• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Where to for Super Rugby?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
just highlights the level of hypocrisy demonstrated by the ARU and utter disregard for the Australia. Rugby supporter..

Fans wanted 5 Oz teams
Foxtel wanted 5 Oz teams
Players wanted 5 Oz teams

But, the Kiwis and SAFFAs wanted only 4 Oz teams so the ARU bow to pressure and allow rugby union in this country to be fucked over..

Pulver and his cronies should resign, even let's say pragmatically, if this were the right decision, the way they have handled it has been atrocious and should take the fall for those reasons alone.

Agree TOCC. We've now reached French Revolution point, where the ruling class are contructing a new palace for themselves as the game disintegrates around them. We need our own Robespierre to clean this lot out forever.
 

Inside Shoulder

Nathan Sharpe (72)
Statement from the CEO of SA Rugby interesting and revealing:

http://m.sport24.co.za/sport24/Rugb...twitter&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

The new 15 team format was clearly all agreed to in London 5 weeks ago, with the ARU's full concurrance.

They agreed to it 5 weeks ago without knowing which team they were going to cut?
That is borderline insane.
Then, apparently, they have got no closer to making up their "mind" about that in the ensuing 5 weeks: FFS.
No wonder my NAB shares never went up in value while Clyne was at the "helm".
 

Twoilms

Trevor Allan (34)
Many people seem to be suggesting that the NZRU have somehow bullied no-nuts Pulver into doing what they want. What i don't understand is how?

It doesn't make sense, they have a veto right. A veto system more or less guarantees that no single party can be ganged up on because they can just veto until the cows come home. Case study - Russia in the UN Security Council.

I thought, well it's probably the broadcasters (i.e. the money) pushing for a cut. But no, i'm reading that Fox stated they wanted 5 Australian teams to remain, particularly the Force due to (relatively) good TV ratings.

So from a relatively strong position, with leverage in the Veto right and backing from the broadcasters, we have sold out 20% of Australia super players, destroyed Rugby Union in whichever state the ARU decides for the foreseeable future and gained absolutely nothing in return.

How the fuck does that even happen? Someone should be contacting ASIC or the ACCC (he says knowing full well both organisations are equally as incompetent as the ARU).
 

The Snout

Ward Prentice (10)
For heaven's sake, we need to get out in 2020.


http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11835387

"Tew told the Radio Sport Breakfast that New Zealand's top players believe there are too many local derbies under the new 15-team format, one of a number of reasons why the format might be re-jigged again after 2020."

"Tew said: "Japan are on notice that they've got to perform at a higher level as time goes on. "


Sorry, but if NZ think they have a right to put other member nations "on notice" , coupled with they seem to want the total opposite with less local derbies, frankly, our time together is at an end.

ARU has 3 years to come up with a viable Australia only competition to replace Super Rugby. Involve any Pacific Islands if you want.
 

Strewthcobber

Simon Poidevin (60)
I thought, well it's probably the broadcasters (i.e. the money) pushing for a cut. But no, i'm reading that Fox stated they wanted 5 Australian teams to remain, particularly the Force due to (relatively) good TV ratings.

So from a relatively strong position, with leverage in the Veto right and backing from the broadcasters, we have sold out 20% of Australia super players, destroyed Rugby Union in whichever state the ARU decides for the foreseeable future and gained absolutely nothing in return.

How the fuck does that even happen? Someone should be contacting ASIC or the ACCC (he says knowing full well both organisations are equally as incompetent as the ARU).

Each of the Super Rugby teams requires funding of approx $5.5m - $8m a year.

The broadcaster agreements will not be changed under the new arrangement. Revenue stays the same

So what the ARU gains is an additional $5m+ or so each year.

As others have said, that means a strengthening of the remaining four teams due to a concentration of talent, but also because the player payments will stay the same - so the remaining players will be paid more, hopefully meaning a better standard of player can be retained.

Given the well publicised financial issues the ARU have created for themselves, they obviously see this as worth it. I don't. But there is at least something gained there - enough for the executive, the board and the other members of the ARU to agree to it.
 

RugbyReg

Rocky Elsom (76)
Staff member
If one team needs to be dropped then have a relegation process. Maintain the core structures to keep all 5 teams in the NRC. Whoever comes last in whatever Super season drops out and displaced by previously relegated team.


I just don't get how relegation works though.

What do the Force (for the sake of the argument) do next year to earn promotion back in?
 

Twoilms

Trevor Allan (34)
Each of the Super Rugby teams requires funding of approx $5.5m - $8m a year.

