Where to for Super Rugby?

[D-Box]

This is going to be another silly idea/question I'm afraid, but if there was to be a full season TT Super Rugby comp, what are the main problems with NZR setting up a new team in Aus? Is it a possibility, or completely ridiculous? It would be NZ run and managed, with (mostly) NZ players, but be given an Australian geographical name depending on where it is located in Aus.

I'm just trying to think outside the box. It would stretch the depth of NZ a bit more so the competition is more even, but it would protect the interests of NZR whereby they keep their players within their system to be conditioned their way and eligible to be picked for the AB's. At the same time, it helps grow the game in the Australian market.

Perhaps it would become too complicated long term.

That's your team on the Gold Coast. Most of the rest of NZ are there already

 

[Dan54]

This is going to be another silly idea/question I'm afraid, but if there was to be a full season TT Super Rugby comp, what are the main problems with NZR setting up a new team in Aus? Is it a possibility, or completely ridiculous? It would be NZ run and managed, with (mostly) NZ players, but be given an Australian geographical name depending on where it is located in Aus.

I'm just trying to think outside the box. It would stretch the depth of NZ a bit more so the competition is more even, but it would protect the interests of NZR whereby they keep their players within their system to be conditioned their way and eligible to be picked for the AB's. At the same time, it helps grow the game in the Australian market.

Perhaps it would become too complicated long term.

I don't see it working. I think it would really struggle to have an identity. Good to think outside of box, but really would struggle to have any interest in it , too many downsides.

 

[dru]

I don't see it working. I think it would really struggle to have an identity. Good to think outside of box, but really would struggle to have any interest in it , too many downsides.

London Irish
London Scottish
London Welsh

 

[Adam84]

London Irish
London Scottish
London Welsh

Moana Pasifika

 

[Adam84]

This is going to be another silly idea/question I'm afraid, but if there was to be a full season TT Super Rugby comp, what are the main problems with NZR setting up a new team in Aus? Is it a possibility, or completely ridiculous? It would be NZ run and managed, with (mostly) NZ players, but be given an Australian geographical name depending on where it is located in Aus.

I'm just trying to think outside the box. It would stretch the depth of NZ a bit more so the competition is more even, but it would protect the interests of NZR whereby they keep their players within their system to be conditioned their way and eligible to be picked for the AB's. At the same time, it helps grow the game in the Australian market.

Perhaps it would become too complicated long term.

Absolutely this is the limitation in thinking at the moment, but why?

NRL look at Australia and New Zealand as one market, it’s not the ARL who set up a team in New Zealand, it’s the NRL who established a team in New Zealand and they did so because it was mutually beneficial to do so, from a sponsorship and broadcast perspective. This is also why any new competition needs to break away from been governed by NZRU/RA, and instead governed by an independent body who make decisions on what’s best for the tournament.

Any expansion teams shouldn’t have any limitations on who they can recruit(no foreign player cap), and similarly the governing unions should be able to select players from these teams regardless of whether they’re based in Australia, New Zealand or Hawaii.

 

[Dan54]

London Irish
London Scottish
London Welsh

Yep but London Irish, London Scots etc aren't paid for by their home unions are they? I can see what joe is suggesting, but see no point in NZR paying for a team in Aus, if we close as home unions where teams could drive from NZ etc , I could maybe see logic.

 

[Dan54]

Absolutely this is the limitation in thinking at the moment, but why?

NRL look at Australia and New Zealand as one market, it’s not the ARL who set up a team in New Zealand, it’s the NRL who established a team in New Zealand and they did so because it was mutually beneficial to do so, from a sponsorship and broadcast perspective. This is also why any new competition needs to break away from been governed by NZRU/RA, and instead governed by an independent body who make decisions on what’s best for the tournament.

Any expansion teams shouldn’t have any limitations on who they can recruit(no foreign player cap), and similarly the governing unions should be able to select players from these teams regardless of whether they’re based in Australia, New Zealand or Hawaii.

