Bandar
Bob Loudon (25)
They got change - now they don't have to go to Singapore to play a Japanese team
Where to for Super Rugby?
- Thread starter Quick Hands
- Start date
- Status
They got change - now they don't have to go to Singapore to play a Japanese team
hoggy
Nev Cottrell (35)
I've always been curious regards why SA has not put more resources into the Currie Cup, concentrating on there own domestic market to grow the game with 12/14 provinces.
Essentially if they are bringing in the greatest percentage of revenue, which by shear definition means they are providing the largest audience (Europe aside) why not direct those funds into SA.
I understand the desire to play NZ and AUS, but what is SA getting out of Super rugby that it cannot get out of a domestic competition with greater following, if there own market is providing the bulk of the funds.
sunnyboys
Bob Loudon (25)
RE: NZR attitude to Oz decline
What do you think would happen to Oz crowds, viewers and broadcast deals if the Test team and Super Rugby teams won >85% of all games we played against NZ, year in and year out? Do you think RA would be happy with this? Do you think RA would be concerned at NZ rugby's decline?
On SA - the broadcaster Supersports has ownership stakes in Super Rugby teams. They are full invested in making Super Rugby work.
What do you think would happen to Oz crowds, viewers and broadcast deals if the Test team and Super Rugby teams won >85% of all games we played against NZ, year in and year out? Do you think RA would be happy with this? Do you think RA would be concerned at NZ rugby's decline?
On SA - the broadcaster Supersports has ownership stakes in Super Rugby teams. They are full invested in making Super Rugby work.
S
Show-n-go
Guest
surely Europe is more appealing to SA though, purely on tv viewership alone
They really haven't given the Pro14 a good stab sending over their weak teams that got pillaged before they left anyway
They really haven't given the Pro14 a good stab sending over their weak teams that got pillaged before they left anyway
Dismal Pillock
Michael Lynagh (62)
Sure, I could do with another souvenir postcard for my collection.
Maybe take it to the Avatar bet thread with the specific terms of the wager and a customer service representative will be with you "momentarily" as a seppo might say.
Strewthcobber
Simon Poidevin (60)
South Africa is almost insolvent because they pay way too many players too much money to play in their domestic competition.
They spread their top resource too thinly over the Currie Cup teams, meaning lots of fairly ordinary players are pro rugby players, and at the same time they can't afford to keep their best players in the country - they aren't getting paid enough.
The Super rugby teams concentrate player payments somewhat to the elite, plus they get to play NZ teams (and Aus too)
dru
David Wilson (68)
I think RSA has a shot at survival through shear weight of numbers. They are not going to hold onto their elite, but they do have a chance at creating a large enough production line that continuously produces a sufficient number of players of sufficient quality to continue success at international level.
Australia has not a snowflake’s chance at this model. Less emphatic but ditto for NZ.
Australia has not a snowflake’s chance at this model. Less emphatic but ditto for NZ.
hoggy
Nev Cottrell (35)
Yes but what suits there market, surely concentrating on promoting the Currie Cup in the long term would bring greater benefits especially if they are so broke, why are they subsidizing the AUS & NZ markets.
14 Currie Cup teams with say 35 professional players that's 490 professional players, they can reduce that by half then.
I don't get the ordinary professional player argument though (heck there's a few guys running around AFL that aren't exactly brilliant), but so what if that suits the market.
Yes they play NZ & AUS, but hey that strategy isn't exactly working, and what do we have test rugby for, or why not Heineken/European cup competitions.
dru
David Wilson (68)
I don’t think it is correct to say that the Saffers subsidise NZ/Aus. The RSA market does open up broadcast market into Europe and that pumps money in but the product being sold is SANZAAR not domestic RSA rugby. Domestic rugby as a market has nothing like the opportunity of Australia.
SARU split Currie Cup into premier division of franchises which targeted professionalism and next tier “first division” which was meant to focus back on amateurism. The franchises were to be opened up to international opportunity. Griquas and Pumas targeted one of the less known rugby comps that is a short season.
