Where to for Super Rugby?

[WorkingClassRugger]

Be interesting to see what unfolds as if we see a domestic competition this would likely include the force as clearly twiggy funding the force means they could be strong viable side in domestic comp. No idea how this would all work but the think tank should be talking to twiggy and his team.

He's how it would work. Either we take our current 5 pro teams and find a 6th and run it similar to the Super 6 concept in Scotland but on a larger scale. Particularly short term in regards to borders being closed. Once they reopen we do the above and add in Fiji and Samoa/combined Samoa/Tongan side. Could base that side somewhere in Aus. Likely either Brisbane or Sydney. Taking games to both Islands but looking to connect with the diaspora here as well.

 

[dru]

Of course we bloody well need the Keewees in particular. Unless Twiggy throws a helluva lot of money around.

You are missing a few caveats here, Wam.

The design of any pro or second tier game with or without the Kiwis must, no exceptions, meet Australian requirements. To level the playing field they need to change AB selection policy to select from any team/franchise in the comp, not restricted to NZ. They need to accept a playing schedule that provides broadcast times that allow suitable advertising here in Aus, starting with east coast time zones but ideally working also for WA viewers. They need to allow min 8 and preferably more home games to give the Aus franchises a chance with building finance and home support. Home games need to be regular not the mish-mash of away tours at the moment. Finals series needs to ensure a sensible qty of Aus teams including at least one home game.

Then absolutely we need the Kiwis. Their inclination to accept the above inversely corresponds to “they can fuck right off”

Please note that empty but warm platitudes of concern for the game in Aus is NOT on the list and meets none of the prerequisits.

 

[zer0]

That's not really a Trans-Tasman competition though.

That's just the NRL-but-with-rugby.

 

[wamberal]

I will support anything that is provided for us to view. Anything.

 

[hoggy]

Take away Super rugby and it would be about a split second before the kiwis all of a sudden become interested in a Trans competition.
But what dru say's is most important, regardless of domestic/trans competition it is the structure of the competition that is the most important thing moving forward. Surely if super rugby has taught us just one thing that is the most important.

 

[Dan54]

You are missing a few caveats here, Wam.

The design of any pro or second tier game with or without the Kiwis must, no exceptions, meet Australian requirements. To level the playing field they need to change AB selection policy to select from any team/franchise in the comp, not restricted to NZ. They need to accept a playing schedule that provides broadcast times that allow suitable advertising here in Aus, starting with east coast time zones but ideally working also for WA viewers. They need to allow min 8 and preferably more home games to give the Aus franchises a chance with building finance and home support. Home games need to be regular not the mish-mash of away tours at the moment. Finals series needs to ensure a sensible qty of Aus teams including at least one home game.

Then absolutely we need the Kiwis. Their inclination to accept the above inversely corresponds to “they can fuck right off”

Please note that empty but warm platitudes of concern for the game in Aus is NOT on the list and meets none of the prerequisits.

yep in other words dru as you say fuck off kiwis, so as you want an Aussie only comp, do you suggest 5 or 6 teams? And who we going to get to buy this comp? And who is going to advertise in it for $s? Or do we make it a NRC, and pray that everyone will suddenly support that?
I think I may just wait and see who broadcasts the NZ comp and watch that.

 

[Dan54]

Take away Super rugby and it would be about a split second before the kiwis all of a sudden become interested in a Trans competition.
But what dru say's is most important, regardless of domestic/trans competition it is the structure of the competition that is the most important thing moving forward. Surely if super rugby has taught us just one thing that is the most important.

I know what you saying hoggy, but sure dru wasn't really serious in suggesting that NZ should play all their games at times to suit Aus, and all extra games should be played in Aus. He was I am sure being tongue in cheek because there was absolutely no reason for NZ to join that a comp like that, I know the rules have been skewed in favour of Aussie so they could get teams in finals for a while, but surely we want any new comp to be good for everyone?

 

[dru]

I know what you saying hoggy, but sure dru wasn't really serious ...

Well yes I was but to be fair, not all games in NZ need to be played to Aus timetable - there just needs to be enough games in suitable slots involving Aus teams to fill the broadcast cast schedule predictably. Having an early game in NZ isn't bad either which would probably suit NZ. Local NZ derbies can be whenever. There is plenty of room for discussion - once the basic Aus requirements are locked in. The one time I would change things is the weekend surrounding ANZAC Day where I would want back to back NZ v Aus teams. Mateship is not just an Australian concept.

