Where to for Super Rugby?

[Omar Comin']

It's more so that you could give all teams two home games to supplement the Super Rugby season.

You could add the Force and make it four games with no final week but then you need 5 weeks to run it and I'm not sure you'd have the time. It depends on when the first test is.

Fair point, though I think a State of Origin series would have more interest and commercial value and some or most of that could feed into the Super Rugby teams. Plus you'd have this nice funnel of starting with 4 teams in Super Rugby (5 including the Force in GRR), whittling that down to 2 State of Origin teams, and then down to 1 Wallabies team.

I think the NRC could morph into this Australian Championship during the test season. Just have a single or double round robin between the 4 Super Rugby teams minus their Wallabies (supplemented by the best club players), plus the Force and any other Australian team in GRR. Fiji could stay involved too if WR (World Rugby) wanted to keep supporting that.

 

[Rebels3]

State of origin wouldn’t work, it’d immediately be perceived as a cheap copy of the league version, which ultimately it would be. Plus as much as I love rugby, as a spectacle it definitely hasn’t a got the kamikaze gladiatorial visuals that league has, that has built the foundation of why origin is so popular. It also isolates a large portion of our playing group, considering 50% of them originate from the islands, NZ, other states and SA.

As a born and bred QLDer that loves origin, I’d have little interest in something trying to replicate the passion and all round interest of it. You’d get a similar crowd to the game as what the reds are already getting in the QLD fixture.

 

[Omar Comin']

State of origin wouldn’t work, it’d immediately be perceived as a cheap copy of the league version, which ultimately it would be. Plus as much as I love rugby, as a spectacle it definitely hasn’t a got the kamikaze gladiatorial visuals that league has, that has built the foundation of why origin is so popular. It also isolates a large portion of our playing group, considering 50% of them originate from the islands, NZ, other states and SA.

As a born and bred QLDer that loves origin, I’d have little interest in something trying to replicate the passion and all round interest of it. You’d get a similar crowd to the game as what the reds are already getting in the QLD fixture.

If it was 25% as successful as the league state of origin it would be a pretty big deal for Australian Rugby. And the one bonus it would have over the league state of origin is it would feed directly into the test season. So there'd be Wallabies spots well and truly on the line. I think you could just make it 2 games as well to avoid any dead rubbers, with the winner decided on points aggregate over the 2 matches.

Almost every Super Rugby player in Australia can easily fit into either QLD or NSW in one way or another. For the rare few who weren't born in either state and haven't lived in either state there could be something worked out. E.g. everyone who doesn't qualify for NSW qualifies for QLD.

 

[liquor box]

State of origin wouldn’t work, it’d immediately be perceived as a cheap copy of the league version, which ultimately it would be. Plus as much as I love rugby, as a spectacle it definitely hasn’t a got the kamikaze gladiatorial visuals that league has, that has built the foundation of why origin is so popular. It also isolates a large portion of our playing group, considering 50% of them originate from the islands, NZ, other states and SA.

As a born and bred QLDer that loves origin, I’d have little interest in something trying to replicate the passion and all round interest of it. You’d get a similar crowd to the game as what the reds are already getting in the QLD fixture.

Doesn't the League version have players who don't originate from NSW and QLD?

 

[liquor box]

I have never liked the idea of state of origin for Union, but think that a GPS v Public Schools game could be interesting, and actually get some passionate response from the public.

Plenty of people would love to stick it to the "toffs" who got everything handed to them.

 

[Set piece magic]

I think people are forgetting a pacific islander team or two function as loss leaders for the game

They might create financial red, but they make up for it, in intruige, away fans which will create
heaps of atmosphere, and a competition which has genuine meaning and feel.

You might lose on marginal cost going to the pacific islands, with the broadcast at their end
not getting many valuable viewers, but you gain interest at home.

They are a more attractive proposition vis a vis the South Africans, or at least one or two of them are.

You can see this in the way they got around the NRC - and that was a third tier competition

 

[Braveheart81]

I think people are forgetting a pacific islander team or two function as loss leaders for the game

They might create financial red, but they make up for it, in intruige, away fans which will create
heaps of atmosphere, and a competition which has genuine meaning and feel.

You might lose on marginal cost going to the pacific islands, with the broadcast at their end
not getting many valuable viewers, but you gain interest at home.

