Where to for Super Rugby?

[sunnyboys]

Wayne Smith (SMH) also calling out the fact that NZR doesnt want to share tv dollars as per SANZAAR arrangements of old. as they say... follow the money.

and the trick here is that the NZR broadcast deal is a bundled deal, and NZR alone get to determine what percent is attributable to Super Rugby. cheeky stuff.

 

[Dan54]

Wayne Smith (SMH) also calling out the fact that NZR doesnt want to share tv dollars as per SANZAAR arrangements of old. as they say. follow the money.

and the trick here is that the NZR broadcast deal is a bundled deal, and NZR alone get to determine what percent is attributable to Super Rugby. cheeky stuff.

Well isn't RA's the same? Haven't they got a bundled deal?
But regardless I bet the biggest portion of NZR deal is for AB tests, they do make pretty big money out of them, then you would have Maori AB money, and Super , ITM(Bunnings cup) College rugby and womens and 7's rugby. So I guessing someone works out what each is worth. Hasn't it always been same?

 

[Adam84]

Ok that was the figure Hamsh spoke of when talking how much the PI teams would need to compete, even if international travel added was 1 mill, which I would imagine would be tops .

As per a tournament design as outlined by NZRU, not what people are calling for now

 

[Adam84]

As always, the devil is in the detail but unless the Kiwis are prepared to deal equitably with Australia, they could find that Plan B doesn’t work out for them. Instead, Rugby Australia could also break off and go it alone.

A trans-Tasman model is needed to benchmark Australia’s progress — or lack thereof. And as a competition model, it is the one that makes most sense, at least as far as RA and the Australian and New Zealand franchises are concerned.

Only the NZRU is complicating matters. While they must realise they need Australia to underpin their own domestic competitions, they are being totally evasive when it comes to that clause in the SANZAAR contract that stipulates that the joint venturers should equally divvy up their broadcast spoils.

There was once a time when Australia would have rolled over and meekly accepted whatever deal New Zealand would have been prepared to offer. They would have been so appreciative that the Kiwis allowed them to play in the same competition. But those days are over, killed off by the clodhopping diplomacy of a year ago.

Now there are different players and a new reality. Respect and fairness would seem to be a helpful starting point for negotiations

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-...-from-sanzaar-ashes-20210628-p584xz.html?btis

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Wayne Smith (SMH) also calling out the fact that NZR doesnt want to share tv dollars as per SANZAAR arrangements of old. as they say. follow the money.

and the trick here is that the NZR broadcast deal is a bundled deal, and NZR alone get to determine what percent is attributable to Super Rugby. cheeky stuff.

Yep time to say good luck to your TT but we are doing our thing with Fiji and will come back to you for champions league competition with sanzaar type deal once we have finished speaking with Japan. I think it is gall to say any side oarticipating should get less broadcast dollars as all all that does is widen the gap as nz for more funds to retain top players.

 

[Dan54]

Yep time to say good luck to your TT but we are doing our thing with Fiji and will come back to you for champions league competition with sanzaar type deal once we have finished speaking with Japan. I think it is gall to say any side oarticipating should get less broadcast dollars as all all that does is widen the gap as nz for more funds to retain top players. This is just bollocks and must agree sooner we remove ourselves from TT the better.

So NZR and RA haven't even spoken about TT yet, and Wayne Smith knows that there is a problem with the split of income?? Geez you don't think there maybe just a touch of imagination there do you RN???

ut as Bullrush said of course RN ,it is all NZR's fault and RA is just the victim again.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

So NZR and RA haven't even spoken about TT yet, and Wayne Smith knows that there is a problem with the split of income?? Geez you don't think there maybe just a touch of imagination there do you RN???

ut as Bullrush said of course RN ,it is all NZR's fault and RA is just the victim again.

Hamish quoted in press about this issue before Wayne’s article

 

[Dan54]

As per a tournament design as outlined by NZRU, not what people are calling for now

Really? who said that was the case, I would think Hamish was talking what it would cost to be in a comp with Australia wouldn't he??

 

[Dan54]

Hamish quoted in press about this issue before Wayne’s article

Did he? I saw where he said RA thought they should get a bigger piece of the pie, but didn't see this quote.

 

[Adam84]

Really? who said that was the case, I would think Hamish was talking what it would cost to be in a comp with Australia wouldn't he??

