Where to for Super Rugby?

[Rugbynutter39]

That's such a simplistic way to look at our success in the 98-03 period. There were so many reasons why we succeeded in that era, and things fell away after about 2005.

Changes to the structure of Super Rugby played a part, but I can't buy the 'let's go back to the 90s' argument that guys like Nick Farr-Jones have been pushing. Super 12! Shute Shield dominance! Winning trophies and skolling beers from the Bled with Johnny Howard!

In reality, the rot started when other nations began to catch up to the tactics we employed at the start of the professional era that gave us a big head start. That and a series of poor admin decisions over a decade that saw us spurn the 2003 World Cup windfall. But there are books, podcasts, threads about that and it's probably not worth relitigating here.

It also has to be viewed in context of what was happening within the broader competing football code environment in Australia with all codes during this same time creating an expanded footprint and encroaching on traditional rugby heartlands (AFL in particular). I still remember when I was in Sydney in the late 90s and attending Swans games with old Victorian mates now living in Sydney at the SCG being in crowds the Tahs now get at the SCG (ie a couple of thousand) with our free tickets (they gave away a lot of free tickets back then in those early days). You now look at Swans games as full houses and across suburban grounds including the park opposite me turned into a joint league and AFL ground with seeing lots of young kids training and playing AFL on their more than league now even. Super Rugby with just focus on expansion with overseas teams in face of expanding domestic footprint of competing footy codes turned out the disastrous strategy as people love local derbies and we moved actually away from that (and AFL NRL and A-League were tapping into that with expanded domestic footprint). We have finally started to move back to that with a Domestic rugby product providing the desired local derbies (Hamish's big bash concept he keeps banging on about) as well as a TT with NZ....Better late then never but appears finally following the successful strategy AFL, NRL and A-League started on nearly two decades ago which is creating a stronger domestic footprint and strong local rivalries/derbies. Surely all 3 competing footy codes doing this whilst we did the opposite by focusing on super rugby with focus in last decade on expanding it with overseas competing teams tells you something why pro rugby is where it is fan support wise.

 

[eastman]

Surely all 3 competing footy codes doing this whilst we did the opposite by focusing on super rugby with focus in last decade on expanding it with overseas competing teams tells you something why pro rugby is where it is fan support wise.

It tells you that rugby league and AFL has no meaningful international competition - so the focus was and will always primarily be on their domestic comps (and these comps have always been more popular than rugby, so they had stronger foundations).

The A-League was successful in its early years but ratings and crowds have dropped dramatically over time. Soccer suffers from a lot of the same issues as rugby with international leagues being far more lucrative, so the best players will never play in Australia. The main advantage is that the sport has unrivaled participation rates so there will always be interest in the sport (primarily at the international and overseas markets).

You spruik that Super Rugby AU has been a blinding success but how much of that simply comes from the fact that it's actually on free-to-air and been supported by genuine marketing, as opposed to being the public insatiable demand for 'local derbies'? Have we just drawn back existing fans who had become disengaged? I can assure you that the average Sydney/ Brisbane office worker isn't talking about Super Rugby AU around the water cooler.

Long story short is that context is important but be genuine with that context- it's just not as simple as saying NRL, AFL and A - League focused domestically and are successful- so we must do the same . Sure there's a lot that rugby can learn and mimic much from their competitors, but most of that is in the sports administration/ business side than competition design.

 

[Slim 293]

Changes to the structure of Super Rugby played a part, but I can't buy the 'let's go back to the 90s' argument that guys like Nick Farr-Jones have been pushing. Super 12! Shute Shield dominance! Winning trophies and skolling beers from the Bled with Johnny Howard!

Are you suggesting that loose fitting collared jerseys won't bring back the Bledisloe Cup?

What if we run a backline move where all the backs are lined up directly behind the scrum?

 

[Rugbynutter39]

It tells you that rugby league and AFL has no meaningful international competition - so the focus was and will always primarily be on their domestic comps (and these comps have always been more popular than rugby, so they had stronger foundations).

