Where to for Super Rugby?

[hoggy]

For Reds fans the NRC provides a sort of litmus test of potential talent for the next year. Remember when Hayne was trialling for NFL? Bit like that. NRC in this mode will never excite greatly more than the rusted on franchise devotees.

In NSW it seems to be a fail connecting to either the Waratahs or the Shute Shied. Some connection via individual clubs maybe, but not a community connection. So it doesn’t even match the level of interest in Brisbane.

This does not mean a domestic comp can’t work, though some lessons are obvious.

The NRC is essentially lining up Aus rugby with NZ and SA to assist Super rugby, but there are some stark differences in each market.

Firstly a domestic competition can and would work if given time, support and most importantly desire for it to happen from RA and rugby supporters.

Given its place in the sporting landscape, it is simply a pipe dream to think that the NRC can gain the code more market share, that is the job of Super rugby (and it is failing miserably).

The NRC can and is already a good feeder system for the Super rugby teams, but as always here, it is expected to do something that it cannot and never will, and then get disappointed when it hasn't conquered the sporting landscape.

 

[wamberal]

The NRC is essentially lining up Aus rugby with NZ and SA to assist Super rugby, but there are some stark differences in each market.

Firstly a domestic competition can and would work if given time, support and most importantly desire for it to happen from RA and rugby supporters.

Given its place in the sporting landscape, it is simply a pipe dream to think that the NRC can gain the code more market share.

Do you agree that any new domestic competition would share some of the characteristics of the NRC?


The teams would presumably all be new, artificial, entities with no history and no tradition. In fact, their identities could well be very similar to the identities of the NRC franchises.


Yes, indeed a domestic competition could work if given "time, support and desire for it to happen from rugby supporters". That applies equally to the NRC, as it does to the existing domestic club competitions.

The big questions are: how much time?


How much (financial) support?

 

[hoggy]

Do you agree that any new domestic competition would share some of the characteristics of the NRC?


The teams would presumably all be new, artificial, entities with no history and no tradition. In fact, their identities could well be very similar to the identities of the NRC franchises.


Yes, indeed a domestic competition could work if given "time, support and desire for it to happen from rugby supporters". That applies equally to the NRC, as it does to the existing domestic club competitions.

The big questions are: how much time?


How much (financial) support?

Its a catch 22 really, but for a domestic comp you could argue we already have 5 teams with identities. The NRC is doing exactly what it is designed to do, could it be more in the future ?

My point re support is that say looking at the AFL, they had a clear vision from the early eighties about a national domestic competition, and drove it with passion, drive and determination to what we have now.

I really don't see that coming from Union, we can't even seem to agree on the way forward and until we know what we want. Do we even have a chance of achieving it.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Do you agree that any new domestic competition would share some of the characteristics of the NRC?


The teams would presumably all be new, artificial, entities with no history and no tradition. In fact, their identities could well be very similar to the identities of the NRC franchises.


Yes, indeed a domestic competition could work if given "time, support and desire for it to happen from rugby supporters". That applies equally to the NRC, as it does to the existing domestic club competitions.

The big questions are: how much time?


How much (financial) support?

In essence yes. But that's not necessarily a bad thing as the NRC now resembles more the traditional representative model that has existed in the game in this country below that of the state based system. We have City and Country in Qld and Sydney and Country in NSW plus a Canberran/ACT team, Melbourne and Perth. If you were looking at really giving it a go with the appropriate backing then you could look to just call Melbourne, Canberra and Perth the Rebels, Brumbies and Force. You could even go further and use the Reds and Tahs for the Brisbane and Sydney based squads.

Look to locate the two Country's in two of the larger regional centres in both states and build from there. It's actually fairly simple in terms of structure. The question is funding it. If you set it up as the primary Australian competition that features all the best domestic talent and bring it to market it might help. It could also assist in drawing in more private equity. As I've said before if it required the entrance of 3 or 4 Asian based teams in order to get that backing then so be it.

 

[hoggy]

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/sp...r/news-story/abd7f7cb9383c0717ab50cfe995a0d4a

 

[Dan54]

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/sp...r/news-story/abd7f7cb9383c0717ab50cfe995a0d4a

Damn you have to subscribe to read it hoggy!!

 

[hoggy]

Damn you have to subscribe to read it hoggy!!

Sorry, google the heading of the article in (The Australian) and c&p into another browser

 

[Brumby Runner]

No good Hoggy. Only brings up the subscribe page. If you want the rest of us to know what's in the article, you will have to post a summary. Thanks.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

No good Hoggy. Only brings up the subscribe page. If you want the rest of us to know what's in the article, you will have to post a summary. Thanks.

The Fairfax guys closed that particular loophole a few months back.

 

[barbarian]

It's another mindless rant from Alan Jones, heavy on opinion and third-hand rumour and light on facts. The crux is:

We have to answer one simple question: what format best suits Australian rugby so that it can regain its pre-eminence on the world stage?

The answer to that is trans-Tasman rugby. The costs alone of Super Rugby are unaffordable and there has been a woeful return on money spent.

We’d be better off cutting ties with South Africa to play in an ANZAC Super Rugby competition. The time zone difference and the cost of long-haul international flights make playing against South African provinces completely unaffordable.

You would have a 12-team competition. To dilute the dominance of the New Zealand teams, the Kiwis would be expected to field seven teams and we would field five.

But like everything Alan says, there is no research and analysis behind this. We'd all love a trans-tasman comp, we've been talking about it for years. The ARU even had a crack at getting the Kiwis on board!

There is no understanding that it's not simply a matter of 'cutting ties' with South Africa and moving to a TT comp.

Why the Oz gives this moron column inches is beyond me.
.

 

[Brumby Runner]

The Fairfax guys closed that particular loophole a few months back.

Fairfax? I don't seem to have a problem opening Canberra Times articles. Maybe with the takeover by Channel 9, the future might be more restricted.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Fairfax? I don't seem to have a problem opening Canberra Times articles. Maybe with the takeover by Channel 9, the future might be more restricted.

They did the same with the SMH site around the same time. I was actually at a presentation featuring their creative department about 7 months ago where they were speaking and a member of the audience pointed that out. The guy speaking didn't seem to care (he wasn't in charge of the site just their media content) but the guy behind him who was seemed to react with a bit of surprise.

Don't be surprised if that soon become the norm. But there is a way around it still. At least for the SMH. That's just simply clearing your cache when you reach your limit on free views. I do it without fail. They still haven't figured (or have been told) about that one yet.

 

[wamberal]

Why the Oz gives this moron column inches is beyond me.
.

Presumably it is free content, and no doubt he spruiks it, and by association, The Oz, on his radio programmes?

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

It's another mindless rant from Alan Jones, heavy on opinion and third-hand rumour and light on facts. The crux is:
Y


But like everything Alan says, there is no research and analysis behind this. We'd all love a trans-tasman comp, we've been talking about it for years. The ARU even had a crack at getting the Kiwis on board!

There is no understanding that it's not simply a matter of 'cutting ties' with South Africa and moving to a TT comp.

Why the Oz gives this moron column inches is beyond me.
.

Does the fucktard have any thoughts as to where the two extra NZ sides are to be based? FFS as Tew has said so many times NZ can't support six Super Rugby-level teams how the fuck does anyone expect us to suddenly front with seven (I'm guessing Jones has heard about the seven-team M10 Premiership & thinks someone can wave a magic wand & the extra money required will appear. Or maybe Jones intends pulling it out of his arse?).

At the risk of repeating myself yet again, there's more goodwill towards Australian rugby (as opposed to Rugby Australia) over here than you probably realise & we'll do our bit to help you guys out but we absolutely will not jeopardize 130-odd years of building the game in this country attempting to save it in yours. And nor should we IMO.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Instead of thinking how to fix Super Rugby or could NRC become a replacement, I prefer to think in terms of how do we fix rugby content during the prime ‘winter’ football months of March to July - with a purpose of maximising the number of Australian fans. (This is also a largely defensive play to protect rugby’s turf from NRL and AFL.)
If that’s the aim you quickly get a list of requirements that can be summarised as:
1. Easy to access for viewers - FTA before pay tv
2. Reliable and regular home games and tv scheduling in useful timezones
3. Predictability of outcomes via talent equalisation
Next on the list after this is branding etc.

On the subject of how quickly can people adopt a sports team - the BBL is instructive - the format, the access for viewers, the amount and scheduling of content was so spot on (after Ten fixed it of course) that people quickly adopted brand new teams over the previous state based alligences.

Quality post for me as sums up what is required imho.....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rugbynutter39]

It's another mindless rant from Alan Jones, heavy on opinion and third-hand rumour and light on facts. The crux is:



But like everything Alan says, there is no research and analysis behind this. We'd all love a trans-tasman comp, we've been talking about it for years. The ARU even had a crack at getting the Kiwis on board!

There is no understanding that it's not simply a matter of 'cutting ties' with South Africa and moving to a TT comp.

Why the Oz gives this moron column inches is beyond me.
.

Alan jones is a rent a opinion rugby commentator that gives about 2 seconds thought to a future oz rugby future blueprint based on one liners that win populist appeal.

Alan jones is good for helping to stir the pot for change in oz rugby but has nfi on Changes required.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[hoggy]

Does the fucktard have any thoughts as to where the two extra NZ sides are to be based? FFS as Tew has said so many times NZ can't support six Super Rugby-level teams how the fuck does anyone expect us to suddenly front with seven (I'm guessing Jones has heard about the seven-team M10 Premiership & thinks someone can wave a magic wand & the extra money required will appear. Or maybe Jones intends pulling it out of his arse?).

At the risk of repeating myself yet again, there's more goodwill towards Australian rugby (as opposed to Rugby Australia) over here than you probably realise & we'll do our bit to help you guys out but we absolutely will not jeopardize 130-odd years of building the game in this country attempting to save it in yours. And nor should we IMO.

As an ex kiwi living in Aus, I would argue most Kiwis have no idea about Australian rugby, Tew is quite happy with a 5 team super rugby set up as SA broadcast money subsidizes them and it is a perfect fit for the All Blacks, they could fund seven teams easily it just depends on the budget and set up.

Kiwi goodwill towards Australian rugby is dependent on what helps kiwi rugby, nothing more. NZ will jeopardize its 130-odd year game the second the bank balance demands it.

Jones may have an agenda but a 12/14 team trans Tasman comp is more than viable given a genuine desire for it to happen and if it can attract private equity.

Alternatively Australian rugby can stick with Super rugby if it wants to accept the reality of its position in the Aus sporting landscape. Kiwi goodwill or not.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Quality post for me as sums up what is required imho...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Part of the accessibility issue could be solved via controlling the digital rights element of the equation.

 

[Dan54]

As an ex kiwi living in Aus, I would argue most Kiwis have no idea about Australian rugby, Tew is quite happy with a 5 team super rugby set up as SA broadcast money subsidizes them and it is a perfect fit for the All Blacks, they could fund seven teams easily it just depends on the budget and set up.

Kiwi goodwill towards Australian rugby is dependent on what helps kiwi rugby, nothing more. NZ will jeopardize its 130-odd year game the second the bank balance demands it.

Jones may have an agenda but a 12/14 team trans Tasman comp is more than viable given a genuine desire for it to happen and if it can attract private equity.

Alternatively Australian rugby can stick with Super rugby if it wants to accept the reality of its position in the Aus sporting landscape. Kiwi goodwill or not.

Don't know about your mates etc hoggy, but back in NZ most that I know that have any involvement in rugby would back WOB's statement, I knew before I came and seems most I talk to at home a reasonable amount about Aus rugby.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

Some thoughts re: Hoggy's post above;

1. NZ has five Super Rugby teams that are kept afloat by broadcast money, the majority of which comes from UK & Europe. Those broadcasters have made it very clear they'll pay far less for a comp with no SA involvement.

2. Even with the current broadcast money our Super Rugby sides are a net cost to NZR: their profitability is entirely dependant on the AB

3. NZR has 26 member Unions, none of which make a profit of more than 1-2% of revenue. Even Canterbury who've dominated domestic rugby for ~15 years only made a profit of $50K last year & that's with NZR paying most of the salaries of Cantab players unavailable due to AB commitments.

4. There is simply no way to re-arrange the 14 semi- & fully professional M10 Cup teams into seven Super Rugby sides. None of Hawkes Bay, Manawatu, Taranaki, Bay of Plenty or Northland have the resources to go it alone & geography renders all but Hawkes Bay & Manawatu combining a la the Tasman Mako pretty much impossible (note that HB & Manawatu tried a JV, admittedly pre-pro rugby, that never really worked).

5. For the reasons above the only TT comp I can see ever happening is some kind of NRC/ M10 Cup hybrid, for which the Brits & Euros will pay fuck all & Fox/ Sky NZ not much more. As for FTA, I seriously doubt any of them are gunna jump at the rights. Without Super Rugby or something like it & TRC or something like it it's just pay-TV filler.

6. Jones clearly knows less about NZ rugby than he appears to know about Aus rugby.