They are a more attractive proposition vis a vis the South Africans, or at least one or two of them are.

You can see this in the way they got around the NRC - and that was a third tier competition

You need someone to fund that though.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

It's more so that you could give all teams two home games to supplement the Super Rugby season.

You could add the Force and make it four games with no final week but then you need 5 weeks to run it and I'm not sure you'd have the time. It depends on when the first test is.

If you don't want it to run over too much of an extended time frame then you could do it featuring 4 teams from Super Rugby and 4 from GRR split into two pools of four. Two from each comp in each pool. Either play each other once or for 3 games or home and away for 6 with the final to be contest by the winner of each pool.

Or conversely run this structure during the RC period especially if the Nations League comes into play at the RC will involve just the 5 (or in our case 6) games. They could then use non-Wallaby squad members as the core, open opportunities for younger players coming through at even cycle extended Wallaby squad players not needed for a particular home game. Some weeks you'd even get full strength squads on the paddock.

 

[Rebels3]

Doesn't the League version have players who don't originate from NSW and QLD?

The significant difference is that their model is based on where you first played the game. Islanders and kiwis that have played in origin have by in large entirely learnt the game in one of the two states, as they came from rugby backgrounds never playing league before. If the same method was used, many of our players wouldn’t be eligible, it’d just be a mercenary like scenario or the potential for the two origin squads under a birth or first played scenario been of a worse standard than the actual Super franchise. In the current playing rosters if it incorporated the league method, there would be no Cooper, Kurindrani, Hunt, Speight, Naivalu, Tupou, Smith twins, DHP, Koroibete, Timu, Naisarani, Valetini, CLL, Samu, Pocock etc. as all played the game in other areas prior to immigrating to Australia or learnt the game in another state.

 

[Rebels3]

I see in an article on the Australian there is murmurs of support behind the 5 Australian based franchises coming together with a team from Fiji post the shortened Super Rugby season in 2021. Will also mean the canning of the NRC, which the article states is losing player support when compared to results in previous years

I guess the start of the year would be Super Rugby and GRR been played and then this domestic comp played after them. Which makes a lot of sense

 

[RebelYell]

Yep the only trouble is with the risk of going alone is obviously that RA will go broke (and of course noone on here would be anything but supportive), all the top Aus and probably NZ players will go to Japan or NH, but hey we will have a local amateur comp to watch. I only saying that because when speaking to mate who is in reasonable position in NZ rugby to actually have info, he says that NZRU have of course looked at other options for revenue, as he assumed all RUs do around the world, and there is not the same money on offer for a Trans tasman comp. It's all very well us coming up with alternative comps, like every game played in a time slot that suits me, playing only teams that really suit me etc etc, but as seen with something like NRC there is no way Aus rugby could survive on it. Don't forget without Super rugby paying the bills, probably NRC wouldn't survive.

Sure, and I take your point, that initially there isn't the same money/broadcast revenue for a Trans-Tasman comp.

Just like initially there wasn't the same money/broadcast revenue as there is now for the Big Bash League.

You need to take the risk, understand you'll lose a lot of players (WHO ARE LEAVING IN DROVES ANYWAY) in the short term, but back the product and the game to eventually reverse the current trends and begin to become more popular, attract more viewers, more interest, and then the $$$ that will come in the future will mean it was the right, brave decision.

Or we could just put a bandaid over the BROKEN LEG we have and wonder why it's not healing.

 

[Braveheart81]

I see in an article on the Australian there is murmurs of support behind the 5 Australian based franchises coming together with a team from Fiji post the shortened Super Rugby season in 2021. Will also mean the canning of the NRC, which the article states is losing player support when compared to results in previous years

I guess the start of the year would be Super Rugby and GRR been played and then this domestic comp played after them. Which makes a lot of sense

A 6 team competition involving the four Super Rugby franchises, the Force and Fiji Drua playing a 10 game home and away season plus finals would be pretty good during the test season.

It would give fans more meaningful home games to attend, a decent TV offering and help improve the financial position of the teams who have reduced their home games from 8 to 6 or 7.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

A 6 team competition involving the four Super Rugby franchises, the Force and Fiji Drua playing a 10 game home and away season plus finals would be pretty good during the test season.