The A-League was successful in its early years but ratings and crowds have dropped dramatically over time. Soccer suffers from a lot of the same issues as rugby with international leagues being far more lucrative, so the best players will never play in Australia. The main advantage is that the sport has unrivaled participation rates so there will always be interest in the sport (primarily at the international and overseas markets).

You spruik that Super Rugby AU has been a blinding success but how much of that simply comes from the fact that it's actually on free-to-air and been supported by genuine marketing, as opposed to being the public insatiable demand for 'local derbies'? Have we just drawn back existing fans who had become disengaged? I can assure you that the average Sydney/ Brisbane office worker isn't talking about Super Rugby AU around the water cooler.

Long story short is that context is important but be genuine with that context- it's just not as simple as saying NRL, AFL and A - League focused domestically and are successful- so we must do the same . Sure there's a lot that rugby can learn and mimic much from their competitors, but most of that is in the sports administration/ business side than competition design.

Sure you make valid points but we did also get 42k to super rugby au final but I do accept your point there are other factors contributing to that success. I have also said our point of difference is to leverage international side, hence saying support domestic and TT with nz (with caveats there is different views on what that might look like short term and long term for those that support the ‘both’ view). But it is all about balance and I guess (for me) the evidence is we got the balance wrong by not having enough focus on domestic vs Intenational side as yes part of a big camp who thinks we need both.

But importantly I did also argue that a basic tenent for success is a decent national footprint which I still think applies to all footy codes to have relevance in oz market as that was really the central thrust of my argument.

And lastly I have also really not said super rugby au is a blinding success and something we can just rely on (hence my keep a foot in both camps view) or keep as is for the next decade. As indeed countered many times long way to go but very good start from a low base. Indeed I have stated many times that (and agreed with others) that would likely need to evolve to avoid getting stale.

 

[Teh Other Dave]

What?
The whole point of privately owned teams is that it costs the Unions nothing.

If the Super Rugby AU teams were privately owned, either by individuals or groups of investors, the national and state unions would save a fuck load of money. The unions would actually be able to reinvest grassroots funds into the grassroots. At the moment you have a system where registration fees are going towards the wages of professional players, which is massive waste of the Unions money.

Additionally, the only reason Cattle is perceived as a problem is because we're constantly having to (unsuccessfully) play a game of "keeping up with the Kiwis", which wouldn't be a problem in a predominantly domestic structure.



We've already seen that there's investor interest for more professional rugby teams. And again, every other sport is able to find investors for expansion teams.

Are you trying to claim that Rugby administrators are in some way so catastrophically incompetent that they can't do what nearly every other sport in the country and the world can do? Even the US can find Australian investors for professional rugby teams.



We'd still get those extra TV markets from the post-season Champions comp. In fact we could get even more money from overseas markets because we could introduce extra countries into the post-domestic competition (Japan for example) without completely fucking over the format of the main competition, which you yourself pointed to as the problem that fucked the original Super Rugby.

You're basically describing the A-League business model, with three defunct clubs and one well on its way. It's a poor imitation of European and South American competitions without any of the supporter buy-in because it runs on a crappy franchise model with private ownership of confected teams (who united to form Macarthur United?). People would sooner watch Premier League on Optus than go to a poor quality A-League match. I'd rather our comp not fade further into that kind of mediocrity than it did pre-Covid.

 

[hoggy]

You're basically describing the A-League business model, with three defunct clubs and one well on its way. It's a poor imitation of European and South American competitions without any of the supporter buy-in because it runs on a crappy franchise model with private ownership of confected teams (who united to form Macarthur United?). People would sooner watch Premier League on Optus than go to a poor quality A-League match. I'd rather our comp not fade further into that kind of mediocrity than it did pre-Covid.

Those Macarthur United bastards just forked out $2 Million to buy Davillia of the Pheonix

 

[Bandar]

You're basically describing the A-League business model, with three defunct clubs and one well on its way. It's a poor imitation of European and South American competitions without any of the supporter buy-in because it runs on a crappy franchise model with private ownership of confected teams (who united to form Macarthur United?). People would sooner watch Premier League on Optus than go to a poor quality A-League match. I'd rather our comp not fade further into that kind of mediocrity than it did pre-Covid.

