Where to for Super Rugby?

[kiap]

We all know RA will partner up with the NZRU. They're too weak not to.

Well it depends under what terms agreed but that potentially could be a decent outcome.

Or, quite likely, a continuation of the same bad outcomes. I actually don't think a Trans-Tasman comp would be competitive right now and that's bad for both sides.

IMO it would be dumb to put all the eggs in that basket.

But I'll stay watching as the ARU continue to run Australian rugby further into the ground.

The sooner they burn it out, the closer we are to the rebuild.

 

[Tomikin]

I'm also pretty sure by then the western force would tag there boat to WSR..might tell us to fuck off if he can't bring his teams with him or just fuck off..

Sent from my HTC 2PS6200 using Tapatalk

 

[dru]

I also have lost enthusiasm for Super and if necessary the Kiwis with it.

BUT, something of an over-reaction here to RSA and Pro14. While I am surprised to see Natal Sharks get the gurnsey (thought at least Griquas would be selected), it’s been open and in SARU planning pretty much from the outset.

They are looking to two international pro comps, which come together domestically in the Currie Cup. There was talk of combining two of the larger Prov Unions to make the final team.

Point is they are not willingly leaving Super, not yet anyway. They want both.

 

[dru]

I’d add that the SARU planning is intended to:
a) not have all their eggs in one basket
b) reinforce and extend exposure to a true national footprint
c) reinforce the waning domestic competition
d) increase grass roots exposure and availability to HPUs (high performance units) across the nation.

Missing parts are expansion into black communities and beyond model C schools (similar concept to out GPS/private schools). But it’s not too shabby. We have laughed in the recent past at SARU debacles - smile on the other side of our face now as they prove themselves in another world to RA.

 

[kiap]

I also have lost enthusiasm for Super and if necessary the Kiwis with it.

BUT, something of an over-reaction here to RSA and Pro14.

Yes, you're right, this is not the final notice from SA for Super Rugby.

It's just more positioning by them facing northward - and using provincial entities as opposed to the equivalent Super franchises.

Point is they are not willingly leaving Super, not yet anyway. They want both.

However, Aussies aren't the only ones that have lost enthusiasm for Super.

Despite what they say they want, the rugby administrators in SA (and elsewhere) will have the decision made for them on Super Rugby by it's continuing decline.

 

[half]

My limited understanding, mainly from media reports is SA provide the bulk of the revenue.

I have been saying this will happen for about 8 years now maybe more, its logical the money and influence in a political sense is in Europe.

 

[Brumby Runner]

I also have lost enthusiasm for Super and if necessary the Kiwis with it.

BUT, something of an over-reaction here to RSA and Pro14. While I am surprised to see Natal Sharks get the gurnsey (thought at least Griquas would be selected), it’s been open and in SARU planning pretty much from the outset.

They are looking to two international pro comps, which come together domestically in the Currie Cup. There was talk of combining two of the larger Prov Unions to make the final team.

Point is they are not willingly leaving Super, not yet anyway. They want both.

Dru, why do you think SA would want to have a presence in both North and South competitions when they are reported above as saying the are disadvantaged by the time zones associated with Super Rugby? And when both the Kings and Cheetahs moved North, neither continued with a presence in Super Rugby.

I think it's more likely they will remove themselves entirely from any Southern Hemisphere competition if they do elect to have a greater presence in the Top 1x competition.

I also think the travel disadvantages are really a smokescreen hiding the fact that their teams also are uncompetitive with the NZ sides, just like ours. NZ's dominance and their dislike of the conference system favouring under-performing SA and Aus sides in Super Rugby will be the death knell of the competition. But that's not to say they are at fault. They have developed their systems from schoolboys onwards towards attaining excellence at all levels, and have been exceptionally successful at it. It is credit to them and a criticism of the administrations in Aus and Sa that we haven't had the intelligence or foresight to do the same.

Anyway, it is looking more and more likely that there will be no Super Rugby post 2020, and NZ might just be left with few or no countries left to play on a regular basis.

