Where to for Super Rugby?

[Dan54]

Nah I call BS as it is about developing a successful competition given nz too small despite its own ego to realise it can’t do it in its own. You compelely missed the point that is about developing a successful commercial competition hence private equity comments. And point being private equity would make decisions more on commercial grounds and more savvy to do the latter then some bureaucratic rugby organisation filled with too many ex players and people grounded in the Amateur era. NzRu has shown by past behaviour they are completely clueless how to engage key stakeholders to build a successful competition. Stop defending a bunch of muppets. Christ we certainly bagged RA when they showed incompetence and again recent behaviour by NZRU shown they are competely just as clueless despite the obvious advantages they have to leverage (ie most popular footy code by far in nz)

I call BS to you too RN, you ask anyone who has been in rugby in Australia long enough especially in 80s etc and then tell me where Aus rugby would be without NZ teams coming and playing them to strengthen the game here. I never realised until I after I came over and met a few of the people that run QRU etc in those days. They weren't convinced the rugby would of even still been going here in a decent form if NZ teams hadn't lost come over to give them quality games at home etc, and boy generally at own cost. And have you even seen the work etc that NZR have put in at Philippines etc? They actually do a shit load of support etc in the way of coaching, helping set up admin etc of the sports in a lot od those countries. I actually know someone who has been involved in taking taking teams , gear etc etc over to these places. NZR used to have quite bit to do with China's rugby set up too, don't know if they still do, but know there was a lot of work put in there late90s,early 00s.

But I realise I will always be wrong with these opinions, as I agree it up to us all to help rugby in developing nations, up to a point, and I do know NZR do a fair bit, probably could do more in some opinions, but I don't know how much RA does to develop the game around world, and I not suggesting it their job either. I just think that because NZR have been successful in making the sport popular in NZ and RA haven't done same here, I not sure why it then up NZ to do everything. And don't tell me it because Rugby is a 3rd or 4th sport in Aus ,it is that because RA has let it become that! NZ also has league and soccer, who go through surges in popularity, but NZR puts a heap of work in to make it popular in NZ (much like AFL etc here) so what do you think their focus should be on? Tell me truthfully.

 

[Dan54]

Mate for me its always been about expansion and new voices at the table.

Central Coast, Newcastle, second Brisbane team, Western Sydney team, plus maybe a sorta Northern Beaches / Northern District team, kinda Eastwood, North Sydney, Gordon, Manly & The Rats forming a team as well.

Thats 10 teams.

The key is involving all the stakeholders who will drive the ratings, in a shrinking and more competitive market.

I would be prepared to play out of smaller and way more affordable stadiums.

Broadcast via youtube, if you want a model for this the NSW Football Federation do an amazing job, also Bar TV .

Get a match of the day on a major broadcaster.

Most won't agree I am use to that. But thats how to do it long term to both grow and expand, chasing short term cash injections to maintain existing structures and to do so means bending over and taking it. Resulting in the pigs at the trough get to stay longer but the game suffers and declines in the street.

Its the street not the bank that decides over the long term and many many many in rugby over decades don't understand its the street you need to get right to get more from the bank. Its not the bank gives and the street needs to accept and comply, many in the street walk away.

On the world events kinda agree but the incoherent squabbling on ideas only a few months back they opposed does not infuse me, when world events as they are today .

I like your ideas half but unfortunately rugby as a sport wouldn't survive long enough for these measures to take effect I don't think without money coming in. Like it or not we have to have a sport that is available for everyone, and that means having a competitive Wallaby team etc , it's the unfortunate reality of survival in sport. We not going to win back fans with a domestic comp, probably just hold some, but the flagship of rugby in Australia is the Wallabies, they get the news, publicity and the casual fans. Everyone talks about NRL and AFL well don't just try and take them on at their level, but promote the sport where they can't at International level. I don't believe soccer would even survive in this country without the interest and news Socceroos get by qualifying for WCs and Asian cup etc. Point of difference!