All good points Adam, but NRL set up Warriors as you said, but to do same it would have to be Sanzaar that sets up a team. I hate to be picky but super is or was run by Sanzaar. Ok made up of reps from Aus,NZ,SA and Arg, but I struggle to think who tis completely neutral independant board is going to appear from. See NZ and Aus actually have all their players contracted to them so as to try to avoid the schmozzle that happens time to time in England and France.

 

[Adam84]

TT Super Round scrapped for 2021, individual games will be played at venue of choice with profit sharing agreement between teams

 

[Braveheart81]

London Irish
London Scottish
London Welsh

I'm not sure these clubs help build much of a case.

London Welsh went bankrupt and was dissolved as a professional club. It still exists as an amateur club.

London Irish has been a financial basketcase for years and has been kept afloat by an owner losing millions of pounds a year.

London Scottish has never been successful on or off the field and is now a semi-professional club.

 

[Adam84]

All good points Adam, but NRL set up Warriors as you said, but to do same it would have to be Sanzaar that sets up a team. I hate to be picky but super is or was run by Sanzaar. Ok made up of reps from Aus,NZ,SA and Arg, but I struggle to think who tis completely neutral independant board is going to appear from. See NZ and Aus actually have all their players contracted to them so as to try to avoid the schmozzle that happens time to time in England and France.

I see these as failings of the current organisation design, rather then reasons why it couldn’t occur.

 

[Dan54]

TT Super Round scrapped for 2021, individual games will be played at venue of choice with profit sharing agreement between teams

Mind you that not really a problem. Think I will be happy with what we are getting at this stage. Not even sure I even that keen on super round.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Absolutely this is the limitation in thinking at the moment, but why?

NRL look at Australia and New Zealand as one market, it’s not the ARL who set up a team in New Zealand, it’s the NRL who established a team in New Zealand and they did so because it was mutually beneficial to do so, from a sponsorship and broadcast perspective. This is also why any new competition needs to break away from been governed by NZRU/RA, and instead governed by an independent body who make decisions on what’s best for the tournament.

Any expansion teams shouldn’t have any limitations on who they can recruit(no foreign player cap), and similarly the governing unions should be able to select players from these teams regardless of whether they’re based in Australia, New Zealand or Hawaii.

A TT competition needs to be more than just an extended trial for the respective national teams. It has to be run with a distinctly commercial mindset. It should be about if there is a viable candidate bidding they should be taken on the merit of their bid and not which national interest they serve. While I'm fine with there be a minimum ratio in terms of eligibility it shouldn't be a case of one or the other. More than they have to be eligible for either.

 

[dru]

A TT competition needs to be more than just an extended trial for the respective national teams. It has to be run with a distinctly commercial mindset. It should be about if there is a viable candidate bidding they should be taken on the merit of their bid and not which national interest they serve. While I'm fine with there be a minimum ratio in terms of eligibility it shouldn't be a case of one or the other. More than they have to be eligible for either.

Are you talking a TT that follows domestic? I think not? SO then having a commercial merit base is better than having a SANZAR based merit base.

But we don't need it. We do need a domestic. Ideally a growing domestic comp (in terms of teams). If the TT proposed is likely to kill that opportunity - well it is not my preferred solution.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Are you talking a TT that follows domestic? I think not? SO then having a commercial merit base is better than having a SANZAR based merit base.

But we don't need it. We do need a domestic. Ideally a growing domestic comp (in terms of teams). If the TT proposed is likely to kill that opportunity - well it is not my preferred solution.

Would apply to either to be honest. But I get the sense we'll be seeing a combined TT competition next year. It honestly doesn't matter which. It needs to be built with a commercial mindset. Even if we have a TT competition there's really only one place it can grow in regards to teams. And it should be seriously looked at.

 

[dru]

It honestly doesn't matter which.

Yeah its does. To some of us anyway.

And it should be seriously looked at.

