Where to for Super Rugby?

[NTT]

Just an aside, when does Billy no clues Pulvers contract run out?

 

[RedsHappy]

@wamberal ^^^^

I'll pay to you the courtesy your cheap insults above would not do to me or others here and thus provide you with some considered arguments against your routine apologies and defence of the rugby elites in Australia and your time-long view that the code's decline here is and was more or less inevitable and outside the rational control of any supervisory institution, no matter how good.

Your thesis that, like some inter-galactical law of pre-destined physical outcomes, rugby in Australia is just bound by a thousand uncontrollable and inevitable and immutable circumstances to die away and, given that, no party is to blame or be held accountable for its demise, is IMO readily refutable by more than a few factual observations or outcomes that highlight (a) how codes utterly dominated by others in the same season can still thrive and (b) how the excellence of actual skills and w-l rate on display, and the related overall results attained, can quite quickly revive a fine code like rugby in a large Australian sporting community.

You constantly argue that Aussie fans are just necessarily hooked on the simpler, faster etc codes of AFL and NRL and so inevitably dear old over-complex, 'boring and slow' rugby just cannot last here. 'It's inevitable and certainly not the ARU's fault in any way, they are unfairly blamed for an extremely complex set of universal sporting truths that simply cannot be altered'.

Case (A): But just take rugby in England. Have you ever spent a weekend in London reading the weekend media/papers' sports sections?

Soccer there totally, utterly, completely, dominates rugby in EVERY respect: size of fan base, economic richness of teams and the master bodies, media attention and space, etc etc. And this remarkable code base has grown and grown over the last 2 decades or so. It's now a prominent global phenomenon, way past just being an incredibly strong local one.

Rugby League also has its foothold in the English north.

But Union in England is nonetheless in a strong and growing position in terms of financial health, participation numbers, crowds generally and thus holds a solid position of media attentiveness (indeed this has directly led to the ARU's unearned - by them - financial windfall via the S18 media income deal).

Could the RFU's ability to hold its own and better than that against the ever-advancing global megalith of the EPL have anything whatsoever ever to do with the possible fact that........it's rather well managed overall.....or it just a quirk of luck that there's no 'fast and dynamic' AFL there and that 'fast and dynamic' League there is just a very niche thing?

Case (B): Only 5-6-7 years ago by simply selecting, coaching, man-managing and marketing well the Brisbane-based Link-Carmichael duo totally and completely turned around the entire fortunes (in all senses) of the QLD rugby scene, and I mean everything was turned round: crowds (Reds' crowds started exceeding Broncos'), big income $s in the tin from massively increased gate and sponsorships, participation levels, general media buzz, people everyday talking about rugby, etc, etc. The transformation was real and remarkable - anyone following sports in Brisbane will tell you that, whomever they support.

The key to this was at the heart of the Australian sports-loving psyche: win fucking lots of games and do so with a truckload of demonstrable skill delivered by some really talented media-friendly and likeable players. Then promote the hell out of it.

If this could be so thrillingly and remarkably done in a 'dying rugby heartland' as Brisbane was in 2007-9 as the then Reds played like shit and acted like shit, why is the overall decline of the code here inexorably governed by some kind of irreversible law of sporting physics that is subject to no form of quality intervention by good leadership and skilled coaching?

Well it's not. There is zero rational basis for the defeatist 'inevitability' thesis of explaining the dying nature of Australian rugby in 2017.

The Reds' tragedy is that that success went rapidly to the heads of the old QRU elite as they learnt nothing really in-depth from their use of outsiders the fix themselves and they recklessly reverted to type and opted for a 'great son and mate of QLD rugby' R Graham (despite him being totally unproven at Super levels) to come in and be HC. The rest is (appalling) history. That managerial call, that decision from the highest echelons of QLD rugby, has taken the code here virtually back to its 2008-9 status. The ARU - even though the QRU is totally financially dependent on it - did not raise a finger to question the risk and manifestly poor due diligence and planning underpinning this crucial, destiny-affecting call.

The key to understanding these facts above is not some 'law-of-sporting-nature-at-work driving the inevitability of rugby's decline in QLD', but rather is almost wholly due to the awful standards of judgment and governance quality at the heart of the QRU historical culture for 10-15 years now. These standards were only temporarily uplifted the threat of bankruptcy at the Ballymore doors.

Once this singular uplift occurred - and, by luck or rare judgement, the code was spectacularly turned around in one of its key markets - really glorious things were achieved for the code here, and this happened, in relative terms, quite recently. The reasons for this remarkable revival's lack of consistency and lack of repetition in QLD rugby are also blindingly clear.

