Where to for Super Rugby?

[TOCC]

But the facts everyone knows:

• ARU own the Force
• Cox owns the Rebels
• Both sides have struggled
• Both Governments have spent massive sums of money to bring the game to there states.
• Both have developed strong grass roots programs and are starting to see the rewards of having a local Super Rugby team.

.

That's a fair assessment, and it would serve both parties well to direct their frustration towards the organisation which has caused this whole shit fight... the archaic ARU

 

[BLR]

Any Force fans willing to lay all there cards on the table with why they have heard they are safe and why the Rebels will be cut? I'm talking honest rugby sources and not anything from newspapers (gossip columns)

'Honest rugby sources' depend on your viewpoint. 'Honest rugby sources' said the Force would be cut in 24-72 hours.

Let's take in the facts and put aside these so called sources who have gotten things wrong time and time again.

In RugbyWA we have a legal case that has destroyed this 24-72 hours limit and has an ex QC (Quade Cooper) and Governor of WA attached to it. This has been the case since April, and nothing has changed, despite the intentions of the ARU. This arbitration go against RugbyWA, however we do have the right to appeal.

In the Rebels you have a license held by a businessman who has said he would not sell. However, to get to where he is as a businessman he needs to be conscious of the bottom line and the Rebels are losing money seemingly without much of a clear plan to turn it around. Acknowledging this Cox must realise he is in an extremely strong bargaining position at the moment and if the Force go he has lost that ability to get a big pay out. He didn't make his cash through sentiment and rejecting financial windfalls.

That is my view anyway, but at the end of the day the way it stands, we are both safe through our seemingly watertight legal means & private owner who doesn't want to sell, so no worries.

 

[Leo86]

I say piss off the Sunwolves/Jaguares

- Not Australian (so keeps national footprint nor goes against ARUs constitution)
- Unsuccessful (struggled)
- No interest
- Less travel

18 teams didnt kill soup 2 countries no one gives a shit about did. between SA, NZ and AUS theres enough expats to form rivalries (creates interests funnily enough)

 

[amirite]

I say piss off the Sunwolves/Jaguares

- Not Australian (so keeps national footprint nor goes against ARUs constitution)
- Unsuccessful (struggled)
- No interest
- Less travel

18 teams didnt kill soup 2 countries no one gives a shit about did. between SA, NZ and AUS theres enough expats to form rivalries (creates interests funnily enough)

Please read up on this more before commenting.

Firstly, the Japanese and Argentinian teams have had no direct impact on Aussie Super rugby sides. Or to phrase another way, they were not kept at our expense. The scenarios are independent.

Secondly, before the Rebels were founded the ARU had several well respected consultancy firms basically confirm 5 Aussie teams is a bad idea. This was when the Jaguares were nothing more than a glimmer in Augstine Pichot's eye, so they had no impact there either.

Whilst I imagine strange television time zones and lack of tangible rivalries with these two new sides did nobody any good, it's a minor factor in this whole fiasco. Especially considering we already had weird game times (South Africa) and teams relatively few people on our shores care about (Kings, Cheetahs, Lions, and arguably the other South African sides).

Basically, Australia fucked up. Direct your unhappiness at the appropriate people.

 

[Leo86]

My point being

Crowd/ television numbers are dropping. Knock on effect sponsors are dropping.

Theres been argument that weaker sides are hurting the comp. So coz Sunwolves have money this doesnt count?

Aside from ARU/ Australias woes super rugby is hurting (take note of threads name)

I attribute some of this over all fuck up to expanding outside of the original tri-nations

Has Japan and Argentinas rugby gotten better yes, but so has everyone elses in the world. Did they have to join Super or could we held more friendlies to achieve the same outcome?

I see the south africans as traditional foes as i do the kiwis. Over the last decade many south africans have had to relocate and i personally talk alot of rugby with them.

This is a forum, i can have my opinion, you can disagree but dont tell me to read up on more. Im a rugby fan/supporter makes me part of the community. Forums are for discussion not for those on high horses to shut others down

 

[dru]

Please read up on this more before commenting.

Is this condescension necessary?

The two new teams did not have "no direct impact on Aussie Super rugby sides". Sure it's one piece of a much larger puzzle but the additional logistical and travel cost alone is a direct cash impact.

The overexpansion also led to a desire from SANZAAR to cut teams, added with a desire to keep the expansion teams, Australia is lucky to only be asked to cut one. A direct impact. Yes the ARU explanation stands outside this but the initiator was SANZAAR with this in mind.

This is compounded by a completely confused draw, with and without the conference system as it was offered. Also compounded to the conference confusion due to the new team expansion.

