Where to for Super Rugby?

[Strewthcobber]

I have no inside knowledge.

RA don't want to go broke. The most likely way that happens is the super rugby teams perform even worse than now and state unions have to be bailed out.

The most likely way super rugby teams would perform worse is if Twiggys comp signs a bunch of super rugby quality players. They will be looking for 200+ players to fill the rosters.

Twiggy wants Aus eligible players in his comp, RA want those players playing super rugby.

Here we are

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

[half]

Who are all the new members that are going to move Rugby in the right direction for you kiap, if you get rid of them you have to have replacements or we may find rugby may not actually be played?

Dan

I have been arguing against Super Rugby from 1999.

My reasons have not changed, although the solutions have changed.

You have used the chief excuse I have always heard, in that how will we replace the revenue.

I think this is the wrong question.

There is no question even by Super Rugby supporters than it is fraying at the edges.

I have tried using other codes, which has erred Super Rugby supporters no end.

So I will try a different way.

When I provide advise about investing money, I tell people their are three markets, being the bond market, equity market n real estate market.

Althrough the bond market carries the least risk and has. A guaranteed return, most say leaving your money in the bank is by far the greatest risk.

Just staying with a failed model is by light years the greatest risk.

Your question should be what method has the less long term risk, not what has the highest revenue next year.

 

[kiap]

I have no inside knowledge.

RA don't want to go broke. The most likely way that happens is the super rugby teams perform even worse than now and state unions have to be bailed out.

The most likely way super rugby teams would perform worse is if Twiggys comp signs a bunch of super rugby quality players. They will be looking for 200+ players to fill the rosters.

Twiggy wants Aus eligible players in his comp, RA want those players playing super rugby.

Here we are

Agree with a fair bit of that.

Obviously WSR doesn't want 200+ Aus players, though. That would be counterproductive both ways.

I think what will happen, and it's been mentioned before, is that WSR will end up not being an Australian comp. It will go elsewhere.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

What could make things pretty interesting next year is if World Series Rugby does well in its first proper season. It will be head to head with Super Rugby and SANZAAR will be having discussions about the next broadcast deal.

Would RA consider getting off the Super Rugby wagon if WSR showed huge potential? WSR in 2019 will reportedly be an 8 team comp with 2 Australian sides. Maybe in 2021 it's a 12 team comp with 6 of them based in Australia.

I don’t think they would jettison super rugby after 1 successful year for wsr but certainly look to have foot in both camps say move another oz side or two out of super rugby and into wsr perhaps.

At this stage they won’t need to put all their eggs in one basket and from a risk management perspective that is a good thing


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wamberal]

Althrough the bond market carries the least risk and has. A guaranteed return, most say leaving your money in the bank is by far the greatest risk.

.

It is all a bit more complicated than that. It depends on your time frame, doesn't it? Cash is very safe in the short term. Bonds can fall in value, particularly when interest rates rise.


One thing for sure. Only somebody who is prepared to burn their money invests in sport.

 

[hoggy]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=12122584

This article highlights why the game will continue its slow decline in Australia, it shows no understanding of why the game is struggling here, and its simple solution as always is that by the Wallabies winning, somehow everything will magically turn around.

The game will never grow in Australia when the only strategy is to put 99% of your resources into the one entity in the hope of throwing a few crumbs to those below. You will never grow the game from the top down.

When you neglect building the floor you eventually have nothing to walk on.

It has nothing to do with Wallaby wins.

 

[dru]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=12122584

This article highlights why the game will continue its slow decline in Australia, it shows no understanding of why the game is struggling here, and its simple solution as always is that by the Wallabies winning, somehow everything will magically turn around.

The game will never grow in Australia when the only strategy is to put 99% of your resources into the one entity in the hope of throwing a few crumbs to those below. You will never grow the game from the top down.

When you neglect building the floor you eventually have nothing to walk on.

It has nothing to do with Wallaby wins.

“The problem for New Zealand is it can't fix the problem as it is essentially the victim.”

Bwahaha! The essential issue with Supe is that the comp increasingly is amended to suit the Kiwis at the same time as trending to NOT suit Australia and South Africa. In deed something that suits all may not be possible.

Sorting out the base, Hoggy, is clearly the start point, but the top down approach is not centred on Australia either.

 

[hoggy]

“The problem for New Zealand is it can't fix the problem as it is essentially the victim.”

