Where to for Super Rugby?

[dru]

Everyone would love a popular 10-12 team national competition that has good teams involving most of our best players and is supported by decent crowds.

How far away is that dream from our present reality though?

Maybe the question should be what do the fans want that is remotely feasible within a viable time frame?

I don't think that's the correct question, BH. The question is how far away from the dream (successful Aus Rugby) is the current reality (Super and ARU)? The answer is a gulf. Gestalt leap. Complete miss. Word it how you will. The only thing that is largely proven to be non feasible is the current Soup.

From there we (should) start working on that Plan B.

 

[Braveheart81]

From there we (should) start working on that Plan B.

Whatever Plan B is still needs to be viable within an acceptable time frame.

 

[Omar Comin']

Everyone would love a popular 10-12 team national competition that has good teams involving most of our best players and is supported by decent crowds.

How far away is that dream from our present reality though?

Maybe the question should be what do the fans want that is remotely feasible within a viable time frame?

It's certainly feasible, the question is at what level of professionalism it would be feasible. The nuclear option for Australian rugby would be to follow soccer's example of essentially decoupling the national team and the national competition. i.e. remove any restrictions on Wallabies eligibility and focus on building the best national competition possible. There's no doubt this could at least be comparable with the A League in terms of player salaries etc given the revenues generated by the Wallabies alone (before finding out what such a competition would generate itself). That would instantly make it superior in quality to say the ITM Cup and Currie Cup.

We have to decide whether the current priority, i.e. keeping (almost all) the Wallabies players based locally and giving them an ideal preparation and selection process before the test season is both a) realistic and b) the best option going forward. Not just looking to 2020, but 20 years forward.

 

[Braveheart81]

There's no doubt this could at least be comparable with the A League in terms of player salaries etc given the revenues generated by the Wallabies alone (before finding out what such a competition would generate itself). That would instantly make it superior in quality to say the ITM Cup and Currie Cup.

If you were looking at a 10 team competition (or even an 8 team comp, I'm not so sure).

Squad sizes will be close to double an A League team.

Some teams at least would have to be close to brand new in terms of having any sort of current supporter base.

I still think a Trans Tasman competition is the most likely and most viable next step after Super Rugby reaches its conclusion/restructures again.

 

[Omar Comin']

If you were looking at a 10 team competition (or even an 8 team comp, I'm not so sure).

Squad sizes will be close to double an A League team.

Some teams at least would have to be close to brand new in terms of having any sort of current supporter base.

I still think a Trans Tasman competition is the most likely and most viable next step after Super Rugby reaches its conclusion/restructures again.

You could even just have 6 teams playing a triple round robin to begin with. Or 6 Australian teams and a couple of others - opening it to Asia-Pacific if there's interest (Fiji would seem to be at least 1 other).

I agree Trans Tasman could be great. But there's been no indication from the NZRU that it's what they want and so there'd need to be some catalyst to force their hand.

 

[Braveheart81]

I agree Trans Tasman could be great. But there's been no indication from the NZRU that it's what they want and so there'd need to be some catalyst to force their hand.

I think it will be the same catalyst that will ultimately drive us out of Super Rugby.

Any professional domestic competition is going to need a number of backers willing to invest a lot of money over a number of years. I'm not sure we have it.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

So lets think about what the broadcasters would want....

Doubt they are increasingly interested in super rugby and want an alternative product themselves.

So suspect they would be pushing for and supporting a trans tasman comp with bit of Asian/PI input (ie Fiji and Japan with Fiji supported by World Rugby, or at least initially).

But can imagine no way broadcasters would just support 5 oz sides in with 5 kiwi sides as much as kiwi's would not support it which means reduced number of oz sides or as stated before more open borders policy /flow for nz/oz players between sides whilst able to represent for national honours.

I just can't see 5 oz sides in a trans tasman competition as not addressing real short term issue which is just cannot compete against current 5 kiwi sides as don't have depth or quality of talent to match them with same number of sides in competitive competition.

This is why where we go from here less clear cut.

 

[Joe King]

What do the fans want?

Well, I thought the most popular games for the majority of fans for any particular team, were the local derbies. At the very least, this would have implied a 3x6 structure (ideally with the cross-conference games after the regular season). Instead, we got the most ridiculous structure ever. And the reason for that structure had to do with maximising revenue, didn't it? And plus, they were trying to accommodate other factors like the NZRU's desire for their teams to play the SA teams. I thought this was more to do with preparing the AB's rather than pleasing the fans.

