Where to for Super Rugby?

[Rugbynutter39]

Sorry Rugbynutter, this is where i disagree with you the RA are broke, in 20 years they have shown no real genuine desire to push a domestic option and to be fair neither has the fan base really pushed it. The two year sign up is probably all they could get with co-vid concerns. There has been no real push for a domestic comp or even a hint that it is brewing in the background. PE will be busy paying of the current bills. does it matter if TT works or not, what options will you have at the end of 2023.

With the SA wins the RA have got there sugar hit they desperately needed, it will be all in on a 2023 world cup, followed by the Lions in 25 and 27 world cup, a domestic competition is simply not on the radar. I would be happy to be proved wrong.

It would be plan b for sure but we reckon a failed TT may force there hand. Private equity would want a successful TT not not at any cost as can only flog a dead horse for so long. In two years we also are likely to have RA replaced by an independent body running rugby of media reports are correct.

 

[hoggy]

It would be plan b for sure but we reckon a failed TT may force there hand. Private equity would want a successful TT not not at any cost as can only flog a dead horse for so long. In two years we also are likely to have RA replaced by an independent body running rugby of media reports are correct.

Not sure what the definition of a failed TT is though, the game here needs growth, not a happy continuation of the status quo. If they could impliment say an 8 team NRC (5 super sides, maybe the Drua, a 2nd NSW & QLD team) then maybe come 2023 they have the option to say see ya.

Right now the NZRU know just how fucked the RA are. The issue you have is all of the RA and all the supposedly important powerbrokers are all Wallaby Top down centric, all tied to that set-up. No one is pushing the domestic agenda.

 

[dru]

Not sure what the definition of a failed TT is though

Anything that trends the W/L ratio between Australian and NZ teams at less than 50%.

And we all know it will be well less.

You say :

No one is pushing the domestic agenda.

I don't agree, but just wait.

 

[hoggy]

You say :


I don't agree, but just wait.

I hear ya Dru, but say you take the top 10 influential people in Aus rugby (and choosing those maybe opening a can of worms), of those who are actively pushing a domestic agenda.

 

[dru]

I hear ya Dru, but say you take the top 10 influential people in Aus rugby (and choosing those maybe opening a can of worms), of those who are actively pushing a domestic agenda.

Seriously, you think that strength of the claimed "top 10" (so much wrong in that thinking) will remain as everything wanes? As it will. The push to domestic agenda will increase. Very little risk in that statement.

 

[Dan54]

Mate we know both sides of the ditches media play up to their own audiences. Nz press and media is just as bad as oz media and press. Latter we can surely agree on. The media and press only fuel the relationship challenges.

Couldn't agree more mate, why I say continually that I take everything I read in papers with a huge grain of salt, from wherever it comes from!

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Couldn't agree more mate, why I say continually that I take everything I read in papers with a huge grain of salt, from wherever it comes from!

and as we all have our own bias - of course our views will be partly influenced by the media to some extent given it is still the primary source of information we rely on.

 

[Pfitzy]

In two years we also are likely to have RA replaced by an independent body running rugby of media reports are correct.

Haven't heard that yet - link?

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Haven't heard that yet - link?

NoCookies | The Australian

www.google.com.au

 

[Jimmy_Crouch]

Haven't heard that yet - link?

One management model is something McLennan has been working on (discussed this on the Breakdown last year also). It is Sports Australia's preferred model and something Twiggy has also spoken about (it is how we get him in the tent and to part with some $$$). Golf, Waterpolo, Sailing and Softball are just some examples of sports that have transitioned from a federated model over the past few years.

 

[half]

Let me hark back to my offerings in the past.

* We need a NDC.
* We need time to determine the nature of the NDC, i.e. teams, model, consensus among rugby stakeholders,, model structure i.e. my idea use USA franchise licence systems.
*We need time to both develop the above into an acceptable and practical model, then sell it, them implement it. IMO between two and five years.

What we lack is any medium to long term plan other than what suits NZ.

We are enjoying the best media coverage we have had in years, the Nine / Fairfax / Stan / Radio Network is beyond brilliant and leaves Fox and friends light years behind.

The issue as I see it and it scares me. Nay scares is way way way to tame, you can just keep increasing the fear works.

The issue is, are we seeing history REPEAT itself.

Back in the day when Super Rugby first started and we got more funding per team than even the AFL, when we received more per game than any other code. The powers said look how great we are and failed to develop rugby as all was sweet in the rugby world.

Today we are experiencing another great media experience, some new money coming in, we just won a couple on internationals. So lets sit back and enjoy.

Rugby should be using the good times and very friendly media partner to build for the future. But all I see it slaps on the back and more of the same. Reminds me of the late 90's and early 00's.

 

[Adam84]

But all I see it slaps on the back and more of the same. Reminds me of the late 90's and early 00's.

I think we see different things.. People are happy the game survived financial disaster, they aren't celebrating the position rugby is in overall though.. There is a difference.

I disagree its like the late 90s and early 00s, back then the model was working well and suited the demand at the time, whereas now i think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who thinks the current model is the long term solution.

 

[half]

I think we see different things.. People are happy the game survived financial disaster, they aren't celebrating the position rugby is in overall though.. There is a difference.

I disagree its like the late 90s and early 00s, back then the model was working well and suited the demand at the time, whereas now i think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who thinks the current model is the long term solution.

Adam

No doubt you were a fan of the No Body Really Cares competitions. Both failed badly.

IMO they failed because of a lack of support from all rugby stakeholders.

