Where to for Super Rugby?

[sendit]

Braveheart you lost me at it feeds down from the top.Tell me where the national team for afl drives success from top down view and hence why afl is most successful footy code in oz. Seriously these sort of comments just make me angry about the plight of rugby in this country.

It's 100% a combination of the two, there is absolutely no doubt a successful super team/Wallabies leads to an increase in participation, more money coming in etc etc

However you obviously need that grass roots investment to foster that interest successful teams produce

You can't just go we are investing in grass roots to save our future or we are investing in pro rugby to save our future it needs to be a holistic approach

 

[Dan54]

On public messaging and actions recently to date Dan no I don’t. There approaching state unions rather then through RA was exhibit A. NZRU are a absolute disgrace in terms of their behaviour around this. Look forward to your attempts to justify this as anything but.

Don't need to justify it, I don't agree with everything they did, or have supposed to have done, see as I keep saying I don't believe everything I read in papers otherwise I would of been waiting for the Big Bash style comp that Hamish is supposed to of said was going to happen, the RA super team with Drua and Sunwolves, the TT that was going to involve separate comps with a PI team in NZ and Sunwolves in Aus that was trumpeted for a month or so again, the big announcement that NZR had to agree to RA's terms for for Super rugby by sept 4th, the TV deal that supposedly Rob Clarke was going to tell us about on sept 4th.
Like all these things, I don't believe RA actually stated all these things anymore than I believe all the things NZR supposedly did. mate I not saying and never have said that NZR (or RA) have not done things wrong, but I just asked to tell me why you think NZR are not looking at anything outside their own bubble. I have seen posts saying they do nothing for Asian rugby, when I pointed out I knew people who have been part of coaching groups etc etc sent by NZR to Phillipines, China etc there is an eerie silence. Mate noone does things completely right, especially NZR or RA, but I repeat we have no idea what they do. See I don't know what RA is doing outside their bubble, but I am sure you will explain to me what they doing that NZR aren't. It's not a contest between rugby boards, it's on the field that the comp is!

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Dan let’s face it RA and NZRU will talk about what they would like to do but it will be what in particular broadcasters and / or private equity investors are prepared to fund and support that will determine what will happen.

I personally think broadcasters been too passive to push RA and NzRU in a better direction given my views on their limited competence and hence why an active private equity investor could be a good thing at this point if that were too happen.

At this point we are waiting to see what will happen...

 

[Braveheart81]

Braveheart you lost me at it feeds down from the top.Tell me where the national team for afl drives success from top down view and hence why afl is most successful footy code in oz. Seriously these sort of comments just make me angry about the plight of rugby in this country.

The AFL is the top level there. Clearly there is no international component of any note.

The vast numbers of juniors around the country and particularly in non-traditional AFL states is a result of the commercial success of the AFL, the fact that kids have teams in their state with players to follow and there are lots of development officers running comps and giving free kit to kids that sign up fuels that rapid increase.

They have been able to bypass that organic growth at grassroots level where league and union have always been reliant on volunteers to run everything by paying people because they've had the money.

It is still a top down view. The professional players are incredibly well paid and the clubs are well financed and very professional. It's the reality in literally every sport. The professional level drives the revenue and the success of that dictates how well financed all the levels below it are (which over time helps grow the peak of that pyramid).

 

[Rugbynutter39]

The AFL is the top level there. Clearly there is no international component of any note.

The vast numbers of juniors around the country and particularly in non-traditional AFL states is a result of the commercial success of the AFL, the fact that kids have teams in their state with players to follow and there are lots of development officers running comps and giving free kit to kids that sign up fuels that rapid increase.

They have been able to bypass that organic growth at grassroots level where league and union have always been reliant on volunteers to run everything by paying people because they've had the money.

It is still a top down view. The professional players are incredibly well paid and the clubs are well financed and very professional. It's the reality in literally every sport. The professional level drives the revenue and the success of that dictates how well financed all the levels below it are (which over time helps grow the peak of that pyramid).