 

[Rebels3]

Very interesting article in the Australian today. Mick Byrne basically highlighted that Australian rugby is caught in a time warp that is focused on outdated training methods and beliefs on how the game is played. Also kinda suggested that Cheika had highlighted to the different coaches that we need to be focusing on learning how to play more unstructured rugby, which appears to be ignored. Ino I and others have been questioning the Australian style or play and how we still aspire to play the game like it's 1999-2003 all over again, but the game as well and truly moved on for that.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...s/news-story/606b2d237045db71ca46d3b7a7bbd593

 

[RedsHappy]

Very interesting article in the Australian today. Mick Byrne basically highlighted that Australian rugby is caught in a time warp that is focused on outdated training methods and beliefs on how the game is played. Also kinda suggested that Cheika had highlighted to the different coaches that we need to be focusing on learning how to play more unstructured rugby, which appears to be ignored. Ino I and others have been questioning the Australian style or play and how we still aspire to play the game like it's 1999-2003 all over again, but the game as well and truly moved on for that.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...s/news-story/606b2d237045db71ca46d3b7a7bbd593

V useful post R3, thanks, and I saw that revealing article is well.

What the article fundamentally says is: The NZRU run the code very competently in NZ, have a really well-considered set of approaches and strategies to keep improving their skills etc, whilst here in Australia we have neither improved our skills base nor adapted to that of others.

 

[RedsHappy]

Just an aside, when does Billy no clues Pulvers contract run out?

Media (P&P) has been saying his contract expires late this year and that he Pulver wants a renewal for 3 more years, namely 2018-2020.

 

[RugbyReg]

Just an aside, when does Billy no clues Pulvers contract run out?

This year. He's told the board he wants a 3 year extension though.

 

[The torpedo]

V useful post R3, thanks, and I saw that revealing article is well.

What the article fundamentally says is: The NZRU run the code very competently in NZ, have a really well-considered set of approaches and strategies to keep improving their skills etc, whilst here in Australia we have neither improved our skills base nor adapted to that of others.

The major problem is that people look at the successful days with rose-coloured glasses - i.e. they see us being successful and think what worked in the past will work in the future.

Unfortunately, they fail to consider that everyone else has moved forward while we stand still (and in effect go backwards).

I am optimistic (read: hoping) that the ARU will stop their rectal exams and follow what Ferrari did in rebuilding the F1 team in the mid-90's

 

[NTT]

This year. He's told the board he wants a 3 year extension though.

What he wants and what he gets are 2 entirely different things.

For example we want the Force in Perth but we are getting the "top secret document" shafting.

Me thinks its time for: A petition to not renew Bill Pulvers contract. Especially if he throws Australian rugby under the bus to prop up Argentina and Japan.

 

[Lindommer]

Sorry mate, but I wholeheartedly disagree with you on this. It would be irresponsible for SANZAAR not to look to cultivate new markets in Perth and Melbourne rather than an artificial team in Japan......

fixed

 

[Upthenuts]

^^^^^The ARU are paralysed by fear:

• fear of the NZRU
• fear of the SAFRU
• fear of SANZAAR
• fear of the IRB
• fear of the Fair work Commission
• fear of Folau going back to one of the other codes he has played
• fear of the players - leaving, staying, getting tired and jaded
• fear of the fans

They are addressing these in reverse order: by ridding the game of all fans they can then move onto the players.

When I was coaching W.W. Ellis I used to say that fear of making the wrong decision is a bigger enemy than making the wrong decision and then committing 100% to it: doing nothing will have a certain outcome and will be a negative, doing something even if it appears initially to be the wrong decision can be salvaged if you back it to the hilt. I may not have been right but it worked OK.

iron maiden has. fear of the dark, maybe the aru want that too

 

[Gnostic]

The major problem is that people look at the successful days with rose-coloured glasses - i.e. they see us being successful and think what worked in the past will work in the future.



Unfortunately, they fail to consider that everyone else has moved forward while we stand still (and in effect go backwards).



I am optimistic (read: hoping) that the ARU will stop their rectal exams and follow what Ferrari did in rebuilding the F1 team in the mid-90's

There is actually nothing wrong with an examination of what worked in the past, but it has to be looked at critically. For instance Macqueen '98 - '02 was based on something we still see in Australian Rugby, possession dominance and repetitive phase play. It was based around the ruck interpretations of the time, which now would be penalised 9 times out of 10 for sealing off, hands in the ruck, going off feet etc. It also promoted homogenous style of player that Eddie Jones then took to the next level in a misguided appraisal of where the game was headed.

The trouble is it was the last really successful era in the game in the country and naturally people look back and say why can't we win like that again? Well because it just wouldn't work because the laws have changed/applied differently (and I would say appropriately). Has anybody in charge noticed this in Australian Rugby? I don't think so, including Chieka, who appointed Larkham as assistant and attack coach, a coach with very limited top level experience and somebody whose tenure at the Brumbies has shown that he cannot get past that 1998 game plan himself. The Wallabies last year and the Brumbies this year have shown that they can totally dominate possession and the stats (as the Tahs did under Hickey/Foley) and do absolutely nothing resembling an effective attack unless you somehow rate the rolling maul as a brilliant attack move.

