Where to for Super Rugby?

[WorkingClassRugger]

I think you could do a loose partnership like the rebels have with kintetsu, but anything more would likely piss a lot of other clubs off. An arrangement like that begs so many questions around contracting and potential cap breaches it becomes pretty unworkable.

Could be that they are thinking of using the MLR team as an academy set up for their Super Rugby ambitions. Which would mean they could split the squads and at least in theory remain complaint with the MLR cap. But again. If that's there intent they won't likely get past the current stage with MLR.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

^ geez looks like those MLR blokes have got all kinds of morals & standards of practice. How's a fly-by-night kinda guy meant to operate under such conditions? Gotta be un-American, surely.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

^ geez looks like those MLR blokes have got all kinds of morals & standards of practice. How's a fly-by-night kinda guy meant to operate under such conditions? Gotta be un-American, surely.

Protecting their investments.

 

[hoggy]

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-...up-in-super-rugby-debate-20200711-p55b5m.html

The slanging match continues, but do we need anymore proof that its about time to look after ourselves, because the Kiwis only want a Super rugby competition that suits them.

 

[Dan54]

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-...up-in-super-rugby-debate-20200711-p55b5m.html

The slanging match continues, but do we need anymore proof that its about time to look after ourselves, because the Kiwis only want a Super rugby competition that suits them.

Of course Aussie have to look after themselves, always should of, but not sure what in that write up makes you think it's anymore proof?

 

[eastman]

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-...up-in-super-rugby-debate-20200711-p55b5m.html

The slanging match continues, but do we need anymore proof that its about time to look after ourselves, because the Kiwis only want a Super rugby competition that suits them.

Don’t believe everything you read in the paper mate- they have managed to get a few quotes of a guy known to stir the pot.

 

[Merrow]

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-...in-trans-tasman-squabble-20200712-p55bdc.html
I’m liking McLennan. He’s playing a good game.

 

[Bobby Sands]

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-...in-trans-tasman-squabble-20200712-p55bdc.html
I’m liking McLennan. He’s playing a good game.

Elite operator.

 

[Dan54]

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-...in-trans-tasman-squabble-20200712-p55bdc.html
I’m liking McLennan. He’s playing a good game.

Me too, I repeat what I posted on here after he was on NZ's Breakdown, just strikes me as a bloke with head screwed on.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Of course Aussie have to look after themselves, always should of, but not sure what in that write up makes you think it's anymore proof?

Hansen is just pure comedy as he clearly thinks doing things like getting involved in pushing kangaroos match against the all blacks (he did after all propose rules for this with 14 a side etc) as just another self less sacrifice by nzru to help the nrl expand its power base. Gees how stupid we are - let’s have another great moment like back in 2009 when nz over turned oz push to keep South Africa out of super rugby. Yep let’s do what nz want and let them make another great decision to ensure they keep us to complete irrelevance in oz sport (if not already close to achieving with the great NZ led super rugby debacle)

 

[Bandar]

It seems Hansen is still dirty about Trevor Chappell bowling underarm in 1981

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

.......let’s have another great moment like back in 2009 when nz over turned oz push to keep South Africa out of super rugby.......

You've made this statement a coupla times now, would you care to elaborate?

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Sure in recent interview John O’neil Stated plans had been drawn up for trans tasman competition back in 2009 involving 5-6 teams each from oz and nz and that was a heart beat away from agreeing this but to quote John NZRU blinked and moved away from this as was not willing to not have South Africa in super rugby. The rest is as you say is history. I also note Steve Tew who was NZRU head at that time did not come out and refute John’s claims of what transpired.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

^ as I recall, that was in response to reports that SARU were set to withdraw from Super Rugby at the end of the 2006-10 broadcast rights cycle. Which they didn't, of course, instead paving the way for a fifth Australian franchise.

 

[dru]

I had predicted how things were likely to run some time back (tldr: shrinkage by Aus directed by NZ), have been close and could still have nailed it. Which would be very disappointing.

BUT there are a few things that are impacting those predictions.

1. While there are predictable voices in Kiwi rugby pushing the shrink Aus to Kiwi greatness model , there is also an undertow theme which is quite different and seems willing to give Aus enough rope - which of course is all we can ask for.

2. McLennan has all the appearance of being willing to stand firm and call the Kiwi bluff. The test will be whether he is able to line up the favoured three Aus franchises behind him. Stay strong McLennan. Direct engagement between those favoured and NZRU remains a likelihood - which should it eventuate we should fund $nothing.

3. I love the language from Penny. Firstly that a key Kiwi identity in Aus rugby is willing to voice a desire for Aus rugby to stand up. Secondly that this is coming from the HC of one of the franchises that Kiwi is likely to be interested in - maybe NSW is actually willing to sit behind McLennan?

4. Major game changer - Forrest suggesting an olive branch may be possible to Aus rugby, not just WA rugby and GRR.

We are not going to get the domestic comp that would be my preference, but a true national footprint for the Australian game in a TT is not a bad second best. If something can be done to level the playing field in terms of playing quality I would go so far as to say it is a superior outcome to the domestic comp I have been advocating.