 

[hoggy]

I like your ideas half but unfortunately rugby as a sport wouldn't survive long enough for these measures to take effect I don't think without money coming in. Like it or not we have to have a sport that is available for everyone, and that means having a competitive Wallaby team etc , it's the unfortunate reality of survival in sport. We not going to win back fans with a domestic comp, probably just hold some, but the flagship of rugby in Australia is the Wallabies, they get the news, publicity and the casual fans. Everyone talks about NRL and AFL well don't just try and take them on at their level, but promote the sport where they can't at International level. I don't believe soccer would even survive in this country without the interest and news Socceroos get by qualifying for WCs and Asian cup etc. Point of difference!

Sorry Dan, but this is where I fundamentally dis-agree with you, that point of difference has made exactly zilch of a difference over the last 20 odd years.

it is not about taking on the AFL/NRL, its about the fact that that's exactly what Aussies want. the game can survive on the occasional sugar hit of the Wallabies but with nothing substantial below that level that casual viewer very quickly fades away.

As a Kiwi having lived here for nearly 30 years now, the one thing i have come to realize is the average Aussie will happily chuck on a yellow shirt when it suits them, but day to day they worship club based tribal codes.

It is my honest observation here that international sport will get you some viewers but domestic club sport will get you fans.

 

[half]

I like your ideas half but unfortunately rugby as a sport wouldn't survive long enough for these measures to take effect I don't think without money coming in. Like it or not we have to have a sport that is available for everyone, and that means having a competitive Wallaby team etc , it's the unfortunate reality of survival in sport. We not going to win back fans with a domestic comp, probably just hold some, but the flagship of rugby in Australia is the Wallabies, they get the news, publicity and the casual fans. Everyone talks about NRL and AFL well don't just try and take them on at their level, but promote the sport where they can't at International level. I don't believe soccer would even survive in this country without the interest and news Socceroos get by qualifying for WCs and Asian cup etc. Point of difference!

Dan

What do you mean by "rugby as a sport would't survive long enough"

How is this determined, i.e. by player numbers [real not someone who came for an hour], media, the number of professional teams,

Interesting until FFA joined Asia Australia only once made the world cup, moreover the socceross only played two meaningful games every four years yet they have always had the player numbers, so I fundamentally disagree with your point on the socceroos and whether soccer will survive, but thats slightly off topic.

Rugby in Australia has been shrinking for years, and the excuse to not implement change has always been the money thing.

Effectively what placing the need for money as more important than the needs of the game and the stakeholders generally has brought us to where we are today. I always argued it would take five years and SCREAMED to do it now for so so so so so so long .

Rugby is in far more trouble than anyone on this site understands, as I posted a couple of pages back there are over 130 professional teams across a number of sports in Australia all chasing, broadcast / crowd & sponsorship revenue. Many of these sports are less than 10 years old i.e. Big Bash, professional netball, . Further as I said the percentage of people watching traditional sports is falling.

Into this mix comes the concussion issues, AFL can change its high mark, soccer can outlaw heading, this will change these games but tackling out of rugby and make it touch and the games is no the same.

All having more money does is keep those in paid employment in jobs a little longer.

NOW

Just because we get less money does not mean no money

Reducing costs i.e. stadium hire, travel, will be massive as will reduced wages and yes some player may leave, but they are now anyway.

There will still be broadcast revenue be it smaller.

Most importantly is we change the structure of the team format from RA owing and running the competition with various unions running teams, to a USA based franchise model of private ownership of teams and those teams own the competition.

AnyWho off to work I must go and I am tied of going over the same old ground, for me as I have been advocating for years, move to a private ownership model, lots and lots of consultation, develop a National Domestic Competition .

Many on this site are simply working out the best way to run the current failing set up and that's pure madness IMO.


All traditional sports are facing huge pressure from E-games, the net in general, so we have a shrinking market, the recent AFL concussion case will effect not only assets but future revenue and parents willing to let their kids play.

Rugby needs to expand its reach to me its obvious, to do this we need to get all the stakeholders on broad.

So I disagree with you, every year we wait, the harder it will be .

 

[Dan54]

Dan

What do you mean by "rugby as a sport would't survive long enough"

.