The bigger issue for Australia was a lack of effectiveness in management, direction and promotion - not related to the S18 expansion. This and a lack of being able to connect the game to the transient fan for games in difficult time zones - both compounded with the two new teams (possibly did not have to be that way for Japan but they were placed in Africa).

IMO the scenarios are far from independent even though there is a wider story. At the end of the day, the push to reduce Australian franchises would have been much less puissant had SANZA(A)R stabilised at S15.

 

[amirite]

My point being

Crowd/ television numbers are dropping. Knock on effect sponsors are dropping.

Theres been argument that weaker sides are hurting the comp. So coz Sunwolves have money this doesnt count?

Aside from ARU/ Australias woes super rugby is hurting (take note of threads name)

I attribute some of this over all fuck up to expanding outside of the original tri-nations

Has Japan and Argentinas rugby gotten better yes, but so has everyone elses in the world. Did they have to join Super or could we held more friendlies to achieve the same outcome?

I see the south africans as traditional foes as i do the kiwis. Over the last decade many south africans have had to relocate and i personally talk alot of rugby with them.

This is a forum, i can have my opinion, you can disagree but dont tell me to read up on more. Im a rugby fan/supporter makes me part of the community. Forums are for discussion not for those on high horses to shut others down

Some things are differing opinions, and some things are factually incorrect. Yours was the latter.

Whilst you've made some fair points in your follow up post, I also feel like just because you personally, anecdotally feel like like South Africa is a traditional foe and you have South African mates, it doesn't make the economics stack up.

Only 100k South Africans live in Australia, spread reasonably evenly across our population centers. Their games also start at weird times and they have plenty of Super rugby teams that've historically been a mess.

If there's an issue to be drawn with Argentina and Japan, the same issue exists for South Africa. (FYI - not my point, but relevant to yours).

The overexpansion also led to a desire from SANZAAR to cut teams, added with a desire to keep the expansion teams, Australia is lucky to only be asked to cut one. A direct impact. Yes the ARU explanation stands outside this but the initiator was SANZAAR with this in mind.

Australia asked to get rid of a team, they've said they were waiting for the opportunity for a while. This is not a SANZAAR pushed and Australia caved scenario.

The ARU have said the decision was made to cut at team at the first opportunity before Argentina and Japan had Super rugby teams.

Thus, no direct impact.

 

[cyclopath]

Ok, enough is enough.

No more talk about how much Cox is asking for.

Any Force fans willing to lay all there cards on the table with why they have heard they are safe and why the Rebels will be cut? I'm talking honest rugby sources and not anything from newspapers (gossip columns)

Rugby land here in Vic, has so many different reasons why we are safe, some from good sources to. But all in all it's stuff that we get told to remain silent about until the announcement and I don't feel safe until it's announced.

But the facts everyone knows:

• ARU own the Force
• Cox owns the Rebels
• Both sides have struggled
• Both Governments have spent massive sums of money to bring the game to there states.
• Both have developed strong grass roots programs and are starting to see the rewards of having a local Super Rugby team.

Let's come up with some new stuff cause 358 pages could be reduced to 25 if you removed all the repeating arguments.

Posts? Yeah, about right I'd say.

 

[Leo86]

Some things are differing opinions, and some things are factually incorrect. Yours was the latter.

Whilst you've made some fair points in your follow up post, I also feel like just because you personally, anecdotally feel like like South Africa is a traditional foe and you have South African mates, it doesn't make the economics stack up.

Only 100k South Africans live in Australia, spread reasonably evenly across our population centers. Their games also start at weird times and they have plenty of Super rugby teams that've historically been a mess.

If there's an issue to be drawn with Argentina and Japan, the same issue exists for South Africa. (FYI - not my point, but relevant to yours).

Australia asked to get rid of a team, they've said they were waiting for the opportunity for a while. This is not a SANZAAR pushed and Australia caved scenario.

The ARU have said the decision was made to cut at team at the first opportunity before Argentina and Japan had Super rugby teams.

Thus, no direct impact.

Factually correct
- Not Australian (so keeps national footprint nor goes against ARUs constitution)
- Unsuccessful (struggled)
- No interest
- Less travel
Opinion
18 teams didnt kill soup 2 countries no one gives a shit about did. between SA, NZ and AUS theres enough expats to form rivalries (creates interests funnily enough)

There has been an argument that Super rugby (not just Australia) was sucessful as 15 or 12 of which South Africa were a part of. I only say traditional foe as it was originally SANZAR and the Tri-nations.

