Where to for Super Rugby?

[Omar Comin']

If South Africa agrees to drop two teams I don't think the ARU are going to stand in the way of a reduction to 15 teams by vetoing everything.

I don't think they will either, but I think it would be disgraceful. The only change we should agree to in the short term is 3 conferences of 6, in a similar model to Super XV.

There's no good reason for us to drop a team. The whole point of doing so would be to try and keep our very best players based domestically for as long as possible, which we both agree will fail in the long run.

The only possible reason I would agree to it would be if it was the only way to get a closed Trans-Tasman (maybe plus Japan) conference. But that is clearly not on the table if South Africa are looking to cut teams. And even then I'm not sure it would be a good idea. One of the big negatives is that it would reduce our ability to develop a legitimate plan B in the future. If we used our veto we'd have 3 years to figure something out based around our 5 existing teams. And if we were willing to go off on our own I really believe NZ would stick with us anyway.

 

[Brumby Runner]

I agree with all those things.

The question is how to change them though.

BH, I agree with most of the views you've put forward in this discussion. It is absurd to think Aus rugby can go it alone, either in competition structure or in law modifications. It is a world game and while we want to be part of that world we are bound to the laws put in place by WR (World Rugby).

We can lobby for change, and I'm sure in the past both ARU and NZRU have done just that, probably with little impact. However, we could still try if we can see improvements to be had in the way of scrums and mauls.

With scrums, I think all offences should be long arm penalties but without the option of taking a penalty goal attempt. No stuffing about with short arms, and non-offending sides electing to scrum again unless perhaps if it is a 5m scrum in the action.

The call at a maul should be to use it on the first occasion it it becomes immobile. No second shoves. And the attacking team should be penalised for swimming off the side as the defending side is when they do it.

I'm sure there would be a distinct drop in the number and duration of scrum and maul activities if law changes like these could be brought in, but that the dominant scrum will still be rewarded and a properly constructed maul will still form part of the overall game experience.

 

[dru]

I've reached a point where I'm completely comfortable with moving to a domestic comp. it would work something like this:

1. Unequivocably veto any reduction in team numbers. Now.
2. Propose a trans-Tasman comp to follow current commitments out to 2020.
3. When that fails, announce a withdrawal from after 2020 BUT
4. Offer a Champions League to follow the domestic comp.
5. Aus would NOT offer the top two/three teams to the Champions League but two/three SOO style teams. To be coached from an extended WB coaching team.
6. Open offer to NZ to revert to a trans Tasman comp any time they wake up.

Discussion around Japan/Pacific Islands etc to be pursued simply on an opportunistic basis within or without of the domestic comp.

Let the SRU sort out 3 teams in conjunction with a fourth set up by Waratahs. NSWRU can sort its shit out.

QRU continues in conjunction with rep Premier teams. Three all up.

Add in Canberra, Melbourne, Perth.

TV rights to the domestic comp to be negotiated based on higher content, local content, friendly time zonez.

SOO teams if two are:
Aus Red: Qld SOO + Melbourne + Perth.
Aus Blue: NSW SOO + ACT.

SOO teams if three are:
Aus Red Qld domestic teams
Aus Blue NSW domestic teams
Aus White (or what ever) ACT, Vic, WA

If they dont want the Champions League, then set up the three SOO teams at then end of the domestic season to prepare for the WB internationals.

When NZ finally changes their mind, they had a chance on the Ground Floor, now let them sort how we gel from here.

Super as it is, is the slow death of Aus rugby. Time to change.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I tend to think if we do ever see a TT competition it will be both NZ and our market penchant for derbies that will see it get up. The NZ fans are big fans of the derbies as are ours with games featuring teams against either ones opposition from across the Tasman coming second.

The connection to SA has been on the slide for some time and I can see it only gaining momentum.

 

[half]

I think a Trans Tasman comp prior to 2020 is massively unlikely but I think we are slowly heading down that path of it becoming more acceptable as the long term plan to NZ. I think plan B is staying in Super Rugby for the next few years.

The upheaval of leaving Super Rugby, launching multiple new teams in the space of an offseason and then expecting that competition to be financially viable with no significant reserves to be able to give it time to grow would be financial suicide.

If Australia does have to lose a team (hopefully that won't happen but it does seem likely), I don't think it is a viable option to withdraw from Super Rugby instead, launch a new comp and add 3 teams all before next season.