Sorry mate, bad wording what I should of said that Rugby wouldn't survive at it's level it at now in Aus, would risk becoming a boutique sport. I know we measure sport by playing numbers, but to get young kids playing the game we need it to be on TV unfortunately. Mate I remember how much Union got knocked and League took off on NZ when the Kiwis became competitive with Kangaroos, same as soccer in 80s when NZ qualified for WC, player numbers etc jumped because it was on TV and top team was doing well.

 

[Dan54]

Sorry Dan, but this is where I fundamentally dis-agree with you, that point of difference has made exactly zilch of a difference over the last 20 odd years.

it is not about taking on the AFL/NRL, its about the fact that that's exactly what Aussies want. the game can survive on the occasional sugar hit of the Wallabies but with nothing substantial below that level that casual viewer very quickly fades away.

As a Kiwi having lived here for nearly 30 years now, the one thing i have come to realize is the average Aussie will happily chuck on a yellow shirt when it suits them, but day to day they worship club based tribal codes.

It is my honest observation here that international sport will get you some viewers but domestic club sport will get you fans.

Of course, but see my post above, you need to get young kids into sport. I know how many junior teams there was in Aus when I first came here in 90s, when Wallabies were going well. Anyway I agree you have to have some success at club level etc, and evryone talks of building from the bottom, only way that works is for a lot of interest at the bottom ie kids . Also unfortunately need money to promote game, and where does that come from?

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I call BS to you too RN, you ask anyone who has been in rugby in Australia long enough especially in 80s etc and then tell me where Aus rugby would be without NZ teams coming and playing them to strengthen the game here. I never realised until I after I came over and met a few of the people that run QRU etc in those days. They weren't convinced the rugby would of even still been going here in a decent form if NZ teams hadn't lost come over to give them quality games at home etc, and boy generally at own cost. And have you even seen the work etc that NZR have put in at Philippines etc? They actually do a shit load of support etc in the way of coaching, helping set up admin etc of the sports in a lot od those countries. I actually know someone who has been involved in taking taking teams , gear etc etc over to these places. NZR used to have quite bit to do with China's rugby set up too, don't know if they still do, but know there was a lot of work put in there late90s,early 00s.

But I realise I will always be wrong with these opinions, as I agree it up to us all to help rugby in developing nations, up to a point, and I do know NZR do a fair bit, probably could do more in some opinions, but I don't know how much RA does to develop the game around world, and I not suggesting it their job either. I just think that because NZR have been successful in making the sport popular in NZ and RA haven't done same here, I not sure why it then up NZ to do everything. And don't tell me it because Rugby is a 3rd or 4th sport in Aus ,it is that because RA has let it become that! NZ also has league and soccer, who go through surges in popularity, but NZR puts a heap of work in to make it popular in NZ (much like AFL etc here) so what do you think their focus should be on? Tell me truthfully.

RA without doubt played a key role where we are but I believe the threat to rugby is far greater from league etc and do believe a stronger trans tasman competition would benefit all long term commercially. My view is league expansion and strength also a threat to nz. I think we have no choice personally but to go it alone but I don’t think it will happen sadly.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Dan

What do you mean by "rugby as a sport would't survive long enough"

How is this determined, i.e. by player numbers [real not someone who came for an hour], media, the number of professional teams,

Interesting until FFA joined Asia Australia only once made the world cup, moreover the socceross only played two meaningful games every four years yet they have always had the player numbers, so I fundamentally disagree with your point on the socceroos and whether soccer will survive, but thats slightly off topic.

Rugby in Australia has been shrinking for years, and the excuse to not implement change has always been the money thing.

Effectively what placing the need for money as more important than the needs of the game and the stakeholders generally has brought us to where we are today. I always argued it would take five years and SCREAMED to do it now for so so so so so so long .

Rugby is in far more trouble than anyone on this site understands, as I posted a couple of pages back there are over 130 professional teams across a number of sports in Australia all chasing, broadcast / crowd & sponsorship revenue. Many of these sports are less than 10 years old i.e. Big Bash, professional netball, . Further as I said the percentage of people watching traditional sports is falling.

Into this mix comes the concussion issues, AFL can change its high mark, soccer can outlaw heading, this will change these games but tackling out of rugby and make it touch and the games is no the same.