Yes it was, you referenced the quote go have a listen

 

[Adam84]

So NZR and RA haven't even spoken about TT yet, and Wayne Smith knows that there is a problem with the split of income?? Geez you don't think there maybe just a touch of imagination there do you RN???

ut as Bullrush said of course RN ,it is all NZR's fault and RA is just the victim again.

Who said they haven’t even spoken about TT?
Is this the NZRU CEO again?

 

[Dan54]

Who said they haven’t even spoken about TT?
Is this the NZRU CEO again?

Also Hamish who said last week that RA board still couldn't decide what they wanted. But yes NZR CEO has said they were talking this week. Have you heard someone say they have spoken?

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Dan, Nzru should pay you a fee as a defender of nzru honour and integrity on this site (with the approach you take of they can never do anything wrong and deny it even if black and white or just plain create diversions to mislead and avoid focus on issues relating to nzru).

If you are already then you deserve a pay rise as you do a Stirling job to keep us going completely feral on nzru...

 

[Adam84]

Also Hamish who said last week that RA board still couldn't decide what they wanted. But yes NZR CEO has said they were talking this week. Have you heard someone say they have spoken?

Dan. he said they hadn’t decided on the best format(funding and Drua/MP (Moana Pasifika) viability a factor here), and you interpret that to be that NZRU and RA haven’t spoken about a TT at all? Of course they’ve spoken

“Trans Tasman currently feels pretty imbalanced,” McLennan said. “We’re not changing our five teams so we need to work out an equitable attribution to running the competition. New Zealand’s [TV] ratings went up during Trans Tasman, whilst ours went down.”

“We like the idea of including Fiji and Pasifika but we’re not sure how it’s going to be fully funded over the long term

“We’re not quite sure yet of the best trans-Tasman model for next year and beyond,” McLennan said. “Whilst we got towelled, it was probably the best learning we’ve had in terms of understanding what we need to do. Bravo to New Zealand.”

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I call bullshit on most of the shit you're saying here.

You're basically pissed off at NZRU because they have ensured that NZ rugby- whether it's Super Rugby or the ABs - is some of the best rugby in the world. NZRU had NOTHING to do with the demise of rugby in Australia. They just kept getting better and better at producing great rugby players and coaches and now Australia struggles to compete on the field.

NZRU may now be in a position where purely due to our small country size, the remoteness of our location and the absolute dominance they have displayed for the last 10 years where we have to work with Australia to help them become competitive again but your anger is bullshit.

It's your own rubbish results and lack of competitiveness that has killed Super Rugby.

Lol you have basically agreed with my argument that Super rugby has been designed for nzru interests at expense of crap product and indeed as you yourself acknowledge as we can’t match the depth of nzr...thanks for providing support for my arguments lol. I find your post funny...

 

[Tomikin]

I don't think that is what Bullrush means. He just saying stop blaming NZR for RA's f*** ups. NZR makes mistakes , but they are not the reason that RA is broke, and that rugby has gone backwards in Aus. Basically ALL NZR's problems are caused by NZR, and RA's problems are caused by RA. Don't keep deflecting the blame. Fullstop!

Just out of interest, with your comment of how sustainable etc, Aus rugby is basically getting 33 mill a year from TV rights with nothing in bank and only still afloat because of a handout from WR (World Rugby), NZR gets $80 mill a year, got $90 mill in the bank, and they know that won't last because they spend money on grassroots etc. So tell us again about substainable?
Both boards need other, but not sure who needs who more!

RA's in a shit sandwich, which isn't NZer's fault. But I'd take our 33 million for 2 more years, we probably add the Fiji team, and if we keep our rating high at super rugby we could possibly get a bump next round, and you never know might afford another Sydney team. That be 7 professional teams 6 Australian again all with uncertain of outcome so people are watching, more professional positions for players, more players, more interest, more fans, more grassroots. Then Maybe a second Queensland team or a Japanese team.

See what I'm getting at. We have room to grow, and a massive market that is untouched by rugby. I see a lot of crossover casual fans Australia could get if they aren't getting thumped by Kiwi's week in week out.

How's your market if the Australian aren't watching ?

 

[dru]

RA's in a shit sandwich, which isn't NZer's fault. But I'd take our 33 million for 2 more years, we probably add the Fiji team, and if we keep our rating high at super rugby we could possibly get a bump next round, and you never know might afford another Sydney team. That be 7 professional teams 6 Australian again all with uncertain of outcome so people are watching, more professional positions for players, more players, more interest, more fans, more grassroots. Then Maybe a second Queensland team or a Japanese team.

