Where to for Super Rugby?

[oztimmay]

The first round of staff sackings being at the Western Force. Sad day for those involved.

Article doesn't say that TF has dropped plans for a legal challenge to remain in Super Rugby, but you would think it's not likely to happen now.

https://thewest.com.au/sport/rugby-...-staff-leave-the-building-today-ng-b88596268z

 

[andrewM]

F U A R U

 

[RebelYell]

Good try, but his ego didnt stop him selling the club to the ARU - the ARU didn't have the money so they couldn't buy it. Sure Morgan Turinui put pressure on him, but pressure is nothing to Cox. He unloaded the team because he had ran it into the ground - lost his sponsors, halved his paying memberships, and lost the season and he couldn't afford to pay the out of season off field staff wages until next years membership subscriptions stated to come in.

What you've said isn't incorrect - however once the key players leaned on him and tricked him into a commitment, he became terrified about being known as "the guy who sold the Rebels back to the AR". At that point, he stopped negotiating with them

 

[Ulrich]

Wasn't Boland the union that went under before WP? Are they fully back?

I'd love to see the Griquas playing as an international franchise.

Boland will always be there. They've had shitty leadership as have WP, but Paarl Gymnasium & Paul Roos etc are schools technically in the Boland area let's not forget and so is the University of Stellenbosch.

 

[lou75]

What you've said isn't incorrect - however once the key players leaned on him and tricked him into a commitment, he became terrified about being known as "the guy who sold the Rebels back to the AR". At that point, he stopped negotiating with them

Commitments to Cox - really - this is what held him back from accepting $5.7 million ?- you sweet naive creature - he flogged off his TGI Friday's stake two weeks later because he is broke ! - the ARU couldn't pay - so Cox backed away - end of story

 

[half]

One thing I have banged on about since hhhmmmm a long long time is we have seen the other codes expand and re market themselves over the last say 17 years, and we have kinda stood still. OK OK don't all yell Force and Rebels.

But you understand what I mean rugby has hardly set the world on fire with innovation and new ideas and developing plans in response to what other codes are doing.

We have been partly blessed over the last 12 to 18 months, with FFA in a kinda muddle as well. Infighting between the clubs and FFA with FIFA threatening to step in.

Where am I going with all this and how does it apply to a Super Rugby thread.

TWAS at a meeting tonight, with some local business folk. I was invited by a client.

Sitting at the table was a person who claimed to be well connected to FFA.

My client told me he was as well so unless this fellow was lying through his teeth he is close to FFA.

What this guy said was the clubs and FFA have reached a number of agreements, which he said where they have reached an agreement on funding, on the eventual control and timing of promotion & regulation, next year two expansion teams will be brought in Brisbane Strikers playing out of Ballymore and a Wollongong team[the Wollongong team if the Murdoch / Gordon bid succeeds for 10]

If this is true, and it does make kinda sense as FIFA are about to step unless FFA can resolve things, it means right at a time when we reducing teams and in an almost civil war. The code we are against for the number 3 title will be expanding and all holding hands again.


Don't know the answer or if what the guy said is true.

What I do know is the last thing we need is a three or four way spilt.

We have Super Rugby, we have the Shute Shield [its size and following and influence should not be ignored], we have the WA anti ARU mob, we have TF rugby. In all this we still seem years away from a national domestic competition.

League and AFL have funds, media and a very loyal following and both these codes seem united in a sense of purpose of where they are going. If FFA also put their house in order I would add cricket to this as well, while we engage in a civil war of dick measuring then it won't be good for rugby.

 

[Quick Hands]

^^^I think it's fairly clear that the prime reason for the ARU bringing in the Force and the Rebels was not a master plan to expand the game and have 5 equally funded and eventually equally performing franchises. The aim was more to have a couple of places to warehouse players, but to never seriously threaten NSW, Qld of the ACT on the field.

If in any doubt, let's contrast ARU expansion into non-traditional areas with that of the AFL and NRL.