The recent change to numbers away from elite probably takes the first tier back to quasi pro. There will be politics involved as they want to get the game inculcated across the poorer black areas. It is extremely important to the way things work.
Div 1 Currie cup also has Namibia, Argentine XV.
SARU has done questionable things but right now they are switched on and in action. They are not twiddling thumbs while sycophantically pawning to NZ leadership of SANZAAR they are actively chasing the future of the game in Africa.
If only Australia.
SARU split Currie Cup into premier division of franchises which targeted professionalism and next tier “first division” which was meant to focus back on amateurism. The franchises were to be opened up to international opportunity. Griquas and Pumas targeted one of the less known rugby comps that is a short season.
The recent change to numbers away from elite probably takes the first tier back to quasi pro. There will be politics involved as they want to get the game inculcated across the poorer black areas. It is extremely important to the way things work.
Div 1 Currie cup also has Namibia, Argentine XV.
SARU has done questionable things but right now they are switched on and in action. They are not twiddling thumbs while sycophantically pawning to NZ leadership of SANZAAR they are actively chasing the future of the game in Africa.
If only Australia.
WorkingClassRugger
Michael Lynagh (62)
I still think there's a way Super Rugby can satisfy both of those needs. A two phased competition would be the most ideal set up. The first being 8 team leagues and the second being a combined Cup competition. This would provide SA with more emphasis on domestic Rugby with the exception of still having the Jaguares competing with them. We could cut another team from Super Rugby in terms of funding to form another 8 team league with the 5 NZ teams. This would be accompanied with opening the door for GRR to have a 2nd Aus based team (ideally the team cut from RA funding) to ensure it gets to 8 teams itself.
Japan could be integrated into this structure using its Top League structure. All teams play their 16 week league (14 rounds plus finals) and then the leagues are split into depending on whether there are 3 or 4 either 8 x 4 pools playing at least one game against each opponent for 3 with the winner of each pool progressing to the Super 8 stage or home and away for 6 games with the same progression to finals. Or if only 3 then 4 x 6 pools playing each other once for 5 games with the top 2 progressing to the Super 8 stages.
Omar Comin'
Chilla Wilson (44)
Interesting tidbit from a Rich Freeman article yesterday about Japanese rugby:
"While the demise of the Sunwolves makes for depressing reading there may be some light at the end of the tunnel. Changes on the JRFU board are set to put in place committee men who share the same views as Joseph and Leitch. Among them is Sunwolves CEO Yuji Watase, who is hoping to keep the team involved in Super Rugby in one way or another. One thing Watase said he was looking at was forming a joint venture with an overseas team or teams and lending Japanese players to those sides."
https://english.kyodonews.net/news/...an-coach-joseph-defends-sunwolves-policy.html
Presumably that team or teams would be Australian. Not sure how they keep the Sunwolves brand alive through something like this, but I'm sure RA and 1 or 2 (or 4) of our Super Rugby teams would be open minded to a link up if there was a financial component to it. It would cost the JRFU a lot less to get say 15-20 Japanese eligible players in Super Rugby this way than the fee it has had to pay to have the Sunwolves in the competition.
"While the demise of the Sunwolves makes for depressing reading there may be some light at the end of the tunnel. Changes on the JRFU board are set to put in place committee men who share the same views as Joseph and Leitch. Among them is Sunwolves CEO Yuji Watase, who is hoping to keep the team involved in Super Rugby in one way or another. One thing Watase said he was looking at was forming a joint venture with an overseas team or teams and lending Japanese players to those sides."
https://english.kyodonews.net/news/...an-coach-joseph-defends-sunwolves-policy.html
Presumably that team or teams would be Australian. Not sure how they keep the Sunwolves brand alive through something like this, but I'm sure RA and 1 or 2 (or 4) of our Super Rugby teams would be open minded to a link up if there was a financial component to it. It would cost the JRFU a lot less to get say 15-20 Japanese eligible players in Super Rugby this way than the fee it has had to pay to have the Sunwolves in the competition.
