Where to for Super Rugby?

[BLR]

I largely agree.

To frame it a bit differently, getting rid of the team is not an incompetent act in isolation, but everything that led to this point probably was. This was all forecasted.

It is when the team that is getting cut is done so on incorrect assumptions.

 

[I like to watch]

It's not about 'growing balls', as many have said.

The ARU over leveraged themselves financially, and so they CHOSE to cut a side. When a company is so close to insolvency that it goes through solvency tests, you either have to come up with new revenue streams (any ideas?) or cut expenses. If you do not do this you WILL become insolvent. This would undoubtedly be a worse outcome for Australian rugby than either the Force or Rebels organisation ceasing to exist.

It's not incorrect to say the ARU have shown incompetency to get to this point, that the situation was badly handled, and that it continues to be badly handled.

But, in a vacuum the decision to cut a side makes sense.

I feel disgusting saying that, but it's just plain right.

But we are not in a vacuum.
It is incompetent to bail out 2 franchises,only to decide shortly thereafter, that one must go.
It's beyond the pale, that the documentation you executed in bailing out both entities, will now, 5 minutes later,bite you on the arse.

That is incompetence!

 

[sidelineview]

The sticking point is the contract between RugbyWA and ARU which stipulates that the Force must remain part of Super Rugby until 2020.

By the time the ARU pay out legal fees, redundancy packages and other contractural obligations there won't be much money saved.

What are the odds of the Force being kicked out ? Regardless of the usual rhetoric it looks like the decision has been made.
Also, what are the odds the Force will pursue serious legal action?

When South Sydney was unfairly kicked out of the NRL comp they rallied the troops, took legal action against News Corp and wrote themselves into the history books with a monumental victory.

I might be running with a simple assumption but it seems pretty simple.
If the Force are the team to be cut, I hope they throw everything they can at the ARU. They'll get plenty of support.

 

[amirite]

It is when the team that is getting cut is done so on incorrect assumptions.

I am a Rebels supporter. Even I can say there's no clearly correct choice between the Rebels and the Force.

If you're not objective enough to say that, and I'm not saying you're not, then I don't really respect your opinion.

But we are not in a vacuum.
It is incompetent to bail out 2 franchises,only to decide shortly thereafter, that one must go.
It's beyond the pale, that the documentation you executed in bailing out both entities, will now, 5 minutes later,bite you on the arse.

That is incompetence!

I think you understand that I was not saying we are in a vacuum, but that the decision to cut a team at this stage has some semblance of sense, even if the decisions leading up to it do not (including ignoring two separate reports that said team 5 was a bad idea because the ARU felt optimistic).

My understanding is that they bailed out the two sides because they had to, because there was no opportunity to get rid of a team until 2020. They've stated if there was, they would've taken it.

Now, due to declining audiences a conversation was opened by SANZAAR. That conversation resulted in the ARU doing what they saw as necessary, scrapping a team.

I wish this wasn't happening. But people are misframing it pretty severely.

 

[amirite]

As an aside - it's fucking weird to see rugby.com.au shitting on the ARU as much as any other mainstream outlet (obviously not as much as independents like G&G).

When you start your own independent media source, you'd hope they'd be a little less 'independent'.

 

[Blue]

In all fairness, there's only one other direct case study and that's SA Rugby. They're taking just as long as the ARU.

There is nothing fair about this process. Here or in SA.

These guys are nothing but a bunch of of ass kissing political suits. The lot of them. All about position, one upmanship, agendas, covering your arse.

Nothing about our game.

It's a tough situation, but the way it is being handled is abysmal.

 

[I like to watch]

I am a Rebels supporter. Even I can say there's no clearly correct choice between the Rebels and the Force.

If you're not objective enough to say that, and I'm not saying you're not, then I don't really respect your opinion.


I think you understand that I was not saying we are in a vacuum, but that the decision to cut a team at this stage has some semblance of sense, even if the decisions leading up to it do not (including ignoring two separate reports that said team 5 was a bad idea because the ARU felt optimistic).

My understanding is that they bailed out the two sides because they had to, because there was no opportunity to get rid of a team until 2020. They've stated if there was, they would've taken it.