Economics, South Africa argue they bring the money. (Not my opinion, i believe product brings the money, my opinion NZ are currently the sought after product broadcast wise)

Super Rugby is for South African, New Zealand and Australian audience. Of which our times are orobably shit viewing times for eitherof the other audience. Once again thread is "where to for super rugby" not Aussie conference of super rugby.

With out being in the meeting i dont think ARU asked but were asked and they were happy to oblige. Reason unsustainability of 5 teams.

Now my opinion, if we didnt involve two extra countries and incorporate a 4 conference model, super rugby could of been a better product, possibly brought in sponsers and made it more sustainable. This of course is a hypothetical and of which we can only presume to know of what would of happened.

Admittedly i wanted to hear peoples thoughts on this hypothetical or any other they might have and see if its just me or not. Whilst also having a discussion that wasnt about yours or my team being removed. Silly me

 

[TOCC]

Please read up on this more before commenting.

Firstly, the Japanese and Argentinian teams have had no direct impact on Aussie Super rugby sides. Or to phrase another way, they were not kept at our expense. The scenarios are independent.

Japan and Argentina certainly do have an impact, the expansion to 18teams has had massive ramifications on not just the messed up draw and ease of understanding for the fans, but the travel required for teams as well, in addition Australian teams now receive one less home game every second season which impacts the bottom line of Oz clubs. Super Rugby has been trending downwards for years, but the expansion to 18teams has dramatically increased the rate of decline.

There's no need to be so condescending in your posts when many of your own comments are quite subjective.

 

[dru]

Australia asked to get rid of a team, they've said they were waiting for the opportunity for a while. This is not a SANZAAR pushed and Australia caved scenario.

The ARU have said the decision was made to cut at team at the first opportunity before Argentina and Japan had Super rugby teams.

Thus, no direct impact.

For goodness sake, I'm not going back over what I've already said.

Stay happy, bloke.

 

[Quick Hands]

Jeremy Paul joins the revolution
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport...n/news-story/27d03d28ca9b4e253e522fe33fafb5c9

 

[half]

Jeremy Paul joins the revolution
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport...n/news-story/27d03d28ca9b4e253e522fe33fafb5c9

Great read...

 

[Joe Blow]

He is right of course but who wants to step into the hot seat, or sit in it?
They do need to go.
What about someone like Rod McQueen? We are going to need some very clever people leading the way if rugby in Australia is going to survive and eventually thrive.

 

[BLR]

He is right of course but who wants to step into the hot seat, or sit in it?
They do need to go.
What about someone like Rod McQueen? We are going to need some very clever people leading the way if rugby in Australia is going to survive and eventually thrive.

Rod McQueen has been out of the game for too long and wasn't he involved in the Rebels early days? We need Kiwi administrators, cut out the bs and re-structure the lot.

 

[wamberal]

It would not matter who was on the Board, we are where we are as the result of twenty years of decisions.


Does anybody seriously believe that getting rid of the current admin and replacing it will achieve anything tangible?


What, precisely, would a new administration do to solve our current dilemmas and problems? Wave a fairy wand?

 

[Sauron]

It would not matter who was on the Board, we are where we are as the result of twenty years of decisions.


Does anybody seriously believe that getting rid of the current admin and replacing it will achieve anything tangible?


What, precisely, would a new administration do to solve our current dilemmas and problems? Wave a fairy wand?

A new administration would have a better chance of driving through wide-reaching reforms; the current lot have lost all legitimacy. Anything they do will be (rightly or wrongly- and more likely the former) seen as feathering their own nest.

They're tainted, they need to go.

 

[James Pettifer]

It would not matter who was on the Board, we are where we are as the result of twenty years of decisions.


Does anybody seriously believe that getting rid of the current admin and replacing it will achieve anything tangible?


What, precisely, would a new administration do to solve our current dilemmas and problems? Wave a fairy wand?

Perhaps be able to articulate what they want rugby to look like in Australia in 20 years, have a clear strategy to execute toward this goal and start action.

The current group can't even work out what will be happening in 8 months.

 

[swingpass]

The current group can't even work out what will be happening in 8 months.

8 months !!! they cant work out 48 - 72 hours, FFS

 

[dru]

It would not matter who was on the Board, we are where we are as the result of twenty years of decisions.


Does anybody seriously believe that getting rid of the current admin and replacing it will achieve anything tangible?


What, precisely, would a new administration do to solve our current dilemmas and problems? Wave a fairy wand?

Even if I agreed, which I dont, there is still a principle of accountability involved.

TBH, the steadfast, backward looking "stability" (atrophying in nature) of the ARU starts with the impossibility of change unless supported by NSW/Qld. Who are the blokes who should the first up against the wall. Viva la revolution.