Dan54
David Wilson (68)
How is NZ the leader of SANZAAR? All 3 countries have same vote dru, wasn't it Saffas who were blamed for moving on Sunwolves? Your ability to blame NZ for all Aus rugby's woes is quite enterprising, but shows that the problem maybe that to a nimberso called rugby supporters here are living with head in sand unfortunately, and can't see that Aus rugby's problems if they have them are caused by Aus rugby, noone else!! mind you mate, I quite prepared to listen to the instances where NZ is to blame for Super rugby's problems.
swingpass
Peter Sullivan (51)
interesting there already exists a MOU between the Rebels and the Sunwolves about this sort of thing.
Rugbynutter39
Michael Lynagh (62)
For me the sun wolves would be better for global rapid rugby
half
Dick Tooth (41)
Outside on helmet.
Enter into the world we should not talk about.
I.e what other codes are doing.
Remember I keep mentioning letting a new comp in where the teams control the comp.
Guess what soccer just did it and it will grow there game.
From the roar.
https://www.theroar.com.au/2019/07/01/ffa-reaches-in-principle-agreement-for-independent-a-league/
Enter into the world we should not talk about.
I.e what other codes are doing.
Remember I keep mentioning letting a new comp in where the teams control the comp.
Guess what soccer just did it and it will grow there game.
From the roar.
https://www.theroar.com.au/2019/07/01/ffa-reaches-in-principle-agreement-for-independent-a-league/
hoggy
Nev Cottrell (35)
Exactly, it doesn't happen in rugby because of to many vested interests or more appropriately self interest. You may not agree with all his views, but Brett Papworth summed it up nicely in describing the set up of Rugby in Australia.
"about 150 people are doing very nicely out of the game in this country, and are in no hurry to change things, while the rest of the game is falling of a cliff."
half
Dick Tooth (41)
There are a number of articles now on the change to the running of the A-League.
What is a common theme in them all was this is only the start.
For me what is most interesting is the financial relationship between the clubs and the governing body. Essentially from what I have read is FFA will receive a percentage of the revenue received from the A-League clubs.
How about that, the national domestic competition paying a fee to the national body.
Very strong rumours as well 10 want 2 A-League games next year and are in negotiation with Fox.
At some point the penny must drop, let me type this slowly so the slow hopefully those not on board will understand.
Broadcasters want quantity at watchable times. Further something that each major population centre has people they can connect to.
Issue is those at the bottom, cannot unite around demanding change. This results in those in charge being able to create divisions at lower levels. Look at this site alone many people support RA ideas and solutions, many still support minor changes to Super Rugby, many still think the NRC is a great idea.
Hoggy this is the best example I can give to explain what I mean. Compare the reaction to ideas expressed by two people in there codes. Many in each code don't like them and many within their codes think are a bit extreme. But one code understands the need to change and to change they have to unite around agree positions and change at the end the final structure and the other code argue constantly about the ideas suggest ulterior motives and what team he is with and do we like that team.
Compare the support that Craig Foster gets and the support that Bret Papworth gets. The soccer folk understand Foster's heart is in the right place and support him, understanding he can help drive change. Its amazing that Papworth gets it in the neck. Most soccer people understand the Utopian world Craig Fosters wants will never come to pass but equally they understand he is part of a united force against soccer's governing body.
WE need to kick out those in the governing body, reshape the governing body and develop a logical pathway forward.
Also we need to be prepared to destroy whats there if we don't get what we want. Many will think I am mad in saying we need to be prepared to destroy professional rugby to save it. No existing union has the intellect and media connections and government connection to pull us out of the fire nor do they have the capital. Nor for that matter do the Australian Super Rugby teams.
We will do any of the above. I very much doubt it.
Tomikin
David Codey (61)
Well first off you bastards could lose a few more games more often, and letting us win the Bledisloe once every say 2 - 3 years wouldnt go astray.
Dan54
David Wilson (68)
Ok Tomikin, I will write to NZRU immediately, and get them to issue an apology- Status