• 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.
WorkingClassRugger

WorkingClassRugger

Michael Lynagh (62)
Quick Hands said:
Having a COO would seem an admission of the inadequacies of the CEO.

The sheer depth and breadth of the incompetence is actually sending me dizzy - and we are only talking about one issue (super rugby). The same brand of organisational incompetence extends the length and breadth of the game.

I don't think that I can adequately express it all, but here goes:

1. they admit a 5th team, knowing that it's unsustainable
2. They institute the NRC - knowing that it's also unsustainable
3. They go along with the Super 18 concept even though they are given two separate reports saying that it will be a disaster for Australian rugby
4. Despite apparently "looking for an excuse" to revert to 4 teams, they don't do so during the S18 implementation process
5. They trumpet the S18 as being a triumph for the ARU, in particular the negotiating skills of BP and state that it will be the saviour of Australian rugby
6. The costs of implementing S18 almost chew up all of the increased broadcast revenue
7. In July 2015 they get a private owner to take control of the Rebels, but seemingly retain extensive liabilities
8. In Feb 2016 they effectively take over the Force and enter into a legally binding alliance with RWA
9. Points 7 and 8 both seem to contain binding agreements for the Force and the Rebels to stay in Super rugby unitl 2020?
10. They go to the London meeting publicly stating that the want to retain 5 teams
11. They now say that they really went there with a proposal to cut one team and go to four
12. After at least 8 months warning of a possible restructure they have no objective criteria on which to base the extinction of either the Force or the Rebels
13. They announce a farcial 72 hour consultation period, but are forced to back track after RWA file a Supreme Court injunction
14. This process could go on for "weeks or months"
15. Still no objective criteria on which to base the decision announced.

Have I missed anything?
Click to expand...


Sorry, how is the NRC unsustainable?
 
WorkingClassRugger

WorkingClassRugger

Michael Lynagh (62)
chibimatty said:
We can have 2 rival offices in Darwin, just the ARL/Super League war days.

I keep hearing all this talk of how New Zealnd would rather play South African teams and shot down a Trans-Tasman competition etc, (a trans-tasman competition I'm not actually for anyway.) So let's go from the not-so-sublime to the ridiculous. Let NZ and South Africa have that competition, less redundant local derbies and no arguments about travel disadvantages.

The other three Super Rugby countries, with the largest economies, go their own way in a Pan-Pacific competition. Australia's five teams survive, maybe Western Sydney gets a look in too, Japan brings in it's two biggest sporting franchises, the Yomiuri Giants and the Hanshin Tigers, to create the "Tokyo Giants Rugby" and "Kansai Tigers Rugby" plus a team in the Yakuza rugby heartland called the "Kyushu Gangsters." Argentina brings along it's Buenos Aires Jaguares, Los Tucumanos del Noroeste and Los Gauchos de las Pampas. We all get jet-lag and have a magnificent party. Later on we bring in Uruguay, Chile, Hong Kong, Hawaii and conquer the world.

etc.
Click to expand...


Or we can just invite 5 of the Top League clubs. Let them recruit talent as a means of building competitiveness as soon as possible. Full home and away for 18 rounds. Leave SA/NZ and Arg to themselves.
 
Rebels3

Rebels3

Jim Lenehan (48)
Not sure who watched kick and chase tonight, but I have to say Clyne was pretty honest about everything that was asked. No clear indication from him as to who is the unlucky side to get the scrap.
 
Inside Shoulder

Inside Shoulder

Nathan Sharpe (72)
Rebels3 said:
Not sure who watched kick and chase tonight, but I have to say Clyne was pretty honest about everything that was asked. No clear indication from him as to who is the unlucky side to get the scrap.
Click to expand...

More clued up than Kearns - the brumbies have developed the least players.
What a dope
 
I like to watch

I like to watch

David Codey (61)
Quick Hands said:
Having a COO would seem an admission of the inadequacies of the CEO.

The sheer depth and breadth of the incompetence is actually sending me dizzy - and we are only talking about one issue (super rugby). The same brand of organisational incompetence extends the length and breadth of the game.

I don't think that I can adequately express it all, but here goes:

1. they admit a 5th team, knowing that it's unsustainable
2. They institute the NRC - knowing that it's also unsustainable
3. They go along with the Super 18 concept even though they are given two separate reports saying that it will be a disaster for Australian rugby
4. Despite apparently "looking for an excuse" to revert to 4 teams, they don't do so during the S18 implementation process
5. They trumpet the S18 as being a triumph for the ARU, in particular the negotiating skills of BP and state that it will be the saviour of Australian rugby
6. The costs of implementing S18 almost chew up all of the increased broadcast revenue
7. In July 2015 they get a private owner to take control of the Rebels, but seemingly retain extensive liabilities
8. In Feb 2016 they effectively take over the Force and enter into a legally binding alliance with RWA
9. Points 7 and 8 both seem to contain binding agreements for the Force and the Rebels to stay in Super rugby unitl 2020?
10. They go to the London meeting publicly stating that the want to retain 5 teams
11. They now say that they really went there with a proposal to cut one team and go to four
12. After at least 8 months warning of a possible restructure they have no objective criteria on which to base the extinction of either the Force or the Rebels
13. They announce a farcial 72 hour consultation period, but are forced to back track after RWA file a Supreme Court injunction
14. This process could go on for "weeks or months"
15. Still no objective criteria on which to base the decision announced.

Have I missed anything?
Click to expand...
Yep, you forgot to praise the Lord for the arrival of of Billy P, imagine the mess we'd be in,without him :)
 
Inside Shoulder

Inside Shoulder

Nathan Sharpe (72)
Quick Hands said:
Having a COO would seem an admission of the inadequacies of the CEO.

The sheer depth and breadth of the incompetence is actually sending me dizzy - and we are only talking about one issue (super rugby). The same brand of organisational incompetence extends the length and breadth of the game.

I don't think that I can adequately express it all, but here goes:

1. they admit a 5th team, knowing that it's unsustainable
2. They institute the NRC - knowing that it's also unsustainable
3. They go along with the Super 18 concept even though they are given two separate reports saying that it will be a disaster for Australian rugby
4. Despite apparently "looking for an excuse" to revert to 4 teams, they don't do so during the S18 implementation process
5. They trumpet the S18 as being a triumph for the ARU, in particular the negotiating skills of BP and state that it will be the saviour of Australian rugby
6. The costs of implementing S18 almost chew up all of the increased broadcast revenue
7. In July 2015 they get a private owner to take control of the Rebels, but seemingly retain extensive liabilities
8. In Feb 2016 they effectively take over the Force and enter into a legally binding alliance with RWA
9. Points 7 and 8 both seem to contain binding agreements for the Force and the Rebels to stay in Super rugby unitl 2020?
10. They go to the London meeting publicly stating that the want to retain 5 teams
11. They now say that they really went there with a proposal to cut one team and go to four
12. After at least 8 months warning of a possible restructure they have no objective criteria on which to base the extinction of either the Force or the Rebels
13. They announce a farcial 72 hour consultation period, but are forced to back track after RWA file a Supreme Court injunction
14. This process could go on for "weeks or months"
15. Still no objective criteria on which to base the decision announced.

Have I missed anything?
Click to expand...

8 more fuck ups and you have a game day 23
 
Gnostic

Gnostic

Mark Ella (57)
Quick Hands said:
Having a COO would seem an admission of the inadequacies of the CEO.



The sheer depth and breadth of the incompetence is actually sending me dizzy - and we are only talking about one issue (super rugby). The same brand of organisational incompetence extends the length and breadth of the game.



I don't think that I can adequately express it all, but here goes:



1. they admit a 5th team, knowing that it's unsustainable

2. They institute the NRC - knowing that it's also unsustainable

3. They go along with the Super 18 concept even though they are given two separate reports saying that it will be a disaster for Australian rugby

4. Despite apparently "looking for an excuse" to revert to 4 teams, they don't do so during the S18 implementation process

5. They trumpet the S18 as being a triumph for the ARU, in particular the negotiating skills of BP and state that it will be the saviour of Australian rugby

6. The costs of implementing S18 almost chew up all of the increased broadcast revenue

7. In July 2015 they get a private owner to take control of the Rebels, but seemingly retain extensive liabilities

8. In Feb 2016 they effectively take over the Force and enter into a legally binding alliance with RWA

9. Points 7 and 8 both seem to contain binding agreements for the Force and the Rebels to stay in Super rugby unitl 2020?

10. They go to the London meeting publicly stating that the want to retain 5 teams

11. They now say that they really went there with a proposal to cut one team and go to four

12. After at least 8 months warning of a possible restructure they have no objective criteria on which to base the extinction of either the Force or the Rebels

13. They announce a farcial 72 hour consultation period, but are forced to back track after RWA file a Supreme Court injunction

14. This process could go on for "weeks or months"

15. Still no objective criteria on which to base the decision announced.



Have I missed anything?
Click to expand...



16. Total lack of transparency leading people to justifiably question the integrity of the ARU processes/systems and individuals, to the point the ARU now has IMO irreparably damaged its standing in the community such that it is compromised in its ability to manage the game. one example being the SRU directly opposing the NRC by running their finals series at the same time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top