I still think something like this at the very least, was such a missed opportunity:

 

[Omar Comin']

I think it will be the same catalyst that will ultimately drive us out of Super Rugby.

Any professional domestic competition is going to need a number of backers willing to invest a lot of money over a number of years. I'm not sure we have it.

The Kiwis consistently say they want their teams to continue playing regularly against South African teams home and away. Their priority is high performance and AB preparation, not building a fan focused competition in our time zone. If they can stabilise super rugby through consolidation that will always be their preference.

Without the ARU basically forcing an ultimatum - and being prepared to go off alone if NZ refuses then I don't see how a Trans Tasman comp happens anytime soon. The only other way would be the SARU fully aligning with Europe, but I personally doubt the Pro14 expansion will be the huge success it'd need to be for that to happen in 2020.

 

[wamberal]

The fans want games in local time zones. They want games that involve traditional rivalries between recognisable teams. Get those two factors right and we are at least in the ballpark as a sport.

 

[Braveheart81]

The Kiwis consistently say they want their teams to continue playing regularly against South African teams home and away. Their priority is high performance and AB preparation, not building a fan focused competition in our time zone. If they can stabilise super rugby through consolidation that will always be their preference.

Without the ARU basically forcing an ultimatum - and being prepared to go off alone if NZ refuses then I don't see how a Trans Tasman comp happens anytime soon. The only other way would be the SARU fully aligning with Europe, but I personally doubt the Pro14 expansion will be the huge success it'd need to be for that to happen in 2020.

Yes, they do say that playing South Africa is important but I also expect that desire will decrease as South Africa remain similarly uncompetitive like Australia and some of their teams look to Europe. Whether or not that increases is currently unknown.

New Zealand teams have also been struggling for crowds and are also experiencing the same issues with the 18 team competition in terms of dissatisfaction.

Their teams are going well on the field but I don't think they are immune to the broader issues facing Super Rugby and will not bend over backwards to continue having a franchise competition with South Africa if South Africa want less and less to do with it and Australia is looking less likely to continue. I don't think the desire to play South Africa outweighs fiscally responsible decisions for the future health of their teams.

I definitely don't think we can make an ultimatum to New Zealand of Trans Tasman competition or else but I largely think the same issues that are hurting us are playing out in New Zealand.

The terrible performance of our teams this season is confusing the issue that our problem is not being competitive. The bigger issue is that even if we were competitive the Super Rugby competition is becoming an increasing problem.

My bet is that Australia and New Zealand will be playing the same competition after 2020, whatever that is.

 

[Highlander35]

I've got no problem with the use of traditional sides: a domestic based competition should probably include Manly, Sydney Uni, Randwick and Eastwood: and likely include a 2nd Northern Suburbs side and a 2nd Western Suburbs side: whether that's a promoted Shit Shield side, The Rays and the Rams, or new set of amalgamations.

What it cannot be, is an insular expansion of the Shute Shield itself, and locked off to Clubs solely rather than allowing for representative sides. I couldn't care less about the result of Warringah v Wests, and can't imagine a scenario where I ever would.

What I might care about is an intense match between a 3rd placed Uni and a 4th Placed Randwick, as my Rebels could jump from 6th from to 4th if the loser doesn't get a bonus point, and we beat Eastwood on our home turf.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

[daz]

The fans want games in local time zones. They want games that involve traditional rivalries between recognisable teams. Get those two factors right and we are at least in the ballpark as a sport.

Well, I must admit, that pretty much covers it from my point of view.

Think about AFL and NRL. On the whole, fans can see their team play week in and week out, for 26-odd weeks per year. If not at the stadium every second week, then at least at decent times on TV for the family to watch; either lunch or dinner time.

That's how you build tribal. That's how you build a base.

Not by playing at home 8 times a year, with huge gaps at 3am timeslots, and a 4 week break three quarters of the way through the season. Zero momentum, and it stops dead any attempt to build passion.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Yes, they do say that playing South Africa is important but I also expect that desire will decrease as South Africa remain similarly uncompetitive like Australia and some of their teams look to Europe. Whether or not that increases is currently unknown.



New Zealand teams have also been struggling for crowds and are also experiencing the same issues with the 18 team competition in terms of dissatisfaction.