 

[Joe King]

We all know RA will partner up with the NZRU. They're too weak not to. So. Seeing as that the likely outcome we could end up with a Pacific Super 12. Our five. There five plus Fiji and a combined PI squad funded by
The group who tried to buy the Warriors based out of Hawaii. Which is somethinv they actually expressed interest in. q

It's a good model in theory, but it doesn't solve the problem of our lack of competitive teams. In fact, it makes it a bit worse, with 5 Aussie teams. How do we solve this?

 

[Omar Comin']

It's a good model in theory, but it doesn't solve the problem of our lack of competitive teams. In fact, it makes it a bit worse, with 5 Aussie teams. How do we solve this?

I think there's two potential solutions that allow Australia to have 5 teams in a Trans-Tasman comp. The best, IMO, would be for NZ to relax their All Blacks eligibility slightly so that some New Zealanders can play for Australian teams (or other teams in the competition) and remain eligible. Australia has the economy and the population centres while NZ has the player depth - our weakness is their strength and vice versa. It should be possible to figure something out.

The other is for there to be an extra team or 2 in New Zealand. Whether this is commercially viable is the big question. Surely it would make more sense commercially to add an extra team in Western Sydney than in Tauranga or Napier-Hastings.

Either way there would need to be some mechanism to even out the player quality across the competition for it to be successful. And realistically that either means diluting the concentration of NZ's top players or having only 3 Australian teams. And I'd rather we do our own thing without NZ than have just 3 teams.

 

[Bandar]

It's a good model in theory, but it doesn't solve the problem of our lack of competitive teams. In fact, it makes it a bit worse, with 5 Aussie teams. How do we solve this?

I agree, we need to either get he AB to select players from any club in the comp or go on our own.

 

[Braveheart81]

Monday 7 May 2018

The Future - SANZAAR Statement


SANZAAR, as publicly announced last year, is in the middle of a detailed strategic review to determine the future of Super Rugby and The Rugby Championship. This major internal review is being driven by the SANZAAR Executive Committee and the Member Unions: Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and Argentina.

SANZAAR CEO Andy Marinos said today, “SANZAAR is currently engaged in a detailed strategic planning process that has the ultimate and very important aim of producing a road map for the competitions’ future formats up to and including 2030, and in the shorter term the delivery to market of competitions for the next iteration of SANZAAR’s broadcasting rights.”

“As part of this process the member unions have fully committed to the strategy and their future participation. Any talk of a change to the stakeholder relationship and partners withdrawing, creation of new teams in new markets and Trans-Tasman competitions is unsubstantiated speculation and simply wrong.”

“This 12-year strategy is designed to address the challenges facing our game and to clearly articulate SANZAAR’s vision and purpose in terms of a sustainable future. The desired outcome is the delivery of competitive, innovative, engaging and financially sustainable competitions to ensure the continued success of the Member Unions and the Super Rugby clubs/franchises.”

“Everything has been on the table – status quo, expansion, contraction, competition formats, etc - as part of our initial blue-sky thinking. We basically started with a blank piece of paper and now we are doing the detailed analysis on what is viable, sustainable and best for our competitions.”

“There is an incredible amount of detailed work taking place in this review and we have specialist groups working across all aspects of the review. Therefore it is very disappointing that various aspects of the initial work in terms of potential tournament formats been taken out of context and aired in public.”

"Potential expansion into new markets for example should not be confused with only an increase in teams. We are already in the process of taking the established product to new markets. Matches being played in Singapore, Hong Kong, Fiji and Samoa are examples of this.”

“We are especially mindful at present that we have just come out of a process that has seen a contraction of Super Rugby. The introduction of new teams or any form of expansion would need to meet a defined set of criteria that have been established,” added Marinos.

"Finally, SANZAAR considers Isaia Toeava to be an important part of the future of Super Rugby regardless of the future direction of the competition," said Marinos.

ENDS

 

[wamberal]

Isaia Toeava?


Oh. I see. An in-joke. Ha ha.

 

[oztimmay]

Monday 7 May 2018


"Finally, SANZAAR considers Isaia Toeava to be an important part of the future of Super Rugby regardless of the future direction of the competition," said Marinos.