Now, due to declining audiences a conversation was opened by SANZAAR. That conversation resulted in the ARU doing what they saw as necessary, scrapping a team.

I wish this wasn't happening. But people are misframing it pretty severely.

I take your point, that dropping a team would have raised complications in regard to ARU undertakings in with SANZAR.
And, possibly some of us a going off early about guaranteed places in the comp that it's said the ARU agreed to.
However, IF, the ARU has given these guarantees to both crippled franchises, at a time when they had no bargaining power.
It's incompetence, plain and simple.

 

[Dctarget]

As an aside - it's fucking weird to see rugby.com.au shitting on the ARU as much as any other mainstream outlet (obviously not as much as independents like G&G).

When you start your own independent media source, you'd hope they'd be a little less 'independent'.

I respect it. I was taken aback by it too when I first saw the article, but it's refreshing to see that they have some independence and transparency.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Like a few others here, I watched Kick and Chase on Fox last night and listened to Cameron Clyne with interest. I actually thought he spoke very well and laid out a lot of the issues in a way that was understandable to the average punter. He's no mug this bloke, clearly, as is evidenced by his history in the corporate world. Doesn't mean I agree with the decision or the process, but at least someone from the very top level of the game is prepared to front up and mostly answer the tough questions.

 

[dru]

My understanding is that they bailed out the two sides because they had to, because there was no opportunity to get rid of a team until 2020. They've stated if there was, they would've taken it.

That's interesting and something I have missed. Do you recall where it came up?

The bailing out, then belatedly chopping (and losing the invested $) is on my gripe list too. Wouldnt mind checking out the response.

 

[kickedmyheight]

I am a Rebels supporter. Even I can say there's no clearly correct choice between the Rebels and the Force.

If you're not objective enough to say that, and I'm not saying you're not, then I don't really respect your opinion.


I think you understand that I was not saying we are in a vacuum, but that the decision to cut a team at this stage has some semblance of sense, even if the decisions leading up to it do not (including ignoring two separate reports that said team 5 was a bad idea because the ARU felt optimistic).

My understanding is that they bailed out the two sides because they had to, because there was no opportunity to get rid of a team until 2020. They've stated if there was, they would've taken it.

Now, due to declining audiences a conversation was opened by SANZAAR. That conversation resulted in the ARU doing what they saw as necessary, scrapping a team.

I wish this wasn't happening. But people are misframing it pretty severely.

I certainly take your point. I am trying to stay as measured as possible during this but it is hard! I am a Force supporter but will be almost equally as sad if the Rebels get cut. Neither team deserve this, nor any other Aus franchise for that matter.

My main gripes are twofold. First, the ARU did enter into binding agreements with both the Rebels and Force and they should be well versed in the potential ramifications of backing out of either of those commitments. So to therefore go to SANZAAR offering to put themselves into this situation seems mindblowingly idiotic. Did they just think that the Force (as this was clearly their targetted side for the axe) would just say "no worries, see you in a few years"? They put themselves in this hole and then deliberately dig themselves deeper! While I understand that the finances need to stack up, this is hardly a new issue and the ARU is tasked with finding a solution that would benefit all of Aus rugby. Given the incredible damage cutting a team will cause to at least one area of Aus rugby, this should have always been seen as the last possible resort. That argument has not been made by the ARU, in fact cutting a team has seemed to be their plan A.

My second issue is that over many years the ARU has failed to adequately support (not purely monetarily) either of the expansion teams. They gave out a licence and let them fend for themselves. You can argue fairly that the local unions have not done as well as they could have either but the ARU holds a lot of the responsibility for the current position both the Force and Rebels find themselves in. While a lot of this isn't the current boards doing directly, they cannot simply wipe their hands of responsibility and carry on. It is even more frustrating when you co sider that Aus rugby got it right once before, the Brumbies are arguably the most successful expansion team in super rugby.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

[amirite]

That's interesting and something I have missed. Do you recall where it came up?

The bailing out, then belatedly chopping (and losing the invested $) is on my gripe list too. Wouldnt mind checking out the response.

Just some lines from the announcement press conference on Monday morn. TBH, there was a lot of stuff said in that press conference that I haven't really seen in writing since.

To paraphrase what was said, they knew 5 teams was not feasible long term within the first year of the Rebels' operation, but there was no out until 2020 and so they made funding decisions with that in mind.