See what I'm getting at. We have room to grow, and a massive market that is untouched by rugby. I see a lot of crossover casual fans Australia could get if they aren't getting thumped by Kiwi's week in week out.

How's your market if the Australian aren't watching ?

I really don't see a lot of alternatives to this approach, short of RA biting the tongue, digging in with NZRU and crossing fingers on how it pans out. That seems quite a black and white pair of alternatives to me.

So if you consider that doubling down on domestic is the obvious choice, noting that clearly there is room for Fiji. Possibly MP (Moana Pasifika) if Australia pacific diplomacy can replicate the Fiji deal. The question you are left with is a) whether to TT/champions league and b) how to do it.

"Yes" to (a) if it can be handled properly and especially with a plan to broaden to Japan. Then to (b) "how"? I'm increasingly thinking that the interface to NZ with Super quality test level Australian teams needs to be two representative teams. Allow the current WB coach to be DOR to both these teams, introduce the two most successful domestic club coaches, and devise a way to spread the top 70 players equitably.

Of course this requires NZR being willing to play.

 

[Tomikin]

I really don't see a lot of alternatives to this approach, short of RA biting the tongue, digging in with NZRU and crossing fingers on how it pans out. That seems quite a black and white pair of alternatives to me.

So if you consider that doubling down on domestic is the obvious choice, noting that clearly there is room for Fiji. Possibly MP (Moana Pasifika) if Australia pacific diplomacy can replicate the Fiji deal. The question you are left with is a) whether to TT/champions league and b) how to do it.

"Yes" to (a) if it can be handled properly and especially with a plan to broaden to Japan. Then to (b) "how"? I'm increasingly thinking that the interface to NZ with Super quality test level Australian teams needs to be two representative teams. Allow the current WB coach to be DOR to both these teams, introduce the two most successful domestic club coaches, and devise a way to spread the top 70 players equitably.

Of course this requires NZR being willing to play.

I think take the 2 top teams of each league for Champions League (NZ/Aus/JAP) and Rest into a knock-out shield comp.. I don't like the rep model, I think we as teams should celebrate our champions like soccer..

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I really don't see a lot of alternatives to this approach, short of RA biting the tongue, digging in with NZRU and crossing fingers on how it pans out. That seems quite a black and white pair of alternatives to me.

So if you consider that doubling down on domestic is the obvious choice, noting that clearly there is room for Fiji. Possibly MP (Moana Pasifika) if Australia pacific diplomacy can replicate the Fiji deal. The question you are left with is a) whether to TT/champions league and b) how to do it.

"Yes" to (a) if it can be handled properly and especially with a plan to broaden to Japan. Then to (b) "how"? I'm increasingly thinking that the interface to NZ with Super quality test level Australian teams needs to be two representative teams. Allow the current WB coach to be DOR to both these teams, introduce the two most successful domestic club coaches, and devise a way to spread the top 70 players equitably.

Of course this requires NZR being willing to play.

The 2 representative teams won’t work as dilutes the brands of five existing clubs..as well as resents Tiago teams which only play champions league...plus what do you do with players outside those who do champions league (ie nrc?).

I still struggle with champions league with 5 kiwi teams...Japan teams would have same problem. Unfortunately I think we still need extra games beyond 2 round 6 team domestic plus finals. I don’t have any short term solution but agree we need it for extra games.

 

[dru]

I think take the 2 top teams of each league for Champions League (NZ/Aus/JAP) and Rest into a knock-out shield comp.. I don't like the rep model, I think we as teams should celebrate our champions like soccer..

The 2 representative teams won’t work as dilutes the brands of five existing clubs..as well as resents Tiago teams which only play champions league.plus what do you do with players outside those who do champions league (ie nrc?).

I still struggle with champions league with 5 kiwi teams.Japan teams would have same problem. Unfortunately I think we still need extra games beyond 2 round 6 team domestic plus finals. I don’t have any short term solution but agree we need it for extra games.

Fair enough - the idea hasn't gained a lot of traction. However, do you see the top two Aus clubs ever meeting a criteria of "Super test standard"? I just see a long term issue with the Aus input at TT never being up to speed. Which is a silver bullet to the werewolf of NZR-RA TT from my perspective.