Where to for Super Rugby?

[Dan54]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news/article.cfm?c_id=80&objectid=12081466

It looks like the Kiwis don't want conferences anymore

Hell Hoggy, the kiwis have been against conferences from the start, it was never considered a good idea amongst NZ players and administrators.

 

[Braveheart81]

And I think this is the catch 22 we face, should test rugby be central to the rugby calendar. Where has that got rugby here in 2018. It is the pinnacle of the game but we are trying to turn it into a weekly comp, there is a reason gold is valuable.

To me this new structure is doing as much as they can without actually doing anything. The question is? is this the way forward for the game here, or does it just ensure all those same people get there weekly pay checks.

Will rugby gain anymore popularity in Australia under this structure, i don't think it will.

It is central to the global rugby calendar and I don't see that changing. We have to play other rugby at the same time because one game a week isn't enough.

If you opted out of the majority of test rugby to play a long domestic comp I guarantee you would still be playing without our best players because they would all be overseas.

Will rugby gain popularity because we have an NRC level competition running for 20+ weeks and do away with the majority of the games that people actually watch?

I think that would be way worse.

 

[Rebels3]

Hell Hoggy, the kiwis have been against conferences from the start, it was never considered a good idea amongst NZ players and administrators.

The round robin format is good in theory but it just isn't practical.

A) suddenly the season would be dangerously short = $$$$, we already have close to the shortest domestic season of the major sports in the world
B) Travel would increase = $$$$
C) It would be just as unfair as the conference season, for starters some countries have more teams, so immediately they travel less etc. There is 4 SA teams and 1 from Arg, so 5 fixtures, who decides has to travel to Arg or SA 3 times and who decides only travels 2 times??? SA Tours would also extend from 4 weeks to 5 or 6 weeks depending on the luck of the draw. Thats massive $$$ on accommodation etc. Players are already citing that travel is a major problem (away from the obvious financial constraints, which would be compounded again with more travel expenses and reduced season) as why they prefer to move to europe to play, esp those with families that want to be home 6 nights a week for 52 weeks

I am a fan of round robin competitions but it needs to be home and away, but with the CC and NPC that's simply not going to happen. The good thing about the top 8 this year is that the best 8 teams are going to make it, that is unquestionable.

 

[Omar Comin']

I can see RA being open to cutting another team, especially if they can do so through a Brumbies and Rebels merger. I doubt 4 teams are sustainable with crowds of under 10k on a regular basis. And for the reasons Braveheart has given I don't see them moving away from the current season model, so Super Rugby in some form will remain.

The one positive is that with Super Rugby ending in mid-June at least there'll be a longer window to have a better NRC. There'd be enough time to have a double round robin or close enough to it. But a lot of work needs to be done to get people to care about the teams so that it's not only watched by rusted on rugby fans to see how certain players go.

 

[Dan54]

The round robin format is good in theory but it just isn't practical.

A) suddenly the season would be dangerously short = $$$$, we already have close to the shortest domestic season of the major sports in the world
B) Travel would increase = $$$$
C) It would be just as unfair as the conference season, for starters some countries have more teams, so immediately they travel less etc. There is 4 SA teams and 1 from Arg, so 5 fixtures, who decides has to travel to Arg or SA 3 times and who decides only travels 2 times??? SA Tours would also extend from 4 weeks to 5 or 6 weeks depending on the luck of the draw. Thats massive $$$ on accommodation etc. Players are already citing that travel is a major problem (away from the obvious financial constraints, which would be compounded again with more travel expenses and reduced season) as why they prefer to move to europe to play, esp those with families that want to be home 6 nights a week for 52 weeks

I am a fan of round robin competitions but it needs to be home and away, but with the CC and NPC that's simply not going to happen. The good thing about the top 8 this year is that the best 8 teams are going to make it, that is unquestionable.

I know there are problems Rebel, but wasn't when we had Round Robin format when Super rugby was at it's best? Not sure we will ever get back to it, but still is best system if it could be worked.

 

[dru]

But a lot of work needs to be done to get people to care about the teams so that it's not only watched by rusted on rugby fans to see how certain players go.

How on earth does that work with shrink to three? A lack of National footprint simply is a reduction in rusted on fans. Nor will a 3 Aus team comp bring back the non-rusted fans.

If NZ want to end conferences due to it being a better cohesive comp, then they also need to make it a better cohesive comp by allowing AB selection from the comp, not simply domestic teams. Not going to happen? Then that answers the first query too.

If we cut another team, or reduce domestic involvement it is a one-way trend to oblivion.

Cut from Super now, and start the focus on Australian rugby.

