Where to for Super Rugby?

[Rebels3]

Long post, sorry. But would rather get people's feedback on here than another platform.

This assumes we only have 18 weeks or so between late February and the July Inbound Tests…

If we're serious about involving the Japanese teams, then here is a different sort of model that might be a way forward, and suit the preferences of both Australian and NZ, as well as the broadcasters. It is not a new model, but one based upon the highly successful European Rugby Championship.*

It involves having separate domestic comps with a champions league. But instead of having the champions league played after the domestic season, it would run throughout the domestic season and be played on designated weekends. I'll come back to what this structure looks like later.

But basically, the champions league would be divided into three divisions: Cup, Shield, and Plate (for want of better names).

In the Cup division you would have the top 2 teams from Super Rugby AU, top 2 from Super Rugby Ao, and top 2 Japanese teams. In the Shield division you would have the next 2 best teams (3rd and 4th) from each domestic comp, and in the Plate division you would have teams placed 5th and 6th from each domestic comp.**

Within each division, you would play everyone NOT from your own domestic comp once for 4 games + 1 bye each + a final = 6 weeks total. And you end up with a Cup, Shield, and Plate winner.

I’ll explain why the byes are important further below. But here is an example of what the format for the Cup division would look like based on this year's results:

Round 1 (H v A)
Japan 1 v Reds
Brumbies v Chiefs
Japan 2 v Crusaders

Round 2 (H v A)
Brumbies v Japan 1
Chiefs v Japan 2
Byes: Crusaders and Reds

Round 3 (H v A)
Reds v Japan 2
Crusaders v Brumbies
Byes: Chiefs and Japan 1

Round 4 (H v A)
Chiefs v Reds
Crusaders v Japan 1
Byes: Brumbies and Japan 2

Round 5 (H v A)
Reds v Crusaders
Japan 1 v Chiefs
Japan 2 v Brumbies

Round 6 (H v A)
Final of Cup, Shield, Plate (1st v 2nd in each division)


* The European Champions Cup is actually only played over 9 weekends spread throughout the English Premiership, Top 14, and Pro 14. There is a second division for all the teams that don’t qualify for it.

** Side note: rankings for the champions league are based on the previous year's domestic comps. If a team wants to move up into a higher division of the champions league, they need to improve their position in their respective domestic competition.

—————————————————————

Now if Super Rugby AU and Super Rugby Ao are played as a home and away double round robin with six teams each, including finals, you would need 12 weeks. No byes are needed because they would be included in the champions league (see below).

I’m not entirely sure how Japan plans to structure their domestic comp. However, for Australia and NZ: 12 weeks for their domestic comp + 7 weeks for the champions league = 18 weeks. A perfect fit.

Now, as I said above, instead of playing the champions league after the domestic comps, you would follow the European model and play the champions league on designated weekends during the domestic comps. So for example:

Weeks 1-2: domestic comps in each country
Week 3: champions league round 1
Weeks 4-5: domestic comps in each country
Week 6: champions league round 2 (byes in each division)
Weeks 7-8: domestic comps in each country
Week 9: champions league round 3 (byes in each division)
Weeks 10-11: domestic comps in each country
Week 12: champions league round 4 (byes in each division)
Weeks 13-14: domestic comps in each country
Week 15: champions league round 5

Weeks 16-17: finals of domestic comps in each country
Week 18: final of champions league: Cup, Shield, and Plate


With this model, every team from Super Rugby AU and Super Rugby Ao is involved in their domestic comp and the champions league at some level. And every team from Super Rugby AU and Super Rugby Ao gets a minimum of 7 home games each year.

The byes are only during the champions league so that Australia and NZ can each have three games across each weekend of their respective domestic competitions. And having byes for two teams in each division of the champions league on certain weekends would still provide six games over those particular weekends. This is good for the broadcasters.

