Where to for Super Rugby?

[WorkingClassRugger]

I would only put money into a team I could relate to. NSW Country Eagles, I could relate to. Perhaps the Tahs but I dont think they are for sale. $1000 no problem, maybe that would include entry to some home games

How about a competition as a whole? If membership with voting rights to a new structure as a whole were on offer then I'd happily part with $1000 p.a.

 

[molman]

It won't be based out of Hawaii. They appear to be planning on running two distinct squads. One in whatever NZ gets up and running and the other in Major League Rugby.

So a team funded by a private consortium based in NZ with only Pacific Islander players? How does this help the people of Fiji, Samoa and Tonga exactly?

 

[Rugbynutter39]

"RA has said it would not accept a reduction in the number of Australian teams and has threatened to abandon an alliance with New Zealand and launch its own competition."

Hope this reported in the press is correct....thanks for the memories NZ in playing you in Super Rugby but being dictated to by you in a closed borders competition where you determine who participates, how competition is run and designed only to promote interests of AB's and ignore any other regional interests and growth objectives for the game ain't going to fly.

Happy to play you in the Bledisloe and in Champions League matches JOINTLY arranged and agreed together between relevant member nations but otherwise lets be really frank NZRU has done sweet f'all to help our game and indeed our fixation on trying to work with NZ has probably held us back as clear as mud NZRU too arrogant and near sighted to work with others in the region to promote and grow the game in the region beyond the AB's.

 

[KOB1987]

Murdoch press putting a more positive spin on the developments. Both the Aus and DT through Smith and Panda saying that the Pacifica team is unlikely to be sorted for next season due to Covid amongst other reasons and next year might see a straight 5 x 5 TT as a base model. They’re also saying that Auckland isn’t the right place to base the Pacifica team as the large islander population there would impact on the Blues fan base, and that it’s better of placed in Western Sydney.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I imagine Foxtel would prefer TT competition so maybe more spin on it to not kill it. Regardless of whether 5 x 5 TT teams still have major concerns competition designed and run by NZRU.

If they started talking about 5 oz teams they may have at least some support as Force with recruitment of players outside Australia showed how we could shore up issues of depth short term with a bit of investment. I don't think us rugby fans could go through another team being cut and I think RA and Hamish well understands that. I think we all have seen the anguish cutting the force did so can't see why even Twiggy or force fans would want to wish that on another team and fan base and wider oz rugby supporters who felt the pain on this decision last time. We need 5 teams as a base to grow our game as all the teams IMHO make sense to invest in to be their for the long term.

 

[Dan54]

If RA chose to not participate in this sham then where will the Kiwis get their extra three to five competitive teams?

Assuming their hypothetical Pasifika team can be put together then I only count six.

Call their bluff, Hamish!

I strongly suspect that Twiggy is already in, he wasn't on a NZ rugby prgramme for nothing this week!! And if you had a PI team, don't all RA contracts have to be renegotiated or something at end of September? Potentially a bloody lot of PI players could be available.

 

[Dan54]

To everyone who is getting their knickers in a twist, have you actually read what the Statement from NZR is? It includes this:

Robinson indicated that ownership models for the new competition had yet to be agreed upon.
He said that NZ Rugby had considered a range of different models and were open to having talks with private equity firms, who have injected capital into both the English Premiership and Pro14 competitions in Europe.

Oh shit do some of you screaming about a NZR owned comp think it time to stop being such drama queens!!

plus: “We think we can do that by virtue of what we are essentially doing, which is going out to the wider Australasian-Pacific environment to see what we can find out.
“At this stage we're working to 2021 but it’s our preference to work beyond that, but we've got a lot of work to do with Sanzaar around that.”

NZ Rugby has already held talks with Australia about the level of its potential involvement, and more detailed discussions will begin next week.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

Yeah so we are really squabbling over nothing. It's 3 NZ teams and 5 Aus teams

Sure, that's a conversation we could have if RA weren't broke and/ or had a broadcast partner

 

[Dan54]

Sure, that's a conversation we could have if RA weren't broke and/ or had a broadcast partner

C,mon WOB it easier to say that NZR are going own a comp and make Aus do this or that Basically they have said they want to see a comp set up of 8-10 teams, all teams have to be financially sustainable and bring something to the table to help sell it to broadcasters, and see who wants to buy it! Oh and a comp without SA or Argos in it, but based around NZ-Aus and Pacific rim, bugger me if it not something I thought most of these posters wanted anyway?

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby...-to-south-africa-in-historic-super-rugby-move

 

[Quick Hands]

Why does it sound like NZ are owning the comp and we’d be lucky to join them rather than an equal partnership?

Because that is what it is. NZRU are going to run a competition and invite EOIs from anyone who wants to be part of it.

There's never been the suggestion of a partnership equal or otherwise.

 

[Quick Hands]

How about a competition as a whole? If membership with voting rights to a new structure as a whole were on offer then I'd happily part with $1000 p.a.

I think that if RA wants an Australian competition then they shouldn't try to run it themselves (we know how that ends)

For example (Only an example, the numbers are just examples before people start splitting hairs over percentages)

RA gives an unnamed billionaire the licence to run an Australian competition. Licence agreement includes financials and availability of players for test windows etc.

Clubs/groups of clubs/regions submit an EOI to be part of it, with criteria including financial viability etc

If example there are 8 teams who meet the criteria the teams each own part of the competition - let's say they each own 10% and the unnamed billionaire owns the remaining 20%.

Ownership structure of teams could be member-based, or privately owned or a mixture of both.