The broadcaster agreements will not be changed under the new arrangement. Revenue stays the same

So what the ARU gains is an additional $5m+ or so each year.

As others have said, that means a strengthening of the remaining four teams due to a concentration of talent, but also because the player payments will stay the same - so the remaining players will be paid more, hopefully meaning a better standard of player can be retained.

Given the well publicised financial issues the ARU have created for themselves, they obviously see this as worth it. I don't. But there is at least something gained there - enough for the executive, the board and the other members of the ARU to agree to it.

Wonder how much money would be gained if we cut their salaries.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jon

Rebels3

Jim Lenehan (48)
For heaven's sake, we need to get out in 2020.


http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11835387

"Tew told the Radio Sport Breakfast that New Zealand's top players believe there are too many local derbies under the new 15-team format, one of a number of reasons why the format might be re-jigged again after 2020."

"Tew said: "Japan are on notice that they've got to perform at a higher level as time goes on. "


Sorry, but if NZ think they have a right to put other member nations "on notice" , coupled with they seem to want the total opposite with less local derbies, frankly, our time together is at an end.

ARU has 3 years to come up with a viable Australia only competition to replace Super Rugby. Involve any Pacific Islands if you want.


2020 could be bloodier than it is now. Let's hope we have considerable runs on the board between now and then to leverage a better competition.
 

KOB1987

John Eales (66)
Having read the article by Wayne Smith, I think this will play out in the least painful way and that is that Cox will sell his licence to the Force and the Rebels will go. The 'own the force' campaign will continue.

The Brumbies won't officially merge with the Rebels, however their province will be extended to include Victoria. That's purely academic though, just like they get fuck all of their players from the Riverina now they'll also get fuck all of them from Melbourne. They may play say 2 of their 8 home games in Melbourne which is by no means a disaster. But they may not too.

As long as Melbourne still has the Rising and there are plans to continue or even expand the NRC the VRU should be able to continue with their elite development centre or whatever it's called.
 

fatprop

George Gregan (70)
Staff member
They agreed to it 5 weeks ago without knowing which team they were going to cut?
That is borderline insane.
Then, apparently, they have got no closer to making up their "mind" about that in the ensuing 5 weeks: FFS.
No wonder my NAB shares never went up in value while Clyne was at the "helm".


They know who is going, they just don't know how to spin such bad news, whatever they do it will be bad press.

5.05pm on the Thursday before Good Friday sounds like the kind of timing
 

lou75

Ron Walden (29)
Had a little look at the ARU constitution for voting, it seems that the nominees are put to the members for approval on a two thirds vote, so they need 10 votes for approval -
8 member unions
2 NSW & QLD
5 Super Rugby
1 RUPA

Can the little states and territories form an alliance of voting? WA, SA, NT, VIC, TAS + 2 Super rugby + RUPA = 8 votes can hold them accountable and reject nominees and possibly changes

http://myrugby.rugby.com.au/myrugby/images/docs/Gov/Details.pdf
 

Strewthcobber

Simon Poidevin (60)
Had a little look at the ARU constitution for voting, it seems that the nominees are put to the members for approval on a two thirds vote, so they need 10 votes for approval -
8 member unions
2 NSW & QLD
5 Super Rugby
1 RUPA

Can the little states and territories form an alliance of voting? WA, SA, NT, VIC, TAS + 2 Super rugby + RUPA = 8 votes can hold them accountable and reject nominees and possibly changes

http://myrugby.rugby.com.au/myrugby/images/docs/Gov/Details.pdf

They may be strategically incompetent, but the board isn't stupid. I imagine the smaller unions will see a relatively small, but significant and vital for them increase in funding contingent on this proposal making it through the AGM
 

fatprop

George Gregan (70)
Staff member
Had a little look at the ARU constitution for voting, it seems that the nominees are put to the members for approval on a two thirds vote, so they need 10 votes for approval -
8 member unions
2 NSW & QLD
5 Super Rugby
1 RUPA

Can the little states and territories form an alliance of voting? WA, SA, NT, VIC, TAS + 2 Super rugby + RUPA = 8 votes can hold them accountable and reject nominees and possibly changes

http://myrugby.rugby.com.au/myrugby/images/docs/Gov/Details.pdf


You don't do this type of stuff without the board being aware, they might not like the outcome, but they would have seen the figures and watched enough games over the last few years to see something had to change

It wasn't working, it isn't profitable and we weren't winning, the only reason we even get semi finalists is because of the comp structure, not merit
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top