• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Where to for Super Rugby?

Status
Not open for further replies.

dru

David Wilson (68)
^^^ We continue to ignore supposed demands from NZRU and SARU.
1. Kiwis want more exposure to Africa
2. Saffers wont more exposure to NZ
3. Saffers want a Super comp that avoids the franchises replicating the Currie Cup
4. Avoid weak teams embarrassing the comp.

Boxes ticked:
1. Saffers want less travel
2. Saffers want two home finals
3. More time zone friendly games

If we are to shake up the stakeholders we may as well push for a simplfied 3 conference system.

And if SANZAR is not going to get hold of it, no evidence so far that they will, we need that B Plan.
 

mudskipper

Colin Windon (37)
Long-time ACT Brumbies administrator Geoff Larkham has hit out at speculation on the club's future, warning Australian rugby officials the Canberra rugby community will "wither and die" if the franchise is axed.

'I can't see any reason why the ARU would cut the Brumbies. They're the most successful club on the field and the community rugby program is better than anyone else in Australia," Larkham said.


"Kicking the Brumbies out is like cutting off your right arm. It's not the right way to go.
"It's been the cash cow for rugby in the area and without [the Brumbies], our grass roots would wither and die.

"We've got the best community rugby program and stepping stones in Australia barring none. The others don't have a pinch to what we've got in the ACT, it's a shame the Brumbies are even being talked about."

Brumbies officials will ramp up their search for a new head coach next week when they interview a shortlist of candidates to replace outgoing mentor Stephen Larkham.

The ARU is involved in the process to find a new Canberra coach, and it's unlikely the game's governing body in Australia would have allowed interviews to proceed if they were considering cutting the Brumbies.

The Brumbies were plagued by off-field drama last year, but they have been the most financially stable club of Australia's five franchises.

They borrowed $450,000 from the ARU but paid back the debt when they moved into a new $15 million base at the University of Canberra.

Other hurdles for axing the Brumbies include a 30-year pre-paid lease at the university and a five-year agreement with the government to play games at Canberra Stadium.

The ACT Rugby Union board also owns the rights to the Brumbies brand and any bid to merge teams or axe the Brumbies would have to be tabled in the board room.

ACT sport minister and deputy chief minister Berry conceded the Brumbies' future would also likely affect delayed plans to build a new $300 million stadium in Civic.

The plans have been put on hold while the government pushes ahead with its light rail project, but without the Brumbies the venue would be used only for Canberra Raiders home NRL games.

"We've spoken to the Brumbies and assured them of our support," Berry said.
"We'll do all of we can to help the cause. They've been here for 21 years, they're a founding team and there's huge support here.

"They live here, their families live here and they're an important part of the community ... We would have to re-evaluate [our funding] depending on what happens."

The Brumbies, one of three foundation Australian teams, increased their average viewership on Fox Sports last year and had four of the top 10 Super Rugby audiences.

The Brumbies have also been a factory for Wallabies players, with almost 50 per cent of the club's representatives earning Australian honours.

It is hoped the Brumbies will attract a big crowd to the club's clash against the Otago Highlanders at Canberra Stadium next weekend to fire a message to the ARU and SANZAAR.

"It would be dreadful if anything happens to the Brumbies ... the worst possible option would be for the brand to leave Canberra," Geoff Larkham said.
 

Dan54

David Wilson (68)
The Brumbies getting good independent media support from interstate, with the Courier Mail and now Kiwi Cully in the SMH both writing very blunt pieces supporting their existence....

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/u...about-axing-the-brumbies-20161001-grt20a.html

I would seriously doubt whether there any support for dropping Brumbies in NZ Slim, most Kiwis rightly or wrongly always consider them as much a core part of super rugby as Reds , Waratahs or any NZ teams.
 

swingpass

Peter Sullivan (51)
Nows a good opportunity to stock up on your Rebels merchandise
i'll wait till the fire sale

the decision right or wrong to delete an Aus franchise will be based on where the ARU see the future. personally i'd hope all the current franchises survive. they may well because the SARU might not be able to cull two teams.

the argument about past glories, development of local talent, foundation team etc, wont mean a thing in the decision process. for Super rugby to survive the franchises need to have a product worth watching, if that means importing players from OS then it should be done, what locality they are based is not really germane except in the ability to generate income. if the Wodonga Wombats have the best XV then people will come and watch, how many local boys play for Barcelona or AC Milan, or Wasps or Toulon ?

in trying to protect the Wallabies from imploding by restricting access to the playing pool the ARU have possibly shot themselves in the foot. uninspiring on field performances have led to a down trend in attendances and TV support. the whole concept and format needs a revamp, Skunk's idea above seems implausible in the short term but is the direction needed. the fans need to coalesce and work together not just cannibalise each other for the sake of their preferred team. (my original reply was with a tongue in cheek wink)
 

wamberal

Phil Kearns (64)
Just out of interest, do Australian posters support an Oz team being cut?


Easy to ask, complex to answer. Which team? What happens if we do not cut a team? Is there a realistic alternative?



We are corks bobbing down the gutters of life, mate. Or to put it another way, ask the question again when the determinations have been formalised. I suspect there will be a variety of answers.
 

half

Dick Tooth (41)
I think more people are quickly realising you have been right for 18 years half.

Sent from my EVA-L09 using Tapatalk


Thanks for the comment, over the years at BBQ's and on forums etc my views have not cough cough cough been accepted so nicely.

To me its incredibly simple. World over every successful code has a strong national domestic competition.

Our Super Rugby partners had / have strong national domestic competitions.