The difference being that Super AU is still in the top 5 leagues in the world where as the A-League would struggle to be in the top 50.

Edit: Also people are invested in clubs in other leagues, very few rugby fans care about the NZ teams, let alone the Top 14, Premiership or Pro whatever

 

[Teh Other Dave]

The difference being that Super AU is still in the top 5 leagues in the world where as the A-League would struggle to be in the top 50.

It will struggle to be 7th in a far smaller sport if we spread the talent thin.

Edit: Also people are invested in clubs in other leagues, very few rugby fans care about the NZ teams, let alone the Top 14, Premiership or Pro whatever

So you're saying that there are normally bugger all Kiwi supporters at Super Rugby games? Have you even been to one?

 

[hifflepiff]

So you're saying that there are normally bugger all Kiwi supporters at Super Rugby games? Have you even been to one?

Thats exactly the point, beyond Kiwi expats (<2% of the population), barely any Australians even could point to where the Kiwi teams are from on a map, let alone feel any emotional connection or rivalry with them as a team. There are inbuilt rivalries between the Australian regions and even sub-regions. Between Australian and NZ regions? Not so much.

If Rugby Union ever wants to be a cultural force in Australia again, it needs to actually appeal to the majority of Australians. That means not playing half the regular season against teams Australians don't give a fuck about.

And you know what, the Kiwi expats can still watch their teams play in Aus during the post-season comp. Thats the beauty of this structure, it allows us to appeal to everyone without having to compromise one market for the other.

 

[Dctarget]

And you know what, the Kiwi expats can still watch their teams play in Aus during the post-season comp. Thats the beauty of this structure, it allows us to appeal to everyone without having to compromise one market for the other.

Also might actually make expats finally become a paying member and proper supporter of their local club instead of just shitting on them.

 

[Brumby Runner]

This may have been suggested already - but I have a simple mind and have gotten lost. Can we effectively keep this year model but slightly tweaked

Week 1 - 5 Rd 1 SRAU SRAO
Week 6-10 Rd 2 SRAU SRAO Rd1 SRTT (Domestic Derbies)
Week 11-12 Finals SRAU SRAO
Week 13 General Bye
Week 14-18 Rd2 SRTT (Trans Tasman Games)
Week 19-20 Finals SRTT

(adding two more teams takes it to 23 weeks less if Dom is straight final and if you dont have the general bye)

Basically we take the second round of the domestic comp and use them as part of the ladder for SRTT. It basically gives you the single round robin TT with the first round forming the end of the Domestic Comp. It gives the best of both worlds, TV some opportunities to build up to finals. You could make a great story going into the TT around how many games different teams would need to win to make the finals. We would just need to make sure we have one set or rules going into the comp.

By my calculation the table going into what I propose be R2 SRTT would have been

Chiefs 16
Reds 15
Brumbies 14
Force 12
Crusaders 10
Highlanders 10
Rebels 6
Hurricanes 6
Blues 6
Waratahs 2

and then after last week we would be at

Chiefs 20
Reds 15
Brumbies 15
Highlanders 15
Crusaders 14
Force 13
Hurricanes 11
Blues 11
Rebels 6
Waratahs 2

Which is a much nicer looking table and after the first round of what is being pushed as TT only 2 teams are out of contention after week 1

I reckon I could support that concept. ATM it is feasible that NZ teams could fill the top 3 or 4 spots on the ladder each and every year the present system operates. I wonder how many of the supporters of TT only, or casual viewers, will stay engaged when that happens?

Another thought. There is a good chance that three Aus sides will be competitive with some of the NZ sides. I wonder if the same could be said if any other country was engaged in a similar competition with NZRU?

 

[D-Box]

Another thought. There is a good chance that three Aus sides will be competitive with some of the NZ sides. I wonder if the same could be said if any other country was engaged in a similar competition with NZRU?