This is going to be a VERY long week for you, my good man. Dismal Pillock would be loving this.

 

[Braveheart81]

This is going to be a VERY long week for you, my good man. Dismal Pillock would be loving this.

It sure fucking is.

I'm just going to sit down and relax and hope it all blows over.

 

[Derpus]

I agree, we need to either get he AB to select players from any club in the comp or go on our own.

This won't happen because the ABs that go abroad will suddenly become a lot worse.

 

[Dismal Pillock]

"Finally, SANZAAR considers Isaia Toeava to be an important part of the future of Super Rugby regardless of the future direction of the competition," said Marinos.

 

[Bandar]

This won't happen because the ABs that go abroad will suddenly become a lot worse.

So we should go out on our own

The Kiwis can do their own thing too...

 

[RedsHappy]

Monday 7 May 2018

The Future - SANZAAR Statement


SANZAAR, as publicly announced last year, is in the middle of a detailed strategic review to determine the future of Super Rugby and The Rugby Championship. This major internal review is being driven by the SANZAAR Executive Committee and the Member Unions: Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and Argentina.

SANZAAR CEO Andy Marinos said today, “SANZAAR is currently engaged in a detailed strategic planning process that has the ultimate and very important aim of producing a road map for the competitions’ future formats up to and including 2030, and in the shorter term the delivery to market of competitions for the next iteration of SANZAAR’s broadcasting rights.”

“As part of this process the member unions have fully committed to the strategy and their future participation. Any talk of a change to the stakeholder relationship and partners withdrawing, creation of new teams in new markets and Trans-Tasman competitions is unsubstantiated speculation and simply wrong.”

“This 12-year strategy is designed to address the challenges facing our game and to clearly articulate SANZAAR’s vision and purpose in terms of a sustainable future. The desired outcome is the delivery of competitive, innovative, engaging and financially sustainable competitions to ensure the continued success of the Member Unions and the Super Rugby clubs/franchises.”

“Everything has been on the table – status quo, expansion, contraction, competition formats, etc - as part of our initial blue-sky thinking. We basically started with a blank piece of paper and now we are doing the detailed analysis on what is viable, sustainable and best for our competitions.”

“There is an incredible amount of detailed work taking place in this review and we have specialist groups working across all aspects of the review. Therefore it is very disappointing that various aspects of the initial work in terms of potential tournament formats been taken out of context and aired in public.”

"Potential expansion into new markets for example should not be confused with only an increase in teams. We are already in the process of taking the established product to new markets. Matches being played in Singapore, Hong Kong, Fiji and Samoa are examples of this.”

“We are especially mindful at present that we have just come out of a process that has seen a contraction of Super Rugby. The introduction of new teams or any form of expansion would need to meet a defined set of criteria that have been established,” added Marinos.

"Finally, SANZAAR considers Isaia Toeava to be an important part of the future of Super Rugby regardless of the future direction of the competition," said Marinos.

ENDS

I hope everyone realises that, courtesy of BH81, all but the last line of that statement above was indeed actually issued by SANZAAR today. Yes, really. True.

It's bizarre character and peculiar sense of reality detached could not be made up if we tried. Almost as though Marinos was presiding over a highly successful, rapidly expanding enterprise where only creative brainstorming and the human imagination lay between it and even greater glories on the global stage.

We are even looking forward and thinking through the ultimate plan for - up to - 2030.

 

[Joe King]

Monday 7 May 2018

The Future - SANZAAR Statement


“This 12-year strategy is designed to address the challenges facing our game and to clearly articulate SANZAAR’s vision and purpose in terms of a sustainable future.

Ha! That would be a first.

 

[Joe King]

Monday 7 May 2018

The Future - SANZAAR Statement


"The desired outcome is the delivery of competitive, innovative, engaging and financially sustainable competitions to ensure the continued success of the Member Unions and the Super Rugby clubs/franchises.”

"continued success"! Are you kidding me?!

So rather than putting maximum enjoyment for the fans as the number one priority, they will continue to compromise and go for the quick buck. The next 12 years will be as depressing as the last. I hope I'm wrong.