• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Where to for Super Rugby?

Status
Not open for further replies.

sendit

Bob Loudon (25)
Don't get me wrong, I enjoy playing NZ teams but I do feel like it's more enjoyable if we played them less often, it would keep its novelty.

At the end of the day I want Australian rugby to do well and enjoy following Australian players and teams. I can appreciate the skill level of NZ games but don't have much interest in whether their teams do well or poorly.

Again this is just my personal feelings and and I don't mean to pass off my observations as being statistically relevant . For lack of hard data I can really only speak from my personal experience, but outside of hardcore rugby fans and Kiwi's I really don't see that much interest in non-Australian teams.


yea for sure, i think its just an interesting question to ask. Logically in my mind, it doesn't make a huge amount of sense, i get the "i only watch the wallabies and care about Australia" to an extent. But if you're invested in a competition, again logically, i feel you should intrinsically have at least a passing interest in the other teams and how they are faring in the competition
 

Uh huh

Alfred Walker (16)
Whatever they do, I hated the NRL rules they brought in for this season and I hope they're consigned to the bin when we go back to playing the kiwis.
 

sendit

Bob Loudon (25)
I don't really know if free movement would help that much. Can Australian teams offer that much more than NZ teams for top players? Keeping in mind we'd probably have to offer a fair bit more as we'd be asking them to move away from home to a team that's likely to be worse than the one they're currently playing at. If we can get these players I could definitely see the benefit in such a system.

And if we can't get the best NZ players then we'd just be asking for the players NZ teams don't want, which as we've seen in the past is unlikely to improve Australian teams and much more likely to just end up with Kiwi journeymen take up space on a teams roster (in the process keeping out young Australian players).


With the amount of kiwis living over here id say the lifestyle is a pretty decent carrot. Plus the exchange rate would help a little

Our problem isnt top line talent though, our best and NZ best are in the same ballpark (for the most part) our depth has always been the issue. At least from my view, the open borders is more of a marketing/tv audience/fan engagement than helping prop up Australian squads
 

hifflepiff

Charlie Fox (21)
With the amount of kiwis living over here id say the lifestyle is a pretty decent carrot. Plus the exchange rate would help a little

Our problem isnt top line talent though, our best and NZ best are in the same ballpark (for the most part) our depth has always been the issue. At least from my view, the open borders is more of a marketing/tv audience/fan engagement than helping prop up Australian squads

In regards to depth, Australian teams already often hire a journeyman Kiwi or other overseas player if depth in a particular position is short.

The main benefit to the open borders system is that it allows players to qualify for NZ/Aus whilst playing in the other country. To that end you'd have to assume it's really only relevant for those players that are actively contending for an All Blacks spot (maybe the top 15% of players). Whilst lifestyle may help a bit, if we want to get these guys to come play for one of our teams we'd have to convince them to come to a team where they're probably going to be losing more often (and as such be less likely to get selected for the AB's). We'd probably have to pay out the nose to get these guys and I'm not convinced we could get a large enough number of them to make that much of a difference to Aus teams performances. What I fear would end up happening is in order to hire them, we'd have lose a couple of our young/middle tier players which would end up being worse in the long run (particularly for depth).

That said, I'm not saying its an intrinsically bad idea, I'm just not convinced it would lead to the massive jump in competitiveness that people expect. (Also, I don't really think the gap is that big between NZ and Aus teams, at least this year).
 

qwerty51

Stirling Mortlock (74)
Look how many Kiwis are in NRL sides. They'll come. In flocks. Not just Kiwis either, open it up for Samoans, Tongans, Fijians, Argentineans. Sure initially the wages will be shit but grow the TT, get higher wages -> turn it into the best domestic comp in the world. Shift the focus to the club game instead of Wallabies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mst

sendit

Bob Loudon (25)
Look how many Kiwis are in NRL sides. They'll come. In flocks. Not just Kiwis either, open it up for Samoans, Tongans, Fijians, Argentineans. Sure initially the wages will be shit but grow the TT, get higher wages -> turn it into the best domestic comp in the world. Shift the focus to the club game instead of Wallabies.