 

[Braveheart81]

Argumentative agreement, BH?

Surely we look for some kind of sustainability from from a revised Super, if so for the Saffers, what the NZ H proposes is not it. IF the proposal excludes re-introduction of the Force (let alone another cut), it is not for us Aussies either. imo.

Not doubt it is either idle speculation from errant journos or an ambit leaked from NZRU - always start your bidding low, eh? Either way is is an indicator of NZ feelings and to be frank, imo opinion anyway, it is a set of attitudes that is not worth entering.

As half says "it is time".

@half - amazing times, mate. I was only a kid but remember the theme well, completely contagious, just at a point in time where I was becoming politically aware. And panicked parents doing their best to keep things stuck in the groove of the past.

It's worse for South Africa than anyone else.

For the Aussie teams it would mean probably 11 of 13 games in our timezone being the only four teams outside our time zone being 3 in South Africa and 1 in Argentina and you would probably play two away.

It's a shorter comp that is done before July and then we can look to have an extended domestic comp running from July through to early October.

Australia still needs to fit in with the best option available. Because this isn't ideal I don't think means we go for a less ideal domestic only comp unless in the next two years several more private owners emerge who are willing to throw millions at the game.

 

[Omar Comin']

How on earth does that work with shrink to three? A lack of National footprint simply is a reduction in rusted on fans. Nor will a 3 Aus team comp bring back the non-rusted fans.

If NZ want to end conferences due to it being a better cohesive comp, then they also need to make it a better cohesive comp by allowing AB selection from the comp, not simply domestic teams. Not going to happen? Then that answers the first query too.

If we cut another team, or reduce domestic involvement it is a one-way trend to oblivion.

Cut from Super now, and start the focus on Australian rugby.

My thinking is more that if Super Rugby becomes shorter and more concentrated then the NRC can develop into something a lot better because it'll have a larger window and more resources could go into it. Let Super Rugby be a short, high quality test preparation and selection tournament for a small group of elite players, and use the NRC to expand the national footprint and provide more content, local rivalries and connection to grassroots.

This isn't even necessarily my preference, I just think it's hard to see anything else being a better option given the commercial realities and the international rugby calendar.

 

[Rebels3]

I know there are problems Rebel, but wasn't when we had Round Robin format when Super rugby was at it's best? Not sure we will ever get back to it, but still is best system if it could be worked.

The world rugby environment has completely changed since then tho, the North is twice as strong financially since those days. Australia and most certainly South Africa will never get the depth of players playing for their clubs that there was then, again. Financially it's unrealistic.

 

[dru]

My thinking is more that if Super Rugby becomes shorter and more concentrated then the NRC can develop into something a lot better because it'll have a larger window and more resources could go into it. Let Super Rugby be a short, high quality test preparation and selection tournament for a small group of elite players, and use the NRC to expand the national footprint and provide more content, local rivalries and connection to grassroots.

This isn't even necessarily my preference, I just think it's hard to see anything else being a better option given the commercial realities and the international rugby calendar.

That works for me, however:

1) the domestic comp is the big one and runs in the early season prior to the June/July tests;
2) NRC does not currently meet the requirements for a true tier of professional rugby and needs complete overhaul for this purpose
3) The period following the June/July tests becomes a Super system where we prepare selective teams (SOO style) from the domestic comp in a Champions league style short system.

This way Super can have a contracted/shrunk Australian set of rugby teams without impacting the core requirements for Australia.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

My thinking is more that if Super Rugby becomes shorter and more concentrated then the NRC can develop into something a lot better because it'll have a larger window and more resources could go into it. Let Super Rugby be a short, high quality test preparation and selection tournament for a small group of elite players, and use the NRC to expand the national footprint and provide more content, local rivalries and connection to grassroots.

This isn't even necessarily my preference, I just think it's hard to see anything else being a better option given the commercial realities and the international rugby calendar.

I've suggested it before but we should look to flip the schedule with the NRC kicking off the year and then moving into Super Rugby in a shortened format. Make everyone including Wallaby squad player participate as a means of competing for selection in Super Rugby.

 

[lou75]

^^ actually that is a very good idea

 

[dru]

It's worse for South Africa than anyone else.

For the Aussie teams it would mean probably 11 of 13 games in our timezone being the only four teams outside our time zone being 3 in South Africa and 1 in Argentina and you would probably play two away.

It's a shorter comp that is done before July and then we can look to have an extended domestic comp running from July through to early October.

Australia still needs to fit in with the best option available. Because this isn't ideal I don't think means we go for a less ideal domestic only comp unless in the next two years several more private owners emerge who are willing to throw millions at the game.