All having more money does is keep those in paid employment in jobs a little longer.

NOW

Just because we get less money does not mean no money

Reducing costs i.e. stadium hire, travel, will be massive as will reduced wages and yes some player may leave, but they are now anyway.

There will still be broadcast revenue be it smaller.

Most importantly is we change the structure of the team format from RA owing and running the competition with various unions running teams, to a USA based franchise model of private ownership of teams and those teams own the competition.

AnyWho off to work I must go and I am tied of going over the same old ground, for me as I have been advocating for years, move to a private ownership model, lots and lots of consultation, develop a National Domestic Competition .

Many on this site are simply working out the best way to run the current failing set up and that's pure madness IMO.


All traditional sports are facing huge pressure from E-games, the net in general, so we have a shrinking market, the recent AFL concussion case will effect not only assets but future revenue and parents willing to let their kids play.

Rugby needs to expand its reach to me its obvious, to do this we need to get all the stakeholders on broad.

So I disagree with you, every year we wait, the harder it will be .

Half if we could get private equity investment your plan makes sense - otherwise I don’t know who is going to pay or fund it. It might be super club option better as leveraging existing teams Vs creating new teams as only have nrc to remind you how last time that strategy went

 

[half]

Nutter & Dan

Pink Floyd sang in “Wish You Were Here”
“two lost souls
swimming in a fish bowel
year after year
Going over the same old ground”

At the risk of repeating my many many many many times made arguments.

The money thing or lack of future money has been used for yonks now as the reason not to change as we may not have enough funding. If you want concrete certainty with cast iron guarantees about funding the next say 3 years at existing funding needs, then we will never do anything as what you seek within the existing framework cannot happen.

To get private investors the existing structure of rugby in Australia needs to go through fundamental change.

To muster the forces to create the change needed to create an environment conducive to enticing private investors requires all stakeholders on board as it could be easy derailed by any number of stakeholders.

Meaning vision, leadership obviously needed but the willingness to listen, advise, develop and implement.

Risk and risk adverse are an interesting business topic. I say repeating and then working out how to make a lessor version of the repeat work is insane nay insane is way to kind a word, idiotic is better. In business terms inept, incompetent, are two weak negligent is better.

The model we have is failing badly, the sporting environment [i.e. less people watching traditional sports] is rapidly changing, rugby has some serious head winds in the courts with compensation re concussion and convincing parents to let their kids play.

By far the greater risk is not to attempt to change the lessor risk IMO by light years is to change the structures and systems and to make that work will require hard work, vision and so on. BUT BUT BUT it will take time and quite a bit of time.

Back to Pink Floyd, we are lost and going round in circles, we keep going over the same old ground. We need to fix this, it looks from a distance as if rugby is stuck in a 70’s / 80’s / 90’s sporting models.

AnyWho, that’s kinda a summary of my previous thoughts, have not been around for a while because its pointless just repeating yourself, so will disappear for a while again.

Hope in some small way my thoughts make a small difference at least in the conversation if nothing else.

 

[Dan54]

Yep listen mate I understand what you saying as I sure does RN, we seem to forget one thing, doubt whether many in RA would hold their jobs if they took that much of a long term view unfortunately. I see where RN comes from with private equity, but we all know you have to give people a reason to invest, and so we caught between the old proverbial rock and a hard place. It is very very easy for us to say we have to go back to roots and the suffer at the top while we get it sorted, not sure if you read very many forums when the Wallabies are losing, and not sure if fans will stick with us while it happens. I can almost guarantee there would be calls for heads to roll at board level. To make changes people want now needs private money so the game doesn't suffer too much in meantime. I can guarantee almost every sport in same boat.
Mate the comparison I will give you is government, every party that has ever held power knows what is right in the long run, but you have to be in the position to implement the changes until the end. Same scenario mate, we all know what we want to happen, but if our ideas are followed and crash, we just put on a rugby forum next week how crazy they were to do what we suggested.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Nutter & Dan

Pink Floyd sang in “Wish You Were Here”
“two lost souls
swimming in a fish bowel
year after year
Going over the same old ground”

At the risk of repeating my many many many many times made arguments.

