Where to for Super Rugby?

[Dan54]

It's ok. We all remember that great All Black Steve Devine.

loody hell JC, I struggle to remember him too I think I getting too bloody old

 

[Dan54]

Dan you use to be saying full TT and no domestic so your position has moved. That is ok as prefer flexible thinking. I am open to domestic and TT as despite my concerns about TT I think as no perfect proven solution better to have foot in both camps. I also think easier to probably stay in TT but make condition that continue to review with view to improving year on year jointly with nzru and RA (or independent body running it if that happens)

Actually you wrong I have said and continually said that in best scenario, TT with a PROPER domestic comp is answer (ie a proper NRC type comp) but RA has had no desire to adress their problems. I still think a proper fair comp is a full one or 2 round (ie super 12) , but as I have said RA has over the years not worried about a proper tird tier comp,instead thinking the way forward was just adding teams first, and now we whave to pick up the pieces.
The only thing I have and will continue to argue against ( and with people here) is having completely seperate comps as some have suggested as it will kill Aus rugby. I not talking about rusted on supporters, but even some of them will get awful tired of a 5 team comp.
Look it speaks volumes that Hamish is saying that RA board still can't agree on how they think the comp should be run, whether that is because of incompetence or how complicated it is, can be open to discussion!

I also agree comp should be run by an independanr body as per NZR's idea, but then that body's job will be to run comp in best form, not to suit Aus or NZ rugby.

 

[Dan54]

Currently, players only came here if they have given up on playing for NZ.

It also allows for Australian players to play in NZ eg. Lealiifano to improve without having to return to Australia to play Wallabies

Mate if the money was there, players could play in Aus and come home if they saw an AB opportunity anyway, I doubt there money or desire for players to go and play in Aus that some think. I can't see any Aus teams being able to fork out the money to get a Ardie , RMo etc etc, it's got no upsides anyway, you would still be playing in same comp against same players for roughly same money.
As for the players coming to NZ, remember when they used to come over for ITM cup etc, worked well as players got experince and took it back to their Super teams. Third tier is where all this stuff should be happening.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Actually you wrong I have said and continually said that in best scenario, TT with a PROPER domestic comp is answer (ie a proper NRC type comp) but RA has had no desire to adress their problems. I still think a proper fair comp is a full one or 2 round (ie super 12) , but as I have said RA has over the years not worried about a proper tird tier comp,instead thinking the way forward was just adding teams first, and now we whave to pick up the pieces.
The only thing I have and will continue to argue against ( and with people here) is having completely seperate comps as some have suggested as it will kill Aus rugby. I not talking about rusted on supporters, but even some of them will get awful tired of a 5 team comp.
Look it speaks volumes that Hamish is saying that RA board still can't agree on how they think the comp should be run, whether that is because of incompetence or how complicated it is, can be open to discussion!

I also agree comp should be run by an independanr body as per NZR's idea, but then that body's job will be to run comp in best form, not to suit Aus or NZ rugby.

Ok so TT as full pro comp and we have NRC third tier as our semi pro competition. That won’t work and way to kill oz rugby - instead what we are advocating is Super rugby Au With TT (or champions league), plus NRC third tier semi pro competition. We definitely agree on NRC but we need our own domestic pro comp (super rugby Au) plus TT or champions league with nz. Of course the ambition is to expand in time number of teams in our super rugby Au comp (ie Fiji or Japan teams included in the mix).

So we agree on need for NRC and independent commission to run TT competition.

 

[Dan54]

Ok so TT as full pro comp and we have NRC third tier as our semi pro competition. That won’t work and way to kill oz rugby - instead what we are advocating is Super rugby Au With TT (or champions league), plus NRC third tier semi pro competition. We definitely agree on NRC but we need our own domestic pro comp (super rugby Au) plus TT or champions league with nz. Of course the ambition is to expand in time number of teams in our super rugby Au comp (ie Fiji or Japan teams included in the mix).

So we agree on need for NRC and independent commission to run TT competition.

Always have agreed on that mate, and I have posted such. The way I suggested a full TT comp combined with Super Au and Ao should add to Aus rugby surely. Still should be a NRC behind it and REAL attempts to help grassroots rugby, like make it more attractive for kids to play game ,ie; actually put money into kids rugby, and don't sharge kids team to play (was $200 a team as RA charge per team, don't know about now).

 

[sunnyboys]

Alwya have agreed on that mate, and I have posted such. The way I suggested a full TT comp combined with Super Au and Ao should add to Aus rugby surely. Still should be a NRC behind it and REAL attempts to help grassroots rugby, like make it more attractive for kids to play game ,ie; actually put money into kids rugby, and don't sharge kids team to play (was $200 a team as RA charge per team, don't know about now).

about $360 this year for a 10yo. not cheap.

 

[Dan54]

about $360 this year for a 10yo. not cheap.

Yep and it not all RA charge I know etc but to help grassroots rugby there should be money put into to lower costs.
Hell we have parents moaning over here in NZ at $25-35 a year!! And quite a few clubs have no fees, as they get NZR actually grants money to PUs/clubs on number of teams, not other way around.
But I realise it all about what they can afford, and RA is getting $33-5 mill a year of Stan compared to NZR having a deal worth about $80 mill a year. So maybe not in same ball park, but should not be getting kids to help pay the top echelon in my opinion.

 

[hoggy]

My kid 11 plays League, his fees are $285 per year, he gets a full training & playing kit with that, we also get raffle tickets worth $100, with the option to onsell or keep, so potentially the fees could be $185

 

[sunnyboys]

i had to buy shorts and socks. usually a training shirt is provided free (didn't seem to get one this year!). jerseys are on loan from the club for the season.

and this is at one of the largest juniors clubs in QLD in believe

some goes to club, then BJRU, then QRU, the RA. everyone gets their share...

 

[Dctarget]

i had to buy shorts and socks. usually a training shirt is provided free (didn't seem to get one this year!). jerseys are on loan from the club for the season.

and this is at one of the largest juniors clubs in QLD in believe

some goes to club, then BJRU, then QRU, the RA. everyone gets their share.

I signed up for my local for the first time in 6 years and was shocked by the price of $420. But now seeing the juniors' fees it's not terrible. I get socks, shorts and a training tee included. To be honest 2 x training sessions + a game a week, with insurance etc. I think it's fair.

 

[Adam84]

But I realise it all about what they can afford, and RA is getting $33-5 mill a year of Stan compared to NZR having a deal worth about $80 mill a year. .

If Sky TV pay NZRU extra for the TT portion doesn't it stand that they should look at revenue sharing agreements, for Nine/Stan tv ratings have reportedly declined during the TT.

 

[Dan54]

If Sky TV pay NZRU extra for the TT portion doesn't it stand that they should look at revenue sharing agreements, for Nine/Stan tv ratings have reportedly declined during the TT.

Have no idea what proportion is paid etc. Same as test matches. Same as I don't know how much of RA's portion is for super rugby. Are they played by number of games?

 

[Dan54]

I signed up for my local for the first time in 6 years and was shocked by the price of $420. But now seeing the juniors' fees it's not terrible. I get socks, shorts and a training tee included. To be honest 2 x training sessions + a game a week, with insurance etc. I think it's fair.

Yep well seniors here pay more than juniors, between $30 to $120 that I know of. Think were about $360-$400 in my club in Oz. What I say about difference between actually saying and doing in support of grassroots rugby!
Whoops just found a senior club that has subs of $175, as $50 goes toward fund for new clubrooms.

 

[Bullrush]

Mate if the money was there, players could play in Aus and come home if they saw an AB opportunity anyway, I doubt there money or desire for players to go and play in Aus that some think. I can't see any Aus teams being able to fork out the money to get a Ardie , RMo etc etc, it's got no upsides anyway, you would still be playing in same comp against same players for roughly same money.

Again - I'm not talking about the Saveas or Mo'ungas. There is a grade of players a level or two under the ABs who could look to move to Australia to play Super Rugby here if for nothing more than a change of lifestyle. It's not all about the money. For Australia, this is more about depth than just importing Test-ready players. For NZ players, it's about not going half-way around the world (particularly in these times) to still play Super Rugby with the opportunities to earn Test status.

As for the players coming to NZ, remember when they used to come over for ITM cup etc, worked well as players got experince and took it back to their Super teams. Third tier is where all this stuff should be happening.

Why shouldn't it happen at Super Rugby level? If Australian players are getting experience at ITM Cup level which benefits their Super Rugby teams, why shouldn't they take NZ Super Rugby experience to benefit them at Test level?

 

[Bullrush]

I signed up for my local for the first time in 6 years and was shocked by the price of $420. But now seeing the juniors' fees it's not terrible. I get socks, shorts and a training tee included. To be honest 2 x training sessions + a game a week, with insurance etc. I think it's fair.

I'm not 100% sure but I think the insurance is a big difference in comparing NZ with Aus. I think that having ACC in NZ is a huge bonus.

I used to run a American Football Club here in Aus and the insurance alone accounted for around $130 of player's fees, if I remember correctly.

Wages/disposable income for Aussies is probably quite a bit better as well so $400 is not the same in NZ as it is here. In my experience anyways.

 

[Adam84]

Mate if the money was there, players could play in Aus and come home if they saw an AB opportunity anyway, I doubt there money or desire for players to go and play in Aus that some think. I can't see any Aus teams being able to fork out the money to get a Ardie , RMo etc etc, it's got no upsides anyway, you would still be playing in same comp against same players for roughly same money.
As for the players coming to NZ, remember when they used to come over for ITM cup etc, worked well as players got experince and took it back to their Super teams. Third tier is where all this stuff should be happening.

Why are you happy for players to play across the Tasman in the third tier, but not second?

If it improves the overall product, I.e. Super Rugby improves by having competitive teams and fans are more engaged, then does any of it matter?

 

[Derpus]

about $360 this year for a 10yo. not cheap.

I never understood why people find this to be so unreasonable? Gotta have insurance and pay for shit.

Other sports eclipse these prices by orders of magnitude.

Obviously RA shouldn't be taking that money, because that's idiotic. But 200-300 for a full season of sport is completely reasonable.

 

[Adam84]

NRL has a lately transient playing population, doesn’t matter what country or state they’re from the just follow the opportunity.

If a player has concerns that playing for team ‘x’ will harm his representative chances then he doesn’t do it, but if it offers him greater playing opportunities then maybe he will.

Aus and NZ should be working together, not trying to protect their own diminishing space of the global market.

 

[Adam84]

Personally I believe a successful outcome would be when you have Wallabies playing in NZ and All Blacks playing in Australia, maybe then I’d actually have an interest in watching some of the kiwi games as well.

 

[sendit]

I never understood why people find this to be so unreasonable? Gotta have insurance and pay for shit.

Other sports eclipse these prices by orders of magnitude.

Obviously RA shouldn't be taking that money, because that's idiotic. But 200-300 for a full season of sport is completely reasonable.

I'd be more ok with it if the insurance was actually good. All sport insurance in Australia is crap, they just have to have it for public liability