The competition is at the next level down braveheart and where it needs to win hearts and minds. Wallabies important but the neglect of pro competition that underpins it is critical to grow the game in terms of pathways, provide local teams to support etc etc

 

[Braveheart81]

The competition is at the next level down braveheart and where it needs to win hearts and minds. Wallabies important but the neglect of pro competition that underpins it is critical to grow the game in terms of pathways, provide local teams to support etc etc

Of course the competition the next level down is important to rugby. Rugby in Australia would be stronger if that competition was stronger.

There is no international game for AFL. There is no purposeful positioning that they haven't chosen the international game as their centrepiece. It doesn't exist. The AFL is the pinnacle and the sport and how it is promoted, funded and run is based around that.

Rugby's biggest problem was the absence of professionalism. Unlike AFL and NRL we have 100+ years where the international game has been the pinnacle of the sport and professional competitions which are essentially 25 years old. The AFL is based on 140+ years of that competition being the centre of the sport and the NRL of 110+ years.

Have we completely neglected that pro competition or is it just a reality of the relatively short time we've had to grow it and shift the onus away from test rugby (which has always made money and was a cash cow prior to professionalism because they didn't have to pay anyone).

I agree with you in general but I think there is no easy way to shift that focus. I still think you engage more people in that professional competition once they're engaged with the Wallabies. It's incredibly difficult to make someone who doesn't care about the Wallabies more interested in that next level of competition that doesn't have 100+ years of tribalism behind it.

We have a very difficult task of trying to increase the interest and revenue generating capacity of a professional competition where we will only have a small number of teams spread around the country in saturated sporting markets with a pretty small following. Essentially what you need is to cannibalise the club rugby crowd that is spread across a bunch of teams to follow one or two pro teams in that city which I think is very unlikely to happen to a significantly greater degree than it does for our Super Rugby teams.

 

[Dan54]

Dan let’s face it RA and NZRU will talk about what they would like to do but it will be what in particular broadcasters and / or private equity investors are prepared to fund and support that will determine what will happen.

I personally think broadcasters been too passive to push RA and NzRU in a better direction given my views on their limited competence and hence why an active private equity investor could be a good thing at this point if that were too happen.

At this point we are waiting to see what will happen.

Yep I understand, and agree to a large degree, and I think the battle is to have private equity money without losing all control of your players as what seems to have happened particularly in France.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Of course the competition the next level down is important to rugby. Rugby in Australia would be stronger if that competition was stronger.

There is no international game for AFL. There is no purposeful positioning that they haven't chosen the international game as their centrepiece. It doesn't exist. The AFL is the pinnacle and the sport and how it is promoted, funded and run is based around that.

Rugby's biggest problem was the absence of professionalism. Unlike AFL and NRL we have 100+ years where the international game has been the pinnacle of the sport and professional competitions which are essentially 25 years old. The AFL is based on 140+ years of that competition being the centre of the sport and the NRL of 110+ years.

Have we completely neglected that pro competition or is it just a reality of the relatively short time we've had to grow it and shift the onus away from test rugby (which has always made money and was a cash cow prior to professionalism because they didn't have to pay anyone).

I agree with you in general but I think there is no easy way to shift that focus. I still think you engage more people in that professional competition once they're engaged with the Wallabies. It's incredibly difficult to make someone who doesn't care about the Wallabies more interested in that next level of competition that doesn't have 100+ years of tribalism behind it.

We have a very difficult task of trying to increase the interest and revenue generating capacity of a professional competition where we will only have a small number of teams spread around the country in saturated sporting markets with a pretty small following. Essentially what you need is to cannibalise the club rugby crowd that is spread across a bunch of teams to follow one or two pro teams in that city which I think is very unlikely to happen to a significantly greater degree than it does for our Super Rugby teams.

The idea is to create a product that could win back fans - we accept that would take investment - private equity anyone

 

[Adam84]

On public messaging and actions recently to date Dan no I don’t. There approaching state unions rather then through RA was exhibit A. NZRU are a absolute disgrace in terms of their behaviour around this. Look forward to your attempts to justify this as anything but.

Yep NZRU reaching out to the states and deliberately trying to undermine RA was pretty disgraceful, honestly what the fuck are they thinking. So fixated t on looking after themselves their wiling to try and destroy Australian rugby in the process without considering the longer term impacts of doing so.

 

[half]

If there is a code in a worst position that us it's soccer. A-League & Socceroo rating are in free fall, crowds are down, sponsors are leaving.

A three year civil war between key stakeholders, the sacking of Lowy.

So so so so so why mention this.

Well, hhhmmmm eeerrr gggrrr they have something or a couple of things I have been banging on about i.e. a national domestic competition with competing teams owned by private investors and soon the teams will own and control the A-League, very similar to USA code models.

I also live on the Central Coast, this bits important to understand the following links, the Mariners owner a few weeks back put the club up for sale, massive local news the clubs been sold to Sydney guy. This follows on from the Newcastle team being sold last week, Canberra & Tasmania putting in bits to join the league.

I only just found out about the Newcastle sale, the bids from Canberra & Tasmania as when reading the Mariners news the other articles kinda linked to it.

NOW NOW, given the A-League rating are roughly 20% of ours, maybe a tad more.

Does the fact that in the middle of a 100 year pandemic, with only a one year media deal, and rating a fraction of ours, FFA have buyers coming out of their backside to be involved. It also appears they plan to increase teams must have rocks in their heads but private equity is footing the bill.

Does this not SCREAM, go nation competition, with privately owned teams, in a privately run competition.

Links for anyone interested,

Mariner purchase

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/soccer...e-central-coast-mariners-20200924-p55yv5.html

Canberra bid

https://www.ftbl.com.au/news/canber...sons-love-for-his-departed-grandfather-553903

Newcastle sale

https://www.newcastleherald.com.au/...estment-firm-in-talks-to-obtain-jets/?cs=6160

Tassie bid

https://www.ftbl.com.au/news/tasman...angular-york-stadium-financial-backers-553808

 

[Rugbynutter39]

If there is a code in a worst position that us it's soccer. A-League & Socceroo rating are in free fall, crowds are down, sponsors are leaving.

A three year civil war between key stakeholders, the sacking of Lowy.

So so so so so why mention this.

Well, hhhmmmm eeerrr gggrrr they have something or a couple of things I have been banging on about i.e. a national domestic competition with competing teams owned by private investors and soon the teams will own and control the A-League, very similar to USA code models.

I also live on the Central Coast, this bits important to understand the following links, the Mariners owner a few weeks back put the club up for sale, massive local news the clubs been sold to Sydney guy. This follows on from the Newcastle team being sold last week, Canberra & Tasmania putting in bits to join the league.

I only just found out about the Newcastle sale, the bids from Canberra & Tasmania as when reading the Mariners news the other articles kinda linked to it.

NOW NOW, given the A-League rating are roughly 20% of ours, maybe a tad more.

Does the fact that in the middle of a 100 year pandemic, with only a one year media deal, and rating a fraction of ours, FFA have buyers coming out of their backside to be involved. It also appears they plan to increase teams must have rocks in their heads but private equity is footing the bill.

Does this not SCREAM, go nation competition, with privately owned teams, in a privately run competition.

Links for anyone interested,

Mariner purchase

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/soccer...e-central-coast-mariners-20200924-p55yv5.html

Canberra bid

https://www.ftbl.com.au/news/canber...sons-love-for-his-departed-grandfather-553903

Newcastle sale

https://www.newcastleherald.com.au/...estment-firm-in-talks-to-obtain-jets/?cs=6160

Tassie bid

https://www.ftbl.com.au/news/tasman...angular-york-stadium-financial-backers-553808

it screams don't reduce your footprint but rather try to create something or join something where over time you can increase your footprint. Going it alone i think over time we can.

 

[mst]

^^^^
What's it also screams is why are so many bids put forward and rejected even though they are supposedly full of such promise? The second question is why none of this is doing anything to stop the decline of the game?