So we get a full domestic comp in each country (yay for Super Rugby AU!), but for those who felt a six team domestic comp would get a little stale, this structure totally takes care of that. And for any Kiwis who were worried about the intensity of Super Rugby Ao and potential player injuries, this structure gives the NZ teams plenty of 'breaks' throughout with games against the 'weaker' Australian and Japanese teams. And finally, I think it would be favourable with the broadcasters and private investors, especially with the Japanese teams involved.

Next step: invite Japan to be part of the Rugby Championship.

Side note: if for some reason the Japanese teams are not involved (at least initially), it would still work just as well for Australia and NZ. Only difference would be, in each division of the champions league, you would play the other teams NOT from your own domestic comp twice, home and away, for the same amount of games.

——————————————————-

One of the drawbacks of this model might be that for any given Australia team, they would only play two of the NZ teams rather than all 5 (or 6 including M Pasifika). The same might be said for any given NZ team playing only two Australian teams. At the same time, however, this structure keeps the the best NZ teams only playing the best Australian teams, and the lower Australian teams only playing the lower NZ teams. This helps to keep the games more competitive and prevent blowout scores (hopefully!). This would be even more important for the Japanese teams involved, if they are to be competitive.

This is good

 

[hifflepiff]

One thing I have been wondering about is how Australia focusing on a primarily domestic structure would affect NZ.

With the prospect of having to make Super Rugby Ao a long term comp, would they also go down the route of adding more teams or would they try to stick with their 5 indefinitely?

Does NZ have enough audience markets for more teams? Maybe they'd look to incorporate a Tongan team in addition to Moana Pasifika?

None of this really matters for Aus Rugby, but interesting to consider.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Would be nice hifflepiff, but geez there's a lot of ifs in that set-up.

(a) How do you make a short season financial
(b) What do you do with the other 5 teams who don't make the cut.
(c) Yes, good point
(d) Not sure how that works, its a 9 team comp. the payoff is being in the top 3

I like the idea of 3 extra teams, but it has to be funded and we also need the players, also if NZ keep there current structure, okay how do you reckon the Hunter (country) will go against the Crusaders.

Don't get me wrong I support a domestic structure, in fact I'll go as far as saying a full TT will be the death knell of the game here.

But there are some serious logistics to be faced with some of the structures being suggested.

Start with 5 or 6 team comp that goes for 2 round home and away series plus finals then have 2 or 3 rep teams join what is now TT 7 week comp (ie replacing 5 oz sides) and then have nrc Comp running alongside that for players not selected from domestic teams.

8 teams is end goal for domestic comp with assumption start with what we have and build over time.

 

[hifflepiff]

Start with 5 or 6 team comp that goes for 2 rounds plus finals then have 2 or 3 rep teams join what is now TT 7 week comp (ie replacing 5 oz sides) and then have nrc Comp running alongside that for players not selected from domestic teams.

8 teams is end goal for domestic comp with assumption start with what we have and build over time.

I don't mean to be rude, and I understand the reasons for why you like this idea, but this competition doesnt make sense for what Aus needs. Why would we want a TT comp that runs for more than twice as long as the domestic comp?

We need to make domestic the focus because its what engages Australian audiences, which should be by far the most important goal. TT should be the Cherry at the end but never the centrepoint.

If you want a competiton to be taken seriously, you need to treat it and promote it seriously. This would functionally relegate the domestic comp to being a pre-season/NRC for TT, which doesnt help anything.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I don't mean to be rude, and I understand the reasons for why you like this idea, but this competition doesnt make sense for what Aus needs. Why would we want a TT comp that runs for more than twice as long as the domestic comp?

We need to make domestic the focus because its what engages Australian audiences, which should be by far the most important goal. TT should be the Cherry at the end but never the centrepoint.

If you want a competiton to be taken seriously, you need to treat it and promote it seriously. This would functionally relegate the domestic comp to being a pre-season/NRC for TT, which doesnt help anything.

