Where to for Super Rugby?

[RedsHappy]

The first paragraph seemed to be the gist of Quick Hands' post. That he was a sports administrator (and that was the entire reason he was good) versus a corporate hack. By the definition insinuated, he was a corporate hack prior to taking on the job in tennis.

My argument is that Ritchie is good because he is a good executive. He did a good job in tennis without a background in sports administration. He has then gone on to do a good job with the RFU (no doubt improved by his experience in tennis).

The talent of the person seems more important to me than their background.

Just about everyone who is in a senior position in sports administration has got there primarily through a background in general business rather than an entire career in sports administration (because it is not really a career path you can get elevated through).

Well, let me put my perspective another way:

If tomorrow I was asked to pick B Pulver's successor I would preference (just as I would have in picking JO'N's back in 2012) an executive with proven executive attributes but equally one that had built, or rebuilt, strong performance outcomes in a prominent pro sporting code with as many analogous attributes to Aus rugby as was possible.

IMO, one of the reasons Pulver scores at the very best a 5/10 grade as ARU CEO after 4 full years in that role is that he was picked on the wrong set of inferred criteria as critical to success in the role.

 

[Braveheart81]

Well, let me put my perspective another way:

If tomorrow I was asked to pick B Pulver's successor I would preference (just as I would have in picking JO'N's back in 2012) an executive with proven executive attributes but equally one that had built, or rebuilt, strong performance outcomes in a prominent pro sporting code with as many analogous attributes to Aus rugby as was possible.

IMO, one of the reasons Pulver scores at the very best a 5/10 grade as ARU CEO after 4 full years in that role is that he was picked on the wrong set of inferred criteria as critical to success in the role.

I would also preference the same criteria.

In terms of your previous post, Gallop had very little corporate experience (a mid level lawyer with a mid tier firm) when he became involved with rugby league and ultimately became CEO. He did a very good job there. He obviously came to the FFA as a big recruitment coup but now fans are thinking he should be sacked because their entire plan of expansion and a strong FTA imprint seem to have fallen in a heap. It will be interesting to see what his next move is (and what is possible).

Ultimately I think the person's ability outweighs the areas of experience. I referenced Jason Allen who had prior sports administration experience who wasn't good for the Tahs but now they have Andrew Hore who also came with sports administration experience (and more importantly in rugby) and is seemingly doing good things.

Without knowing who the potential candidates are and having great insight into their experience and them personally, it is obviously impossible to clearly delineate options.

 

[I like to watch]

IMO, one of the reasons Pulver scores at the very best a 5/10 grade as ARU CEO after 4 full years in that role is that he was picked on the wrong set of inferred criteria as critical to success in the role.

wasnt the only criteria that you had to be in the 1978 1st XV Shore team photo?

 

[RedsHappy]

wasnt the only criteria that you had to be in the 1978 1st XV Shore team photo?

Whoops, forgot that one and you're probably right although upon recall I think a Mosman NSW 2088 current address may have also worked wonders (close to Eales, Hawker, Kearnsey, etc.)

EDIT: Oh, and I did say 'critical to success' in the role, and not 'critical to ARU cultural compatibility, comfortable ongoing engagements with existing ARU directors, and an all round 'good rugby man' and a damn good bloke to boot'.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

It's interesting to note, that the Celtic teams were making a few noises about a South African alliance. Conversely, I actually wonder whether we may see something develop in the future, where they join Super Rugby and the competition is finally split into two manageable separately scheduled leagues based on time zones, with a Super Bowl finish?

I'm sure there has been some long-term theorising on this idea.

If this happens then I reckon we'll see all of the SA franchises move across post 2020. Flight times are similar wothout the need to tranverse multiple timezones which fits much better with the respective TV markets.

Hell, they could even play in the The Champions Cup structures. We feature in Eurovision ffs.

And if this does happen. And it wouldn't be beyond the realms of possibility then how would this change the positioning of the current cuts? Honestly, I actually wouldn't mind if it did. I'd actually encourage SA to do so. It fits better with their needs. It could also force the NZRU's hand in looking more seriously at a Asia-Pacific league set up. Which fits better with ours. The key will be to ensure the RC is maintained. Which to be honest is where the NZ rivalry they so desperately cling to stems from anyway. A bit of distance wouldn't hurt that one bit.

 

[mudskipper]

A strange deal considering the Canberra Raiders pay a $1/year peppercorn rent in the same suburb.

And what happened to the $4million leftover which was going to be used to establish a fund called the Brumbies Rugby Provident Fund, a fund to invest in the future of ACT rugby.