EDIT - And the state RUs are prohibited from having ANY involvement

 

[KOB1987]

I strongly suspect that Twiggy is already in, he wasn't on a NZ rugby prgramme for nothing this week!! And if you had a PI team, don't all RA contracts have to be renegotiated or something at end of September? Potentially a bloody lot of PI players could be available.

He's obviously spruiking the Force and Aus rugby in general, but if the Force were to go it alone into a NZ comp you can be pretty sure that Force players would be treated like any other foreign based player with regards to Wallabies selection. Whatever he decides to do won't be to the detriment of Force players foremost, Australian rugby second. Unless RA try to stitch him up again, which won't happen.

I think he could likely be a foundation investor in the competition though assuming it's in the best interests of Australian rugby, perhaps even back RA's investment in it.

 

[KOB1987]

Because that is what it is. NZRU are going to run a competition and invite EOIs from anyone who wants to be part of it.

There's never been the suggestion of a partnership equal or otherwise.

You're right, but I've settled down on the matter a bit now. Like any negotiation NZRU have thrown their lowball offer on the table first. RA will no doubt counter with theirs. The competition has to be owned and managed equitably. It will end up being 50/50 and with 5 teams each for next year, with Covid providing few other options. 2022 the Pacifica team come in, and perhaps a 12th team (read Japan).

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I think that if RA wants an Australian competition then they shouldn't try to run it themselves (we know how that ends)

For example (Only an example, the numbers are just examples before people start splitting hairs over percentages)

RA gives an unnamed billionaire the licence to run an Australian competition. Licence agreement includes financials and availability of players for test windows etc.

Clubs/groups of clubs/regions submit an EOI to be part of it, with criteria including financial viability etc

If example there are 8 teams who meet the criteria the teams each own part of the competition - let's say they each own 10% and the unnamed billionaire owns the remaining 20%.

Ownership structure of teams could be member-based, or privately owned or a mixture of both.


EDIT - And the state RUs are prohibited from having ANY involvement

Mate, I've pretty much advocated for that exact same model on a number of occasions on this very board. And I'd be more than happy with that.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

You're right, but I've settled down on the matter a bit now. Like any negotiation NZRU have thrown their lowball offer on the table first. RA will no doubt counter with theirs. The competition has to be owned and managed equitably. It will end up being 50/50 and with 5 teams each for next year, with Covid providing few other options. 2022 the Pacifica team come in, and perhaps a 12th team (read Japan).

It won't be Japan. People need to stop suggesting Japanese involvement. They're launching their own 3 tiered structured. With the first two being fully professional and the third being set up along similar lines to the current Top League. Where corporate teams can compete on a semi-professional basis but can be fully professional if they so wish. They're even entertaining allowing South Korean involvement at this level. Which indications are most will do just that. They are also talking about an internal Cup competition alongside this league.

May be we could entice them over to the RC. But anything below that. Well, that ship sunk with the Sunwolves.

 

[KOB1987]

It won't be Japan. People need to stop suggesting Japanese involvement. They're launching their own 3 tiered structured. With the first two being fully professional and the third being set up along similar lines to the current Top League. Where corporate teams can compete on a semi-professional basis but can be fully professional if they so wish. They're even entertaining allowing South Korean involvement at this level. Which indications are most will do just that. They are also talking about an internal Cup competition alongside this league.

May be we could entice them over to the RC. But anything below that. Well, that ship sunk with the Sunwolves.

fair enough, I know little about rugby up there, I was running off said 'people'. Well then, the model works with 11 teams as byes are required anyway. 20 weeks of home and away plus finals.

 

[Set piece magic]

"RA has said it would not accept a reduction in the number of Australian teams and has threatened to abandon an alliance with New Zealand and launch its own competition."

If this quote is correct (I can't find it??) then it shows we finally have a RA board that actually knows what it's doing. The failure to stand up to SA in (2015?) with the introduction of farcical 18 team comp was the greatest failure of Bill Pulver's leadership imo, that saw the competition go from fledging to freefall. You have to stand up to dumb proposals.

 

[Dan54]

Because that is what it is. NZRU are going to run a competition and invite EOIs from anyone who wants to be part of it.

There's never been the suggestion of a partnership equal or otherwise.

No QHs if you read what they saying they want a comp set up and don't know who will own it yet, I not sure why you think says that NZ are running it, of course they would need EOIs to have to take to any investor etc who wants to own and run it. It very much looks to me like they are finding out what everyone is heading towards. I repeat show me other options that have been put forward!
“We think we can do that by virtue of what we are essentially doing, which is going out to the wider Australasian-Pacific environment to see what we can find out.

 

[Dan54]

If this quote is correct (I can't find it??) then it shows we finally have a RA board that actually knows what it's doing. The failure to stand up to SA in (2015?) with the introduction of farcical 18 team comp was the greatest failure of Bill Pulver's leadership imo, that saw the competition go from fledging to freefall. You have to stand up to dumb proposals.

And perhaps allowing Australia to go to 5 teams that weren't sustainable financially were a failure of rest of Saanzar?

 

[dru]

I'm just not sure why the NZRU need to be so combative about this. What do they stand to gain?

Surely they could achieve the same result with negotiation behind closed doors, which seems to be RA's tactic.

Maybe if they own the competition, they can push for a greater share of overseas TV revenue?

TBH the position is completely understandable. As is our response.

We have requirements that should be entirely Aus based and a line not to be crossed. You cant stop NZRU approaching the teams they want directly, but an approach to RA should presume things will not be accepted by NZ and a domestic comp is likely. They get nothing, nada, unless on our terms.

If/when NZRU approaches the franchises direct, no funds should be made available for the break away comp from RA. NZ ends up with a comp that must fund itself, including the anointed franchises, or with a comp barely more in numbers than than what they have now.