Nah you have misread as I have stated the rep teams join the current TT competition which is single round 6 week competition. I am basically saying keep domestic 2 round competition with plans to expand to 8 teams when can be done and then have 3 regional rep teams join a Short form TT or champions league competition with nz sides AFTER the conclusion of the domestic comp. The domestic is the centrepiece as 2 round competition.

Obviously this is hypothetical and can probably be picked apart but I liked the idea as can have our domestic competition not constrained by having teams strong enough to compete with nz teams but still have something with nz with smaller # of rep teams that any players from domestic comp (whether that be 5 or 8) could largely represent if good enough. The rest of players not selected for rep teams play in nrc style comp run over same period with top club players.

Not saying is the answer but I like the logic as even with a champions league would our top sides compete with top nz sides - probably not. This is why I like this idea which is kob1987 idea and not mine, as allows us to have domestic comp not designed just to suit playing with nz in another comp.

 

[hifflepiff]

Nah you have misread as I have stated the rep teams join the current TT competition which is single round 6 week competition. I am basically saying keep domestic 2 round competition with plans to expand to 8 teams when can be done and then have 3 regional rep teams join a Short form TT or champions league competition with nz sides. The domestic is the centrepiece as 2 round competition.

It is possible I've misinterpreted. When you refer to a "two round" comp do you mean every Aus team plays every other home and away (i.e. current Super AU) or a literal two round comp (i.e. two weeks)?

If it's the former then I think that structure could work (even if I'm unsure if Rep teams are the way to go) and I rescind my previous statement.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

It is possible I've misinterpreted. When you refer to a "two round" comp do you mean every Aus team plays every other home and away or a literal two round comp (i.e. two weeks)?

If it's the former then I think that structure could work (even if I'm unsure if Rep teams are the way to go) and I rescind my previous statement.

No I mean 2 round home and away competition as per current super rugby au structure. Yes rep teams means creating teams with other identities which comes with own challenges but I find it hard to reconcile how we can have a domestic competition and still be involved in a competition with NZ given I don’t see nzru doing anything to accomodate us as they don’t care whether having a domestic competition is in our interests or whether a 8 team domestic competition suits oz interests as again the latter does nothing for them. Hence trying to look at options where can have domestic comp but still do something with nz that enables us to compete and makes for 2 quality products that appeal to fans.

 

[liquor box]

And seems Thorn wants full comp, among other comments
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby...rets-gulf-after-reds-rout-in-kiwi-clean-sweep

What is he meant to say?

If he tells the truth that Australian Rugby is not good enough to compete he would be crucified.

If he says he only want to compete with Aussie teams he will look soft and not up for a challenge.

 

[liquor box]

Aus teams need around 7-8 home games a year to at a minimum break even, so will need around 16 games to make money in the modern environment. I like the idea of other comps and different tiers

Maybe a re-adjustment of the break even line is required. This could be less staff, lower wages, renegotiate stadium costs etc.

 

[dru]

One thing I have been wondering about is how Australia focusing on a primarily domestic structure would affect NZ.

With the prospect of having to make Super Rugby Ao a long term comp, would they also go down the route of adding more teams or would they try to stick with their 5 indefinitely?

Does NZ have enough audience markets for more teams? Maybe they'd look to incorporate a Tongan team in addition to Moana Pasifika?

None of this really matters for Aus Rugby, but interesting to consider.

NZ and more specifically NZ sport does not have the economics to build the rugby comp they want on their own. Which is why they wanted Aus rugby par boiled down to three teams plus a couple of Pasifika. But it is wishful thinking. Pasifika will be poor compared to Aus Super and Aus Super isn't up to the job. And hopefully RA has understood that fewer teams will not work.

None of it works for them. NZ pro rugby and Aus pro rugby are currently incompatible.

 

[Rebels3]

Maybe a re-adjustment of the break even line is required. This could be less staff, lower wages, renegotiate stadium costs etc.

Wages are already a massive issue for retaining talent or attracting young talent. Contrary to belief the average wage of a super rugby player isn’t that huge.

