Where to for Super Rugby?

[Moono75]

Replace what you said with rebels and VIC rugby.

I'm glad there is passion out west, but Vic rugby is as important as wa rugby. We don't have a right to have a team as much as you don't have a right to have a team as much as we do. Good times ahead for both, hopefully, well fingers crossed anyway.

I back five OZ teams in as the best way forward. But if it comes to the pinch, I believe WA delivers more benefit long term. If that opinions shits people off so be it. Our passion got us into Super Rugby first and we aren't getting thrown out quietly.

 

[Sir Arthur Higgins]

I think 5 teams is the best way forward with south africa losing two and japan exiting. Australian teams given an allowance to sign japanese players as well as an overall increase in foreign quotas.
japan team is truely woeful and they aren't there yet. better path would have been to get japanese players playing in NZ and Aus super rugby teams and then w hen there is sufficient japanese depth, bringing a team online.

 

[dru]

We really need to stop this "take them not us". All it does is support the cutters.

Take a snap shot right now of how much we have invested in Melbourne and Perth. We can talk about the effectiveness of that spend, but right now the most important discussion is whether we are willing to throw that investment away.

I am not the only one who says NO.

 

[No4918]

The latest meeting was April 6th wasn't it??

 

[SammyP]

We really need to stop this "take them not us". All it does is support the cutters.

I think this right here is yet another negative for Oz rugby to come out of all of this.
If the announcement is made that an Australian team will definitely be cut, fans of each of the three franchises will all be saying don't cut us cut "name of other team here"
I think we should retain all 5 teams. Definitely.
BUT if the announcement came that there WILL be a cut then my view could very easily change to the Brumbies have to stay, get rid of one of the others instead.
No, I don't want to see any team cut. But i would rather the Rebels or Force over the Brumbies if it comes down to it.
This whole thing can either bring the Oz rugby community together in unity or it will tear us apart even more as we fight and argue about which team should go. "They cost more" or "Their results are worse" etc etc
I have a feeling I know which one it will be.
And that just makes me sad

 

[SammyP]

The latest meeting was April 6th wasn't it??

I think (and I'm far from an expert like some) that SARU met on the 6th to discuss SA and what they want, but no announcement was made in regards to Super Rugby, more about the Springboks.
Last night Geerob wrote that the ARU are meeting tomorrow and it sounds pretty ominous (title f piece -"ARU to meet on Sunday to prepare for vote on 15-team Super Rugby model"), but I am desperately hoping it means this whole thing could be coming to a conclusion

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/u...am-model-for-super-rugby-20170407-gvg0j5.html

 

[dru]

Geerob thinks they will announce a team as cut? Before we know that a S15 is possible?

Firstly the ARU should simply announce "no". But if you are going to say "yes" surely there needs a caveat around confirmation from SARU and details of how the revised format works (for Australia).

 

[RedsHappy]

"Settling for mediocrity killing Australian rugby"

As Cannon says so well, we're now patting ourselves on the back for 'good second halves' and 'can't fault the efforts' .... as winning becomes the increasingly rare exception:

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport...s/news-story/4dcbdad8b9ea97dd5ecceabf463c8088

 

[dru]

"Settling for mediocrity killing Australian rugby"

As Cannon says so well, we're now patting ourselves on the back for 'good second halves' and 'can't fault the efforts' .. as winning becomes the increasingly rare exception:

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport...s/news-story/4dcbdad8b9ea97dd5ecceabf463c8088

"The silence (from the ARU at the moment) is offensive."

Could_not_agree_more.

 

[Ulrich]

As much as the administration sucks; both AUS and SA could do better at Super Rugby level at this point in time.

At the end of the day you have to ask yourself as individual if you are giving your best. I reckon a good portion are not.

Get on with it for now for those concerned.

 

[Quick Hands]

We really need to stop this "take them not us". All it does is support the cutters.

Take a snap shot right now of how much we have invested in Melbourne and Perth. We can talk about the effectiveness of that spend, but right now the most important discussion is whether we are willing to throw that investment away.

I am not the only one who says NO.

Everyone needs to stand together and say no one goes.

 

[Ulrich]

Everyone needs to stand together and say no one goes.