Yes, absolutely. Perhaps this may see some serious limitations.

 

[Rebel man]

I do agree rugby Australia needs a change in governance to move away from the federated model. Then like the AFL and NRL they need an organisation that runs the competition. So have rugby Australia with the states sitting underneath looking at growing the game at a grass roots and community level across Australia then have super rugby have a CEO of super rugby that makes strategic decisions for the best way forward for that competition

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Yeah its does. To some of us anyway.



Yes, absolutely. Perhaps this may see some serious limitations.

Whether it combined TT or Super Rugby Au/Ao plus TT it all needs to be conducted with a commercial focus. So in that sense. Whichever model doesn't actually matter. As for the format. What would be more valuable to broadcasters. The ability to sell 5-6 games a week or just 2?

 

[Tomikin]

They should still have a super rugby AU champion... Different table with the first past the posts between the derbies.. That at least means one teams King of the west ( e.g west of NZ )

 

[dru]

Whether it combined TT or Super Rugby Au/Ao plus TT it all needs to be conducted with a commercial focus. So in that sense. Whichever model doesn't actually matter. As for the format. What would be more valuable to broadcasters. The ability to sell 5-6 games a week or just 2?

Not quite. If a (so called) commercial focus indicated a TT needed less Australian teams then I would close down the initiative completely.

We need to invest domestically, and to deny any third party having the opportunity to stop that happening. If a TT can't work to Australian requirements then the answer is simply no.

We may need to build, before looking to commercial dictators.

What we want is what is more valuable to the broadcasters - in the calm longer term. If the commercial input wishes to take that on board then good. Doubt this will happen with commercial arrangements that are in the first instance looking to NZR operating without obvious input from Australia.

Cut NZ clean if that is needed for Australia to set a National base. Those negotiations can then occur from Australia, not a non-negotiated fledgling NZR dominated TT.

 

[half]

Not quite. If a (so called) commercial focus indicated a TT needed less Australian teams then I would close down the initiative completely.

We need to invest domestically, and to deny any third party having the opportunity to stop that happening. If a TT can't work to Australian requirements then the answer is simply no.

We may need to build, before looking to commercial dictators.

What we want is what is more valuable to the broadcasters - in the calm longer term. If the commercial input wishes to take that on board then good. Doubt this will happen with commercial arrangements that are in the first instance looking to NZR operating without obvious input from Australia.

Cut NZ clean if that is needed for Australia to set a National base. Those negotiations can then occur from Australia, not a non-negotiated fledgling NZR dominated TT.

Dru

In this one exchange you have identified one of the core issues rugby faces in Australia.

We have never as a sport had the courage hhhmmm nay belief in rugby that we can go it alone.

Whether thats been against league in the 70's, or other challenges since.

The fear, OK tone it down so not to stir, the concern is we don't have the funds and we don't have the product.

What I find interesting [again not trying to stir other words spring to mind] is in the early 60's in NSW state public schools rugby was the winter code. One of my clients who played for Parramatta high still has on display a photo of himself winning the combined state schools V combined public schools competition or play off match, from the early 60's.

Aside from a couple of selective schools and Epping Boys, today there are almost no state public schools were rugby is the winter code.

Even in many GPS and CAS schools, AFL & soccer are making huge gains especially with the AFL throwing in heaps of cash.

There is a fundamental lack of understanding, of the need to have a reasonable number of teams if for no other reason than to get players.

The need for an expanded local domestic competition has never been greater.

Interestingly Basketball, is growing again and they made some hard decisions a little while back.

However, getting past the fear sorry concern, how do we get thu the next two years is such we stay welded to a model developed by a subscription overseas broadcaster, who had a primary interest of maximizing profit, rather than to grow rugby.

So closed is the mind set, that even something with as many variations that is private equity is reduced to group think major play equity investments, not that dis-similar to the Tri Nation & Super Rugby, Fox discussions in the 90's.

I still hope the penny will drop, but time is running out.