The money thing or lack of future money has been used for yonks now as the reason not to change as we may not have enough funding. If you want concrete certainty with cast iron guarantees about funding the next say 3 years at existing funding needs, then we will never do anything as what you seek within the existing framework cannot happen.

To get private investors the existing structure of rugby in Australia needs to go through fundamental change.

To muster the forces to create the change needed to create an environment conducive to enticing private investors requires all stakeholders on board as it could be easy derailed by any number of stakeholders.

Meaning vision, leadership obviously needed but the willingness to listen, advise, develop and implement.

Risk and risk adverse are an interesting business topic. I say repeating and then working out how to make a lessor version of the repeat work is insane nay insane is way to kind a word, idiotic is better. In business terms inept, incompetent, are two weak negligent is better.

The model we have is failing badly, the sporting environment [i.e. less people watching traditional sports] is rapidly changing, rugby has some serious head winds in the courts with compensation re concussion and convincing parents to let their kids play.

By far the greater risk is not to attempt to change the lessor risk IMO by light years is to change the structures and systems and to make that work will require hard work, vision and so on. BUT BUT BUT it will take time and quite a bit of time.

Back to Pink Floyd, we are lost and going round in circles, we keep going over the same old ground. We need to fix this, it looks from a distance as if rugby is stuck in a 70’s / 80’s / 90’s sporting models.

AnyWho, that’s kinda a summary of my previous thoughts, have not been around for a while because its pointless just repeating yourself, so will disappear for a while again.

Hope in some small way my thoughts make a small difference at least in the conversation if nothing else.

Half we both want change and I appreciate your views as they at least challenge status quo - we need to build towards the vision of where we want to get to - realising won’t happen over night. I increasingly feel doing something with nz is not the answer as whilst RA recently (about bloody time) shown open to put everything on the table, nzru has not shown the same. In short I do feel we are better going it alone as think we never really move forward if tied to nzru thinking and self interest. And yes Dan if we talk history, RA probably shares most of the blame of where we are, but in terms of moving forward I never seen them more open to change. Can’t say same for NZRU in terms of what seen coming across the ditch in terms of messaging. For me RA is ok for me at the moment whilst NZRU is an organIsation moving forward I would rather not see us partner with. And I am talking about where things are now Dan - not the past as RA has different people at the helm and showing much more positive appetite for positive change as opposed to Nzru who seem stuck in their bubble.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Yep listen mate I understand what you saying as I sure does RN, we seem to forget one thing, doubt whether many in RA would hold their jobs if they took that much of a long term view unfortunately. I see where RN comes from with private equity, but we all know you have to give people a reason to invest, and so we caught between the old proverbial rock and a hard place. It is very very easy for us to say we have to go back to roots and the suffer at the top while we get it sorted, not sure if you read very many forums when the Wallabies are losing, and not sure if fans will stick with us while it happens. I can almost guarantee there would be calls for heads to roll at board level. To make changes people want now needs private money so the game doesn't suffer too much in meantime. I can guarantee almost every sport in same boat.
Mate the comparison I will give you is government, every party that has ever held power knows what is right in the long run, but you have to be in the position to implement the changes until the end. Same scenario mate, we all know what we want to happen, but if our ideas are followed and crash, we just put on a rugby forum next week how crazy they were to do what we suggested.

I think we need success at grass roots, club level, pro level and wallabies level - I don’t buy that just need wallabies to be successful as to me we need the entire rugby ecosystem to be strong as you are only as strong as your weakest link. To me this is where RA has failed in the past in not seeming to recognise this.

 

[Braveheart81]

I think we need success at grass roots, club level, pro level and wallabies level - I don’t buy that just need wallabies to be successful as to me we need the entire rugby ecosystem to be strong as you are only as strong as your weakest link. To me this is where RA has failed in the past in not seeming to recognise this.

It all feeds down from the top though. It's the same in any sport. Australia won gold in the Women's Rugby 7s at the 2016 Olympics and enrollments in girls 7s increase substantially instantly. Niche sports get huge boosts out of Olympics success etc. because they suddenly get the exposure and a hero that kids want to emulate.

