Where to for Super Rugby?

[daz]

Because cash is the asset that the ARU lack.

And by making very reasonable demands (from a legal and business perspective at least), that your opponent can't fulfill, it gives you maximum bargaining power.

Beyond that, this ongoing saga has now meant that I personally couldn't care less about Australian Rugby outside Victoria goes. It's nepotistic, poorly run, and I feel little to no emotional attachment to it anymore.

If Cox rips the ARU a new one, then abandons ship, I'll abhor him and his businesses for life, but it's nothing that the ARU and the rest of the North East establishment don't deserve.

Well said. I must admit I personally couldn't care less about any other team. I'm a Rebels supporter, and the other Oz teams mean as much to me as the SA and NZ teams do.

As for Coxy, it's his team and his money. As long as he keeps the Rebels going he can do whatever he wants with his money. It doesn't bother me in the slightest.

I think supporters of other teams need to worry about their team, rather than tin foil hatting what Coxy is or isn't doing. Now, let's put some energy and thought into a Rebels 2018 thread.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

And that's the key. With a bit of creativity, SANZAAR could solve the issue for Oz rugby, which would be good for everybody else.

Except for one thing: if anyone lets the ARU off the hook for this they will continue to be run incompetently on all or nearly all levels: this should be a wake up call to everyone that these blokes are trashing our game.

 

[Gnostic]

Well said. I must admit I personally couldn't care less about any other team. I'm a Rebels supporter, and the other Oz teams mean as much to me as the SA and NZ teams do.



As for Coxy, it's his team and his money. As long as he keeps the Rebels going he can do whatever he wants with his money. It doesn't bother me in the slightest.



I think supporters of other teams need to worry about their team, rather than tin foil hatting what Coxy is or isn't doing. Now, let's put some energy and thought into a Rebels 2018 thread.

Daz that is the sort of mentality that has got the code into the position it is in. I am a Tahs supporter yes, but I have also been hyper critical of them and the management for years and while I support the Tahs against all comers I hold a strong interest in all the Australian sides. If its an Australian side against anybody else in anything I will support the Australian side, even if I have no interest in the sport.

That said the parochialism that has allowed the ineptitude of the ARU to flourish, so long as it doesn't impact upon X (insert team here) and the lack of integrity in the systems is the single biggest problem in the game. If it would see the managerial systems fixed and allow a true sustainable plan for the future I would happily see all the Super sides cease to exist INCLUDING the Tahs.

I am rugby supporter first and foremost and I want to see Rugby flourish in Australia, not die a slow and agonising death at the hands of inept management because I'd prefer to see the Tahs at the expense of the rest of the game.

 

[Gnostic]

So if SANZAAR now holds firm to the bargain that the ARU agreed to (which they have already taken to the broadcasters so I don't see how they can not do so) the ARU has very little choice.
1) The Force and the Rebels have contracts that pretty much guarantee their place and they may well bankrupt the ARU now regardless of the decision.
2) The Brumbies, NSW and Qld have no such contracts. However NSW and QLD are the historical and structural base of the game in Australia.

The above point are the only solid facts. In such case I can see no other option IMHO if they actually want to seek a resolution under current structures and merge the Brumbies and Rebels as a senior representative side keeping the NRC sides separate. If nobody is happy with that then it is probably the right choice.

Make no mistake, my preference is ditching Super Rugby altogether but that will not happen so merge the two. It is probably the most workable solution as the Brumbies now own no property and have next to no cash and how better to sweep the ASIC and Fed Police investigations under the carpet than to dissolve the body it is about by merging them with another.

 

[RoffsChoice]

Going to throw back to this. And this.

 

[cyclopath]

Cue Slim in 3.........2.........1......... and back down the wormhole of despair we go.
Fuck this thread is like having one of these stuck on your face!

 

[Gnostic]

Going to throw back to this. And this.

That really addresses the points.