Money talks and the broadcasters are the money. Viewership is down so the logical conclusion is they want changes.

The stalemate here is that AUS does not lose all that much when SA teams are cut, and likewise for SA - domestically.

It's with the European influence that we lose and we lose more when the competitiveness sucks. There is also no inherent rivalry between AUS and SA as there is between AUS and NZ or NZ and SA.

I think we both find it hard to like one another (AUS & SA) because we have little in common other than Britain and to *some extent* similar weather and landscape.

We just don't click for the most part.

 

[The torpedo]

"Settling for mediocrity killing Australian rugby"

As Cannon says so well, we're now patting ourselves on the back for 'good second halves' and 'can't fault the efforts' .. as winning becomes the increasingly rare exception:

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport...s/news-story/4dcbdad8b9ea97dd5ecceabf463c8088

Exactly. Look at the Brisbane Lions - lost to Essendon last week (84-111) and played decent (bar the 2nd Qtr.) and coach Chris Fagan says that is unacceptable.

What we need are coaches who recognise that a). it's gonna be a long fucking rebuild (5+ years), but b). high standards need to be maintained and winning is all that is acceptable (for players and coaches).

 

[moa999]

Let's just add about 15 NZ teams. Might finally even up the competition that way.

 

[BLR]

Just a thought, let's say that the ARU decide they don't want to pull the trigger on the Force and the ownership campaign goes well, they charge perhaps $3million or so for the IP to the Force and tell the Force they will get a reduced allocation because of the cash they got from the campaign.

Now say if the ARU tell the other unions to try out similar campaigns with the idea of all franchises being a proportion of self funding in a way, with the sweetener for the fans being that they have a direct say & the more they get in there the more they have to spend on players. Green Bay Packers has been spoke about alot but we want to have a country of 5 Barcelona powerhouses.

Think patron or kickstarter for rugby.

Or cut the ARU entirely and we do whatever as they are a bunch of muppets.

EDIT: If the ARU are constantly banging on about money let's just aim to get them out of the picture if it threatens our teams.

 

[wamberal]

Which sport would these teams play? Not rugby, if the ARU is "cut".

 

[BLR]

Which sport would these teams play? Not rugby, if the ARU is "cut".

Do the ARU hold the trademark to the motions of rugby or are they a administrative construct?

The English & French clubs and their relationship with the RFU & FFR would be like this. If a ruling body is incompetent surely a bit of distance from that clusterfuck could be a good thing. (I know there is bad things about the lax relationship between the two when it comes to national rugby but this is up to the ARU to solve, not the franchises.)

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

You know the more this goes on with all the uncertainty the more sick to death I'm becoming of it. I'm going to watch the Force tomorrow but only as an act of solidarity (and the fact that I'm a paid up member). I'm just giving less and less of a shit about what happens to the game in this country the longer it goes on. If we do get punted then we might as well go back to NSW and QLD and I'll find something else to do with my time.

That's how sick of all this political wrangling, zero communication and innuendo via the press I've become.

 

[Quick Hands]

Money talks and the broadcasters are the money. Viewership is down so the logical conclusion is they want changes.

The stalemate here is that AUS does not lose all that much when SA teams are cut, and likewise for SA - domestically.

It's with the European influence that we lose and we lose more when the competitiveness sucks. There is also no inherent rivalry between AUS and SA as there is between AUS and NZ or NZ and SA.

I think we both find it hard to like one another (AUS & SA) because we have little in common other than Britain and to *some extent* similar weather and landscape.

We just don't click for the most part.

I'm not sure that there's a mutual dislike, but you're right in saying that there isn't the same traditional rivalry as with NZ.

 

[wamberal]

Do the ARU hold the trademark to the motions of rugby or are they a administrative construct?

I am not a lawyer. Not even a bush lawyer. But AFAIK, the IRB is the world governing body, and the ARU is affiliated with them. So if any club or other entity wants to play rugby in this country, the ARU or its nominees would presumably have to consent.


It kind of stands to reason that any serious sport has a formal governance regime.

Broadcasters, governments, insurance companies, etc etc. You name it. They would not be interested in supporting a rebel sport, which is what it would have to be.