I’m also already a believer that one of the issues we have is the lack of games the average rugby player plays in Australia is a direct correlation with us been the least savvy playing nation going around, directly shows with game smarts in games. Any fewer games and we will continue to not understand how to manage a match and figure out the dark arts. There is teams in Europe with less talent than we have in some of our teams but wouldn’t of allowed the complete wipeout some of our teams have had with some savvy play to halt momentum at times.

 

[Rebels3]

Paul Cully’s latest article in SMH is worth a read, highlights a lot of topics that are argued on here

- SRAU vs TT going forward
- when will there be an Aus win
- SS advocates must grasp hard truth
- Wallabies coaches learning about players
- Aus and NZ refs not on same page

 

[hoggy]

Paul Cully’s latest article in SMH is worth a read, highlights a lot of topics that are argued on here

- SRAU vs TT going forward
- when will there be an Aus win
- SS advocates must grasp hard truth
- Wallabies coaches learning about players
- Aus and NZ refs not on same page

Paul Cully: Is Super Rugby Trans-Tasman finished before it started? (smh.com.au)

"Woe betide the rugby boss who ignores what the supporters want. The high performance arm of Rugby Australia might like the clashes against New Zealand opposition, but will fans lured back by Super Rugby AU stick around next year if fortnightly floggings against the Kiwis are on the menu?"


They didn't do it for 20 years of Super rugby, just maybe they have no option now.

 

[dru]

Paul Cully’s latest article in SMH is worth a read, highlights a lot of topics that are argued on here

- SRAU vs TT going forward
- when will there be an Aus win
- SS advocates must grasp hard truth
- Wallabies coaches learning about players
- Aus and NZ refs not on same page

Interesting read.

 

[Rebels3]

McLennan now saying he wouldn’t mind the same structure next year.

I personally think SRAU is now more likely to stay than go

 

[hoggy]

McLennan now saying he wouldn’t mind the same structure next year.

I personally think SRAU is now more likely to stay than go

And as pointed out, it is becoming a commercial reality. Cully's angle of the Washington generals is pretty apt, the game won't survive with a bunch of expat Kiwis doing an annual pilgrimage to watch there old team.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

NZ and more specifically NZ sport does not have the economics to build the rugby comp they want on their own. Which is why they wanted Aus rugby par boiled down to three teams plus a couple of Pasifika. But it is wishful thinking. Pasifika will be poor compared to Aus Super and Aus Super isn't up to the job. And hopefully RA has understood that fewer teams will not work.

None of it works for them. NZ pro rugby and Aus pro rugby are currently incompatible.

Yep nz want the oz audience to target and hence 2 or 3 oz teams as part of their competition. Goes back to nz for being part of bigger competition that attracts bigger audience need oz teams as won’t get much watching a nz competition without oz teams. This is why I think nz needs us more long term then we need nz.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

McLennan now saying he wouldn’t mind the same structure next year.

I personally think SRAU is now more likely to stay than go

I think the same structure makes a lot of sense. As despite the thrashings in TT we have to play nz to a) benchmark where we need to get to b) with only 5 teams can’t run long enough pro season to sell enough content for broadcasters and c) gives us time to work out other strategies to improve our competitiveness without over investment in TT so then can consider longer form TT option when it makes sense (ie can produce competitive games)

 

[wamberal]

Let us not overlook the fact that our Schoolboys, and Under 20s have been more than competitive against the Keewees recently. Why should we give up now? Keep fighting, if we can retain these young guns the future is very bright.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Let us not overlook the fact that our Schoolboys, and Under 20s have been more than competitive against the Keewees recently. Why should we give up now? Keep fighting.

Hamish seems is leading the fight. Like what he is saying per what quoted in this article.

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-...-from-trans-tasman-rugby-20210523-p57uf1.html

Wonder if twiggys private capital arm lead contender for PE investment as constitutional reform was key condition for his investment