Somehow and IMO it beggars belief rugby fans supported and accepted the model. But the lazy suits in over 20 years never even opened up for debate a plan "B". Instead they tried to convince us that Super Rugby would grow rugby and was our national domestic competition. Then hide it away on Fox.

What today I find sad is no one is demanding the ARU board who passed and supported the latest fuck ups resign nor are we demanding a plan "B". We as supporters are not holding Pulver responsible for the move to 18 teams, nor his "for the love of Mary crazy decision" to solve the Saturday clash between the private schools and local park teams by moving the park teams to Sunday morning. To date and growing over 60% of teams folded.
 
T

TOCC

Guest
What today I find sad is no one is demanding the ARU board who passed and supported the latest fuck ups resign nor are we demanding a plan "B". We as supporters are not holding Pulver responsible for the move to 18 teams.

There's plenty of people asking questions of the ARU and Pulver over this mess. However it serves no purpose to have them resign at this critical point in time, despite their past mistakes it is better to have them in charge rather then trying to recruit and appoint a new board when crucial negotiations are taking place.
 

wamberal

Phil Kearns (64)
We as supporters have no power, other than the power of onlooker, basically.


The governance structures of the ARU do not allow for audience participation. We can choose to walk away, that's about it.


Maybe we should emulate Switzerland, and allow every supporter to have a vote in every important decision.


That would work out well, I am sure.
 
T

TOCC

Guest
As for the contractural issues, I don't see why there needs to be a complete moratorium placed on contracting non-Wallabies, most clubs usually approach the end of the season with 5-6 positions vacant on the roster, that's 25-30 across the Australian teams.

Let teams to continue contracting players with an additional clause in there that if the team folds then they may move to another team under the same contract, or if they don't want to move then they are free for a release. Worst case a team folds and all teams have an expanded squad for 2018-2019 to allow for the additional contracted players.

Teams need to lock in players and players want to lock in their future. At the current rate, players will look to secure their futures overseas due to the poor handling from ARU/SANZAAR


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

wamberal

Phil Kearns (64)
At the end of the day, the success or failure of whatever is promulgated will depend largely on the quality of the rugby on display. The better the playing stock, the better the rugby. Have a look at just about any ITM Cup game for reinforcement of this simple fact.


Tahs fans had no problems accepting Potgeiter. For example.
 

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
Thanks for the comment, over the years at BBQ's and on forums etc my views have not cough cough cough been accepted so nicely.

To me its incredibly simple. World over every successful code has a strong national domestic competition.

Our Super Rugby partners had / have strong national domestic competitions.

Somehow and IMO it beggars belief rugby fans supported and accepted the model. But the lazy suits in over 20 years never even opened up for debate a plan "B". Instead they tried to convince us that Super Rugby would grow rugby and was our national domestic competition. Then hide it away on Fox.

What today I find sad is no one is demanding the ARU board who passed and supported the latest fuck ups resign nor are we demanding a plan "B". We as supporters are not holding Pulver responsible for the move to 18 teams, nor his "for the love of Mary crazy decision" to solve the Saturday clash between the private schools and local park teams by moving the park teams to Sunday morning. To date and growing over 60% of teams folded.

Half, I think I'd qualify as a fairly harsh critic of the ARU on many things and I've certainly questioned Pulver's abilities on a number of occasions. I've often been taken to task by quite a number of posters for these views. I note that finally some of these people are finally starting to question the ARU and its competenance. (I would say though, that Pulver wasn't responsible for the move to Sunday junior club rugby - although he probably would have made the same decision as it coincides with the rugby world view of most administrators in the ARU/NSWRU over the past 20 years)

I'll own up to being initially in favour of the super rugby concept. Whether it was right or wrong 20 years ago is up for debate. However, what's fairly clear is that super rugby has had its day. From an Australian perspective, the evidence is overwhelming that we are obtaining no net benefit from our participation: Wallabies results in decline, Aussie super teams in decline, private school rugby in decline, state school rugby almost gone, junior club rugby almost gone, subbies rugby in Sydney in decline. The trend line for every one of these is down. The only area which seems to be holding its own is grade rugby at district level. Add to this the game is broke or almost broke.

What I find quite puzzling is that despite significant evidence from other sports as to what works for elite sport in Australia, rugby authorities either ignore the evidence completely or say how it couldn't apply to rugby - apparently we're so unique that the sporting norms which apply across the Australian sporting landscape don't apply to rugby.

EDIT: And I'd add that it's almost beyond belief that the ARU were warned twice, in two separate reports that continuing in super rugby would be a disaster for the code in this country, but signed up again anyway.
 

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
At the end of the day, the success or failure of whatever is promulgated will depend largely on the quality of the rugby on display.

The problem is Wamberal, that for parts of the season, the rugby isn't on display, it's hidden away on pay TV at 3am.

Of the people that I work with, only one was even aware that the Waratahs are back in Sydney and playing tonight (and he only knew because someone had given him 4 free tickets).

It's a bit like running a butcher shop with all the best cuts of meat and closing for a couple of weeks here and there and then opening for a couple of weeks from midnight until 5am and wondering why you go broke.
 

Inside Shoulder

Nathan Sharpe (72)
The problem is Wamberal, that for parts of the season, the rugby isn't on display, it's hidden away on pay TV at 3am.

Of the people that I work with, only one was even aware that the Waratahs are back in Sydney and playing tonight (and he only knew because someone had given him 4 free tickets).

It's a bit like running a butcher shop with all the best cuts of meat and closing for a couple of weeks here and there and then opening for a couple of weeks from midnight until 5am and wondering why you go broke.
Particularly with the price of meat these days
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top