What happen the guys in charge from start to finish developed it in six months or less. That's why it failed huge assumptions made and done quickly...

I have heard nothing of any real substance nor any plans outside the existing...

You simply cannot do things without time.

Let me put my helmet on, way way way back when, and after the first failed attempt for the Nobody Really Cares phase one.

About the same time of Phase One NRC, FFA started to put together their FFA Cup competition which many claim is the best thing they ever did.

AR made phase one in about six months, FFA spend almost five years in discussion with their state bodies, major club teams in former competitions, the A-L clubs.

Phase two NRC again about six months.

What the FFA Cup showed is when you plan a major change you need to get everyone on board and understand their issues and try and sort them out.

Any National Domestic Competition despite what many on this site think needs lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots of planning, and lots and lots and lots and lots of discussion, negations with all of rugby stakeholders for it to work.

If we go along the line well the board is smart and clever they can design a competition in an afternoon it will fail.

Our own history with the Nobody Really Cares highlights this and FA's, FFA Cup shows how important getting all stakeholders on board is.

To date I see nothing accept more of the same

 

[Adam84]

Half, I don’t see the relevance of that towards what I just said.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I think we see different things.. People are happy the game survived financial disaster, they aren't celebrating the position rugby is in overall though.. There is a difference.

I disagree its like the late 90s and early 00s, back then the model was working well and suited the demand at the time, whereas now i think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who thinks the current model is the long term solution.

I think more people would be fine with the interim solution if we knew it was on the path to what is the long term solution and desired target future state model /blueprint for pro rugby. In many ways I think that is the problem as we don't really know (or moreso the relevant bodies involved) or have a different view (ie NZRU and RA and even within our own ranks and different oz rugby stakeholder views) of what is the appropriate long term model.

That is why I was disappointed we dumped Super Rugby AU and did not at least keep a short form version in as seems putting all our eggs in the TT basket with no Super Rugby Au or NRC to fall back on should TT go pear shaped.

 

[Adam84]

I think more people would be fine with the interim solution if we knew it was on the path to what is the long term solution and desired target future state model /blueprint for pro rugby. In many ways I think that is the problem as we don't really know (or moreso the relevant bodies involved) or have a different view (ie NZRU and RA and even within our own ranks and different oz rugby stakeholder views) of what is the appropriate long term model.

That is why I was disappointed we dumped Super Rugby AU and did not at least keep a short form version in as seems putting all our eggs in the TT basket with no Super Rugby Au or NRC to fall back on should TT go pear shaped.

agreed, and realistically a NRC 2.0 was never occurring in 2021 regardless with the border lockdown, I know they’ve spoken about a 3rd tier been on the table going forward but no vision of what they looks like yet.

I’ve said it before but I would have loved to be a fly on the wall to see what compromises and promises were made to get the TT across the table.

 

[Derpus]

agreed, and realistically a NRC 2.0 was never occurring in 2021 regardless with the border lockdown, I know they’ve spoken about a 3rd tier been on the table going forward but no vision of what they looks like yet.

I’ve said it before but I would have loved to be a fly on the wall to see what compromises and promises were made to get the TT across the table.

Join the NPC with a couple teams?

 

[Dan54]

Join the NPC with a couple teams?

Could well be a great idea for a couple of years ,until something gets set up in Aus (travel probs, covid etc of course being overcome)
Sam Scott Young etc don't look like it's doing them any harm.

 

[half]

Half, I don’t see the relevance of that towards what I just said.

The relevance is we are not doing anything or discussing new systems / structures. Your previous post said people wanted change so my comment about history repeating itself was wrong.

Discussing new structures / systems should be happening now and be well advanced. We have agreed to maintain the status que. My fear is establishing a new competition will / IS considered easy and anyone of normal intelligence could write up the competition in an afternoon.

I have always maintained as much as I want change and a NDC the need to bring all rugby stakeholders along, to get general agreement on the way forward is difficult and will take time.

As I mentioned both Pulver & Flower's NRC, were essentially designed in an afternoon board meeting, and thrown together and were up and running within six months.

 

[Joe King]

I know we're locked in for two years, but if the AU teams are not competitive, I expect the cry for change will be louder than old Super Rugby.

Looking forward, what if we played a short round robin Super Rugby AU comp with only the top 2 or 3 teams qualifying for SRP (Super Rugby Pacific).

All the Wallabies and potential Wallabies from the AU teams that didn't qualify must be drafted into the teams that did qualify.

RA to be in charge of the draft. So for example, if the Reds qualify, but don't have a great outside centre, RA can draft the best outside centre from one of the AU teams that didn't qualify to bolster the Reds.

Underneath SRP (Super Rugby Pacific), we play a home and away Super Rugby AU B comp for the coaching staff and fans of the AU teams that don't qualify.

There are always downsides and no easy solutions, but some of the benefits include:

1. Keeps all 5 Super Rugby AU teams alive.
2. Includes a Super Rugby AU domestic comp.
3. Potentially makes the AU teams more competitive in the SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) comp.
4. Having less AU teams in SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) will then benefit the Wallabies in terms of cohesion (according to Ben Darwin).
5. It still allows the Super Rugby AU winner to go all the way and win SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) if they are good enough.
6. It allows all the Super Rugby AU teams the chance to play in SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) if they are good enough.

A 10-team SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) comp will only go for 11 weeks (a 9-team SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) comp will only take 10 weeks). So that's not too long for any AU team to miss out for. In any case, fans of an AU team that misses out on SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) for that season will probably adopt an AU team that does qualify.