If we are to go TT I have no reason to expect other than the obvious 5 teams, and would expect NZ to do the same. A possible alternative for leveling the playing field would be an increase in NZ teams, but it increases the travel cost for Aus teams so would need considering, and again NZ have shown no interest.

I'm not actually antagonistic about NZ, more about RA who seems to have failed to clearly set out what was required for Australia survival. But I have no interest at all in continuing with NZ to the failure of Aus which has been trending for years.

FWIW, I don't see National (Covid) entry requirements allowing an international competition between NZ and Aus until a vaccine is readily available - 12-18 months. So a desire for TT is probably moot. Though once reality sets in I suspect NZ might reconsider their flexibility with Aus. Maybe not, who knows.

I don't see the rugby watchers changing much as non-rusted-on disappeared long ago.

 

[Dan54]

I understand what you saying dru, and I do understand what you are saying, but for any new comp or alternate comp to work it has to suit everyone. And I just don't think the idea of one more NZ team is all that bad, although I not sure at this stage where it would be done. As for RA saying that NZRU would have to let players be picked for ABs if they were playing for an Aus team is beyond arrogance, as it would be for NZRU to give RA instructions on who should be available for Wallabies. I still not comvinced that a Trans-Tasman comp would be popular in NZ anyway, as I haven't ever seen a great appetite for it from NZ rugby followers, really what is in it for a NZ rugby fan? Ok with ones like me living in Australia, I can watch kiwi teams play, but the general fan at home I don't think is crying out to watch Aus teams play. Even our own WOB says he as a rule doesn't watch games from Aus as a rule as time not good. I go and watch Reds play almost every game (because I a rugby tragic) and know which teams bring in biggest crowds at Suncorp at least, they are usually The Tahs and NZ teams. I not sure RA can go to any tables around the world and bargain from a place of strength, because to be honest I not sure they got enough to tempt anyone with. In saying that I don't want and don't think they would, do I want NZRU going to table with unreasonable demands, what we all have to remember is although the comp will probablt be reset in some way, lets get it rest so it suits EVERYONE, not just Aussie, or NZ or SA.

 

[Bandar]

It really depends on what the comp is aiming to achieve - at present it is just a selection trial for national team.

There is different eligibility, salary caps and resting protocols depending on which country you're from and an unfair finals ranking system, so if you want a fair comp, allow anyone to play anywhere, pay them in the same currency with the same salary cap let the guys play not have the first 5 weeks off because they played in November.

 

[drewprint]

I understand what you saying dru, and I do understand what you are saying, but for any new comp or alternate comp to work it has to suit everyone. And I just don't think the idea of one more NZ team is all that bad, although I not sure at this stage where it would be done. As for RA saying that NZRU would have to let players be picked for ABs if they were playing for an Aus team is beyond arrogance, as it would be for NZRU to give RA instructions on who should be available for Wallabies. I still not comvinced that a Trans-Tasman comp would be popular in NZ anyway, as I haven't ever seen a great appetite for it from NZ rugby followers, really what is in it for a NZ rugby fan? Ok with ones like me living in Australia, I can watch kiwi teams play, but the general fan at home I don't think is crying out to watch Aus teams play. Even our own WOB says he as a rule doesn't watch games from Aus as a rule as time not good. I go and watch Reds play almost every game (because I a rugby tragic) and know which teams bring in biggest crowds at Suncorp at least, they are usually The Tahs and NZ teams. I not sure RA can go to any tables around the world and bargain from a place of strength, because to be honest I not sure they got enough to tempt anyone with. In saying that I don't want and don't think they would, do I want NZRU going to table with unreasonable demands, what we all have to remember is although the comp will probablt be reset in some way, lets get it rest so it suits EVERYONE, not just Aussie, or NZ or SA.

In a recent article Paul Cully suggests that there is more appetite in NZ to watch an NRL game versus a Super game between an NZ team and an Aus team. Does this strike true to you?

And if so, why not try and emulate what the NRL do? Don’t get me wrong, league stinks, but we could learn a lot from their model. Maybe it’s a pipe dream on my part, but a 10 team trans-Tasman comp where players can freely sign between clubs/countries could work really well.