I hate to say I told you so.

But I have been arguing this for maybe two years or more on this forum, mostly to negative responses.

Not saying this is simple but to repeat my long argued belief.

The ARU needs to gather all our stakeholders and develop a inclusive and acceptable to all solution. To have ready to go by the next media deal.

That little to no work has been done IMO is neglect by the ARU. IMO it was always a five to six year process to listen, develop, listen more, talk to media networks, its not easy and its a hell of a lot of work and a hell of a lot of arguing.

I don't believe our current leadership has shown the where with all to undertake this task of being able to unite the tribes by commanding not demanding respect.

In fact the rushed NRC [IMO very rushed] and moving the local district Saturday morning competition to Sunday to fix the clash with private schools has resulted in huge numbers dropping out. Plus the NRC does not have close to universal support within the rugby community.

Just as an example the FFA Cup, a very common cup world wide in soccer, in fact most soccer playing nations have an FA cup. FFA spent 4 [four] years in negotiation with all stakeholders. Yet before they started everyone wanted it. Working these things out is not as easy as having a few board meetings and saying from a high saying we are going to do this will not work.

We need to spend time with all rugby stakeholders and let everyone have their say and come up with a solution. Its not easy by any means.

 

[Braveheart81]

I hate to say I told you so.

But I have been arguing this for maybe two years or more on this forum, mostly to negative responses.

The biggest impediment has been the fact that NZRU had no interest in that and were intent on Super Rugby with South Africa and the expansion of that competition.

That position seems to be pretty rapidly changing mostly due to the failure of the expansion to 18 teams.

 

[mark_s]

Seems to be a rush to throw the baby out with the bathwater here.

I think a purely domestic comp is a poor idea with bad outcomes for Aus rugby. How would rugby succeed here going head to head with NRL AND AFL? Its no chance. Even a trans-tasman comp has limitations that I would be wary about, and I think NZ likes seeing/playing the SA teams.

Super rugby has been very positive for all 3 nations (Aus, NZ and SA) up until the last couple of years. Its a matter of making changes (not small changes, but not large in number either) to address the key issues

Aus and SA players are spread to thin, not at all helped by the player drain to Europe and Japan which neither of us can stem. The answer is to shrink to strength in both countries.

Helpfully, by doing so, it means Sanzar also addresses the other biggest issue of the current competition which is the draw/team pools/finals format - but this can't be that hard and the moving of the international window will also help to keep interest in super rugby (which dies out now during the break).

 

[Omar Comin']

Aus and SA players are spread to thin, not at all helped by the player drain to Europe and Japan which neither of us can stem. The answer is to shrink to strength in both countries.

So then when the gap in salaries between here and overseas widens further and 4 teams spreads the top Australian talent too thin do we go back to 3 teams? And then 2? And then 1? Is keeping our Wallabies based domestically worth losing fans and hindering grassroots development? Because that's what will happen if rugby abandons entire regions.

 

[mark_s]

Maybe, but you deal with that if/when it happens.

I am not sure why the pay gap will continue to widen, plus its not only about money for players who head OS - there are also lifestyle and national representation considerations.

 

[wamberal]

Got it the wrong way around champ. Rugby is not abandoning regions, regions are abandoning rugby.

How else to explain how buoyant the Force's support base was when the franchise was launched, contrasted with the current situation. Ditto for all our franchises, to one extent or another.


We are in a holding pattern at best, waiting for a deus ex machina.

 

[Omar Comin']

Got it the wrong way around champ. Rugby is not abandoning regions, regions are abandoning rugby.

How else to explain how buoyant the Force's support base was when the franchise was launched, contrasted with the current situation. Ditto for all our franchises, to one extent or another.

We are in a holding pattern at best, waiting for a deus ex machina.

Well you'll never get any of these people back by cutting their teams. And you'll lose a whole lot more people that have stuck around.

The causes for Rugby's decline are obvious for anyone to see. It's a combination of performance and the sporting market here becoming a lot more competitive over the last decade or so with the advent of the A League, Big Bash, further AFL expansion, big money for the NRL etc. And all these competitions cater to local audiences and aren't glorified selection trials for something else. Rugby is basically set up in Australia to be a bandwagon sport. It doesn't focus on tribalism and local engagement to the same extent as the competition and it suffers because of it - except in those times where one of our teams does well in a big international competition. Of course, our teams only play in international competitions so lean years are guaranteed. Meanwhile in the other sports Australian teams win and make the finals every year. They also play every week at a good time for over 20 weeks in the year.

