Jamie
Billy Sheehan (19)
Valid point but again as far as a Super Rugby membership goes. 6 home games is not enough. I want more Tahs games if I’m going to pay for a membership not less.
Where to for Super Rugby?
- Thread starter Quick Hands
- Start date
- Status
Valid point but again as far as a Super Rugby membership goes. 6 home games is not enough. I want more Tahs games if I’m going to pay for a membership not less.
WorkingClassRugger
Michael Lynagh (62)
It would have to be really meaningful for it to draw in the necessary funding in order to support the professional franchises. Which I suspect it won't. Club footy is great and all but they don't rate and therefore add little to any real value. We need to look to suit ourselves and that means exploring more opportunities to play meaningful games against meaningful opposition.
Rebels3
Jim Lenehan (48)
Under the new method teams will play the other Aus teams once, and only every second year at home. As a QLDer living in Melb, only getting to see that rivalry every two years, is simply not good enough.
Playing the reds, Tahs and Brumbies three times wouldn’t bother me at all.
Playing the reds, Tahs and Brumbies three times wouldn’t bother me at all.
hoggy
Nev Cottrell (35)
It would be great to have a domestic competition with private money helping to fund it, and also accepting that we can't compete with the money in Europe, select Wallabies playing overseas, and build it up slowly. I would go for 8 teams to start, reduce the Sydney teams by two. But it ain't gonna happen sadly.
dru
David Wilson (68)
Where do I sign up?
WorkingClassRugger
Michael Lynagh (62)
Part of me would like to see the franchises seek out GRR with a proposal for a 12 team double round robin competition. Open up the borders in terms of where players can play. As in as long as they play on GRR they are Wallaby eligible. Seek out private backing where possible and look to do as GRR intends and sign as much of the best available international talent.
hoggy
Nev Cottrell (35)
It will be interesting to see how GRR plays out, especially as it may not be so handicapped like Super rugby to adjust to consumer demands. If he can get private money and broadcasters involved and produce an attractive competition, it may very well quickly make Super rugby redundant, (due to the inability of that competition to evolve).
WorkingClassRugger
Michael Lynagh (62)
That's a big part of why I'm interested in the concept. That and it's being set up in a much different way in comparison to Super Rugby which is hamstrung by Union machinations. It's primarily out to entertain and draw in mass interest. Now, that may take 5-10 years to really begin to see results but small tweaks that while still protecting the integrity of the game offer audiences a more enjoyable experience will go a long way toward that.
I cannot remember where I saw it but someone 'discovered' (by echoing something many have been saying for yonks) the issue with Super Rugby is that it's not treated as a commercial property. More a glorified trial system for the Test arena. Which is exactly the issue. The international game is vitally important in Rugby but it cannot be the be all and end all in its ability to generate interest and value. A good mix of both is what is needed and it can be achieved.
Rebels3
Jim Lenehan (48)
Anything that’s potentially built needs to be simple, in our time zone and leverage the existing strengths in the market, of which rugby has 4 recognizable brands, the Wallabies, Waratahs, Reds and to a lesser extent the Brumbies. Getting rid of any of these brands isn’t smart business. They are the brands that drive recognition and positive association to businesses and the general public.
The problem has been these brands haven’t been leveraged correctly. Having the North Sydney Cuddly Bears, Brisbane Pelicans etc. wouldn’t be appealing to many commercial entities and I don’t think to the vast majority of fans either. You’d be better off having a semi-pro comp made up of existing clubs. Even those clubs would struggle to attract talent if the Tahs, Reds etc. were removed to aspire to.
Hence why I believe the only viable option in Australia is an Aus League with the existing teams. Also having teams from Hong Kong etc. won’t solve any issues as they aren’t relatable to the audience in any capacity.
The problem has been these brands haven’t been leveraged correctly. Having the North Sydney Cuddly Bears, Brisbane Pelicans etc. wouldn’t be appealing to many commercial entities and I don’t think to the vast majority of fans either. You’d be better off having a semi-pro comp made up of existing clubs. Even those clubs would struggle to attract talent if the Tahs, Reds etc. were removed to aspire to.
Hence why I believe the only viable option in Australia is an Aus League with the existing teams. Also having teams from Hong Kong etc. won’t solve any issues as they aren’t relatable to the audience in any capacity.
WorkingClassRugger
Michael Lynagh (62)
Ideally, yeah. We'd have an Aus league. Problem is do we have the interest and more importantly finances to do it? Our only real options outside of Super Rugby will need to involve a level of international play alongside domestic offerings. I look at what GRR is looking to do as a happier medium. Games in time zones that better fit our audiences with if we were ever to see all the Aus teams involved and GRR got another team in their alongside the PI squads a good number of teams relevant to Aus consumers.
And as important having a purely domestic competition is what's more important going from what we see from the likes of the A-League and NBL is the opportunity if done right to create arguably the best Rugby competition in the world. Which plays a big part in why the likes of the AFL and NRL are so popular while the A-League and NBL both with larger participation bases are far less relevant in the eyes of their bases.
hoggy
Nev Cottrell (35)
Agreed they haven't been leveraged properly, but how do you do that, take the Wararahs, 6/7 home games a year, no NSW derbies, games in the wrong time zones against opposition no on gives a f___k(sorry SA), the problem is how do you leverage those brands when the competition structure does not allow you to do that.
And secondly when the RA's only real priority is the Wallabies you end up shoving a square peg in a round hole.