I did not attack the Brumbies right to be there. Ok I had a sly dig at the lack of integrity in their management, but again that is more to do with the ARU than them and the lack of leadership in that body.

You tell me a way forward then. You want to cut or Merge NSW or Qld? Tell me how that would work since the vast majority of Australian players come from those areas. You want to cut the expansion sides, OK in an ideal world that would be the case, but the ineptitude of the ARU appears to have made that impossible and now likely to destroy the ARU financially no matter what decision is made. The status quo is NOT an option as they have already signed up to the decision with SANZAAR and got approval from the broadcasters all before getting a system in place to actually cut/merge a side.

So what is the solution.

As I said under current structures and remaining in the competition merging the Brumbies is the only one I see that gives the ARU a remote possibility of survival.

As I also said my preference has long been withdrawal from Super Rugby altogether and dissolution of the ARU and replacement with an Independent Commission (but I doubt that is going to happen).

Honestly if the above doesn't take place and the ARU moves against the Force or the Rebels I think it is reasonable to expect the ARU to collapse inside 12 months followed by the provinces as they go broke without bailouts.

 

[Merrow]

No offence Gnostic, but you keep spouting the same opinion, and i still think it stinks. You can put in as many fancy words as you like, but you still sound like someone with an axe to grind with the Brumbies.

 

[Gnostic]

Cue Slim in 3...2...1... and back down the wormhole of despair we go.

Fuck this thread is like having one of these stuck on your face!

View attachment 9253

We are just keeping the suspense going until Coxy bursts out the chest of the ARU.

 

[Gnostic]

No offence Gnostic, but you keep spouting the same opinion, and i still think it stinks. You can put in as many fancy words as you like, but you still sound like someone with an axe to grind with the Brumbies.

Well tell me a solution, a real and viable one that may end with the ARU in more or less one piece.

No argument the solution does suck. It is shit to even consider the death of the most successful brand in Professional provincial rugby in this country. Thank the ARU. Just tell me another solution that is real and viable.

No axe to grind, no more than with the Tahs or Reds management for their incompetence.

 

[Merrow]

Well tell me a solution, a real and viable one that may end with the ARU in more or less one piece.

No argument the solution does suck. It is shit to even consider the death of the most successful brand in Professional provincial rugby in this country. Thank the ARU. Just tell me another solution that is real and viable.

No axe to grind, no more than with the Tahs or Reds management for their incompetence.

Rocky buys out the ARU instead of the Rebels Probably cheaper.

 

[Quick Hands]

Just to clarify:

1. Rebels have a contract and the ARU can't cut them

2. Force appear to have a binding agreement until 2020 - can't cut them

3. Brumbies have a promisory estoppel (I think I have that right - so theyr'e safe

4. NSW & Qld have the ability to call an EGM and have the board tossed out - and highly unlikely that the ARU would cut them given the mutual survival pact which operates between the 3.

Cameron, Bill - I think you have a problem.

 

[RoffsChoice]

So what is the solution.

ARU has made this bed, and now needs to lie in it. You're spot on that Queensland and NSW are the heartland of Rugby in Australia. You could argue that NSW would be the least hurt of any region by the loss of their Super team, but any argument about local pathways applies equally to NSW. Leave them alone.
That statement from the ARU has no doubt affected policy at the Brumbies. If they come out and announce a head coach for 2018 onwards (which it appears they will when they return from Argentina), it will be under the knowledge that they are safe from the cut. They have no doubt made other business arangements as a result of that. Cut the Brumbies now, and ACTRU will take the ARU to the cleaners. Not a contract, but enough in the legal world to protect them.

ARU really has three choices: push for Super 18 to continue through to 2020, cut the Rebels, or cut the Force. None of those options are plausible under present circumstances. So, change the circumstances; SARU clearly aren't going to let their teams fold, with all this talk of expansion into the Pro 12. Get some help over there to try and reverse the decision, restructure into three six-team conferences instead of three five-team. Otherwise, take the blow from the Rebels or the Force/WA Govt on the chin, hope like hell you survive.