It would give fans more meaningful home games to attend, a decent TV offering and help improve the financial position of the teams who have reduced their home games from 8 to 6 or 7.

That'd work as well and probably what the NRC needs to evolve into anyway.

 

[Rebels3]

A 6 team competition involving the four Super Rugby franchises, the Force and Fiji Drua playing a 10 game home and away season plus finals would be pretty good during the test season.

It would give fans more meaningful home games to attend, a decent TV offering and help improve the financial position of the teams who have reduced their home games from 8 to 6 or 7.

It just makes sense, plus plenty of opportunities for young players to be exposed when the wallabies are playing etc. also some associated success with at least one side will bring positive stories to the game.

If the world league goes ahead I’d also love to see the a push for no super rugby on ANZAC day weekends and the Unions playing the extra bledisloe fixture that would need to be played, on that weekend.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I see in an article on the Australian there is murmurs of support behind the 5 Australian based franchises coming together with a team from Fiji post the shortened Super Rugby season in 2021. Will also mean the canning of the NRC, which the article states is losing player support when compared to results in previous years

I guess the start of the year would be Super Rugby and GRR been played and then this domestic comp played after them. Which makes a lot of sense

Providing they go with the home and away schedule this makes a lot more sense.

 

[Braveheart81]

This seems to be a key element of the Sunwolves axing:

“SANZAAR was advised by the Japan Rugby Football Union (JRFU) in early March that they would no longer be in a position to financially underwrite the Sunwolves future participation post 2020."

 

[half]

 

[mst]

I find this interesting. Is it my imagination, or does this seem similar to, if not GRR?

“However, Japan and the Asia Pacific region remain strategically important to SANZAAR.

“We will continue to work with the JRFU, Japan Super Rugby Association and other stakeholders, as we have done throughout this review process, to establish a truly professional league structure in Japan in which current and potentially new teams could participate.

“We have presented options to them around the establishment of a Super Rugby Asia Pacific competition structure including Japan, the Pacific Islands, North and South America and Hong Kong."

https://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/...p/news-story/97fcd151d33c6797209e50311b3a53c1

 

[Omar Comin']

The significant difference is that their model is based on where you first played the game. Islanders and kiwis that have played in origin have by in large entirely learnt the game in one of the two states, as they came from rugby backgrounds never playing league before. If the same method was used, many of our players wouldn’t be eligible, it’d just be a mercenary like scenario or the potential for the two origin squads under a birth or first played scenario been of a worse standard than the actual Super franchise. In the current playing rosters if it incorporated the league method, there would be no Cooper, Kurindrani, Hunt, Speight, Naivalu, Tupou, Smith twins, DHP, Koroibete, Timu, Naisarani, Valetini, CLL, Samu, Pocock etc. as all played the game in other areas prior to immigrating to Australia or learnt the game in another state.

A lot of those islanders and kiwis who have played state of origin in league would have played some league before moving to Australia. But do you really think this is such a big deal? For some of those guys you've mentioned it's completely obvious who they would play for in a state of origin as their family moved to NSW or QLD when they were kids or teenagers (e.g. Pocock, Cooper, Kuridrani etc). Others moved to one or the other as adults and have lived there for several years.

There's a few players with little connection to either state, but not many. And those guys could either just all be allocated to Queensland, or they could make a choice. I don't think it would matter much, people would want to see the best players involved more than they'd want the teams to be 100% pure. And there'd be a lot on the line if it was played in the lead up to the test season. I bet it would get more interest than Wallabies test matches against lower drawing opponents likes Argentina, Italy and Scotland.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I find this interesting. Is it my imagination, or does this seem similar to, if not GRR?

“However, Japan and the Asia Pacific region remain strategically important to SANZAAR.

“We will continue to work with the JRFU, Japan Super Rugby Association and other stakeholders, as we have done throughout this review process, to establish a truly professional league structure in Japan in which current and potentially new teams could participate.

“We have presented options to them around the establishment of a Super Rugby Asia Pacific competition structure including Japan, the Pacific Islands, North and South America and Hong Kong."

https://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/...p/news-story/97fcd151d33c6797209e50311b3a53c1

With the exception of the Nth and Sth America bit. Yeah. But conversely it kind of screams bullshit to me around the whole thing. Like they are just throwing together random regions in an effort not to look even worse than they currently do.