Yes - but.

It is worst for the RSA franchises that remain with Super. Remember though that for RSA Super has become the B Plan at that stage as they sheet home opportunity within Europe.

Through adequate management they do not end up shagged like Australia would be.

I would still question South Africa's interest in sticking with Super if cut to two teams. Seems a stretch.

 

[Braveheart81]

That works for me, however:

1) the domestic comp is the big one and runs in the early season prior to the June/July tests;
2) NRC does not currently meet the requirements for a true tier of professional rugby and needs complete overhaul for this purpose
3) The period following the June/July tests becomes a Super system where we prepare selective teams (SOO style) from the domestic comp in a Champions league style short system.

This way Super can have a contracted/shrunk Australian set of rugby teams without impacting the core requirements for Australia.

Post the July series we'll go straight into the Rugby Championship.

I think the first half of the year is when we can play a franchise based competition with our best players.

Yes - but.

It is worst for the RSA franchises that remain with Super. Remember though that for RSA Super has become the B Plan at that stage as they sheet home opportunity within Europe.

Through adequate management they do not end up shagged like Australia would be.

I would still question South Africa's interest in sticking with Super if cut to two teams. Seems a stretch.

If South Africa pull out altogether though then we're left with the Trans Tasman/Pacific scenario which is preferred.

We still have to work within the options available and the test season is almost entirely out of our control. I think whatever doesn't involve NZ is going to be our plan B.

 

[Strewthcobber]

I've suggested it before but we should look to flip the schedule with the NRC kicking off the year and then moving into Super Rugby in a shortened format. Make everyone including Wallaby squad player participate as a means of competing for selection in Super Rugby.

I reckon the reality post 2020 is the Wallabies will be playing 14/15 games in around 18 weeks after the start of July.

They will need a squad of at least 30 over that period to deal with injury, selection, rest etc.

So you have about 19 weeks from mid-Feb to the 1st test of the year to get any play from our best players domestically.

Can you fit an NRC + Supe in that space?

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

[Omar Comin']

I've suggested it before but we should look to flip the schedule with the NRC kicking off the year and then moving into Super Rugby in a shortened format. Make everyone including Wallaby squad player participate as a means of competing for selection in Super Rugby.

I think this could be good, but the two problems are cost and time. If you start with the NRC it can't go for very long (maybe 10 weeks), and you need to pay a lot of players proper wages to ensure it's a decent standard. Revenues probably wouldn't be very high. And RA always prioritise high performance and this isn't the optimal option for preparing Wallabies.

Then there's the problem of a long international season with nothing else happening.

If you can accept a domestic comp that doesn't contain the Wallabies players then you can have an expanded NRC from late June to early or mid October. That's a proper window for a decent competition. And fringe Wallabies players would still be reasonably involved.

 

[sunnyboys]

There are a couple of contradictory pieces at play in this... the premier drawcard below Test rugby needs to start in feb/mar to compete against our NRL/AFL rivals - and it’s just when aussies expect footy to start. Super Rugby hasn’t been that ‘drawcard’for some time now. Without giving NRC (or its next iteration) that prime slot we will never know whether it can become that ‘drawcard’.

If the NRC did get shifted to the start of the year we would be back to the old days where non test squad players are sitting around twiddling their thumbs. But NRC played in Aug to Oct will never be a drawcard. It’s just not how our sports calendar plays out in this country.

Building from NRC or Super Rugby (depending on which wins out) into Test rugby without a break for June test will be fantastic for continuity.

But short of getting Super Rugby on free to air I can’t see what could possibly revive it now. It’s done. Kaput!

 

[dru]

Subtle point, but if NZ wishes to continue Super Rugby it is far from kaput. Super Rugby in Australia, is of course, a different matter.

My concern is whether the destruction of Super Rugby in Australia (already complete in WA) ALSO means the destruction of pro rugby in Australia.

 

[hoggy]

A pretty depressing article in the Australian this morning by Wayne Smith. SANZAAR are meeting in Singapore, but all indications are that not much is going to change. NZ are pushing for an end to conferences and the Sunwolves future is a bit up in the air, but the SA's apparently are staying put.

Behind a paywall, but this sentence sums it up.

"Rugby Australia, which will be represented today by CEO Raelene Castle and deputy chairman Brett Robinson, have done months of war-gaming ahead of the crucial meeting in September, including polling 800 fans, but when push comes to shove in SANZAAR politics, it’s clear that the Australians are not masters of their own destiny."


Mind you, have to give them credit they found 800 fans.

 

[sunnyboys]

The beginning of the end if this is accurate. A disgrace