Where to for Super Rugby?

[Set piece magic]

It'll be easily made up for by increased ratings I believe: this year the ratings have utterly capitulated.

 

[Braveheart81]

It's nearly 20% (17%) fewer games

120 regular season games instead of 135. That's less than 12% reduction.

There is one extra game per team in the new competition.

 

[barbarian]

Why does the NZRU not want a trans tasman competition?

ARU and Super Rugby are going to die long term without a trans tasman comp. The only thing that prevented it happening was the NZRU.

The SARU is run by the toxic South African government, which was behind the crazy push for the kings. Why are we cooperating with an organisation that's politically compromised.

Cam Clyde saying we couldn't call NZ's bluff, total bs. NZ would freak if they couldn't play the Bledisloe Cup.

Why are we so tolerant of the crazy SARU's demands, as well as the NZRU stomping on us and our interests? We send nice guys to negotiations! Tell Steve Tew to get fucked, he was the shit bloke that released that media release about the bug last year on game day. Tell him its trans tasman comp or them v sheep / politically compromised organisation

You'd be surprised how little Kiwis care about the Wallabies and the ARU.

They see the Boks as their great rivals, and the idea of a Trans-Tasman comp is met with laughter. They believe the SA teams are great competition and strengthen the performance of the ABs.

I think NZ would be totally fine if we walked away from the Bledisloe. They'd probably rather play an internal comp instead of a Trans-Tasman.
.

 

[amirite]

There is one extra game per team in the new competition.

With 1 more game but a lot less travel time I wonder if this model is better or worse for player welfare.

 

[Blue]

Thought no 1 for the day:

If the Kiwis can make Southland-Otago, Northland-Auckland etc etc work as franchises South Africa should jsut shut the fark up and make mergers work.

Lions-Cheetahs, Stormers-Kings

Thought no 2 for the day.

My choice would be Force stays. Better for the game in Aus. Merge the Brumbies and Rebels and maintain na foothold in both Canberra and Melbourne.

You know it makes sense. Like lamb chops. With the crispy bit of fat on the side. Nom Nom.

 

[Jon]

You'd be surprised how little Kiwis care about the Wallabies and the ARU.

They see the Boks as their great rivals, and the idea of a Trans-Tasman comp is met with laughter. They believe the SA teams are great competition and strengthen the performance of the ABs.

I think NZ would be totally fine if we walked away from the Bledisloe. They'd probably rather play an internal comp instead of a Trans-Tasman.
.

unless of course - we had the bledisloe and then decided to walk away from it

 

[Benaud]

The "consultation process" goes like this:

Force - We've decided based on these numbers that you're gone in 2018. Convince us we're wrong in the next 72 hours.

Rebels - Unless the Force come up with something compelling in the next 72 hours, you retain a team until 2021. Work out something with the Brumbies in the interim if you want a future beyond that point.

 

[Omar Comin']

You'd be surprised how little Kiwis care about the Wallabies and the ARU.

They see the Boks as their great rivals, and the idea of a Trans-Tasman comp is met with laughter. They believe the SA teams are great competition and strengthen the performance of the ABs.

Then let them play a South Africa/NZ only competition and see how long it lasts! Both NZ and SA have said they want fewer local derbies and to play each other. We're the odd one out here.

The Australian economy is roughly 3 times bigger than New Zealand's and South Africa's combined! It is also the country out of the 3 with by far the most room for rugby to grow. It's a ridiculous situation that the leaders of our union are so accommodating of a professional structure that suits everyone but us and provides almost no ability to grow the game in this country.

 

[barbarian]

unless of course - we had the bledisloe and then decided to walk away from it

Of all the ludicrous hypotheticals posed in this thread, Jon, us 'having the Bledisloe' is easily the most far-fetched

 

[Lindommer]

I deeply regret not posting this earlier. Much earlier.

There was a meeting of the Sydney chapter of the Rugby Business Network in 2015 when the new, 18 team Super Rugby was explained by an ARU wallah. I thought it sounded like a dog's breakfast then (many present had some difficulty getting their heads around the draw!), and nothing since has made me think any differently. To bow to the SAf government's wishes and set up a franchise in a predominately black area purely for political purposes should never have been agreed to; the Kings either stacked up on rugby criteria or they didn't. Plainly they don't. As for lumping the Japanese franchise in with the Saffers and then allowing them to refuse to play away in Tokyo, HTF did we ever agree to that? I don't have a problem with the Jaguares (the rugby world agreed the Argies should be in a top-level competition and they are in the SH) but the Sunwolves? Once again, HTF did we ever agree to setting up a Japanese franchise, especially considering the antipathy of the company teams in the Top League? If the Japanese are serious about a level of rugby above their Top League let them set up some sort of East Asian competition. IF one non-Saffer team must be culled I fail to understand why the Sunwolves have been ring-fenced. Pulver et al, there's no J in SANZAAR.

Now that I've got up a head of steam I won't let this opportunity slip to post a few thoughts and save some future regrets.

I thought at the time if rugby in Australia was serious about growing the game domestically we should've made an approach to David Gallop after he was shafted by the NRL. His top-level sporting admin experience, knowledge and contacts in the Oz sporting panorama surely would've seen us in a better place than we are now. If all Gallop ever did was take some bark off rugby league I would've been happy. He's doing a sterling job at the FFA, albeit without the shadow of back-stabbing club chairmen lurking behind him.