 

[Omar Comin']

Maybe, but you deal with that if/when it happens.

I am not sure why the pay gap will continue to widen, plus its not only about money for players who head OS - there are also lifestyle and national representation considerations.

Well that's been the trend for the past 10 years so why will it stop widening?

Rugby is going from strength to strength in Europe, with well set up, full length club seasons that focus on local rivalries and which attract significant private investment. The 6 Nations continues to grow revenues at a good rate, which gets reinvested locally, and in the longer term the game is growing in big new markets like Germany and Spain.

Compare that to here where we play a union controlled, shorter test rugby preparation tournament across multiple time zones that no one but the biggest die hards can fully engage with. It's not attractive to private investors, there is little tribalism, teams disappear for weeks at a time to play in the middle of the night, and people are switching off.

Of course the pay gap will continue to widen while all this is true.

 

[Gnostic]

In all honesty I am almost at the point of not caring if all of Super Rugby disappeared. For two years now I have watched the Australian trot out and then give all sorts of excuses for abysmal skill execution. Skill issues that I have been discussing here along with others for well over 7 years.

I have to say the best Rugby I have watched this year apart from the NZ Super sides playing each other was the 6N and some Top 14. There has not been a single Australian Derby match that was worth watching beginning to end. The best was a 30 minute patch by the Reds a couple of weeks ago. IMHO if I wasn't waiting for the next season of Game of Thrones I would have dropped Pay TV and be waiting for the Shute to start.

 

[half]

The biggest impediment has been the fact that NZRU had no interest in that and were intent on Super Rugby with South Africa and the expansion of that competition.

That position seems to be pretty rapidly changing mostly due to the failure of the expansion to 18 teams.

Disagree the biggest by far impediment was a crazy belief the Super Rugby would work and people should stop posting such rubbish. As if the bubble that was Super Rugby did not need to react to other codes expanding around them.

Remember I kept asking to prepare and if Super Rugby fell apart we would be ready.

I have been called a troll,overly negative, living in a fantasy world, I could go on.

So as ratings, fans, fell away it was not an issue . Its only become an issue IMO because the broadcasters are pissed off with the ratings.

To me it beggars belief with the SA government position we were not sounding alarm bells.

What's more important is not further chest beating by me but actually having a leadership group who understand and can lead us in a new direction.

 

[MarkJ]

My worry is that with the decision taking so long that blokes from the Force/Brumbies/Rebels will take the certainty of a European/Japanese contract now rather than wait on tenterhooks here, unable to negotiate a new deal.

So by the time we (possibly) have 4 teams, the depth will be just as bad because all those blokes have left.

 

[Tex]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...p/news-story/ca4c6d13a93022cc45c43da44119dd8d

Looks ominously detailed for the standard speculative bs we've been drip-fed so far.

 

[p.Tah]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...p/news-story/ca4c6d13a93022cc45c43da44119dd8d

Looks ominously detailed for the standard speculative bs we've been drip-fed so far.

He quotes no one or references a source. Still BS in my mind but time will tell.
Just a damaging article when there is no confirmation given the sensitivities. I'm disappointed with Jamie.

 

[BaysideBird]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...p/news-story/ca4c6d13a93022cc45c43da44119dd8d

Looks ominously detailed for the standard speculative bs we've been drip-fed so far.

If its true...

How to kill Perth Rugby in two easy steps

Step 1: This ^^^^
Step 2: Let the NRL waltz and pick up the scraps.

The Force are finally producing their own talented youngsters, it was never going to be an overnight job. All that money wasted so the old boys can let Canberra keep the financial sinkhole that is the Brumbies. I don't believe they are ever going to be a solid, talent producing franchise again. They will just continue to take leftovers and handouts, and all the progress in Perth will end up in Rugby Leagues hands. Fucking disgraceful...

If its not...

That's still fucked...

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

Pando's article is paywalled. Google "Western Force set to be axed from competition in Super Rugby revamp" to get around it.

 

[Tex]

He quotes no one or references a source. Still BS in my mind but time will tell.
Just a damaging article when there is no confirmation given the sensitivities. I'm disappointed with Jamie.

Certainly damaging, might even force a statement from the ARU. I read it and assumed he was given the story from HQ, but can't see the strategic advantage for leaking it.