Teh Other Dave
Alan Cameron (40)
So that's why the recent Arsenal games drew higher crowds than the A League final?
Where to for Super Rugby?
- Thread starter Quick Hands
- Start date
- Status
So that's why the recent Arsenal games drew higher crowds than the A League final?
Wilson
Phil Kearns (64)
I don't believe we have the playing stocks or financial interest to sustain a local only comp, though we may end up stuck there. Ideally I'd like to see it head in the direction below but it maybe too late.
If super rugby is to survive it needs to move forward as an entity in its own right, not this mess of competing interests we currently have. This really should've happened on the last broadcast deal but I'd love to see a proper independent super rugby commission established with a clearly defined set of goals and the power to actually manage the comp going forward. Personally I think this needs to be for the competition to be a commercial success in its own right, player development and expanding the game to new territories should be second to this, but at the end of the day it's a unity of purpose across the competition that it desperately needs.
Following on from this I'd want player movement opened up across the comp (and ideally locked with in it geographical). So basically any player playing in super rugby or the domestic competitions below it would be available for there country and anyone playing outside would not. Most importantly it helps address depth issues in the competition and offers players opportunity to travel and a larger market to sell to without losing them to Europe. Additionally it will potentially help Japan and Argentina improve depth at an international level and should help to increase interest in games across markets - fans tend to follow their favourite players. It dove tails nicely with the new 5 year eligibility rule, countries don't have to worry so much about young players being poached as project players so shouldn't feel the need to restrict their movements.
Sadly I don't think new Zealand would ever agree to it, I really doubt they'd relinquish control of their players like that. It's this sort of stalemate over a variety of issues that makes it hard to see how super rugby will survive long term, at least in anything resembling it's current guise.
Sent from my SGP611 using Tapatalk
If super rugby is to survive it needs to move forward as an entity in its own right, not this mess of competing interests we currently have. This really should've happened on the last broadcast deal but I'd love to see a proper independent super rugby commission established with a clearly defined set of goals and the power to actually manage the comp going forward. Personally I think this needs to be for the competition to be a commercial success in its own right, player development and expanding the game to new territories should be second to this, but at the end of the day it's a unity of purpose across the competition that it desperately needs.
Following on from this I'd want player movement opened up across the comp (and ideally locked with in it geographical). So basically any player playing in super rugby or the domestic competitions below it would be available for there country and anyone playing outside would not. Most importantly it helps address depth issues in the competition and offers players opportunity to travel and a larger market to sell to without losing them to Europe. Additionally it will potentially help Japan and Argentina improve depth at an international level and should help to increase interest in games across markets - fans tend to follow their favourite players. It dove tails nicely with the new 5 year eligibility rule, countries don't have to worry so much about young players being poached as project players so shouldn't feel the need to restrict their movements.
Sadly I don't think new Zealand would ever agree to it, I really doubt they'd relinquish control of their players like that. It's this sort of stalemate over a variety of issues that makes it hard to see how super rugby will survive long term, at least in anything resembling it's current guise.
Sent from my SGP611 using Tapatalk
James Pettifer
Jim Clark (26)
And what is your point? How does the number of people turning up to another game show anything with regards to the success of the A-league?
My point is that Australia looks really bad in rugby as we play NZ and NZ teams about 30 times a year. No one cares that the teams in the A-League would get slaughtered in Europe.
No one cares in the US that the US College Football teams would get slaughtered in the NLR but they still get over 40k attendance
The NRL and the AFL get away easy as no one else really plays the game.
Teh Other Dave
Alan Cameron (40)
People will watch the A-League because it's on at a convenient time, and they can actually attend the matches. As many people stay up at unsociable hours to watch the Premier League, and even more so the UEFA Champions league, because they are of a much higher quality than the A-League. I don't know how you can fail to see the significance of a touring side like Arsenal drawing a bigger crowd than the biggest A-League game of the year.
In bringing up the NRL and AFL, you've totally ignored their hsitories. Both used to have different names: The NSWRL and the VFL. They weren't the only Rugby and Football leagues in Australia, but they eventually dominated the WAFL, SANFL, and BRL. People in Brisbane, Perth, and Adelaide were more interested in watching the Sydney/Melbourne competitions on television. Very quickly, the West Coast Eagles, Adelaide Crows, and Brisbane Broncos drew bigger crowds to their matches than the entire local league on a weekend. People felt those leagues were of a much higher standard, and made the switch.