 

[hoggy]

" As for RA saying that NZRU would have to let players be picked for ABs if they were playing for an Aus team is beyond arrogance, as it would be for NZRU to give RA instructions "

The issue i have with this is you want your cake and eat it to. Firstly it is not the RA stating this it is the organizer of the competition (Committee). Can you just imagine dictating to Man United who & where they buy there players from.


"I not sure RA can go to any tables around the world and bargain from a place of strength, because to be honest I not sure they got enough to tempt anyone with."

Again i don't see this as the RA going around trying to bargain itself into something. If a competition is set up, firstly a basic structure should be agreed to and then go out to tender for specific interest from clubs or franchises.

But the most important thing is to ensure the integrity of the competition itself, pampering to a bunch of self interested national unions is the exact reason Super rugby is in a massive pile of shit now.

Hows this as the first agreement, you don't start the competition the 3rd week in January and end it in June, and then concede the main three months of winter to your rival codes, its insanity and then wonder why no ones interested and you can't attract investment without selling the whole bloody kitchen sink.

 

[Braveheart81]

Hows this as the first agreement, you don't start the competition the 3rd week in January and end it in June, and then concede the main three months of winter to your rival codes, its insanity and then wonder why no ones interested and you can't attract investment without selling the whole bloody kitchen sink.

Do you have squads large enough that you can play through test season without international players or alternatively, what's the plan instead?

 

[hoggy]

Do you have squads large enough that you can play through test season without international players or alternatively, what's the plan instead?

My point is stopping your domestic season at the end of June is insanity. You then dedicate July/August/September/October? to International rugby which has content of 1/2 games per weekend, we are playing up to 15 tests per year, this in my opinion is unsustainable.
For starters playing NZ 3 times every year damages the exact product your trying to promote, your turning Wallaby gold into 6 pack & Pizza.

Yes international rugby is your biggest revenue driver, but partly due to ensuring your domestic product has no ability to compete with that. You have to reach a sustainable compromise, maybe cap tests at 12, play the domestic games through to early August., restructure the southern tours, say reduce that to two tests.

 

[Braveheart81]

OK, so we're currently playing 3 tests in July at home generally against Northern Hemisphere opposition then 7 tests from August to October in the Rugby Championship / 3rd Bledisloe and then 4 in November against Northern Hemisphere teams in Europe.

Which tests are you moving and which are you dropping completely?

We've played at minimum a 2 test Bledisloe series every year since 1994 and has been annual since 1982. Nothing has changed except us not being able to win the thing.

If the new competition is truly independent and the teams are not directly controlled by RA/NZRU/whoever then how do you compete with test matches that are offering the best players big dollars to be involved in?

What do you mean by restructure the southern tours? When are they moved to and does the competition play through that period?

I agree with you that it is bad that the main season for the bulk of the players ends by the start of July however I think the answer has to be to play through test matches rather than expect them to be cut back substantially.

In a normal year we play 14 test matches so dropping that number by 2 hardly frees up a lot of weeks to have your other competition running for longer.

 

[dru]

I understand what you saying dru, and I do understand what you are saying, but for any new comp or alternate comp to work it has to suit everyone. And I just don't think the idea of one more NZ team is all that bad, although I not sure at this stage where it would be done. As for RA saying that NZRU would have to let players be picked for ABs if they were playing for an Aus team is beyond arrogance, as it would be for NZRU to give RA instructions on who should be available for Wallabies. I still not comvinced that a Trans-Tasman comp would be popular in NZ anyway, as I haven't ever seen a great appetite for it from NZ rugby followers, really what is in it for a NZ rugby fan? Ok with ones like me living in Australia, I can watch kiwi teams play, but the general fan at home I don't think is crying out to watch Aus teams play. Even our own WOB says he as a rule doesn't watch games from Aus as a rule as time not good. I go and watch Reds play almost every game (because I a rugby tragic) and know which teams bring in biggest crowds at Suncorp at least, they are usually The Tahs and NZ teams. I not sure RA can go to any tables around the world and bargain from a place of strength, because to be honest I not sure they got enough to tempt anyone with. In saying that I don't want and don't think they would, do I want NZRU going to table with unreasonable demands, what we all have to remember is although the comp will probablt be reset in some way, lets get it rest so it suits EVERYONE, not just Aussie, or NZ or SA.

