Waratahs 2023
- Thread starter RugbyReg
- Start date
WorkingClassRugger
Michael Lynagh (62)
Just to be clear. I'm referring to Miles Amatosero. Who's 20 and I doubt played in the NRC.
WorkingClassRugger
Michael Lynagh (62)
And is why I support focusing on a domestic competition first.
My mistake. I thought you were talking about Meafou.
qwerty51
Stirling Mortlock (74)
The thing is, we can support what, 8 teams max? That's not a good comp. Best bet is combining with NZ to make a 16-20 team comp.
Last edited:
The Ghost of Raelene
Simon Poidevin (60)
I see Clermont have Miles Amatosero in their squad as well. 20 year old lock listed at 2.03m and 125kg straight out of Waverley College
The Ghost of Raelene
Simon Poidevin (60)
Eyes and Ears
Bob Davidson (42)
I am fan of that apporach too with more NZ teams than Australian ones so there is a more level playing field and all games played in afternoon/evening time slots. Another poster believed that there wasn't suffcient viewer interest in that type of competition. The other challenging area is what is the impact to club rugby in Sydney and Brisbane if there were more professional teams and how does rugby engage those stakeholders in this strategy.
John S
Chilla Wilson (44)
Historically, there's been little engagement from at least Sydney club rugby - they've been quite happy with their little empire
WorkingClassRugger
Michael Lynagh (62)
I'm having a similar discussion over on the r/rugbyunion sub (I've got the day off work and am just burning a bit of time until I go out). And I'm not totally against continuing with Super Rugby Pacific. But I want to see some fairly significant changes implemented. Most notably;
- free movement of talent.
- the establishment of 4 more teams with primary focus toward bringing Aus, NZ and PI back to play in SRP (Super Rugby Pacific). One of which should be a 2nd PI oriented team based in Australia. and,
- a move away from Union administration of the competition resulting in a more commercially focused organisation taking over. One where the Unions have a vote but one that is equally shared among all members.
Part of the goals of these would be to look to create a greater level of parity in the competition, providing more opportunities to players to pursue careers in the game and for there to be a shift in thinking around what purpose it serves which historically from a Union perspective has been as vessel for national selection. These are things I think RL has done fairly well in the last 20 or so years and something we should properly look at emulating as if the current trend continues our current struggles in attracting and retaining talent particularly younger talent will only worsen.
If these were to be part of a new deal then I'd be fine continuing. Though unlike Eyes and Ears I think NZ is pretty much at saturation point in terms of teams and any new teams would likely need to come from Australia. Which I actually think there's room to grow in. And to answer the question around the club game. It would occupy the same place the NSW and QLD Cups do. Semi-professional/elite amateur player pathway.
Last edited:
qwerty51
Stirling Mortlock (74)
100% agree with all those. Just mimic the NRL (and AFL), those comps make bank and have tried and proven solutions.
The only issue is lack of support/passion/history for the clubs (especially if some rebrand like Tahs/Reds). NZ also need to get rid of their NPC and use those teams in this comp (cut half of them).
I go back and forth with keeping the club rugby teams involved because it fixes that problem but of course, they probably need to be amalgamated.
The only issue is lack of support/passion/history for the clubs (especially if some rebrand like Tahs/Reds). NZ also need to get rid of their NPC and use those teams in this comp (cut half of them).
I go back and forth with keeping the club rugby teams involved because it fixes that problem but of course, they probably need to be amalgamated.
WorkingClassRugger
Michael Lynagh (62)
You just open the extra four slots to bids. If a club can meet the criteria then they should be given equal consideration to any other bid. Though as above I'd be keen to see one of those 4 being a 2nd PI squad based in Australia. I'm not bothered by the continuation of the NPC if we maintain SRP (Super Rugby Pacific). Six professional squads seems like it would be probably where the NZ sits most comfortably in my opinion in this scenario.
For some reason it keeps putting any mention of Super Rugby Pacific (at least the abbreviation) into brackets.
Eyes and Ears
Bob Davidson (42)
I like the free movement of talent as another solution to the parity issue. I actually think the NRL are having issues with the parity strategy at the moment and their expansion is fraught with danger. We have to break this system where the Crusaders are always stronger than the Highlanders who are always stronger than Waratahs who are always stronger than the Rebels etc etc.
are we confident we would have enough Australians playing in the competition if we allowed 'free movement of travel'? Or would all of our teams begin to resemble the Force from this and last year?
Yeah, I think it would be a disaster. Very few Australian players would get signed for New Zealand teams and our teams would be filled with middling level New Zealand players displacing Australian players.
All it would achieve is increasing the total number of New Zealanders in the comp.
I highly doubt you'd see superstar All Blacks playing for Australian teams unless someone really broke the bank for them.
qwerty51
Stirling Mortlock (74)
What's the issue? If we had more teams, the same amount of Australians atm would still have pro contracts at a minimum.
There's no reason the NZ clubs would be paying higher than the Aus clubs so could very well see current All Blacks in Aus teams.
It goes back to the shift in priority we need though. Who cares if more NZs play? The focus needs to be on this comp, not Test rugby.
There's no reason the NZ clubs would be paying higher than the Aus clubs so could very well see current All Blacks in Aus teams.
It goes back to the shift in priority we need though. Who cares if more NZs play? The focus needs to be on this comp, not Test rugby.
WorkingClassRugger
Michael Lynagh (62)
There are measures that could be put in place. Things like quotas to ensure things don't go completely haywire. Cap concessions for local players, academy products etc. I guess not total free movement but within reason. That's also part of the thinking behind expanding the number of teams. More teams mean more rosters places to fill. We could then look at representative structures to reduce the field and there's always the option of as I've previously suggested linking up with the JLO in a Cup competition and then allowing players to ply their trade there while still being eligible to play for the Wallabies.
Ultimately we need to remove the obsession and reliance on Tests and look to develop our domestic structures competitively on and off the pitch. If that results in of the 480 odd places available in a 16 team competition (assuming 30 man squads) only 40% of them are Australian players I'd rather they be the best Australian players.
Last edited:
Pass it to Dunning!
Bob Loudon (25)
Tolu Latu signs for one year for less than six figures, says Fox Sports. Even for the trouble he is, that's a bargain and a major upgrade from Tom Horton.
upthereds#!
Peter Johnson (47)
Barely 6 figures it says - so probs a smidge over 100k - plus match fees.