The reality is we have 5 pro rugby teams in Aus, how do we get to a minimum of 8 and how do we fund it and take advantage of champion league style comps to supplement its income.
It can be done, but the RA are only interested in the Wallabies and only interested in driving that agenda, (that's why its never happened here) regardless of the slow decline of the game here PS (those in the tent are all still getting paid well).
So that's why the only real alternative is someone like Twiggy shaking things up.
half
Dick Tooth (41)
Sarcasm is not your strong suite.
I understand you don’t believe it, and maybe even think there is an agenda.
If you don’t think the A-League was a sports market disrupter, then so be it. Most evidence and commentary of the time suggest otherwise. Yep other forms of cricket were in play no one is denying that, and no one is saying it was the only or even major reason, simply it was commentated on by many within the cricket and AFL and netball world in Australia.
However and far more important is how rugby has reacted to the changing Australian sporting landscape.
As I said IMO we have two choices, attempt to develop a totally new operating system by introducing private capital and a franchise team concept. Or stay as we are and hope things will get better.
We are in terminal decline, and unless we have the courage nay balls to challenge the status-que and just develop a system for rugby then we will drift at an increasing rate into indifference in the Australian sporting market.
My ideas to halt this and introduce both capital and smarts is I think well understood and its not super rugby.
Rugbynutter39
Michael Lynagh (62)
What is not hard to understand? - this is the age of the customer where fierce competition for sports fans to engage with your product by providing a full fan and entertainment experience. Many sports and innovations they are introducing which is facilatating them to act as disrupters eg big bash cricket, afl juggernaut etc etc. You are either the disrupter or the disrupted. Rugby with its stale and outdated super rugby product that continues to create misalignment with the growing trends and demands of the modern day sports fan has been the disrupted clearly and not the disrupter that products like afl have been in growing new markets in traditional nrl and rugby strongholds. Why do you think world rugby endorsed rapid rugby? Because it recognises to be relevant in this region it needs new disruptive products and competition that better compete and align to the needs of the modern day sports fan.
Rugby Australia recognises this but imho was late to the party in coming to this realisation.
Rugby Australia recognises this but imho was late to the party in coming to this realisation.
RebelYell
Arch Winning (36)
Question to ponder - with South Africa opening their doors for all overseas based players to be Test eligible, and earning capability greater for SA players in Aus than at home, would we be open to allowing each team the right to sign a couple of capped Springboks?
Rebels3
Jim Lenehan (48)
I’d welcome a springbok or two, but only if they’re legitimate internationals, I wouldn’t want any mid range player that an Aussie could fill the role from. Could potentially get a few over here obviously not earning what they could in Europe but maybe more in SA with the proviso they know they will be released for any boks training camps etc throughout the season.
Rugbynutter39
Michael Lynagh (62)
Nah if capped Springboks going to head overseas and leave their homeland they would go to Europe which travel wise probably just as friendly to head back home for personal visits to family etc as Australia and earning way bigger bucks than pro rugby via super rugby and global rapid rugby can pay.
Highlander35
Steve Williams (59)
Once you get over that 3 or 4 hour mark, where it's not a huge deal, North-South Travel is much easier on the body than East-West Travel.
Rugbynutter39
Michael Lynagh (62)
Sydney to Johannesburg flight time = 14.5 hours
Johannesburg to London flight time = 11.5 hours
Earnings in Europe vs Super Rugby = at least 1.5 times
No brainer.....but already proof is there with how many SA players in Europe vs Australia/NZ - seriously if anyone thinking SA capped rugby players interested in any Southern Hemisphere competitions outside of SA vs Heading to Northern Hemisphere fob bigger bucks they have rocks in their heads....
Johannesburg to London flight time = 11.5 hours
Earnings in Europe vs Super Rugby = at least 1.5 times
No brainer.....but already proof is there with how many SA players in Europe vs Australia/NZ - seriously if anyone thinking SA capped rugby players interested in any Southern Hemisphere competitions outside of SA vs Heading to Northern Hemisphere fob bigger bucks they have rocks in their heads....
Rugbynutter39
Michael Lynagh (62)
We need a new thread - as super rugby as a brand, competition and regional relevance is dying and accelerating rapidly into irrelevance....everybody knows it and now frantically have RA looking for alternatives as they did not have the foresight or funds/capital to do anything about it in many past years and equally struggling to understand how to reverse it.
Those with money who can provide ideas are the options to consider - that is League of Nations, GRR and anyone else who can stump the dollars and ideas to stop the carnage and reverse the terminal trend decline the pro game followed in oz that RA just struggled to do anything about alone...
This is like watching the Titanic go down in slow motion but seriously the history of the bureaucracy and lack of credible leadership means while the Titanic is near the bottom of the ocean many still think it is above the waterline in senior circles...
Those with money who can provide ideas are the options to consider - that is League of Nations, GRR and anyone else who can stump the dollars and ideas to stop the carnage and reverse the terminal trend decline the pro game followed in oz that RA just struggled to do anything about alone...
This is like watching the Titanic go down in slow motion but seriously the history of the bureaucracy and lack of credible leadership means while the Titanic is near the bottom of the ocean many still think it is above the waterline in senior circles...
hoggy
Nev Cottrell (35)
That's because those in the Tent are all still enjoying a nice cruise along the river, yes the ship is sinking, but the whole set up here means those at the top of the ladder are still enjoying canopies and champagne.
And nothing is ever going to change while the only team the RA supports or really cares about is the Wallabies.
- Status