Where to for Super Rugby?

[waiopehu oldboy]

Those on here who believe NZR are the Devil where Australian rugby is concerned may be interested to know they've signed a memorandum of understanding with RA supportive of Forrest's GRR comp & have advised the 19 NZ Super Rugby & M10 sides of GRR being interested in forming partnerships:

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=12181213

 

[dru]

Those on here who believe NZR are the Devil where Australian rugby is concerned may be interested to know they've signed a memorandum of understanding with RA supportive of Forrest's GRR comp & have advised the 19 NZ Super Rugby & M10 sides of GRR being interested in forming partnerships:

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=12181213

Not the devil incarnate, WoB, but no longer "the devil you know is better than etc". Still it's an interesting development and NZR appear to be more supportive than RA.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

Andy Marinos dropping some hints as to what's likely to happen when the SANZAAR board meets in March:

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=12181864

Personally I can't see SA going back to a structure that sees their teams spending twice as long in Australasia as the Aus & NZ teams spend in SA without a fight, being offered an incentive, or both.

Also interesting to see that the Crusaders will barely break even this year because of, not despite, hosting QF, SF & GF: the match fees plus 1/3 share of visitors transport & accomodation costs they had to pay wiping out their match-day revenues (hardly surprising when your stadium holds 24K max with temporary (which is to say, hired) seating).

https://crusaders.co.nz/news/1288-crusaders-limited-partnership-announce-breakeven-result-for-2019

 

[hoggy]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/headlines.cfm?c_id=4

So after World domination went down the plug hole, now they can't even take over a small pacific nation.

 

[Rebels3]

Andy Marinos dropping some hints as to what's likely to happen when the SANZAAR board meets in March:

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=12181864

Personally I can't see SA going back to a structure that sees their teams spending twice as long in Australasia as the Aus & NZ teams spend in SA without a fight, being offered an incentive, or both.

Also interesting to see that the Crusaders will barely break even this year because of, not despite, hosting QF, SF & GF: the match fees plus 1/3 share of visitors transport & accomodation costs they had to pay wiping out their match-day revenues (hardly surprising when your stadium holds 24K max with temporary (which is to say, hired) seating).

https://crusaders.co.nz/news/1288-crusaders-limited-partnership-announce-breakeven-result-for-2019

These guys are idiots.

So a round robin format is fair???? That’d be the case if each country had equal amount of teams. All that is going to happen is that people are going to complain about how unfair it is that NZ have more domestic games than the other teams. Reducing the teams to 14 will also mean half the teams have 7 home games the other half have 6. All it will take is a team missing out on the playoffs to a team that’s played 7 home games and they have played 6.

They also talk about dwindling crowds and TV numbers but wanna reduce derbies, which is one of the few things that rates and people attend.

With such a short season there is no perfect format. The only way this is ending is with SA going north, switching the format is just going to give them more ammunition.

SANZAAR give yourself an uppercut.

 

[Dismal Pillock]

These guys are idiots.

So a round robin format is fair????

wft I thought everyone hated the conf system because it gave the SA and Aus sides an easier ride to the playo..... oh. I see what you've done there.

 

[Lindommer]

Andy Marinos dropping some hints as to what's likely to happen when the SANZAAR board meets in March: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=12181864 Personally I can't see SA going back to a structure that sees their teams spending twice as long in Australasia as the Aus & NZ teams spend in SA on the road without a fight, being offered an incentive, or both.

Crap, Marinos (or others). Check my post #567 on this thread: http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/community/threads/s18-on-its-way.13275/page-29

 

[Rebels3]

wft I thought everyone hated the conf system because it gave the SA and Aus sides an easier ride to the playo... oh. I see what you've done there.

I have no issues with the conference system and most people i socialise with have no issues with it (although most of us watch a lot of us sport and used to the conference systems), however I get the kiwis issues with it, with the difficulty in the schedule it provides them. Most issues with the system are coming from across the Tasman, but to suggest a round robin is fair as well is ludacris, it simply maneuvers the easiness of the schedule from SA and Aus to NZ and the reduction of teams to 14 creates a massive advantage for 50% of teams. Overall my post was designed to highlight there is no perfect or fair schedule with such a short season or a competition played over ridiculous time zones. For these reasons alone, I believe it’s almost inevitable SAF will head north. Clearly not in the next few years but probably within the next 5-10. The system no matter how it’s designed will be systematically unfair for some teams and not for others.

 

[gel]

The conference system is poo.

Round robin the best and only way. But it needs to be an odd number of teams so that you have an even number of home and away games.

It is *not* fair and equal if some teams have 6 home games while others have 7.

