Rebels3
Jim Lenehan (48)
I see the Force chairman has come out and said we should look to Asia on top of what we are already doingAnd another reason for a domestic plus TT competition...
I see the Force chairman has come out and said we should look to Asia on top of what we are already doingAnd another reason for a domestic plus TT competition...
I see the Force chairman has come out and said we should look to Asia on top of what we are already doing
https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/the...d-to-create-asia-australia-comp-c-2929363.ampGot any links?
https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/the...d-to-create-asia-australia-comp-c-2929363.amp
Also Top League chairman has tonight come out saying talks ongoing with Aus, NZ and Japan about a comp
https://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/s...says-talks-under-way-about-nzjapanaussie-compHave you got a link for that one too?
(a) Why would second-rate Kiwi's help us beat teams full of first-rate Kiwi's?
(b) Why would NZ send their developing players over here when they're so protective of their development pathways
(c) Why would any NZer actually in contention for the AB's want to play in Aus when that would frequently mean 1. playing for a worse team and 2. getting less air time in NZ, both of which would decrease their chance of getting selected for the AB's.
(d) Even if we could get top level Kiwi's over (Which as I've argued above, I doubt), why would we want them when 1. They're unlikely to have us start beating the Kiwi teams regularly by themselves (unless they can get 15-20 of their All Black mates to come over with them on the cheap) and 2. We would have to pay out the asshole to have them come over for 2-3 years max vs. Using that money to ensure we can retain our best young players who would otherwise go to League (and might actually stick around).
(e) That doesn't address any of the points Rebels3 made above
“I think there would be an appetite for it, particularly with the way the season is structured,” Deans said.
“You’d have a domestic competition concluded and a domestic champion, or ranking if you like. And then you go across border, so your support base would follow that with interest."
Now we are starting to talk sense, lets just put a full TT to rest. We tried that for 20 years and it was a fucking disaster.
Domestic competitions followed by champion league style comps, ffs it not rocket science.
Easy enough to understand but there will be some people that complain it’s too complicated, despite just about every sporting structure in the world is filled with multiple competitions or conference’s and they seem to understand it just fine. Even rugby league in England manages to have 2 trophies across the year.Or if you wanted to follow the European model and structure the champions league throughout the domestic season on designated weekends, it could look like the following:
Week 1: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 2: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 3: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 4: champions league round 1
Week 5: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 6: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 7: champions league round 2
Week 8: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 9: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League (week off for all Test players in camp)
Week 10: Anzac Day Bledisloe Cup (bye for all non-Test players)
Week 11: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 12: champions league round 3
Week 13: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 14: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 15: champions league round 4
Week 16: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League (semi final)
Week 17: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League (final)
Week 18: champions league final for each division: Cup, Shield, Plate
The benefit of this model is for those who felt a six team domestic comp would get a little stale, this structure helps takes care of that.
And for any Kiwis who were worried about the intensity of Super Rugby Aotearoa and potential player injuries, this structure gives the NZ teams plenty of 'breaks' throughout with games against Australian and Japanese teams.
Now we are starting to talk sense, lets just put a full TT to rest. We tried that for 20 years and it was a fucking disaster.
Domestic competitions followed by champion league style comps, ffs it not rocket science.
Thanks Joe I did forget they play champions league through the domestic season and I agree playing the champions league through the domestic seasons makes a lot of sense ie avoid domestics getting stale and providing different products through the domestic season to add to spice and fan appeal. Definitely favour this approach if we do a champions league (and per reports sounds like when not if which given interest in concept and commercially needing to tie in Japan makes a lot of sense).Or if you wanted to follow the European model and structure the champions league throughout the domestic season on designated weekends, it could look like the following:
Week 1: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 2: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 3: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 4: champions league round 1
Week 5: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 6: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 7: champions league round 2
Week 8: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 9: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League (week off for all Test players in camp)
Week 10: Anzac Day Bledisloe Cup (bye for all non-Test players)
Week 11: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 12: champions league round 3
Week 13: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 14: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 15: champions league round 4
Week 16: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League (semi final)
Week 17: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League (final)
Week 18: champions league final for each division: Cup, Shield, Plate
The benefit of this model is for those who felt a six team domestic comp would get a little stale, this structure helps takes care of that.
And for any Kiwis who were worried about the intensity of Super Rugby Aotearoa and potential player injuries, this structure gives the NZ teams plenty of 'breaks' throughout with games against Australian and Japanese teams.