Time will out all.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I had predicted how things were likely to run some time back (tldr: shrinkage by Aus directed by NZ), have been close and could still have nailed it. Which would be very disappointing.

BUT there are a few things that are impacting those predictions.

1. While there are predictable voices in Kiwi rugby pushing the shrink Aus to Kiwi greatness model , there is also an undertow theme which is quite different and seems willing to give Aus enough rope - which of course is all we can ask for.

2. McLennan has all the appearance of being willing to stand firm and call the Kiwi bluff. The test will be whether he is able to line up the favoured three Aus franchises behind him. Stay strong McLennan. Direct engagement between those favoured and NZRU remains a likelihood - which should it eventuate we should fund $nothing.

3. I love the language from Penny. Firstly that a key Kiwi identity in Aus rugby is willing to voice a desire for Aus rugby to stand up. Secondly that this is coming from the HC of one of the franchises that Kiwi is likely to be interested in - maybe NSW is actually willing to sit behind McLennan?

4. Major game changer - Forrest suggesting an olive branch may be possible to Aus rugby, not just WA rugby and GRR.

We are not going to get the domestic comp that would be my preference, but a true national footprint for the Australian game in a TT is not a bad second best. If something can be done to level the playing field in terms of playing quality I would go so far as to say it is a superior outcome to the domestic comp I have been advocating.

Time will out all.

I also like RA/ Hamish working with twiggy as latter hard nosed negotiators want going into battle on negotiations with NZ. With the possibility of twiggy support and involvement in negotiations as well as of course private equity investment offer that could come i almost have a faint glimmer of hope for oz rugby. I know early days but let me enjoy this slight glimmer of optimism as with golden generation coming through now is the time to invest at the bottom of the cycle and when rock bottom which is no doubt why have private equity tire kicking.

 

[Dan54]

Hansen is just pure comedy as he clearly thinks doing things like getting involved in pushing kangaroos match against the all blacks (he did after all propose rules for this with 14 a side etc) as just another self less sacrifice by nzru to help the nrl expand its power base. Gees how stupid we are - let’s have another great moment like back in 2009 when nz over turned oz push to keep South Africa out of super rugby. Yep let’s do what nz want and let them make another great decision to ensure they keep us to complete irrelevance in oz sport (if not already close to achieving with the great NZ led super rugby debacle)

Or alternately we go back to when Aussie decided the needed 5 teams and along with SA's expansion helped to ruin a bloody good product. Aus didn't push to keep SA out but maybe pushed to have them out. You do realise that Aus have just decided to increase their teams to 5, after having 2 of 4 teams somewhat struggling the best idea is to increase to 5 teams?? And I not saying anything is bad, but you have to admit it does sound somewhat strange.

 

[Dan54]

It seems Hansen is still dirty about Trevor Chappell bowling underarm in 1981

Yeah the bastard made cricket popular in NZ, we didn't want that

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Or alternately we go back to when Aussie decided the needed 5 teams and along with SA's expansion helped to ruin a bloody good product. Aus didn't push to keep SA out but maybe pushed to have them out. You do realise that Aus have just decided to increase their teams to 5, after having 2 of 4 teams somewhat struggling the best idea is to increase to 5 teams?? And I not saying anything is bad, but you have to admit it does sound somewhat strange.

Dan there lies the problem - we only have 2 to 3 pro teams in the face of nrl and afl expansion over the last decade we face being irrelevant. Very few oz fans are interested in a closed border trans tasman competition that limits us to only having 2-3 oz based teams to follow. To grow we need to be in a competition that provides room for growth which a closed borders trans Tasman competition does not allow for. So we either have a model that allows for oz teams with open borders and marquees policy or we do our own domestic competition.

The problem is looking at a closed borders competition as the answer - it isn’t - look at Japan and its expanded new pro league - but if Japan relied just on a competition that involved nz with a closed borders policy they would be limited too just one team.

Sorry the answer is not shrinking to greatness as it is being in this flawed closed borders shoe rugby competition that has been a major part of the problem (as well as others such as lack of investment in grass roots etc)

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

Sure in recent interview John O’neil Stated plans had been drawn up for trans tasman competition back in 2009 involving 5-6 teams each from oz and nz and that was a heart beat away from agreeing this but to quote John NZRU blinked and moved away from this as was not willing to not have South Africa in super rugby. The rest is as you say is history. I also note Steve Tew who was NZRU head at that time did not come out and refute John’s claims of what transpired.

Just for the hell of it I trawled back through the forum threads for 2009 looking for anything to indicate that there was a push to get rid of the SA part of SANZAR. All I found was some chat re: where & when Australia should establish their fifth franchise & whether Australia could in fact sustain five franchises, pretty much the same chat that's been going on for as long as I've been on here. I think you're using the benefit of hindsight to make connections that simply did not exist in 2009.