 

[Quick Hands]

These guys are idiots.

So a round robin format is fair???? That’d be the case if each country had equal amount of teams. All that is going to happen is that people are going to complain about how unfair it is that NZ have more domestic games than the other teams. Reducing the teams to 14 will also mean half the teams have 7 home games the other half have 6. All it will take is a team missing out on the playoffs to a team that’s played 7 home games and they have played 6.

They also talk about dwindling crowds and TV numbers but wanna reduce derbies, which is one of the few things that rates and people attend.

With such a short season there is no perfect format. The only way this is ending is with SA going north, switching the format is just going to give them more ammunition.

SANZAAR give yourself an uppercut.

Ther problem isn't the format, the problem is the concept. It's dead in the water, but those with vested interests in the status quo won't admit it.

 

[Slim 293]

I have to agree with Rebels3 that there's nothing at all wrong with the conference format, and as he alludes to that system works perfectly fine in a number of sporting competitions that span large distances.............

And if Super Rugby was to continue as a worthy, viable international competition covering multiple continents then a conference system is necessary - the idea of a round robin format is ludicrous.

But it's not, so whatever.........

 

[hoggy]

Exactly, as has been pointed out, those in the so called tent of Australian rugby are all doing very well, the game is teetering on so called extinction here, yet were still signing $million contracts.

The problem is those that need to drive the change, are the ones most reluctant to change.

 

[Quick Hands]

Exactly, as has been pointed out, those in the so called tent of Australian rugby are all doing very well, the game is teetering on so called extinction here, yet were still signing $million contracts.

The problem is those that need to drive the change, are the ones most reluctant to change.

 

[hoggy]

https://www.therugbyruckus.com/#podcast

Rugby Ruckus podcast, check out number 18 with Brett Papworth, pretty much hard to argue with a thing he says

 

[Slim 293]

https://www.therugbyruckus.com/#podcast

Rugby Ruckus podcast, check out number 18 with Brett Papworth, pretty much hard to argue with a thing he says

That would be a first.........

 

[hoggy]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby...-rugbys-future-is-leaner-cleaner---and-stable

 

[dru]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby...-rugbys-future-is-leaner-cleaner---and-stable

Obviously a NZ-centric view. I suspect things are somewhat more complex from Aus perspective and Africa is other matter entirely. A “round robin” without conferences is hardly a substantial step for Australia. In some ways it’s a backwards step - fewer home games fewer derbies which we are told is needed.

I would think that two main things need consideration for a more commercially successful Super comp:
1. Strategy for Income outside of the SANZAAR nations
2. Strategy for Income within what is far and away the largest SANZAAR national economy

Cutting Japan does little for 1, reducing appeal to Aus broadcasting does little for 2.

[It’s kind of tedious watching this slo-mo train crash, but occasionally I feel the need to repeat myself. I’ll show myself out now.]

 

[half]

Friday week, Rebels and Brumbies and its all on again.

What metrics measurement do we use for whether Super Rugby is still declining, has bottomed and climbing back, or is terminal and in need of a new plan for Australian rugby.

As an aside, cricket, soccer have both experienced mega falls in both crowds and ratings. Does this influence how we measure Super Rugby metrics.

 

[Aurelius]

Friday week, Rebels and Brumbies and its all on again.

What metrics measurement do we use for whether Super Rugby is still declining, has bottomed and climbing back, or is terminal and in need of a new plan for Australian rugby.

As an aside, cricket, soccer have both experienced mega falls in both crowds and ratings. Does this influence how we measure Super Rugby metrics.

Haven't followed soccer long enough to have an informed opinion, but in cricket the issue is obviously one of too much quantity and declining quality. The BBL, for example, has gone from each team playing 10 games in the regular season to 14, and it's not drawing in the marquee players it used to (the Pietersens, Sangakaras, Kallis' etc) because other T20 leagues are competing with the BBL and offering more money for shorter seasons.

I'm still paying just enough attention to Super Rugby to see that the same issues are going to crop up there (or more accurately, continue cropping up) especially post-World Cup. Losing Adam Coleman? Not good.

 

[Dan54]

I have to agree with Rebels3 that there's nothing at all wrong with the conference format, and as he alludes to that system works perfectly fine in a number of sporting competitions that span large distances.....

And if Super Rugby was to continue as a worthy, viable international competition covering multiple continents then a conference system is necessary - the idea of a round robin format is ludicrous.

But it's not, so whatever...

Actually Slim while I never been a fan of conference system, and we can like it or not, but if we stop and remember Heinekin cup is basically a conference system, and that seems to run ok!