Bwahaha! The essential issue with Sipe is that the comp increasingly is amended to suit the Kiwis at the same time as trending to NOT suit Australia and South Africa. In deed something that suits all may not be possible.

Sorting out the base, Hoggy, is clearly the start point, but the top down approach is not centred on Australia either.

Agreed, the whole emphasis in the article is for Australia to get its house in order to benefit a system perfectly suited to NZ, without acknowledging the whole SANZAAR set-up pretty much ensures that Australia will never be able to get its house in order.

 

[dru]

Agreed, the whole emphasis in the article is for Australia to get its house in order to benefit a system perfectly suited to NZ, without acknowledging the whole SANZAAR set-up pretty much ensures that Australia will never be able to get its house in order.

IMO at least, the RA are not likely to get the house in order for as long as they accept dictates from SANZAR for our primary pro comp. and it diverts attention from the grass.

 

[sunnyboys]

say what you want about the article but the essential premise that this mismatch in talent has removed uncertainty of outcome and hence killed fan interest, is totally correct.

no matter how we got here, its how we respond that matters. there are two ways to look at this:
1. starting next year we somehow become competitive and beat the kiwis consistently and win fans back....
2. we acknowledge that option isnt likely to happen and we move our teams and players to a comp that has some suspense.

to be honest, i dont think australian rugby has the rugby smarts to do number 1, and i dont think we can financially afford to do number 2.

number 2, will be the only option once crowds and viewers collapse completely. we aren't at that point yet... but its coming.

 

[wamberal]

Pretty much spot on. We are where we are now based on a whole history of good and bad decisions. Going back 100 or more years.


I have pointed this out several times, but the game was on its last legs in the fifties, we were saved by the phenomenal popularity of two inbound tours by the Fijians, who played a breathtaking brand of attacking rugby. Totally different to the game played by every body else.


That was a bit of a hint, now I come to think of it. Australians have shown that overwhelmingly prefer a game that is relatively simple to understand, and in which there is a lot of "action". And, by the way, we do prefer to see an Australian team winning.


That is a lot to live up to for rugby.

 

[Joe King]

Am I right in thinking that the main objection against creating a really enjoyable domestic comp to replace Super Rugby, is the drop in revenue, leading to an exodus of players, which then affects the Wallabies, which are the main source of revenue, as well as being the main carrot to attract new fans to the game?

If it were possible and easy for o/s players to be released by o/s clubs and be available for test selection, would that solve the problem? I know it's not realistic, but if it were, hypothetically speaking, would it solve the issue?

Just curious.

 

[Braveheart81]

If it were possible and easy for o/s players to be released by o/s clubs and be available for test selection, would that solve the problem? I know it's not realistic, but if it were, hypothetically speaking, would it solve the issue?

I think the windows of availability are the problem. It might work now when we're using two overseas players, but can you imagine how the Wallabies preparation would have been if 80% of the players only arrived from Europe 5 days before the first game and then had to fly out and back again last week when we didn't have a game.

I think it would be disastrous.

I still think there are huge question marks over whether people would actually show up to watch a domestic competition in the sort of numbers that would make it remotely viable.

 

[sunnyboys]

Braveheart - i'm always interested in what numbers people think is viable. The brumbies have been pulling less than 10k crowds for some time. Tahs quarter final was bested by the Shute final... The Reds crowds have just fallen apart.

IMO Oz rugby fans will always want some form of rugby to watch on telly, at a decent stadium - and at the start and running throughout of the country's typical 'footy' season. I think Super Rugby only retains its currently following because it fills that brief - not because of the standard or that its international... i think those attributes have steadily become less of a drawcard.

i think a decent domestic comp that has those benefits - TV, stadiums, in the prime footy months - has every chance of succeeding

 

[Rugbynutter39]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=12122584

This article highlights why the game will continue its slow decline in Australia, it shows no understanding of why the game is struggling here, and its simple solution as always is that by the Wallabies winning, somehow everything will magically turn around.

The game will never grow in Australia when the only strategy is to put 99% of your resources into the one entity in the hope of throwing a few crumbs to those below. You will never grow the game from the top down.

When you neglect building the floor you eventually have nothing to walk on.

It has nothing to do with Wallaby wins.

Yep typical nz view of rugby’s problems in Australia as they don’t care to understand what is the problem as not motivated enough to really see why they should care as not as impacted. No problem with that but the problem is RA seems to care more about what Nz wants out of SANZAAR then what is best for oz.