Private equity is all well and good, but there are realities to sport that do need to override the wallets of a passionate few. The Canberra bid is a perfect example; there is not sufficient population to support it. Well established teams like the Raiders, Brumbies, have struggled with crowds since the ACT Government introduced AFL in to the market (and fund them to play in Canberra). The Mariners, allegedly the most successful team in A League history has been a perennial failure for the last 6 season and has required financial prop-up's from individuals from it second season onward on a regular basis just to keep it going.

If anything all this tells us is there is available private equity, but also should serve as a cautionary tale on how you can get it wrong and end up with product built on passion that is unsustainable and for niche few. Our equivalent is the Shute shield.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

MST you are right and probably again why if could work something out with kiwi’s it might be a better proposition as established successful clubs. To me kiwis not showing willingness to look at models where could grow a sustainable footprint beyond where it is more a kiwi competition with odd other side involved (ie equivalent of nrl and involvement of warriors).

It would be dangerous to expand the footprint too quickly...

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

SA to leave Super Rugby (Lions, Bulls, Sharks & Stormers to join expanded Pro14, Cheetahs to be cut) but will likely stay in TRC:

https://www.news24.com/sport/rugby/...-set-for-move-to-northern-hemisphere-20200929

 

[Dan54]

SA to leave Super Rugby (Lions, Bulls, Sharks & Stormers to join expanded Pro14, Cheetahs to be cut) but will likely stay in TRC:

https://www.news24.com/sport/rugby/...-set-for-move-to-northern-hemisphere-20200929

Interesting read, seems they are chasing the possibility and nothing actually confirmed yet, hope it works out ok. Interesting to read Rassie's comments saying they be playing better quality teams, and not being stuck with Aus/Arg teams, not sure how much he meant by that. Also in no way can I see Cheetahs being in a TT ( is it just their way of saying you can have scraps?) or whatever comp, so I will wait and see exactly how much of this is correct.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

^ this isn't just newspaper talk, it's confirmation of things that have been in the works for some time now. Biggest question for me is "who's the 18th Pro18 team?"

 

[zer0]

The General Meeting also opted to continue conversations with SANZAAR about entering a team into a modified “Super Series” format, on the proviso that a commercial model was developed to make their entry cost neutral at least, once agreement had been reached with SANZAAR. The meeting agreed that the Toyota Cheetahs would be proposed as the South African entry to such a competition.

https://www.springboks.rugby/news-f...XUoAq2EdQlNqDZH_XCqehhc-OhGzmKpcc9Q98H4aeoUOI

Lol. Fuck off SARU. You're Europe's problem now.

EDIT: Thinking further on it, perhaps I was too harsh. In light of SARU's two decades worth of contributions to Super Rugby, we can be magnanimous and slap them with the same participation fee they slapped Japan with. Also you can play your matches in Singapore Perth, because we'd rather not be bothered flying all the way to South Africa.

 

[dru]

Seems harsh on Free State. Again. Kings inevitably ending up where most ANC PR stunts do.

It is going to be interesting seeing how European teams deal with RSA summer. Great broadcast time slots though.

Sad to see RSA go, has felt inevitable for some time but they have been great contributors to a rugby competition that simply was too adventurous and bold.

 

[Derpus]

Interesting read, seems they are chasing the possibility and nothing actually confirmed yet, hope it works out ok. Interesting to read Rassie's comments saying they be playing better quality teams, and not being stuck with Aus/Arg teams, not sure how much he meant by that. Also in no way can I see Cheetahs being in a TT ( is it just their way of saying you can have scraps?) or whatever comp, so I will wait and see exactly how much of this is correct.

Better quality teams and yet their record is worse than Australias. If you account for their home ground reffing advantage they are easily the worst contributor - Argentina making the final a few years after introduction.

Jog on.

 

[Wilson]

So the Pro14 are looking at going to a 16-18 team competition, with participants split over 5 countries. Also considering a conference model to limit travel required.

What could possibly go wrong?