Sydney Swans given advantages in funding, the draft and salary cap and access to academy players to ensure on-field success. Despite complaints from the Melbourne establishment, players, coaches and resources were funnelled to Sydney so they were succesful on the field.

Melbourne Storm plenty of funding and support and premiers very early in their history. Ability to link with Brisband/Qld feeder clubs to ensure player talent on an ongoing basis. A coaching regime in place which promoted success and now a club culture based on success - despite being almost invisible in the Melbourne sporting world.

ARU expansion, half-arsed at best. No attempt by the ARU to draft talent to either the Force or the Rebels. A procession of ARU cronies and poor performing coaches appointed. Any success achieved by either club despite the ARU, not because of it as the ARU used its top-up funding to assist NSW and Qld.

 

[Ulrich]

I think next year will be a much better year for Austrqlian rugby. I have no basis to support my hypothesis. It's just a gut feel.

 

[lou75]

^^^I think it's fairly clear that the prime reason for the ARU bringing in the Force and the Rebels was not a master plan to expand the game and have 5 equally funded and eventually equally performing franchises. The aim was more to have a couple of places to warehouse players, but to never seriously threaten NSW, Qld of the ACT on the field.

If in any doubt, let's contrast ARU expansion into non-traditional areas with that of the AFL and NRL.

Sydney Swans given advantages in funding, the draft and salary cap and access to academy players to ensure on-field success. Despite complaints from the Melbourne establishment, players, coaches and resources were funnelled to Sydney so they were succesful on the field.

Melbourne Storm plenty of funding and support and premiers very early in their history. Ability to link with Brisband/Qld feeder clubs to ensure player talent on an ongoing basis. A coaching regime in place which promoted success and now a club culture based on success - despite being almost invisible in the Melbourne sporting world.

ARU expansion, half-arsed at best. No attempt by the ARU to draft talent to either the Force or the Rebels. A procession of ARU cronies and poor performing coaches appointed. Any success achieved by either club despite the ARU, not because of it as the ARU used its top-up funding to assist NSW and Qld.

I agree completely

 

[TOCC]

^^^I think it's fairly clear that the prime reason for the ARU bringing in the Force and the Rebels was not a master plan to expand the game and have 5 equally funded and eventually equally performing franchises. The aim was more to have a couple of places to warehouse players, but to never seriously threaten NSW, Qld of the ACT on the field.

If in any doubt, let's contrast ARU expansion into non-traditional areas with that of the AFL and NRL.

Sydney Swans given advantages in funding, the draft and salary cap and access to academy players to ensure on-field success. Despite complaints from the Melbourne establishment, players, coaches and resources were funnelled to Sydney so they were succesful on the field.

Melbourne Storm plenty of funding and support and premiers very early in their history. Ability to link with Brisband/Qld feeder clubs to ensure player talent on an ongoing basis. A coaching regime in place which promoted success and now a club culture based on success - despite being almost invisible in the Melbourne sporting world.

ARU expansion, half-arsed at best. No attempt by the ARU to draft talent to either the Force or the Rebels. A procession of ARU cronies and poor performing coaches appointed. Any success achieved by either club despite the ARU, not because of it as the ARU used its top-up funding to assist NSW and Qld.

Yep just look at the recruitment of Folau and Hunt, who subjectively were both on-field failures, but that's not why they were recruited, they were signed for their off-field marketing pull, which was a massive succsss. They had local media swarming over every training session and trial match just to report what Izzy and Hunt were up to.

Western Force or Rebels were never given any leg up like that, they were both set-up to fail from the beginning.

 

[wamberal]

Yep, it's all the ARU's fault that our game is not as rich and powerful as the AFL and NRL.



Honestly, chaps, get back to the real world. We all thought expansion beyond three franchises was a good thing. And it was. What on earth was the alternative?


Given that we are paupers in the professional sporting landscape, any kind of expansion was going to represent a big gamble.


We gambled, and we lost. Were mistakes made? Yes, of course there were quite a few. We have talked about some, particularly the idiocies surrounding the names of the franchises.