This. We always talk about how crap the Aussies were against the Kiwis but for most of Super Rugby was any one country (not team) consistently good?

 

[Derpus]

If England and France condensed their teams to five i certainly think they would.

 

[Teh Other Dave]

Also might actually make expats finally become a paying member and proper supporter of their local club instead of just shitting on them.

I left Queensland a long time ago. I still death ride every single horrible sporting endeavour that arises from NSW or Victoria. That will never, ever change. Any self-respecting kiwi should do the same to us Aussies. As should Australians with the gammon/soap dodgers.



The trick is to get the second generation on board.

 

[Derpus]

I left Queensland a long time ago. I still death ride every single horrible sporting endeavour that arises from NSW or Victoria. That will never, ever change. Any self-respecting kiwi should do the same to us Aussies. As should Australians with the gammon/soap dodgers.



The trick is to get the second generation on board.

What like those New South Welshman that go for Queensland in SoO or the bloody Australians who go for the ABs because they have some loose relation to the place, like their great aunties ex-boyfriend visited one time (definitely not because they are the better side).

 

[Joe King]

This may have been suggested already - but I have a simple mind and have gotten lost. Can we effectively keep this year model but slightly tweaked

Week 1 - 5 Rd 1 SRAU SRAO
Week 6-10 Rd 2 SRAU SRAO Rd1 SRTT (Domestic Derbies)
Week 11-12 Finals SRAU SRAO
Week 13 General Bye
Week 14-18 Rd2 SRTT (Trans Tasman Games)
Week 19-20 Finals SRTT

(adding two more teams takes it to 23 weeks less if Dom is straight final and if you dont have the general bye)

Basically we take the second round of the domestic comp and use them as part of the ladder for SRTT. It basically gives you the single round robin TT with the first round forming the end of the Domestic Comp. It gives the best of both worlds, TV some opportunities to build up to finals. You could make a great story going into the TT around how many games different teams would need to win to make the finals. We would just need to make sure we have one set or rules going into the comp.

By my calculation the table going into what I propose be R2 SRTT would have been

Chiefs 16
Reds 15
Brumbies 14
Force 12
Crusaders 10
Highlanders 10
Rebels 6
Hurricanes 6
Blues 6
Waratahs 2

and then after last week we would be at

Chiefs 20
Reds 15
Brumbies 15
Highlanders 15
Crusaders 14
Force 13
Hurricanes 11
Blues 11
Rebels 6
Waratahs 2

Which is a much nicer looking table and after the first round of what is being pushed as TT only 2 teams are out of contention after week 1

It sounds as if you're suggesting the same structure as this year, except the second round of Super Rugby AU / Super Rugby Ao would also count as part of the TT/AP. Is that right?

That sounds great. It gives you a home and away Super Rugby AU + a single round robin TT/AP.

 

[Joe King]

Looks like the new Rugby AU CEO sees increasing competitiveness as a priority through international recruitment.

Super Rugby: More foreign players the future for Australian Super franchises says Rugby Australia chief executive Andy Marinos (smh.com.au)

I'm strongly of the belief that the retaining talent in Super Rugby can only benefit both Australia and New Zealand. Even if the Kiwis are slightly hesitant that it may impact the AB production line - they produce enough fcking players that it doesn't even matter!

I don't get the logic of Marinos. He's said a couple of times that the advantage of a full season TT is we get to test ourselves against the Kiwi teams. But we wouldn't be playing the Kiwi teams any more than we are this year.

 

[D-Box]

It sounds as if you're suggesting the same structure as this year, except the second round of Super Rugby AU / Super Rugby Ao would also count as part of the TT/AP. Is that right?

That sounds great. It gives you a home and away Super Rugby AU + a single round robin TT/AP.

Yep - that's it. KISS tournament design principles

 

[Adam84]

only logical choice is Option 1 IMO

 

[D-Box]

only logical choice is Option 1 IMO

In defence of what I proposed it is 1 but more games count in TT