I think of English Premier league and teams like Arsenal which is one of the most popular supported UK teams and remember the teams when I lived in London had anything from 0 to 2 English players in their squad at the time. Yep fans don’t give a shite whether team is half full of foreign imports but they do care about having quality players and quality teams that can win games.I've said this before but NZ must look at making any player in a Super Rugby Comp eligible for the ABs.
Australia needs the player/coach depth and quality of NZ and NZ needs a vibrant, engaged Australian market and fan base. So I'll have a crack at answering your questions:
(a) Because they want to play professional rugby. Rather than Ponsonby or Northland rugby (up the Taniwha!! ) or even club rugby in Europe being the pinnacle of their playing career, these 'second-rate Kiwi's' would love to test themselves against AB and Wallaby players. Fuck - they might just out-play them once in a while.
(b) NZ don't own the players - at least not until they pay them. And paying them is getting harder and harder to do.
(c ) You probably won't get AB contenders - at least not right away. But you could get some great players in the levels not far below that. Or even ex-Test players. This is not just about AB or Wallaby contenders. It's also about depth. In the last 10yrs or so, Australia has produced some GREAT players - Pocock, Genia, Mitchell, Hooper, JOC (James O'Connor), Beale, QC (Quade Cooper). But where was the depth behind them? Some of the absolute shit that RA had to put up with, with those last 3 in particular, knowing that the gap between them and the next guy was too big to really drop or discipline them. Part of the strength of NZ rugby is that even Aaron Smith knows that he has to prove himself on and off the field.
(d) 1. Players don't beat other NZ teams by themselves. But they are better than a lot of the players you have to pick from now. There are guys in ITM and Heartland rugby squads who are better than some of the guys running around for the Waratahs or Rebels. And don't just look at players. Start trying to identify coaches. Look at all the former ABs who hold coaching positions - Scott Robertson, Leon McDonald, Tony Brown, Tana Umaga, Aaron Mauger, Brad Thorn all come to mind off the top of my head. Who is looking for the opportunity to prove themselves in the coaching box next? Australia needs good coaches - not just at Test and Super Rugby level and not just in the HC position. 2. How many of these "best young players who would otherwise go to League" are being retained right now? And ultimately, if these young guns are going to be the best, they will have to prove themselves. If they can't beat out a 'second-rate Kiwi' just to get a spot on their own team, maybe they aren't worth the money and they SHOULD go to league.
In addition to NZers coming to play in Super Rugby AU, Australia should also do the same. Talk to any Aussie player who has spent time playing in the NZ system and how much they learnt and how they improved. Fuck off selecting guys who played in Europe - how many of them came back better? Christian Lealiifano and Henry Speight are 2 guys who come to mind - guys who weren't really on the Aussie radar until they played in NZ.
Western Force supporters don't give a flying shit if a quarter of the team is Kiwi - they just want the Force to win.
Australian rugby needs access to better players and coaches (which will assist in improving and developing local talent) and NZ needs access to the Australian market - but one that isn't defeated and pessimistic.
And much of the onus is on NZ. We have been the best at this sport for over 10yrs now and we need to help Australia, the Pacific Nations and Japan to ensure the game stays healthy in our region. Even if it means being a little less successful on the field.
Just a little though. LOL
And fuck the USA. They have enough money and a big enough market to help themselves.
Yes - I am slightly worried, admittedly selfishly, about if the US ever took rugby really seriously how hard they could become to beating.
Or if you wanted to follow the European model and structure the champions league throughout the domestic season on designated weekends, it could look like the following:
Week 1: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 2: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 3: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 4: champions league round 1
Week 5: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 6: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 7: champions league round 2
Week 8: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 9: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League (week off for all Test players in camp)
Week 10: Anzac Day Bledisloe Cup (bye for all non-Test players)
Week 11: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 12: champions league round 3
Week 13: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 14: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League
Week 15: champions league round 4
Week 16: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League (semi final)
Week 17: Super Rugby AU / Aotearoa / Top League (final)
Week 18: champions league final for each division: Cup, Shield, Plate
The benefit of this model is for those who felt a six team domestic comp would get a little stale, this structure helps takes care of that.
And for any Kiwis who were worried about the intensity of Super Rugby Aotearoa and potential player injuries, this structure gives the NZ teams plenty of 'breaks' throughout with games against Australian and Japanese teams.
I see the Force chairman has come out and said we should look to Asia on top of what we are already doing
Asia? Forgeddaboutit.
Asia? Forgeddaboutit.
Force chairman maybe thinking of Twiggy when he mentions Asia too.