Where to for Super Rugby?

[Inside Shoulder]

The cloud of uncertainty hovering over the competition prompted the ARU to ask its franchises to delay signing players who are not part of the Wallabies' top-up system.
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/rug...il-after-sanzaar-meeting-20170307-guso9i.html

 

[Omar Comin']

Of course it will never happen..
ARU wouldn't pay Folau or Foley $1.5million/annum to play for the Kings and disappear to South Africa of 6 months of the year.

Nor do the NZRU want their rising stars playing in a team like the Sunwolves or Hurricanes.. teams with greater issues then just the quality of players.

If you're considering options which seek to weaken a strength then you're probably exploring the wrong option..New Zealand Rugby is the best thing about Super Rugby and distributing their players won't improve the coaching, mindset or development pathways of other teams.

When I suggested this it was more in the context of a Trans-Tasman league.

There's a simple problem here. NZ produces the best players and particularly the most depth, while Australia has the biggest commercial markets and potential for growth. There should be some compromise here for everyone's benefit. Perhaps outside of test matches the NZRU and ARU need to work together a lot closer. That may seem all for Australia's benefit at the moment but the fact is the NZ model is also threatened by the increasing gap between salaries on offer locally and overseas.

 

[Braveheart81]

Why would All Blacks want to play for Australian teams unless they were offered substantially more money than they get playing in NZ? I'd guess it would have to be a very large increase because the cost of living is substantially higher here.

They would also likely decrease their personal brands as well in the process.

 

[Omar Comin']

Why would All Blacks want to play for Australian teams unless they were offered substantially more money than they get playing in NZ? I'd guess it would have to be a very large increase because the cost of living is substantially higher here.

They would also likely decrease their personal brands as well in the process.

It wouldn't necessarily have to be core All Blacks that were allowed to play for Australian clubs (though I think it would be good for that sort of flexibility), it could just be guys on the fringes of selection. And I believe Super Rugby players in Australia do make more money than those in NZ? Correct me if I'm wrong but I think our super rugby salary cap is around $5 million, while theirs is around $4 million.

And why would it likely decrease their personal brands? A NZ player starring for an Australian team would only benefit by being better known in both markets, in terms of sponsorship opportunities, media profile etc.

 

[Braveheart81]

It wouldn't necessarily have to be core All Blacks that were allowed to play for Australian clubs (though I think it would be good for that sort of flexibility), it could just be guys on the fringes of selection. And I believe Super Rugby players in Australia do make more money than those in NZ? Correct me if I'm wrong but I think our super rugby salary cap is around $5 million, while there's is around $4 million.

And why would it likely decrease their personal brands? A NZ player starring for an Australian team would only benefit by being better known in both markets, in terms of sponsorship opportunities, media profile etc.

I also think players make more in Australia but I would guess that there would need to be a significant differential offered for a player to move over (assuming they are already a good player for a New Zealand team).

In terms of brand, I don't think it would be viewed positively by NZ fans for their players to relocate to Australian teams and I would guess it would make NZ companies less likely to use those players in advertising and promotional roles.

I'm just speculating but I don't think there would be many New Zealanders excited by the prospect of being able to play for an Aussie team whilst still being eligible for the All Blacks.

 

[MarkJ]

I'm just speculating but I don't think there would be many New Zealanders excited by the prospect of being able to play for an Aussie team whilst still being eligible for the All Blacks.

Being a starter for an Australian team rather than a bench player for an NZ one might hold some appeal.

 

[wamberal]

Being a starter for an Australian team rather than a bench player for an NZ one might hold some appeal.

The sad fact is that there are bench players in New Zealand by the score who would walk into some of our starting XVs. This is I suppose a bit of a desperate measure. But anybody who does not know by now that we are in pretty desperate straits has not been paying attention. By hook or by crook, we have to start putting some decent rugby on the field. That has to be the top priority. We are losing ground as we dither.


We simply have to get the general public to take some interest in the game. At the moment interest is dropping off year by year.

 

[Brumby Runner]

I also think players make more in Australia but I would guess that there would need to be a significant differential offered for a player to move over (assuming they are already a good player for a New Zealand team).

In terms of brand, I don't think it would be viewed positively by NZ fans for their players to relocate to Australian teams and I would guess it would make NZ companies less likely to use those players in advertising and promotional roles.

I'm just speculating but I don't think there would be many New Zealanders excited by the prospect of being able to play for an Aussie team whilst still being eligible for the All Blacks.

Think it's more a matter of being good enough to play for the ABs, rather than being eligible. I'd guess that the likes of Retallick (Rebels), Garden-Bachop and Hawera are all eligible, but atm are not in the running because of many better players over there.