Their teams are going well on the field but I don't think they are immune to the broader issues facing Super Rugby and will not bend over backwards to continue having a franchise competition with South Africa if South Africa want less and less to do with it and Australia is looking less likely to continue. I don't think the desire to play South Africa outweighs fiscally responsible decisions for the future health of their teams.



I definitely don't think we can make an ultimatum to New Zealand of Trans Tasman competition or else but I largely think the same issues that are hurting us are playing out in New Zealand.



The terrible performance of our teams this season is confusing the issue that our problem is not being competitive. The bigger issue is that even if we were competitive the Super Rugby competition is becoming an increasing problem.



My bet is that Australia and New Zealand will be playing the same competition after 2020, whatever that is.

If we were competitive and not so many fundamental structural issues with our game in OZ, NZ would be interested. But the reality is they would more than likely see a huge risk putting all their eggs in a Trans Tasman basket.

It is really hard to see what the answer is as whatever come up with that does have enough broadcaster support means won't be enough money for the professional game in oz and/or ability to retain top players.

This is why using things like expanded NRC comp next year could be used as lower risk experiment to trial things / alternative ideas whilst still keeping some involvement in Super Rugby. But we don't have the funds to support 5 teams and if we get to not having a team dropped without plan B we are in serious trouble.

We could be getting to a critical juncture before start of next season if ARU can't jettison a team.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

The fans want games in local time zones. They want games that involve traditional rivalries between recognisable teams. Get those two factors right and we are at least in the ballpark as a sport.

Yep got to get back to basics - that is first and foremost what fans want.

Start from there to create something that works towards that vision but start with babysteps. And may need to accept going backwards to go forwards as we are in a real mess at this point with professional rugby in this country.

 

[Sauron]

This is why using things like expanded NRC comp next year could be used as lower risk experiment to trial things / alternative ideas whilst still keeping some involvement in Super Rugby. But we don't have the funds to support 5 teams and if we get to not having a team dropped without plan B we are in serious trouble.

We could be getting to a critical juncture before start of next season if ARU can't jettison a team.

Hang on, hang on just a second. *If* there's no Plan B!?

Hahahahahahahahaha

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Hang on, hang on just a second. *If* there's no Plan B!?

Hahahahahahahahaha

Sorry yes I see the amusing side of this as ARU never seemed to have clear and coherent plan A so expecting them to have a plan B is comedy at its best.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[No4918]

If we were competitive and not so many fundamental structural issues with our game in OZ, NZ would be interested. But the reality is they would more than likely see a huge risk putting all their eggs in a Trans Tasman basket.

It is really hard to see what the answer is as whatever come up with that does have enough broadcaster support means won't be enough money for the professional game in oz and/or ability to retain top players.

This is why using things like expanded NRC comp next year could be used as lower risk experiment to trial things / alternative ideas whilst still keeping some involvement in Super Rugby. But we don't have the funds to support 5 teams and if we get to not having a team dropped without plan B we are in serious trouble.

We could be getting to a critical juncture before start of next season if ARU can't jettison a team.

Riskier than remaining in Super Rugby?

I think an Aus comp would be very tough to make work to broadcasters. Largely, to the fans we need to attract, Aus teams are poor and there would be little incentive to return or start watching. A comp with NZ will generate significantly more appeal outside the rusted on fans. This will lead to more revenue from broadcasters.

Even looking outside Australia I doubt many people in Europe will be wanting to watch an Aus domestic competition. Make it a trans-tasman prospect and that changes too. It is already said that a large portion of funding to Super Rugby as it stands is from the overseas broadcasters and having NZ involved is key to that. The other aspect is the timezones which won't mate up nearly as well but with few NZ/SA derbies under the current basket case competition it may not prove so important.

 

[Braveheart81]

But we don't have the funds to support 5 teams and if we get to not having a team dropped without plan B we are in serious trouble.

What makes you think that dropping out of Super Rugby is a viable alternative if we can't axe a team?

The contractual issues with SANZAAR will be far worse if we try to withdraw altogether prior to 2021 compared with not being able to remove a team that we said we would.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

What makes you think that dropping out of Super Rugby is a viable alternative if we can't axe a team?

The contractual issues with SANZAAR will be far worse if we try to withdraw altogether prior to 2021 compared with not being able to remove a team that we said we would.

Missing my point we can't find 5 professional teams in super rugby.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk