Where to for Super Rugby?

[Dan54]

As will all true rugby people.

Too true Wamberal, and will be a relief that we can stop worrying about it. There has been so much discussion form everyone (myself included) I almost confused what I want to happen!!

 

[cyclopath]

Yeah? Some would argue otherwise.

You know what they say about arguing with idiots.........?

 

[kiap]

You know what they say about arguing with idiots...?

If you can't beat 'em, you join them.

Right?

 

[Dismal Pillock]

this SA report has 3 getting culled

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news/article.cfm?c_id=80&objectid=11834824

Force culled and

The Japanese Sunwolves are set to join the four Australian teams - the Waratahs, Brumbies, Reds and Rebels.

Uh oh.

Awkward.

"Haro, radiez."

 

[Quick Hands]

You really have no idea do you QH, the reason that I always thought NZ thought it important to play SA was to play the different style of rugby, as I believe it is for Aus rugby to play them and NZ teams! Anyway we will hear tonight what is happening, and then we will be able to stop worrying about it! Really I know that whatever decision is made whether it cutting teams, conferences etc etc, I will still be watching and supporting the game!

So, are you saying that matches against SA teams aren't hard? Your line of argument in your previous post was that NZ derbies are too hard physcially. SA teams are if nothing else hard and physical. It's not really a consistent line that you are running.

 

[GaffaCHinO]

So much contradicting information going around on Twitter land.

Dutton from SMH claiming there will be no teams cut.
Tim Gavil from Abc saying News lmt want to keep 5 aus team which may see a 16 team comp with 2 saffa teams going
And Stuff nz claiming a report from SA is claiming it will be a 15 team comp with force kings and cheetahs gone.

So what that tells me is KNOW ONE HAS ANY IDEA WTF IS GOING ON.

I'll be at the match today to show my support. I live in hope that the ARU will do what is best for aus rugby in Australia and stand up for the fans and players they represent and keep 5 teams in aus.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Cutting anyone of the 3 mooted teams would be bad for oz rugby.
The reason?
Neither the tahs nor the reds are capable of picking the best players nor the best coaches and the only way to get access to the former is to have other provinces find them for them.

 

[RedsHappy]

Cutting anyone of the 3 mooted teams would be bad for oz rugby.
The reason?

Neither the tahs nor the reds are capable of picking the best players nor the best coaches

and the only way to get access to the former is to have other provinces find them for them.

Likely true, but what a deeply depressing state of affairs it reveals. These are the supposed 'pillar' teams holding Australian rugby up.

Is there a professional sporting code in Australian run as poorly as ours has been for a decade or more now?

 

[Bullrush]

So, are you saying that matches against SA teams aren't hard? Your line of argument in your previous post was that NZ derbies are too hard physcially. SA teams are if nothing else hard and physical. It's not really a consistent line that you are running.

Yes - NZ derbies are physically hard and we have to play all the NZ teams twice. Unfortunately we don't get to play teams like the current Reds or Rebels or Force twice.

 

[Rebels3]

Perfect scenario for me would be no teams cut. A restructure of the conference system so it makes complete and utter sense 3x6. Then the aru to announce a complete independent review of all structures from someone who looked over the Irish, English or New Zealand restructuring in the past 10-15 years. Get ewen McKenzie back in the system, don't care what club but he understands systems and pathways. Get the matt Taylor's of this world back, etc.

 

[barbarian]

NOTE TO BILL PULVER.

We, the fee-paying Australian rugby supporters, DO NOT WANT AN AUSTRALIAN FRANCHISE CULLED.

Speak for yourself.

I am still on the fence on this one, and can see merit in both options. Nothing against Force or Rebels fans and players, I certainly understand their arguments. But I also see a history of constant failure on the field, with no end in sight.

Will the broader rugby public really care if we chop a team? Sure the bulk of posters here are against it, but we're the hardest of the hardcore. I'm not sure there is a huge love for the expansion teams among the wider public, and while there may be a backlash I'm not sure it will be that strong (outside of those directly affected).
.

 

[p.Tah]

As will all true rugby people.

No, true rugby people will continue to work at the coal face.
As for the professional side support. They can go get stuffed.

 

[The torpedo]

Is there a professional sporting code in Australian run as poorly as ours has been for a decade or more now?

maybe FFA pre A-League? that's a bloody tough question

 

[Dan54]

Speak for yourself.

I am still on the fence on this one, and can see merit in both options. Nothing against Force or Rebels fans and players, I certainly understand their arguments. But I also see a history of constant failure on the field, with no end in sight.

Will the broader rugby public really care if we chop a team? Sure the bulk of posters here are against it, but we're the hardest of the hardcore. I'm not sure there is a huge love for the expansion teams among the wider public, and while there may be a backlash I'm not sure it will be that strong (outside of those directly affected).
.

One of most sensible posts about it Baba, and not just because like you I not really sure, but even out in local club rugby land there seems to be support for chopping of a team!

 

[wamberal]

One of most sensible posts about it Baba, and not just because like you I not really sure, but even out in local club rugby land there seems to be support for chopping of a team!

The fans we need are the ones who have already left, in droves. The current levels of support are not viable. So, if we lose a few, but gain a lot, who cares? The vast majority of the current support base will bitch, scream, complain, post vitriolic rants here, and then settle down and enjoy the game.

 

[Dan54]

So, are you saying that matches against SA teams aren't hard? Your line of argument in your previous post was that NZ derbies are too hard physcially. SA teams are if nothing else hard and physical. It's not really a consistent line that you are running.

Of course they hard QH, and by the way it not me who says 2 derbies is not preferable but the players, who seem to think that playing other NZ teams once is enough. I wish I could remember wheer the quotes are, but I know Dane Coles in an interview earlier in year said that the local derbies were played with the intensity of test matches generally, he didn't say local derbies in SA or Aus were any different, as he hasn't played in them, but was in a general discussion of Super rugby he said the feeling was once against each local team was enough!

 

[Brumby Runner]

I'm not sure there is a huge love for the expansion teams among the wider public, and while there may be a backlash I'm not sure it will be that strong (outside of those directly affected).
.

And that should be enough in itself, B. How would you or any of the Tahs' supporters feel if it was NSW Rugby facing extinction? I know it has been very mind numbing just having the Brumbies under a cloud so I fully sympathise/empathise with the fans from the Rebels and Force as well.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Of course they hard QH, and by the way it not me who says 2 derbies is not preferable but the players, who seem to think that playing other NZ teams once is enough. I wish I could remember wheer the quotes are, but I know Dane Coles in an interview earlier in year said that the local derbies were played with the intensity of test matches generally, he didn't say local derbies in SA or Aus were any different, as he hasn't played in them, but was in a general discussion of Super rugby he said the feeling was once against each local team was enough!

Dan, it doesn't need the teams to be chopped to reduce the number of local derbies. Just need to have a round robin type of competition. That could be done with 18 franchises as easily as with a lesser number. 17 games followed by finals series wouldn't be too hard to accommodate surely.

Of course, it would mean more travel by all teams so might not be entirely satisfactory to SA. And would reduce the number of local Aus derbies, so may not be entirely satisfactory to Aus as well. But surely, NZ Rugby could wield the big stick to get it if they wanted?

 

[liquor box]

So after all of this drama and suspense I wouldn't be at all surprised if they end up just tinkering with the playoffs. As in remove the wildcards system and just rank the five non-conference winners strictly by competition points.

I think they would extend the number of teams to try to ensure at least one team from each conference. maybe top 8

 

[Jon]

The fans we need are the ones who have already left, in droves. The current levels of support are not viable. So, if we lose a few, but gain a lot, who cares? The vast majority of the current support base will bitch, scream, complain, post vitriolic rants here, and then settle down and enjoy the game.

Not likely. Personally I'll be done with Australian super rugby, I'll actively cheer against the remaining super rugby teams if the force go.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk