Where to for Super Rugby?

[Rugbynutter39]

I think long term all could move away from Super Rugby but as you say WCR we need to find alternatives and until other models proven the SA approach of foot in both camps best way to go. I can't see despite the noise see SA move all teams out of Super Rugby and into pro 14 in the short term until proven pro 14 viable for them and/or they longer term get an invite to 6 nations (and hence lessen reliance on SANZAAR with broadcast deals covering Super Rugby and RC matches).

Indeed oz teams in both WSR and Super Rugby Version 100 (whatever the new comp will be called as surely has to be rebranded) is desirable as WSR is untested so not about to say lets put all our eggs in that basket, but teams in each with oz teams involved in each plus some other Asia Pacific nations involved in WSR without a domestic pro comp to play in to join an expanded and super charged NRC which sees that comp expand to say 10-12 weeks plus finals (to make more meaningful). NRC then becomes hopefully in time our more viable Mitre 10 competition equivalent.

 

[Dan54]

Geoff Parkes made up his mind along time ago, he advocates no change he is the ultimate RA apologist. He is the one that will happily ignore any alternatives.

Read the article, exactly what does he advocate, apart from acceptance of the current top down structure and for the lower levels to stop complaining, some amalgamation and a bit of marketing wish list.

I not saying he right or wrong, just good to read good articles on the subject. But to call him a 'RA apologist' without calling all the ones who are continually rubbishing them on here etc "Anti RA' is a little bit shall we say rubbish? I know he has a lot more knowledge than me on the finances that are coming into the game from at least the research he has done on his very good book, so I think his opinion is to be as respected as anyones!

 

[dru]

Yes Parkes is a believer that only the current competitions can maintain the current revenue provided by broadcast deals. He strongly believes there is no other option.

Its very hard to argue a way forward once that 'truth' has been stated.

Yep, but even then it's not ideal. A business that is not expanding profit is actually going backwards. It's a slower fail but still not a pass mark. Hence the slow speed train crash we have been witnessing since shrink to greatness was first proposed.

 

[dru]

I not saying he right or wrong, just good to read good articles on the subject. But to call him a 'RA apologist' without calling all the ones who are continually rubbishing them on here etc "Anti RA' is a little bit shall we say rubbish? I know he has a lot more knowledge than me on the finances that are coming into the game from at least the research he has done on his very good book, so I think his opinion is to be as respected as anyones!

If it helps I'll cope with being branded anti-RA. Strangely enough just 4 years ago I was being vitriolically labelled an ARU apologist. I'd suggest that the difference is trying to consider what is happening through critical thinking. With the "evidence" we have seen (and RA actions) my position has changed. I'm still open to clear thinking - it's just that Parkes, for all his knowledge and the respect he holds, isn't doing it for me.

These things get emotive.

Have just finished reading a very very good article on ROAR by Geoff Parkes on how he think ARU should go forward, found it probably the best and most interesting ideas etc so far. Well worth a read, though I suspect a few may just ignore it because they have rightly made up their minds that they have the answer.

I could take umbrage but decided to look deeper at your reference. For what it is worth I called out just two items in Parkes' article.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Lets put it this way I think Geoff Parkes offers a more considered view than someone like Alan Jones.

I read his article and agreed with some of his views and disagreed with others. Sounds like most of this thread actually as it might well be what end up with gets a go and starts us on the journey of change but not where we end up...and that is okay as long as we move forward given how much gone backwards in so many ways over the last decade (but not discounting some positive developments in there but more an overall comment).

 

[Joe King]

Geoff Parkes made up his mind along time ago, he advocates no change he is the ultimate RA apologist. He is the one that will happily ignore any alternatives.

Read the article, exactly what does he advocate, apart from acceptance of the current top down structure and for the lower levels to stop complaining, some amalgamation and a bit of marketing wish list.

He isn't a RA apologist. His loyalty is simply to NZ rugby in the end. I like Geoff, but that's what drives his perspective. That's what he wants to ultimately protect. And that's fine for him to come from that position. We've all got our loyalties.

I don't doubt he truly believes this is what's best for Aus rugby, but he is biased, as are we are when we advocate for NZ rugby.

 

[kiap]

He isn't a RA apologist. His loyalty is simply to NZ rugby in the end. I like Geoff, but that's what drives his perspective. That's what he wants to ultimately protect.

Yeah, he's a Melbourne-based enzedder and the current RA align with his sensibilities. Given a different RA pointed another way and he won't be on their wagon.

Whatever. Australia needs a full clean out of its rugby administration and the sooner the better.

 

[Braveheart81]

Whatever. Australia needs a full clean out of its rugby administration and the sooner the better.

Most of the exec positions at Rugby Australia have changed over the last 12 months.

I agree that some more of the board needs to move on and be replaced as well but there has been a lot of change at RA in the last year.

 

[Joe King]

Taking about half of the current Wallabies with them? Where would that allow the Wallabies to improve? RA and Cheika seem to say the right words but actions speak louder than words. Would anyone playing WRC really be picked for the Wallabies? And if WRC is a lower level competition how would form of those players be assessed?

I'm not advocating this position, just a guess at what RA will actually end up doing. FWIW, I think they'll do it, not so much to directly improve the Wallabies, but to improve our Super Rugby teams. A more competitive Super Rugby comp is about the only bargaining chip they have to take to the broadcasters. And I think RA will think they can avoid the ordeal of last time by getting behind WSR in some form, and placing the Rebels there. Secretly, they won't be expecting any Wallabies to come out of WSR.