Dont need it as the reds and waratahs develop everyone buddy

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Are you here to discuss the topic or do you just want to continually deflect the issue and turn this into a parochial debate?

Play funny buggers all you like, but there's no point pretending that the finances of Australian Super rugby teams are in a healthy state at all, even though you like to think otherwise, the Brumbies are also in a precarious state. My point on equity is that the Brumbies hold zero equity in their new facilities, they have paid $5million upfront rent in a $15million facility but don't own any of the facility. I'm not sure what the logic behind that deal was. But lack of equity, and having spent all of the remaining proceeds from the sale of Griffith means the Brumbies have nothing to fall back on. And as mentioned previously, the annual losses at the Brumbies over the past 4 years have been similar to that of the Western Force.

They would be carrying an asset by way of prepaid rent and could, presumably, assign the lease with the consent of the owner, not to be unreasonably withheld.
There are assets other than real property - even in Sydney.

 

[cyclopath]

Dont need it as the reds and waratahs develop everyone buddy

Hardly what he said.

 

[TOCC]

They would be carrying an asset by way of prepaid rent and could, presumably, assign the lease with the consent of the owner, not to be unreasonably withheld.
There are assets other than real property - even in Sydney.

Given it's on the Univeristy of Canberra campus and falls under a UC master plan, I suspect the ability to sublease or repurpose would be limited.

 

[TOCC]

Dont need it as the reds and waratahs develop everyone buddy

and you're back to your old self..

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Given it's on the Univeristy of Canberra campus and falls under a UC master plan, I suspect the ability to sublease or repurpose would be limited.

Have you seen the facility?
Far superior to the Tahs - not up to the ARU taj mahal - but what happens to that if they can convince the government to redevelop the SFS?

 

[dru]

Where have you read / heard this noise dru? From what I have seen SARU are backing their relationship / partnership with SANZAAR.

As I have said before. It will be better for SA to align with Europe in some form.

Finally found the bloody thing. Here it is.
http://www.supersport.com/rugby/sa-rugby/news/170413/8_pro_teams_not_14_in_SARUs_future

 

[Quick Hands]

The first promise given to the tenants of the SFS (Roosters, Waratahs, Sydney FC) was for a totally new stadium to be built in the precinct at Kippax Lake. Clearly they all preferred that model rather than one which required them to relocate for a few years.

Baird then shut down that idea and threw Ayres under the bus.

There is now momentum building again for a new 40,000 seat stadium on the existing site and it seems all tenants are in favour of that deal rather than just a partial upgrade of the existing SFS.

It is reported that the Roosters and Waratahs are both agreeable with that concept with the Roosters to play most games at the SCG and some on the Central Coast where they are looking to increase their footprint with the Tahs playing mostly out of Parramatta Stadium.

Sydney FC is the tenant most unhappy at the moment because they don't want to play out at Parramatta because it is the Wanderers home ground and the potential of an A League expansion in southern Sydney makes playing somewhere there unappealing.

So certainly the Waratahs were against having to relocate when the choice was between not relocating and getting a new stadium or relocating and getting a new stadium.

Now that there is no choice to remain where they are and also get a new stadium, they seem quite agreeable with a move for a few seasons.

Broadly correct, but Davis went a little further than that.

The Waratahs were offered a brand new Parramatta Stadium to use (30,000 capacity), but said it was too small (yes, they really said that).

But asked if the smaller Parramatta Stadium could be a home ground once redeveloped, Davis said it might be too small.​

“That’s Parramatta rugby league, that’s Western Sydney Wanderers. I don’t know,” Davis said.​

“Most of our fan support doesn’t really want to go out there, for whatever reason.​

“The renovated stadium at Parramatta, which I think is an appropriate development because it does need upgrading, it will only seat 30,000. So if we have a 35,000 crowd, we can’t play there.”​

Pressed as to whether he was saying a move to Western Sydney “would spell disaster” for the Waratahs, Davis said: “Yep. That would be my expectation. Given where our fans are based, where our loyalty lies, where our training facilities are, where our office facilities are, it would be a bridge too far.”​

Davis’ comments are at sharp odds with the Waratahs’ marketing theme — “Playing for NSW” — and came on the same day the ARU launched a strategic plan identifying western Sydney as a key focus for growth.​

“I see what the ARU is doing out there, and we are spending a lot of money out there, but it is an aspirational goal,” Davis said.​

“We have to deal with the here and now. We have to deal with income and expenses, and we have to plan for the worst here. The worst is they won’t come. Despite the attraction and the geographical centre of Sydney and all of this stuff, I just don’t know and it is a risk I do not want to take at this stage.”​

The Waratahs’ shunning of Western Sydney — even with the likely financial protection of compensation from the NSW State government — will undoubtedly disappoint rugby fans in the west, who have felt ignored by the franchise for a long time.​

Many of the Tahs’ biggest stars are from Sydney’s west and what is more, crowd figures at ANZ Stadium for Waratahs games were routinely NSWs biggest of the season between 2010-2015.​

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...s/news-story/afa2f1c4a3e0e1f9de89cbd4fcf64728​

 

[Braveheart81]

Broadly correct, but Davis went a little further than that.