 

[RedsHappy]

No offence Gnostic, but you keep spouting the same opinion, and i still think it stinks. You can put in as many fancy words as you like, but you still sound like someone with an axe to grind with the Brumbies.

Merrow - genuine question:

Assuming the Brumbies do remain as is, no merger etc, how do you and your fellow supporters here see their _strategic situation_ being addressed to ensure their financial and (interrelated) playing viability over the say 2018-20 period?

You have similar problems to most of Super teams - declining crowds, declining sponsorship income, declining Foxtel viewship, loss of more and more key players to the EU, getting near or into finals but not winning a Title for long periods now, etc.....and yet you also face an inherently small market with League holding its own and other codes slowly encroaching.

How does all this get fixed and not risk a bad case of institutionally blind denial and just 'kicking the (problems) can down the road' with those core common problems if anything likely to continue a worsening trend if not properly fixed?

This query of you is categorically not an 'attack on the Brumbies' - how can your proud history of achievement against all odds out of a small base not be greatly respected?

But there's a cold wind blowing on all our hills and for any of us to simply be comforted by a lazy notion that 'the others are in even worse shape than we are' is hardly one that can masquerade as a positive survive-then-prosper strategy for the likely-to-remain three other teams.

 

[Joe King]

The Daily Telegraph has now come around to supporting a break from super rugby and the establishment of a national league (assuming a trans-Tasman isn't possible)

Those who believe it could work say an NRU — modelled on something like the A-League and with marquee signings — would tick all sorts of boxes: tribalism, full competition control, consistent prime-time content and an overall boost in positivity. Australian teams would win every week, after all.​

If huge Super Rugby travel costs were eliminated, private ownership explored and Rugby Championship revenues were still available, the finances may work. Derbies have long been the games most watched and most attended.​

The Daily Telegraph has seen a blunt state-of-the-game document written by a respected former official that argues a national competition must be the future.​

RUPA boss Ross Xenos believes a trans-Tasman model is still the best option but a national solution is worth exploring.​

“We very much need to be working on alternative competition models which give us greater control of our business than we currently have,” Xenos said.​

“If this current saga has shown us anything it’s as long as we need to comply with the interests of our SANZAAR partners, we are forever undermining the key success factors for our market.​

“We’ve seen the success in other codes of creating genuine local derbies, where it is a cross-town clash, while also leveraging old, existing state rivalries.”​

The fact that Clyne thinks a NRU wouldn't work is probably the final tick
needed to ensure that it would be a success.

“If the goal was to secure Australian rugby financially, the worst thing you could do is run a national competition,” ARU chairman Cameron Clyne said.​

“The interest in that is virtually zero. The reality is this is a professional game and it costs money, and you have to find ways to generate revenue. A national competition is not one of those ways.​

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...n/news-story/6a040bf82fe9e62802a3610b3edd9cb0​

​

Australia simply must invest in juniors and grass roots, including coaches. We need to get more people playing the game on mass. We need to unearth and invest in as many future players as we can. It is vital to our future international competitiveness for two reasons: the increasing competitiveness from other countries with the global growth of rugby, and the local competition from other codes at the junior and grass roots level. Rugby needs to maintain and grow its influence at the base of the pyramid.

I guess the question is: do we want to put all our eggs in the Super Rugby basket as our main domestic product, try to make as much money as we can out of that competition, and then use the left over revenue to invest into the base of the pyramid? There is potential here, but I think we've already seen the limit of its influence. I don't think its ever going to influence the base of the pyramid as much as we need it to. But maybe that's as good as it gets for rugby in Oz.

At the other end of the spectrum is: we invest in a carefully thought out domestic competition, which could potentially set rugby back in Oz and so has real risks attached, but also has the potential to really influence the base of the pyramid with a natural energy that Super Rugby doesn't seem to have.