Otherwise, I agree with you about the unlikelihood of the current ABs or next in line wanting to play here. And if the contracting of JG-B and Hawera is any measure, then most of the Aussie fans would see that as a barrier to Aus players coming through, judging by the criticism that has been posted from time to time on these threads.

 

[Omar Comin']

In terms of brand, I don't think it would be viewed positively by NZ fans for their players to relocate to Australian teams and I would guess it would make NZ companies less likely to use those players in advertising and promotional roles.

I'm just speculating but I don't think there would be many New Zealanders excited by the prospect of being able to play for an Aussie team whilst still being eligible for the All Blacks.

My speculation would be that as long as they're still eligible for NZ and not defecting to Australia that it wouldn't matter to most people. This could be different among different generations of fans, but my feeling is that most people that have grown up with the internet, and thus in a very connected, globalised world aren't as parochial over stuff like that. And it's just so common for professional sports teams to have international players. During the world cup for instance I didn't notice any reluctance from advertisers to use our players based overseas for promotional work.

And living and working in Australia clearly does appeal to a lot of New Zealanders! The reverse could be the case too for some of our players. It'd be a benefit if there were some more Australian players in Kiwi teams too, as they'd provide extra interest for Wallabies fans in those games. It works both ways in that sense.

 

[No4918]

RUPA has backed the return of 6 team conference..

So Japan to Australia and Argentina to New Zealand with full home and a away matches against your own conference and then a few matches against each other conference.

Probably the best option until the next broadcast negotiations, but still not without its flaws.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

One of those flaws being listening to Force fans complain about travel.

However this is an easy solution and fixes a few issues with the current system. And we get the Sunwolves so easy points and wins to the Aus sides. Our teams will get to look like world beaters twice a year.

 

[TOCC]

My speculation would be that as long as they're still eligible for NZ and not defecting to Australia that it wouldn't matter to most people. This could be different among different generations of fans, but my feeling is that most people that have grown up with the internet, and thus in a very connected, globalised world aren't as parochial over stuff like that. And it's just so common for professional sports teams to have international players. During the world cup for instance I didn't notice any reluctance from advertisers to use our players based overseas for promotional work.

And living and working in Australia clearly does appeal to a lot of New Zealanders! The reverse could be the case too for some of our players. It'd be a benefit if there were some more Australian players in Kiwi teams too, as they'd provide extra interest for Wallabies fans in those games. It works both ways in that sense.

I'm sure there are some players who would, but I also think that the NZRU would be reluctant to give up control of the players to another governing body and team, and teams which haven't delivered results.

I also don't think it's a magic bullet to improving the game in Australia or the tournament as a whole, and it will gloss over issue in Australian Rugbys development pathways and coaching.

 

[Omar Comin']

I'm sure there are some players who would, but I also think that the NZRU would be reluctant to give up control of the players to another governing body and team, and teams which haven't delivered results.

I also don't think it's a magic bullet to improving the game in Australia or the tournament as a whole, and it will gloss over issue in Australian Rugbys development pathways and coaching.

4 or 5 players per team would be just 20-25 players in total and would make a difference. Open it up both ways, 20-25 Australian eligible players in NZ and 20-25 All Blacks eligible players in Australia. Wouldn't be a magic bullet, but doing something like this doesn't mean you can't also improve development pathways and coaching as well. What it might do is improve the competitiveness of teams, which engages more fans, inspires more kids to play etc.

If Super Rugby goes to 3 conferences of 6 I don't think this kind of thing is as necessary, but I think it would be if we had a Trans-Tasman competition.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Kiwis would never taken any aus player ahead of their potential all black youngster.
Just name one player they would want from any Aus franchise.

 

[Tex]

For any of the five teams, or an Aus player who would compete for an AB jersey?

McMahon, Poey and Hooper seem to be highly regarded over the dutch.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I cant see which franchise over there would take them: they have a battalion of abrasive blind sides, a legion of open sides and they don't have any call for 7s who play like a 12 (nor should we, mind you).

 

[Omar Comin']

Ben Volavola getting a contract with the Crusaders, despite being ineligible for the All Blacks, shows it's possible.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Ben Volavola getting a contract with the Crusaders, despite being ineligible for the All Blacks, shows it's possible.

I guess that proves the NZ rugby juggernaut is not infallible.
He is allowed by the NZRU because he's played for Fiji - isn't he?

 

[Strewthcobber]

Digby?

 

[John S]

I guess that proves the NZ rugby juggernaut is not infallible.
He is allowed by the NZRU because he's played for Fiji - isn't he?

I was going to say he played for Crusaders first, but then I realised he played for Fiji in the World Cup before he debuted for Crusaders. I haven't seen if he's playing this year?

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I was going to say he played for Crusaders first, but then I realised he played for Fiji in the World Cup before he debuted for Crusaders. I haven't seen if he's playing this year?

I think he's down at the Rebels