 

[The torpedo]

The Wallabies last year and the Brumbies this year have shown that they can totally dominate possession and the stats (as the Tahs did under Hickey/Foley) and do absolutely nothing resembling an effective attack unless you somehow rate the rolling maul as a brilliant attack move.

Add to this the reds

One thing I was told when I was playing was 'they can't score if they don't have the ball' (i.e. keep as much of the pill as possible). That's all fine and dandy, but take the opportunities you get when you have the pill!

Plus their rolling mauls are pathetic. My u'11's team I played in had a 50-metre rolling maul in a game once

Sorry, had to brag about the rolling maul part

 

[p.Tah]

Bulls can't even score a try against the Chiefs. Even the 'one of the weakest teams' in Super Rugby scored a try against the Chiefs. It's quite obvious the Bulls need to be dropped.

 

[stoff]

Your central argument is the Rebels are disadvantaged by funding from the ARU. This is completely false.

No it isn't. I have never said that - read my posts, prove me wrong.

You also have failed to correctly comprehend the articles describing the current levels of funding, but I'll let that go without querying whether you're 'on drugs' or if 'English is your first language'.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TenVsRhys]

I know we're all dissing the quality of SuperRugby right now, and no doubt the AUS sides are coming up short and its gutting. But there's good footy being played too. The Tahs v Rebs game last week, Reds v Canes tonight, the Lions v Shooorkies game right now is a bloody belter......and that's not even considering the NZ derbies which we know are consistently excellent.

(a) Getting the comp structure right will (b) deliver high quality content. Prioritise accordingly please SANZAAR.

 

[TOCC]

Very interesting article in the Australian today. Mick Byrne basically highlighted that Australian rugby is caught in a time warp that is focused on outdated training methods and beliefs on how the game is played. Also kinda suggested that Cheika had highlighted to the different coaches that we need to be focusing on learning how to play more unstructured rugby, which appears to be ignored. Ino I and others have been questioning the Australian style or play and how we still aspire to play the game like it's 1999-2003 all over again, but the game as well and truly moved on for that.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...s/news-story/606b2d237045db71ca46d3b7a7bbd593

That's why I think cutting a team is 'fools gold', people think the redistribution of those players will improve Australia's performance.. and it may marginally for a short 1-2 year period before the benefit wears off and status quo returns. The increased depth will only last as long as the duration of existing contracts.. at which point those players who were previous Super Rugby starting will head off O/S and we return to the current situation.

The real elephant in the room is the coaching and development of players, cutting a team does nothing to address this.. Reducing competition for players won't increase a teams ability to off-load or make dominant tackles.. In fact, I fear a reduction in the number of teams and a lessening of the competition to recruit players will see teams be even less ingenuitative in their coaching and development techniques.

Wholesale changes are needed in Australian Rugby, but presuming that cutting a team is the solution is ignoring the elephant in the room.

 

[Ulrich]

Whatever happens, at some point Australian rugby will wake up and your teams will perform better.

 

[Quick Hands]

That's why I think cutting a team is 'fools gold', people think the redistribution of those players will improve Australia's performance.. and it may marginally for a short 1-2 year period before the benefit wears off and status quo returns. The increased depth will only last as long as the duration of existing contracts.. at which point those players who were previous Super Rugby starting will head off O/S and we return to the current situation.

The real elephant in the room is the coaching and development of players, cutting a team does nothing to address this.. Reducing competition for players won't increase a teams ability to off-load or make dominant tackles.. In fact, I fear a reduction in the number of teams and a lessening of the competition to recruit players will see teams be even less ingenuitative in their coaching and development techniques.

Wholesale changes are needed in Australian Rugby, but presuming that cutting a team is the solution is ignoring the elephant in the room.

Because cutting a team means that those who should be cut won't be. i.e. Those charged with running the game who have led us into this quagmire.

 

[TOCC]

Whatever happens, at some point Australian rugby will wake up and your teams will perform better.

I agree.. but only if the power that be recognise the need for wholesale changes in the development pathways, it won't happen by ignoring this issue.

Perhaps this will be the annus horribilis that Australian Rugby needed to have, my issue and biggest fear is, that we don't have the right people steering the ship making the crucial decisions.. Pulver has done some great things, but facilitating the improvement in the quality of Australian rugby players isn't one of them.

 

[chibimatty]

Whatever happens, at some point Australian rugby will wake up and your teams will perform better.

I really hope so mate, we've been waiting since 2002.

Perhaps this will be the annus horribilis that Australian Rugby needed to have...

This is a worry I was wondering about TOCC, when we lost one match in a test series to Tonga in 1973, Australian rugby declared a crisis and set about changes that put us on the path to the era of 1979-2001.

Now, we've lost twice to a mediocre Scotland in 2009 and 2012, and in between lost to Samoa in 2011. I wonder when they finally declare a crisis this time around and set about making the changes necessary.

I really thought that defeat by Scotland in Newcastle would have been the straw that broke the camel's back.