 

[kiap]

Most of the exec positions at Rugby Australia have changed over the last 12 months.

I agree that some more of the board needs to move on and be replaced as well but there has been a lot of change at RA in the last year.

What part of "full clean out" don't you understand?

(That's just banter, btw. In this place, I sometimes need to flag that)

But more seriously, I don't think there's been much actual change. Bring all the Raelene cheerleading you want, RA is still on the same old path - downward.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Most of the exec positions at Rugby Australia have changed over the last 12 months.

I agree that some more of the board needs to move on and be replaced as well but there has been a lot of change at RA in the last year.

BH, do you expect to see any significant change of direction with all of those new faces, or will it be steady as she goes. In other words, don't rock the boat, continue with more of the same? Who, among the new faces are the likely change agents?

 

[Braveheart81]

BH, do you expect to see any significant change of direction with all of those new faces, or will it be steady as she goes. In other words, don't rock the boat, continue with more of the same? Who, among the new faces are the likely change agents?

In short, no.

I don't think any changes at Exec or board level are going to bring dramatic changes to any sports organisation of this size. The major items are contracted multiple years in advance so any change takes time.

I reckon you could replace every board member and exec position and the big ticket items would remain relatively stable for the foreseeable future.

I think the longer term goals are bidding for the women's RWC, and then the men's RWC.

The Super Rugby option will be to pursue whatever option makes the most sense after the current broadcast deal with the knowledge that they aren't in the financial position to jettison the other unions and go it alone. I think their preference would be that South Africa decides they want out of Super Rugby.

 

[Omar Comin']

What could make things pretty interesting next year is if World Series Rugby does well in its first proper season. It will be head to head with Super Rugby and SANZAAR will be having discussions about the next broadcast deal.

Would RA consider getting off the Super Rugby wagon if WSR showed huge potential? WSR in 2019 will reportedly be an 8 team comp with 2 Australian sides. Maybe in 2021 it's a 12 team comp with 6 of them based in Australia.

 

[kiap]

What could make things pretty interesting next year is if World Series Rugby does well in its first proper season.

Be great to see!

Although RA still don't want it happening.

 

[dru]

Be great to see!

Although RA still don't want it happening.

This is also my expectation, but I wonder what reality is. No doubt, I think that RA was openly hostile to start, then granted concessions belatedly and with the appearance of reluctance.

In the mean time Twiggy has suggested That Castle has been listening - how 'real politic' this is I don't know. As I understand it, RA would like Twiggy to grab NRL and leave RA to play with the big boys. Twiggy isn't really gelling with that.

Right now I wonder what the actual picture is at RA. I'd bet WSR is being monitored and thoughts have been moving around. The second team in Sydney was an interesting action. Right into the heartland of "eastern" rugby politics. I also wonder what the thinking on this is from SRU.

No doubt Clynne and his cronies are gritting their teeth, but I'd imagine that RA will see this played out and take a developing position as it starts taking shape.

 

[hoggy]

Be great to see!

Although RA still don't want it happening.

But at some stage, we need to see some details, I heard that after the Panasonic game there was supposed to be an announcement.

The reality is its getting awfully late to organize a competition for next year were talking about 6/7 teams that simply don't exist yet. And I would have thought a few more financiers would have been mentioned. As wealthy as Twiggy is he simply cannot fund the whole thing himself.

 

[kiap]

This is also my expectation, but I wonder what reality is. No doubt, I think that RA was openly hostile to start, then granted concessions belatedly and with the appearance of reluctance.

In the mean time Twiggy has suggested That Castle has been listening

That meantime was a long time ago.

The reality is its getting awfully late to organize a competition for next year were talking about 6/7 teams that simply don't exist yet.

It is getting late, although most of the teams are not pure green fields.

The question is 'why is it being delayed?' And much of the answer to that will segue us back to the topic of this thread:

Supe Rugby (and the purported November 2018 date for the announcement of the shape of that comp post-2020).​

It is in RA's interest to use that as a reason for delaying any go ahead of WSR.

 

[Dan54]

Be great to see!

Although RA still don't want it happening.

For someone who is not keen on RA you certainly seem to have a lot of inside knowledge kiap!!

 

[Dan54]

What part of "full clean out" don't you understand?

(That's just banter, btw. In this place, I sometimes need to flag that)

But more seriously, I don't think there's been much actual change. Bring all the Raelene cheerleading you want, RA is still on the same old path - downward.

Who are all the new members that are going to move Rugby in the right direction for you kiap, if you get rid of them you have to have replacements or we may find rugby may not actually be played?

 

[kiap]

For someone who is not keen on RA you certainly seem to have a lot of inside knowledge kiap!!

Not so. There is plenty of information about RA that is outside RA. Some readily found, some less readily found.

It's clear that Rugby Australia haven't approved the WSR comp. What I've said is they don't want it happening; – they do not want WSR to start to roll out now, and I've given a reason.

Now it's possible that, in spite of their public statements, RA secretly can't get enough of this alternate comp. Sure, I am confident in my statement but I'm not a Megalo with such an ego that I can't be wrong.

So … RA are willing to outsource some control for the good of the game and want this to happen ASAP. It's for a different unstated reason (nothing to do with my post-2020 Super assessment) that they're just keeping this hidden … I am skeptical, but maybe others have additional "inside" information.

Who are all the new members that are going to move Rugby in the right direction for you kiap, if you get rid of them you have to have replacements or we may find rugby may not actually be played?

If Super rugby is not actually played then sign me up! No one is indispensable.