Hopefully we see evidence of change with negotiations with twiggy with wsr and what comes out there plus with revised super structure. Hopeful yes...confident? Yep different question and not so much on the latter.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wamberal]

Braveheart - i'm always interested in what numbers people think is viable. The brumbies have been pulling less than 10k crowds for some time. Tahs quarter final was bested by the Shute final.

i think a decent domestic comp that has those benefits - TV, stadiums, in the prime footy months - has every chance of succeeding

I do not disagree that a decent domestic might not succeed, eventually. But it will take a lot of bravery, a big war chest, and a lot of cooperation.


BTW, I for one do not draw too much hope from the SS grand final, or the biggish crowds at some of the derbies. A game between traditional clubs, on a nice afternoon, at a suburban venue can draw well.


Put the same game on at the SFS kicking off at 8 pm and see how many turn up.

 

[Joe King]

I think the windows of availability are the problem. It might work now when we're using two overseas players, but can you imagine how the Wallabies preparation would have been if 80% of the players only arrived from Europe 5 days before the first game and then had to fly out and back again last week when we didn't have a game.

I think it would be disastrous.

I still think there are huge question marks over whether people would actually show up to watch a domestic competition in the sort of numbers that would make it remotely viable.

OK, so preparation for tests would suffer a bit, but it would be better than not having the players available at all, right? Might still draw a crowd. What if say, the RC was in the same time-slot as the 6N, and the SANZAAR nations had the same prep time as them? Again, I know it would be easier moving a mountain, but just hypothetically speaking. Just trying to understand what the main issue is.

Re a domestic comp: I know it wouldn't be the most financially viable comp, otherwise they would have left Super Rugby already. But I'm just wondering, if the issue of test player exodus/availability were solved, would that allow us to aim for a much more enjoyable comp to replace Super Rugby, without having to worry (as much) about the loss of revenue?

 

[Braveheart81]

Braveheart - i'm always interested in what numbers people think is viable. The brumbies have been pulling less than 10k crowds for some time. Tahs quarter final was bested by the Shute final. The Reds crowds have just fallen apart.

IMO Oz rugby fans will always want some form of rugby to watch on telly, at a decent stadium - and at the start and running throughout of the country's typical 'footy' season. I think Super Rugby only retains its currently following because it fills that brief - not because of the standard or that its international. i think those attributes have steadily become less of a drawcard.

i think a decent domestic comp that has those benefits - TV, stadiums, in the prime footy months - has every chance of succeeding

The problem with the Shute Shield is that one game a week is televised and they have to pay for that privilege. In terms of decent stadiums, people love the thought of going to North Sydney Oval as part of a big crowd until they actually do and the facilities are awful. You might put up with that once for the grand final but if you're faced with going their 8 times a season or so the thought of not being able to get food and drink really detracts from it.

Only a couple of teams and matchups draw strong crowds and you only get one grand final a year.

I think an Australian domestic comp would need a huge amount of external funding to be a possibility.

Super Rugby has huge problems and needs to change. I just don't think there's an easy solution that works. I also think that if you are planning to have a competition running most of the year you need to be willing to do it without your best players during the business end of the competition. The test calendar isn't going to change.

 

[sunnyboys]

Hi Braveheart. My use of SS as a comparison was only to highlight the hole Super Rugby has found itself in. I certainly dont think SS is a viable replacement for Super Rugby. and you are right about venues like Nth Sydney Oval. Ballymore holds a similar place in the minds of Brisbane rugby fans. The facilities themselves just don't make for an enjoyable experience on game day. Conversely, larger stadiums a third to half full can also be less than enjoyable.

Oz rugby is truly between a rock and a hard place.

if there was a domestic comp created , i agree it would still need to be concluded before the RC (if we think that is also the best option - that's a whole other topic - but some mooted changes to that format sound positive!)

but the current situation it is truly problematic. I just find it incredibly sad to see the sport i enjoy watching more than another, petering out like it is.

 

[Strewthcobber]

I think an Australian domestic comp would need a huge amount of external funding to be a possibility.

It's pretty true of all domestic comps isn't it? - the crowds and TV money doesn't cover the cost of the teams, you need to find another source

That could be clubs/pokies, spendthrift owners, subsidy from the national team etc etc. But it's got to be something