To be fair most of the "kiwi" RL players are either aussie with kiwi parents or came to Australia during schooling, the amount of out and out kiwis is far less

Id open it up to Aussies, islanders and japanese
 

hoggy

Nev Cottrell (35)
Look how many Kiwis are in NRL sides. They'll come. In flocks. Not just Kiwis either, open it up for Samoans, Tongans, Fijians, Argentineans. Sure initially the wages will be shit but grow the TT, get higher wages -> turn it into the best domestic comp in the world. Shift the focus to the club game instead of Wallabies.


But that's the catch 22, who will shift the focus to the clubs. For 20 years Super rugby was going to be the best competition in the world and for the nzru it will only ever be about the All Blacks.
 

hifflepiff

Charlie Fox (21)
Look how many Kiwis are in NRL sides. They'll come. In flocks. Not just Kiwis either, open it up for Samoans, Tongans, Fijians, Argentineans. Sure initially the wages will be shit but grow the TT, get higher wages -> turn it into the best domestic comp in the world. Shift the focus to the club game instead of Wallabies.


I think its also fair to say that the incentives for NZ League players to come to Aus are a fair bit stronger than the incentives for NZ Union players (Aus league teams have way more more money + opportunity compared to NZ's 1 pro league team).

NZ teams aren't only better because they have better players, it's also because the 5 NZ teams have an organisational culture that focuses on fostering young domestic talent (which Australian teams have begun to do, e.g. the Reds).

Bringing in an overseas player over an Australian player is really only beneficial if a) The player is far better than the domestic competition and b) If you don't have to pay the player so much that you lose depth elsewhere. Historically getting both of these has meant finding heavily underrated players that don't demand massive contracts (e.g. Jacques Potgieter, Tomas Cubelli).

To this end I could see the benefit in looking at Argentinian, Islander and Japanese players because you could conceivably get a very good player without giving up overall squad integrity.

But If you want to get a Kiwi that's notably better than his Australian counterpart you're gonna have to get someone that's actively contending for an AB spot or there abouts. These players are gonna demand pretty big contracts.

If you want to pay less you're gonna be picking up journeymen Kiwi players, who are unlikely to be considerably better than their Australian counterparts and in the process are going to be keeping out young Australian players which messes with Australia's whole talent development process.

Again maybe I'm undervaluing the incentives for NZ players to come and play for Australia, but I don't think open borders is the silver bullet we need to start beating the Crusaders, especially with the extremely limited number of Super Rugby contracts there are going around. Additionally, I really doubt NZ teams are going to be hiring many Australian players, for many of the same reasons I've outlined above.
 

Dan54

David Wilson (68)
In regards to depth, Australian teams already often hire a journeyman Kiwi or other overseas player if depth in a particular position is short.

The main benefit to the open borders system is that it allows players to qualify for NZ/Aus whilst playing in the other country. To that end you'd have to assume it's really only relevant for those players that are actively contending for an All Blacks spot (maybe the top 15% of players). Whilst lifestyle may help a bit, if we want to get these guys to come play for one of our teams we'd have to convince them to come to a team where they're probably going to be losing more often (and as such be less likely to get selected for the AB's). We'd probably have to pay out the nose to get these guys and I'm not convinced we could get a large enough number of them to make that much of a difference to Aus teams performances. What I fear would end up happening is in order to hire them, we'd have lose a couple of our young/middle tier players which would end up being worse in the long run (particularly for depth).

That said, I'm not saying its an intrinsically bad idea, I'm just not convinced it would lead to the massive jump in competitiveness that people expect. (Also, I don't really think the gap is that big between NZ and Aus teams, at least this year).

I keep saying the open borders policy is a furphy, except that RA will only let each team have 2-3 players non Aus I think. As said the top of the pile rugby players aren't going to come, (money wouldn't be any better) and no the lifestyle is basically the same, but the journeymen we talk about are what will add so much to Aus rugby in the depth dept. That is very important, as I believe as someone has said here the top 25-30 players in Aus are not that far off NZ anyway, and I think the only trouble Aus teams have had is they lack depth to compete with NZ teams on a regular basis, this has mainly happened in last 10 years or so. See in Aus at moment I believe if there was a TT comp going in next few years a team like Reds would be challenging for top spot, maybe Brumbies and Tahs, but after that we need to think about buying in depth!
 

dru

David Wilson (68)
Opening up AB selection criteria to Kiwis playing in the comp whether the team is Kiwi or Aus - no it won’t likely result in immediate defection of ABs from Kiwi team to Aus teams.