Fuck Davis says some dumb things.

I think the timing is relevant though. That was a year ago when there was still some debate that there could be a new stadium at Moore Park (and they wouldn't have to relocate).

The answer seems to be different now that the only option for a new stadium at Moore Park involves relocation.

I think there is some relevance in what he says about members and a lot being based closer to the SFS than to Parramatta etc.

They might get bigger crowds when they played blockbuster games at Homebush, but if their bread and butter are memberships, do they put that at risk if they have to move for several years? Personally I think they just have to bite the bullet and if a new SFS can be built at some point they gratefully move to Parramatta for a few years, hope that existing members keep the faith, they can gain some new members/fans out at Parramatta and then move back to Moore Park.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

He's the gift that keeps giving, that bloke. Someone needs to put a gag on the idiot or he'll destroy whatever goodwill there is towards the game in one of its heartlands.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Broadly correct, but Davis went a little further than that.

The Waratahs were offered a brand new Parramatta Stadium to use (30,000 capacity), but said it was too small (yes, they really said that).

But asked if the smaller Parramatta Stadium could be a home ground once redeveloped, Davis said it might be too small.​

“That’s Parramatta rugby league, that’s Western Sydney Wanderers. I don’t know,” Davis said.​

“Most of our fan support doesn’t really want to go out there, for whatever reason.​

“The renovated stadium at Parramatta, which I think is an appropriate development because it does need upgrading, it will only seat 30,000. So if we have a 35,000 crowd, we can’t play there.”​

Pressed as to whether he was saying a move to Western Sydney “would spell disaster” for the Waratahs, Davis said: “Yep. That would be my expectation. Given where our fans are based, where our loyalty lies, where our training facilities are, where our office facilities are, it would be a bridge too far.”​

Davis’ comments are at sharp odds with the Waratahs’ marketing theme — “Playing for NSW” — and came on the same day the ARU launched a strategic plan identifying western Sydney as a key focus for growth.​

“I see what the ARU is doing out there, and we are spending a lot of money out there, but it is an aspirational goal,” Davis said.​

“We have to deal with the here and now. We have to deal with income and expenses, and we have to plan for the worst here. The worst is they won’t come. Despite the attraction and the geographical centre of Sydney and all of this stuff, I just don’t know and it is a risk I do not want to take at this stage.”​

The Waratahs’ shunning of Western Sydney — even with the likely financial protection of compensation from the NSW State government — will undoubtedly disappoint rugby fans in the west, who have felt ignored by the franchise for a long time.​

Many of the Tahs’ biggest stars are from Sydney’s west and what is more, crowd figures at ANZ Stadium for Waratahs games were routinely NSWs biggest of the season between 2010-2015.​

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...s/news-story/afa2f1c4a3e0e1f9de89cbd4fcf64728​

That is a very odd view.
When was the last time they had a full house anywhere? ANZ for the final?

 

[Braveheart81]

That is a very odd view.
When was the last time they had a full house anywhere? ANZ for the final?

The 2011 Fan Forum?

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I reckon that there'd be a few people from Sydney generally who would love a team to support other than the Tahs (i.e. they'd back 'em juts because they were not the tahs!) and putting a bit of direct competition in their backyard might actually wake the joint up

 

[Braveheart81]

I reckon that there'd be a few people from Sydney generally who would love a team to support other than the Tahs (i.e. they'd back 'em juts because they were not the tahs!) and putting a bit of direct competition in their backyard might actually wake the joint up

I think there would too but I don't think it would be a massive number.

If you added a second Super Rugby side in Sydney I reckon they'd be moderately reliant on Tahs fans supporting both (which would happen to a reasonable degree I think).

 

[Quick Hands]

That is a very odd view.
When was the last time they had a full house anywhere? ANZ for the final?

When was the last time that they drew 35,000 to an ordinary super rugby game?

(It would have been at Homebush I reckon)