZ always has been the stronger participant in Super Rugby but before Aussie and SA sides used to be more competitive and that meant better games to watch.
The Aussie derbies have been interesting and quite competitive but when they cross the pond are smash by the Kiwis. That's not the way to attract casual supporters in Australia
Last edited:
wamberal
Phil Kearns (64)
Australian franchises should be told to pick their strongest 23 every game. Getting thrashed does nothing for the competition, and must be pretty disheartening for the players.
stillmissit
Peter Johnson (47)
We should be here to win every game and this kind of stuff including putting RWC players in cotton wool is hardly helping the game. I am still waiting for a major review into why so many players have been injured during Rennies time.
Adam84
Rod McCall (65)
All teams should be picking their best 23 for the integrity of the competition, not just Australia
Given it's only two weeks until the first leg of the promotion/relegation matches it will be interesting to see whether he's right to go then. They obviously think he's a fair chance given the efforts they went to to qualify him.
won't get to it this week but will try to do it on public holiday Monday for next week
Members Section
John Thornett (49)
Just got my tickets to both bankwest & the mcg!
Rugbyman2023
Peter Burge (5)
Anyone know if Ross haylett petty or cam Clark are playing Shute shield? Or have they headed overseas?