At another RBN meeting in 2016 Ann Sherry, ARU Director, waxed eloquent about the 60,000 seater stadium mooted for the Moore Park car park. This time I spoke up and questioned the value in spending $200m odd on an additional 18,000 seats which were only going to be used four or five times a year at best. Someone must've heard me on the night because that proposal's since been shot down.

 

[Braveheart81]

Then let them play a South Africa/NZ only competition and see how long it lasts! Both NZ and SA have said they want fewer local derbies and to play each other. We're the odd one out here.

The Australian economy is roughly 3 times bigger than New Zealand's and South Africa's combined! It is also the country out of the 3 with by far the most room for rugby to grow. It's a ridiculous situation that the leaders of our union are so accommodating of a professional structure that suits everyone but us and provides almost no ability to grow the game in this country.

This premise assumes that they come crawling back to us before all our teams go bust.

I'm not convinced our teams wouldn't fail first.

Alone, any product we had to sell would have very little value internationally and the likelihood of a domestic competition having any interest from a FTA network seems pretty remote.

 

[wamberal]

Ain't that the truth. A number of posters seem to overlook the obvious fact that if rugby could support a viable locally based television product, there would have been one years ago.

 

[Omar Comin']

This premise assumes that they come crawling back to us before all our teams go bust.

I'm not convinced our teams wouldn't fail first.

Alone, any product we had to sell would have very little value internationally and the likelihood of a domestic competition having any interest from a FTA network seems pretty remote.

If it doesn't work at all then we can be the ones crawling back.

But I think such a competition would simply have to operate within its means, and therefore it couldn't really fall over. The question would simply be how popular it was and what level of player it could attract. That would depend on broadcaster and sponsor interest and the willingness of private investors to get involved. International value shouldn't even be a concern in the short term. Just focus entirely on building a product that suits the Australian market in terms of structure, scheduling, geographical reach etc.

I think it's very likely that we'd have to allow more top players to go overseas and relax the Wallabies eligibility rules, but I know we both agree this is probably inevitable anyway! Actually the one way it might not be inevitable is if rugby were to become a lot more popular in this country. And there's no way that can happen any other way.

 

[Highlander35]

You could very easily align the Australian Domestic Season to run opposed to the Japanese Domestic Season, and allow players to play there for non-World Cup years.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

[amirite]

You'd be surprised how little Kiwis care about the Wallabies and the ARU.

They see the Boks as their great rivals, and the idea of a Trans-Tasman comp is met with laughter. They believe the SA teams are great competition and strengthen the performance of the ABs.

I think NZ would be totally fine if we walked away from the Bledisloe. They'd probably rather play an internal comp instead of a Trans-Tasman.
.

Some Kiwis think this, but I don't think most do. You only need to flick through Veitchy and FoxSport's facebook comments to see the views of the common man (the Kiwis). So humble, just like mighty Ritchie.

 

[Set piece magic]

RE: barbarian, I see some of your point, but I think the reality is just different.

Some NZ fans will argue they value the SA rivalry more; the reality is that it is not valued more than the Aus game.

The Wallabies game consistently rates higher than the Boks game in NZ, and the attendances are stronger too. The fans that value it more are in the minority.

We have a tough choice: go it with South Africa, controlled by a black supremacist government, and watch our code die a slow and painful death, or ride out and get some balls. The Bledisloe Cup is invaluable to the NZRU, SkySports and other related vendors.

We propose that South Africa be given a chance to play the champions or something like that, in a game with actual interest.

The other thing to note is that Australian Super Rugby teams are much more valuable to NZ - a NZ team playing in AUS receives pareto SUPERIOR ratings to that of an NZ team playing in SA. I believe the SA games only get ~20,000 people, possibly less watching (this was in the heyday of 2011). By comparison I believe Aus games rate in the vicinity of ~120,000. I believe (but have no figures on me atm) that the attendances are also stronger.

NZ has much more to lose from Australia than South Africa. Jam them. Stop being nice to Steve Tew (who has treated us like pure shit, and is a nasty man), and come ready to negotiate and stomp on their heads.

 

[amirite]

One question for Force (and maybe, Rebel) fans is, do you love:

1. Your team, as an isolated entity
2. Super Rugby
3. The development pathway your young athletes have in rugby

Because, as all of those except #2 can be saved by adding the team and their IP to the NRC. You'd still see good quality rugby, and players would still have a chance to mature.

That's my glass half full take. But, I am still a supporter of at least TRYING the "3 conferences of 6 teams" model.

We have a tough choice: go it with South Africa, controlled by a black supremacist government, and watch our code die a slow and painful death, or ride out and get some balls.

Easy now.

 

[stoff]

Of all the ludicrous hypotheticals posed in this thread, Jon, us 'having the Bledisloe' is easily the most far-fetched

But the second part of the plan is genius.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Set piece magic]

Another side note: it's easily feasible that a trans tasman comp could have 5 teams from Aus and be rated and attended well enough to support this.

One man alone stands in the way: Steve Tew! Trans tasman or #AUSEXIT

 

[GTPIH]

I would hold it at the MCG but the 2013 test was at Docklands.



Now that Perth will have a 60k rectangular stadium it is very viable to have it there too.

The new Burswood Stadium is oval and built for AFL and cricket. Still a good option given both MCG and Docklands are also oval