Grassroots/club rugby are no different and when the Wallabies are doing well numbers are much healthier.

I don't think it is a case of not recognising it, it's a case of scarce resources and lack of control. RA doesn't have direct control over club rugby or grassroots rugby anywhere. They can try and implement policies and provide guidance etc. but it's up to the sub unions to adopt it.

There was absolutely a time when the ARU were profligate (following the 2003 RWC) where they wasted a whole lot of money on corporate largesse, signing dud NRL players for over the odds and paying too much for professional contracts (spending well above the agreed % from the CBA on players) and that was certainly a time when more money could have flowed to the grassroots.

I feel like now RA is a much tighter ship and the grassroots/junior pathways they have any control over are run in a much better and more streamlined fashion. The significantly improved junior results are testament to this.

 

[Dan54]

Half we both want change and I appreciate your views as they at least challenge status quo - we need to build towards the vision of where we want to get to - realising won’t happen over night. I increasingly feel doing something with nz is not the answer as whilst RA recently (about bloody time) shown open to put everything on the table, nzru has not shown the same. In short I do feel we are better going it alone as think we never really move forward if tied to nzru thinking and self interest. And yes Dan if we talk history, RA probably shares most of the blame of where we are, but in terms of moving forward I never seen them more open to change. Can’t say same for NZRU in terms of what seen coming across the ditch in terms of messaging. For me RA is ok for me at the moment whilst NZRU is an organIsation moving forward I would rather not see us partner with. And I am talking about where things are now Dan - not the past as RA has different people at the helm and showing much more positive appetite for positive change as opposed to Nzru who seem stuck in their bubble.

Which only leaves one question, how do you know NZR are stuck in their bubble? Think perhaps you jumping to conclusions, but no probs, we all see what we want .

 

[hoggy]

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-...sh-to-cricket-and-soccer-20200923-p55ybh.html

Now that's going to hurt.

 

[oztimmay]

But not suprising news, at all. Qantas has been smashed this year, and something had to give.

Let the wilde speculation on who will be the new naming rights sponson, begin...

 

[Jimmy_Crouch]

But not suprising news, at all. Qantas has been smashed this year, and something had to give.

Let the wilde speculation on who will be the new naming rights sponson, begin.

Magellan? Come on hook us up Hammer.

 

[oztimmay]

Doesn't Kafe work for some hedge fund?

 

[Rugbynutter39]

It all feeds down from the top though. It's the same in any sport. Australia won gold in the Women's Rugby 7s at the 2016 Olympics and enrollments in girls 7s increase substantially instantly. Niche sports get huge boosts out of Olympics success etc. because they suddenly get the exposure and a hero that kids want to emulate.

Grassroots/club rugby are no different and when the Wallabies are doing well numbers are much healthier.

I don't think it is a case of not recognising it, it's a case of scarce resources and lack of control. RA doesn't have direct control over club rugby or grassroots rugby anywhere. They can try and implement policies and provide guidance etc. but it's up to the sub unions to adopt it.

There was absolutely a time when the ARU were profligate (following the 2003 RWC) where they wasted a whole lot of money on corporate largesse, signing dud NRL players for over the odds and paying too much for professional contracts (spending well above the agreed % from the CBA on players) and that was certainly a time when more money could have flowed to the grassroots.

I feel like now RA is a much tighter ship and the grassroots/junior pathways they have any control over are run in a much better and more streamlined fashion. The significantly improved junior results are testament to this.

Braveheart you lost me at it feeds down from the top...Tell me where the national team for afl drives success from top down view and hence why afl is most successful footy code in oz. Seriously these sort of comments just make me angry about the plight of rugby in this country.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Which only leaves one question, how do you know NZR are stuck in their bubble? Think perhaps you jumping to conclusions, but no probs, we all see what we want .

On public messaging and actions recently to date Dan no I don’t. There approaching state unions rather then through RA was exhibit A. NZRU are a absolute disgrace in terms of their behaviour around this. Look forward to your attempts to justify this as anything but.