But as for saying that the ARU should have done what, for example, the AFL has done is bizarre. A total denial to face the sad facts.


They have money to burn. We don't, and never have had. Nor do we know what sort of "expert" marketing advice was made available to SANZAR at the time that some of these decisions were taken.

 

[barbarian]

^^^I think it's fairly clear that the prime reason for the ARU bringing in the Force and the Rebels was not a master plan to expand the game and have 5 equally funded and eventually equally performing franchises. The aim was more to have a couple of places to warehouse players, but to never seriously threaten NSW, Qld of the ACT on the field.

If in any doubt, let's contrast ARU expansion into non-traditional areas with that of the AFL and NRL.

Sydney Swans given advantages in funding, the draft and salary cap and access to academy players to ensure on-field success. Despite complaints from the Melbourne establishment, players, coaches and resources were funnelled to Sydney so they were succesful on the field.

Melbourne Storm plenty of funding and support and premiers very early in their history. Ability to link with Brisband/Qld feeder clubs to ensure player talent on an ongoing basis. A coaching regime in place which promoted success and now a club culture based on success - despite being almost invisible in the Melbourne sporting world.

ARU expansion, half-arsed at best. No attempt by the ARU to draft talent to either the Force or the Rebels. A procession of ARU cronies and poor performing coaches appointed. Any success achieved by either club despite the ARU, not because of it as the ARU used its top-up funding to assist NSW and Qld.

I'm not sure holding the NRL up as a paragon of expansion virtue is accurate. They also have a string of failed ventures, and really the Storm and Cowboys are the only two success stories. And even then you could say a big reason why the Storm worked was them systematically cheating the salary cap for a decade.

The AFL is fair enough, but they were blessed with tonnes of cash and a completely closed system in which they controlled every element. If players were drafted to the Gold Coast against their will (as many were) then tough luck, it's not like you can walk away to Japan or Europe.

I don't think it's fair to say the ARU half-arsed the Force expansion - they secured plenty of sponsorship (though some of it dodgy) and a host of top-line players - Pocock, Giteau, Mitchell, Sharpe, Cannon etc. And they were competitive in their early years.

They were hardly a warehouse that would never threaten the Eastern states. But then the Firepower money disappeared and there wasn't enough to fill the gap. The ARU didn't have the means to step in, and it all started to go downhill.

So while I don't disagree that the expansion teams were failed by the ARU, I think the early days of the Force actually worked. They got a good side up and running that wasn't just an add-on. Sadly they couldn't keep it going.
.

 

[TOCC]

It's called due diligence Wamberal, the ARU are accountable for being the custodian of the game in Australia, which they've been failing at.

 

[fatprop]

It's called due diligence Wamberal, the ARU are accountable for being the custodian of the game in Australia, which they've been failing at.

Agreed, in hindsight, we should never have expanded to include the Rebels or agreed to allow in the, the extra SA sides, sunwolves and jaguars

But I am sure at the time there were valid reasons for these choices

 

[wamberal]

It's called due diligence Wamberal, the ARU are accountable for being the custodian of the game in Australia, which they've been failing at.

No, mate, it's called "hindsight". I am sure that if rugby was a home grown, home governed, sport like AFL, or to a large extent, NRL, and had been professional all its existence, and was funded by poker machines and huge media deals things would have been different.


As it was, we have always existed on the smell of an oily rag, wetting ourselves when we have a few mill to throw around, when our opponents talked in hundreds of mills.

 

[Mr Wobbly]

^^^I think it's fairly clear that the prime reason for the ARU bringing in the Force and the Rebels was not a master plan to expand the game and have 5 equally funded and eventually equally performing franchises. The aim was more to have a couple of places to warehouse players, but to never seriously threaten NSW, Qld of the ACT on the field.

If in any doubt, let's contrast ARU expansion into non-traditional areas with that of the AFL and NRL.

Sydney Swans given advantages in funding, the draft and salary cap and access to academy players to ensure on-field success. Despite complaints from the Melbourne establishment, players, coaches and resources were funnelled to Sydney so they were succesful on the field.