The NZ issue, that they have not apparently clicked onto, is what happens when Aus goes domestic and RSA looks to the North? That appetite from the fans might change as the competition limitations strike home.

The AB criteria is not a matter of arrogance. It's about managing a level playing field. A competition that is lop sided is going nowhere and no doubt part of why TT has little traction in NZ.

Wherever it goes I suspect domestic comps in both countries will be the go for the pandemic.

When it comes to survival Aus just has to sort it's own mess without capitulation to Super. If that means no NZ in our comp we just have to do it.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

He's how it would work. Either we take our current 5 pro teams and find a 6th and run it similar to the Super 6 concept in Scotland but on a larger scale. Particularly short term in regards to borders being closed. Once they reopen we do the above and add in Fiji and Samoa/combined Samoa/Tongan side. Could base that side somewhere in Aus. Likely either Brisbane or Sydney. Taking games to both Islands but looking to connect with the diaspora here as well.

Twiggy after this will have one thing RA won’t have which is money - if RA could get force, Samoa and Fiji, 4 existing super sides plus maybe one other side to make 8 side comp that would work. RA would need to cede to lot of demands by twiggy for that to happen but given RA won’t be in strong financial position common sense should be that RA be prepared to link to twiggys vision.

I can’t see twigs wanting to go back to rapid rugby as it is given impact of covid likely to have in the medium term so equally might be prepared to entertain such a proposition provided his demands met.

Twiggy plus RA joining forces could offer RA a option to create a more viable comp they can better compete with a less financially strong nrl

Anyhow I would have not given any chance of the above a month ago but given impact of covid I actually hope both RA and twiggy see common sense that better together in post covid world. RA would also need to face up to the fact it has less bargaining power and cede to twiggy in number of areas

Ps rather see RA work with twiggy first on new comp and then discuss if nz want to join but not be dependent on them to join ie so not beholden to nz demands

 

[Rugbynutter39]

In a recent article Paul Cully suggests that there is more appetite in NZ to watch an NRL game versus a Super game between an NZ team and an Aus team. Does this strike true to you?

And if so, why not try and emulate what the NRL do? Don’t get me wrong, league stinks, but we could learn a lot from their model. Maybe it’s a pipe dream on my part, but a 10 team trans-Tasman comp where players can freely sign between clubs/countries could work really well.

I could see it working but politics and nz obsession with keeping ABS playing only for kiwi teams will still be a blocker I reckon even in a post covid world...pity..

 

[Dan54]

" As for RA saying that NZRU would have to let players be picked for ABs if they were playing for an Aus team is beyond arrogance, as it would be for NZRU to give RA instructions "

The issue i have with this is you want your cake and eat it to. Firstly it is not the RA stating this it is the organizer of the competition (Committee). Can you just imagine dictating to Man United who & where they buy there players from.

Look in Wales you can't play for an English club and play for Wales, they have exception, and it is their business how they make those rules surely to god.
Of course noone can tell Aussie or NZ teams where they buy players from, but neither can you tell them where they pick players from. Are you suggesting all players should be contracted to each team, and not to to RA or NZRU? So if a couple of Wallabies were playing in NZ super team, and was required for Wallaby camp, you would be happy if they weren't allowed to attend?
I think I would much rather each country look after their own test players or at very least decide what the criteria they want to nake a player available , and I think it arrogance to think anyone else should tell them what it is!
Do you think that Australian teams should be able to play unlimited number of overseas players? Because Man United could, if you chose to use them as an example, and they still don't tell other countries who they have to select from. I would prefer Aussie teams to bring through Aussie players!

 

[Dan54]

In a recent article Paul Cully suggests that there is more appetite in NZ to watch an NRL game versus a Super game between an NZ team and an Aus team. Does this strike true to you?

I would assume that is among NZ league fans, see unfortunately like it or not NRL is the league comp with world's top league players in it, so people watch that, I would guess that more NZ soccer fans watch EPL than watch the AFL Whoops I mean Aussie soccer, as they see better players, unfortunately like soccer perhaps the best players aren't in the Aussie teams, so NZers will watch games in NZ at 7.30pm than what they perceive as maybe lesser players at 9.30 pm.

I not sure as I don't know anyone who watches league apart from a few nephews who watch Warriors home games.