New talent coming through, especially where missing opportunity in NZ, currently have a disincentive to trying Aus. Because it immediately closes the door on possible AB representation. No new Kiwi talent is going to be keen on that. Remove the disincentive and you will see new talent trying their luck in Aus bolstering Aus franchise depth. In time you may even see these guys make the ABs.

A TT comp where things are managed solely for National interest - not in the interests of the comp itself - are always going to lead to odd skews.

I can understand NZ wanting those criteria to continue, which is fine. It is just that a dampened enthusiasm from Australia to join such a comp is also logically likely to continue.

I don’t see a way past the impasse. About the best is domestic comps followed by TT club comp.
 

Dan54

David Wilson (68)
Opening up AB selection criteria to Kiwis playing in the comp whether the team is Kiwi or Aus - no it won’t likely result in immediate defection of ABs from Kiwi team to Aus teams.

New talent coming through, especially where missing opportunity in NZ, currently have a disincentive to trying Aus. Because it immediately closes the door on possible AB representation. No new Kiwi talent is going to be keen on that. Remove the disincentive and you will see new talent trying their luck in Aus bolstering Aus franchise depth. In time you may even see these guys make the ABs.

A TT comp where things are managed solely for National interest - not in the interests of the comp itself - are always going to lead to odd skews.

I can understand NZ wanting those criteria to continue, which is fine. It is just that a dampened enthusiasm from Australia to join such a comp is also logically likely to continue.

I don’t see a way past the impasse. About the best is domestic comps followed by TT club comp.

yep but not sure if RA is going to want their teams filled with Kiwis anyway, their criteria prevents it happening also. but I cool with whatever happens, and it could only happen if every team has private money paying the bills as neither NZRU or RA would want to be paying part wages of other's players.
 

Dan54

David Wilson (68)
This made me lol

NZ is like the wish version of Canberra

Not sure what you saying, but I never been to Canberra, but basically I have lived in NZ for the first 40 odd years of my life and in Aus the last 20 yrs, and I find the lifestyle quite similar regardless of what anyone thinks, it's like arguments of living in different states in Aus, some you get expensive houses , some cheaper, some have warmer weather , some don't but end of the day they and NZ are quite similar. Both countries are about same in where they are in progress, Aus have bigger population, so like in NZ and here where people tend to head to cities to live etc etc. Both countries rely on imported foreign workers for jobs like fruit picking etc (or farm work), I live a good life here, but no better than family at home who all have what I have, travel overseas etc as much as me etc. The biggest difference I noted is that NZ is more England centric and Aus tends to be USA centric. Just my observations.

And that is no way saying one is better than other, both fantastic places to live, as are most developed countries I have visted.
 

half

Dick Tooth (41)
^^^^^
Dru

The combination of the pandemic, Trump, Johnson, China, and the increasing hard right the Murdoch press world wide is pushing, when added to together has me far less interested in rugby issues today.

However reading these pages makes me feel many are still in the dark, almost in a dream land.

Your logic is spot on. Its interesting all the "Johnny Come Lately s ", who used to support, existing structures, are now experts on how to run a new competition.

The core business and sporting essentials have not changed.

Its simple we need to develop a Local National Domestic Competition, and if we wanta get that right we bring all the stakeholders along. To get all the stakeholders on one page signing the same song and working together, is aside from complex given various self interests and ego's, Its also timing consuming.

You can't only have 5 teams, you need at least 8, but then only for a short time you need 10 teams at least.

I like the new guy in charge, my fear is he will chase the short term dollar fix. Hopefully he can bring enough folk with him .

Its impossible to develop any business that's in trouble with huge competition in a falling market without all key stakeholders both involved as part of the process, but equally a model that suits the environment you are in.

Just on the falling market aspect, sport or people prepared to watch sport on a regular basic is falling and has been for a number of years. The net has given people far more options. E-Games, Youtube, various streaming avenues for non related sports actives is growing.