Melbourne Storm plenty of funding and support and premiers very early in their history. Ability to link with Brisband/Qld feeder clubs to ensure player talent on an ongoing basis. A coaching regime in place which promoted success and now a club culture based on success - despite being almost invisible in the Melbourne sporting world.

ARU expansion, half-arsed at best. No attempt by the ARU to draft talent to either the Force or the Rebels. A procession of ARU cronies and poor performing coaches appointed. Any success achieved by either club despite the ARU, not because of it as the ARU used its top-up funding to assist NSW and Qld.

I'm not sure if you're 100% correct there with your assessment of the AFL's expansion into Sydney. It was pretty much a botched effort but they learned from the mistakes they made. They relocated a broke, struggling South Melbourne to Sydney and they continued to be broke and struggle. The AFL sold the club to private owners who brought in some big name players and splashed money around. Eventually the money ran out and it was back to struggle street for the Swans. After three wooden spoons in a row, shithouse home crowds, and losing millions the AFL stepped back in and took them over. Things can be turned around pretty quickly if the right resources and support (including a few unfair advantages) are put in place. The AFL learned how to do expansion after of ten or so years of bad decisions in Sydney. I think Gold Coast are now the only new club yet to play finals. The ARU watched all of this unfold right on their door step and learned absolutely nothing.

 

[Mr Wobbly]

Yep, it's all the ARU's fault that our game is not as rich and powerful as the AFL and NRL.



Honestly, chaps, get back to the real world. We all thought expansion beyond three franchises was a good thing. And it was. What on earth was the alternative?


Given that we are paupers in the professional sporting landscape, any kind of expansion was going to represent a big gamble.


We gambled, and we lost. Were mistakes made? Yes, of course there were quite a few. We have talked about some, particularly the idiocies surrounding the names of the franchises.


But as for saying that the ARU should have done what, for example, the AFL has done is bizarre. A total denial to face the sad facts.


They have money to burn. We don't, and never have had. Nor do we know what sort of "expert" marketing advice was made available to SANZAR at the time that some of these decisions were taken.

This pretty much completely ignores the state the VFL were in back in the 80s when they started their expansion. Half the clubs were broke, they didn't have a massive TV deal, and the league was dominated by a few rich clubs. They did have vision though. And a plan.

 

[Braveheart81]

The AFL have the big advantage that they can help expansion teams greatly through the draft by giving them priority picks across a few seasons.

There is the expectation though that a lot of players drafted won't play AFL football in their first season and will instead play reserves etc. whilst they get used to adult football. The base salaries are pretty substantial and as barbarian said further up, players have no other options so it's not like they can decide they don't want to go to the club that drafts them.

The problem in rugby is that the starting salaries at EPS and below are pretty low and players might not be willing to relocate on that basis. I think we will always have real difficulty implementing a draft system unless the starting salaries are significantly higher.

 

[BLR]

I don't think it's fair to say the ARU half-arsed the Force expansion - they secured plenty of sponsorship (though some of it dodgy) and a host of top-line players - Pocock, Giteau, Mitchell, Sharpe, Cannon etc. And they were competitive in their early years.

It is when the ARU had sweet FA to do with any of the above you mention. That was all our CEO at the time Peter O'Meara who came in with the view he had to fight the East Coast for everything we got, and it cause a whole bunch of ruffled feathers and even some recruiting sanctions at the time. The ARU essentially told us we have a team, now on your way. They were competitive despite the ARU, not because of them.

 

[TOCC]

No, mate, it's called "hindsight". I am sure that if rugby was a home grown, home governed, sport like AFL, or to a large extent, NRL, and had been professional all its existence, and was funded by poker machines and huge media deals things would have been different.


As it was, we have always existed on the smell of an oily rag, wetting ourselves when we have a few mill to throw around, when our opponents talked in hundreds of mills.

Nah that's bullshit...

SANZAAR and ARU chased the $$ of European broadcast rights, despite recommendations and reports stating that the structure required for that would damage the game.. that's not hindsight, thats chasing fools gold.