 

[Strewthcobber]

That's interesting and something I have missed. Do you recall where it came up?

The bailing out, then belatedly chopping (and losing the invested $) is on my gripe list too. Wouldnt mind checking out the response.

They touch on it here
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/u...ms-in-2011-was-a-mistake-20170410-gvhsrf.html

"That competition has not delivered the outcomes we wanted. I'm not, however, convinced it was the 18-team competition that has led us to losing a team," Pulver said. "Sadly, the adverse affect has been fans have seen a complex competition structure that didn't really work for them. I acknowledge that mistake of that decision but at the time there wasn't an option to drop to four teams."
Clyne believes the expansion was detrimental to the game as a whole, mostly from a financial perspective.
"It became clear almost immediately upon expansion this was a financial problem," Clyne said. "We heard those warnings, we didn't have the option and we wanted to make five teams work. This has been on the cards almost since the expansion occurred in 2011."

 

[KiwiM]

I actually agree Clyne comes across well - much better than Pulver. They should be using Clyne for as much media as possible moving forward.

Here is a link to an interview with Cameron Clyne on Alan Jones program this morning. It is certainly not dull.

http://www.2gb.com/podcast/future-of-super-rugby/

 

[Omar Comin']

The President of WA Rugby Hans Sauer spoke to Alan Jones yesterday as well. It's very insightful: http://www.2gb.com/podcast/hans-sauer/

He seems confident of raising around $7 million in the OwnTheForce campaign. If this is true, maybe the better solution to cutting a team would have been to use the same strategy across all our Super Rugby teams (minus I guess the privately owned rebels). If the Force can raise $7 million what could the Reds and Waratahs raise from a fan ownership model?

 

[Micheal]

Jesus christ what a prick Alan Jones is.

Holier-than-thou and won't even let Clyne get a word in, despite the fact that everyone whose listening wants to hear Cameron's point-of-view, not his.

Lets put Jones in charge and see the whole code fold in 34 minutes.

Edit: still listening. For fucksake. Jones' diction is just one logical fallacy after another, with a bit of cognitive dissonance and condescending bullshit occasionally thrown in there to spice it up.

He genuinely believes that if you're the loudest and angriest then you've won the argument.

Edit 2: if you're heading out on Saturday replay this interview and sip every time Alan Jones says "777 million", mentions the Bledisloe cup or interrupts Clyne. You'll be Kurtley Beale captain punching or Quade Cooper laptop stealing drunk in no time.

Edit 3: add "Japan" and "power of veto" to the drinking game.

 

[amirite]

Jesus christ what a prick Alan Jones is.

Holier-than-thou and won't even let Clyne get a word in, despite the fact that everyone whose listening wants to hear Cameron's point-of-view, not his.

Lets put Jones in charge and see the whole code fold in 34 minutes.

Absolutely. The fact we're choosing to given a known bigot a microphone and a key voice in our conversation at this time is ridiculous. Maybe the fact he's a bigot isn't relevant, but the fact he's a prick certainly is.

He only pops up in the rugby scene in times of turmoil or when there's attention for him.

To quote Alan on himself, "When I coached Australia ... we had the two leading provincial rugby sides in the world. No one could beat Queensland and NSW."

That is not true. Also, your coaching career went up in flames when, despite on field success, he created such a negative culture that everyone wanted out.

 

[Quick Hands]

I actually agree Clyne comes across well - much better than Pulver. They should be using Clyne for as much media as possible moving forward.

Here is a link to an interview with Cameron Clyne on Alan Jones program this morning. It is certainly not dull.

http://www.2gb.com/podcast/future-of-super-rugby/

Pulver needs to kept on a very tight leash. Clyne needs to take control (which it appears that he has) and let BP do the filing and take the minutes.

 

[Lindommer]

Jesus Christ what a prick Alan Jones is.

Yer right there, Mick, and the other Jones isn't much better. Why the rugby media give either of 'em any oxygen puzzles me.

 

[Braveheart81]

Having a COO would seem an admission of the inadequacies of the CEO.

I'm confused why you'd think this.

COO is a very common position within any moderately sized company and larger.

They are almost always the second most senior executive position within a company.