There are some in-between options such as a champions league on the back of each country's domestic competition (the way it should have been from the beginning), but without the appetitive from NZ or SA for this concept, it doesn't seem doable ATM. However, maybe this is all we'll be left with in the end anyway, if we keep trying to persist with Super Rugby. And maybe it's where we will eventually end up if we pursue the second option as well.

Do people think I'm completely delusional in my thinking?

 

[RoffsChoice]

Assuming the Brumbies do remain as is, no merger etc, how do you and your fellow supporters here see their _strategic situation_ being addressed to ensure their financial and (interrelated) playing viability over the say 2018-20 period?

The Brumbies still have $1.5mil in cash reserves, and the Plus500, Aquis, sgfleet, Land Rover, AustBrokers, and UC sponsorships sum up to just over $7mil/year. No idea how much the All Homes, TAB, Classic, 104.7, bartercard, Coca Cola, Canberra Milk, Club Lime, NCDI, Canberra Times, or McDonalds sponsorships ad up to; some may be as part of their agreement with the ACT, but there may well be another million or two per year in there.

Stadium rental is basically zero, and the ACT Government has promised to carry any increase in cost. Covering staff costs for the night requires 3,000 silver members per game, when last reported. This was, in part, reduced when they increased parking costs by 40%, and season ticket costs by, on average, $30. Last time it was reported (2015), the Brumbies made $80,000 per 1,000 people at each game. If they continue to make the finals (and SANZAAR decide to give them a better time than 5pm on a friday), they'll get another 15k to the game and bring in over $1mil.

The Brumbies have posted a loss each year for four years, and that could be dangerous. However, three of those four years were due to covering for the decreased ARU funding to ACT rugby; while cutting that funding to local rugby is not a good thing, it surely hurts them even more to lose the Brumbies altogether. And, of course, there was the (apparent) multi-million dollar settlement with Jones, and the $5mil "acquisition" of the facility at UC, with ACT Govt protection.

Television agreement come into it as well; the Brumbies don't sell their product for free. However, I don't have any numbers for this.

 

[cyclopath]

To take another tangent, as much as there seems to be some glee at the ARU and / or individuals within it being financially ruined by Andrew Cox, where does that leave an escape solution?
If the ARU is ruined financially, what happens?
If individual board members face personal liability, how does that play with finding a new board?
Who finds the new board? It seems management structures within Aus Professional rugby are inherently batfisted, so who oversees the establishment of a new structure?
I personally find the notion that Andrew Cox et al can financially devastate the ARU more than a bit unnerving, regardless of whether the ARU brought this all upon themselves.
Just some random thoughts, since most of the previous thoughts on this thread have been round the block so many times they remind me of this bloke.

 

[Slim 293]

Stadium rental is basically zero, and the ACT Government has promised to carry any increase in cost. Covering staff costs for the night requires 3,000 silver members per game, when last reported. This was, in part, reduced when they increased parking costs by 40%, and season ticket costs by, on average, $30.

Jones also drove away quite a few members when he jacked up the memberships, and tried to take away the seats from foundation members.........

 

[RedsHappy]

@cyclo

There is no way that Cox is aiming to financially devastate the ARU.

What would that achieve for him - no more ARU cash subsidies (that he absolutely needs) and a high chance he would not have any influence over who replaced this body, institutionally or personally, thus significantly increasing his risk of owning the Rebels.

What Cox clearly wants and connives to get (and who can blame him after recent events) is increased leverage.

I think what he wants is princally:

- Improved conditions of policy control over what he can and can't do with team construction and so on

- improved ARU subsidies by quantum and/or time extension

- significant management change at the highest ARU levels

The ARU have 'gifted' Cox this opportunity for him to gain significant leverage over them.

 

[cyclopath]

Well, we don't really know what he wants, do we? Quite a few posters seem quite accepting of the concept he could ruin the ARU Why is that perceived to be a good thing?
As for my other questions.........