Dru, into this falling market, consider in Australia we have 139 professional sporting teams [listed below] many relatively new:-
AFL men’s 18
AFL women’s 14
Rugby League 16
Rugby League Women’s 10
Super Rugby 5
Netball 8
Basketball men’s 9
Basketball women’s 9
Football 12
Cricket Shield teams 7
Big Bash Men’s 8
Big Bash Women’s 8
OD state teams 7
Super V8’s [see note] 8

Total 139

As I said, posted, yelled, screamed, for two decades now, long term we need a "National Domestic Competition" and we need everyone in rugby behind it.

All the above sports are chasing broadcast agreements, sponsorships etc, so so so so much has changed over the past two decades. What was will not survive the future.

AnyWho, keep up the logic hopefully people will one day understand.
 

dru

David Wilson (68)
yep but not sure if RA is going to want their teams filled with Kiwis anyway, their criteria prevents it happening also. but I cool with whatever happens, and it could only happen if every team has private money paying the bills as neither NZRU or RA would want to be paying part wages of other's players.

Two things Dan.

1. With 5 teams and open to Kiwis, it shouldn’t be hard to ensure better opportunity for Aus talent compared with 2 or 3 teams and no Kiwis.

2. Yep you are right. High end talent is only affordable to the Aus teams with RA top up and that is not going to happen for Kiwi players. Other funding would be required to make it work once a Kiwi player was regularly a starter in an Aus team.
 

dru

David Wilson (68)
@ half

China, Trump and Johnson are contributing to your rugby enjoyment malaise? Fark me, man. Just let the rugby be an out on the world shite.

I am befuddled by those issues too, but damned if I’ll let it interrupt the rugby.

One thing on the domestic comp issue. COVID has forced a situation where it is as good a time as any to move forward. I do think though we will devolve back to a TT. Not at all what I think is ideal but I think it will happen. Still a chance that it will be domestic thence TT. Personally I would split Reds, Waratahs and Brumbies into two teams each under the same admin and coaching groups. Then recombine them + a Force/Rebels team for the TT.

Well a bloke can dream fluff if he wants, eh?
 

Dctarget

Tim Horan (67)
@Dan if the lifestyles are the same why does NZ have 520,000 people living in Aus? (The largest proportional expat population in the world). And Aus has 62,000 living in NZ?
 

hoggy

Nev Cottrell (35)
@Dan if the lifestyles are the same why does NZ have 520,000 people living in Aus? (The largest proportional expat population in the world). And Aus has 62,000 living in NZ?

Economic factors do play a part, but there are many other factors in play, NZ is a small isolated island pretty much at the bottom of the world, Aus will always be an attractive option for Kiwis, same language, just a couple of hours flight home, it is very much viewed over there as the big city option, its not like moving to Russia or similar.

My situation is I met an Aussie girl, and here I am, but pretty much most of my old mates back in NZ are doing okay.

You have to look at those figures in context.
 

Dan54

David Wilson (68)
@Dan if the lifestyles are the same why does NZ have 520,000 people living in Aus? (The largest proportional expat population in the world). And Aus has 62,000 living in NZ?

For the same reason any small or medium size town in Australia or NZ have a huge proportion of their population moving to cities (and NZ and Aus are only 3 hours apart and pretty cheap to move between), where there is more people more employment opportunities, or are you going to tell me there is a better lifestyle in a city than a smaller town? I have lived in both places and as I say both are great places to live, I am in the process of returning to NZ, not because I think the lifestyle better or worse just time to go home. Perhaps you struggled to find living in NZ different and found the lifestyle markedly different, but I haven't found life in either country that different. But that is only for me as I said and you may have different experiences.

Whoops sorry didn't see hoggy's post above but bang on!
 

sendit

Bob Loudon (25)
AFL men’s 18
AFL women’s 14
Rugby League 16
Rugby League Women’s 10
Super Rugby 5
Netball 8
Basketball men’s 9
Basketball women’s 9
Football 12
Cricket Shield teams 7
Big Bash Men’s 8
Big Bash Women’s 8
OD state teams 7
Super V8’s [see note] 8

lol unless the NRLW sprouted 6 new teams in the last 24 hours id say that data is wrong

get your point though
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top