Australia looks really bad in rugby because our teams are under-performing. Badly. At the same time, Super Rugby audiences have taken a dive in Australia. This is because the quality of the games have been low. There is no point promoting derby matches when they're of minimal bearing as to who will win the competition; they've lost their meaning.
The quality of professional rugby in Australia will drop more markedly if we decide to leave Super Rugby.
Something needs to be done to make Super Rugby viable again, I do not question that, but it comes down to more meaningful games and more competitive teams - i.e. improving the quality.
Highlander35
Steve Williams (59)
Are they?
jimmydubs
Dave Cowper (27)
For me we need to compete against nrl etc in Oz. Super rugby is pretty much dead. Rsa is going so it's over.
Modified nrc and build from scratch.
And although it pains many rugby supporters we need to attract nrl players and supporter base (as well as those inclined from soccer and all). We can't sit in a bubble believing that our (admittedly great) international sport will survive if there arent bums on seats.
We'd need a stringently enforced no dickheads policy. A bunch of twiggy and Coxs to get things up and running. And some decent leadership.....
So yes it's a pipe dream. One that had channel 9 at one point deciding whether it's showing rugby or league (news Ltd don't own the storm anymore, maybe they want to own a rugby team... Hahahah.. Oh).
But we have the best product, or the potential for it to be. An nrl sized and supported local comp feeding an ass kicking wallabies who regularly bring back bill.
-----Alarm clock noise------
Modified nrc and build from scratch.
And although it pains many rugby supporters we need to attract nrl players and supporter base (as well as those inclined from soccer and all). We can't sit in a bubble believing that our (admittedly great) international sport will survive if there arent bums on seats.
We'd need a stringently enforced no dickheads policy. A bunch of twiggy and Coxs to get things up and running. And some decent leadership.....
So yes it's a pipe dream. One that had channel 9 at one point deciding whether it's showing rugby or league (news Ltd don't own the storm anymore, maybe they want to own a rugby team... Hahahah.. Oh).
But we have the best product, or the potential for it to be. An nrl sized and supported local comp feeding an ass kicking wallabies who regularly bring back bill.
-----Alarm clock noise------
Teh Other Dave
Alan Cameron (40)
wamberal
Phil Kearns (64)
A Trans-Tasman comp would only work if the Australian franchises are allowed to select as many Keewees as they want to, and if the AB selection policy were changed to allow Australian based players to be eligible for national team selection.
That would even the playing field a bit.
That would even the playing field a bit.
kinda like the nrl, would be ok, i would like to see a added rule then that the new comp doesnt qualify a nz player for wallabies n a aussie player for the abs, then players would have to sign up for the npc or nrc to be selected
T
TOCC
Guest
Qualification is changing to 5 years soon anyway, so won't be much chance of Oz poaching Kiwis on residence basis any more, only if they move over in their teens
Highlander35
Steve Williams (59)
Can't see that specific rule formally being in place or World Rugby letting it happen.
Particularly when that would effectively be in place anyway without any rule being in place. Unless you literally play no Rugby between mid-August through February, you'll be playing NRC (and gaining Australian eligibility if you don't have it), NPC (and gaining New Zealand eligibility if you don't have it) or playing Top League (and hence gaining no more than 1/4 eligibility for either nation, as it increases to 10 years for non-consecutive residency).
ask quades granny, lol
easy way is the abs would say you dont have to play super rugby for an nz team, just have to play in the super comp and also play for an npc team and you can be selected. i think they should have adopted this policy years ago
T
TOCC
Guest
Biggest concerns from a NZRU perspective(and rightfully so) is that the NZRU would lose the positive control of a players development if he were signed to an Australian team. Until Australian teams can demonstrate that they are effectively developing players skills and fitness, then New Zealand would be very reluctant and apprehensive of All Black candidates signing for an Oz team.
However I do think this is an inevitable outcome, I think we will see an monumental shift in rugby in the Asia Pacific in the next 5 years as Super Rugby desolves as we know it. And i do think Australian and New Zealand stand to benefit by allowing Wallabies and All Blacks playing in one another's country.. Australia more so
p.Tah
John Thornett (49)
Only Appoint NZ coaches to coach Oz teams
Highlander35
Steve Williams (59)
Also moving away from full control over your players means that you lack the ability to rest overworked players and ensuring that key players are 100% fit before returning to play during the domestic season.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
id rather see players like luatua and fekitoa, possible future abs but not in the top selection spots playing for the sunwolves or even the dreadful tahs, that fucked off on the other side of the world. i think all the top abs would stay with nz, but just with the two i mentioned what aus team wouldnt take those two?
- Status