Where to for Super Rugby?

[Inside Shoulder]

Yes the clean grounds issue was of their own making, just like the ARU failures over the last 15 years is theirs/ours. JON MK1 could have been less grasping and pulled the then NZRU aside and said look, this is the IRB rules, the stadia have to be clean we have been given a go it alone option but we don't want to do it... No what was done was take the opportunity to get the dollars for the ARU so they could "piss it up the wall" (Copyright Bill Pulver 2016).

The "distraction" excuse is the best sugar coating the Fox team can come up with given the total lack of anything nearing quality from the Australian sides since blaming dew every week the whole season makes one look like a dick (please take note Tim Horan and George Gregan)

The dew is more kafe's go, isn't it?
This is too depressing.

 

[KOB1987]

i am trying to tell you that these are not "unenforceable promises" - http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/promissory_estoppel.asp.
You should not assume that the ARU is free to turn their attention to the brumbies as a means of avoiding litigation: they are not.

That's all true, but what's to say the ARU can't live up to that promise to the Brumbies with a new owner, a new board, and a new management team.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

That's all true, but what's to say the ARU can't live up to that promise to the Brumbies with a new owner, a new board, and a new management team.

How many fronts do you think they can fight on at once?

 

[GaffaCHinO]

Just to remind the ARU what they are trying to cut.

 

[Gnostic]

Google reckons this, but it just looked like a massive bell-end to me.

View attachment 9164

I haven't seen that many Dr, but I'm sure you'd suggest a cream or ointment of some kind to lessen the inflammation. Perhaps a course of antibiotics. Maybe the unit we are discussing are beyond treatment and require more drastic intervention, could I suggest

 

[Gnostic]

How many fronts do you think they can fight on at once?

I think you are forgetting a chief rule in management and legal fights - "If it isn't written down, it never happened." The Rebels and Force have what seem to be ironclad contracts/agreements. Do the Brumbies?

Please do not consider that this is an attack on the Brumbies, I voted on the poll to leave Super Rugby altogether, IMHO Australian Rugby would be better off long term with NO (ZERO) sides in Super Rugby, it is a doomed competition and is preventing the wholesale root and branch reformation of our structures while we try and support the continued involvement in it.

 

[cyclopath]

The dew is more kafe's go, isn't it?
This is too depressing.

The Commentary Box is a veritable cornucopia of excreta - Kafe and Kearns like some dew, but often become more viscous as they focus on their various parochial fascinations; Clarkieeeee likes plain old spittle; Marto favours dribble; the rest something more purulent.

 

[Quick Hands]

How many fronts do you think they can fight on at once?

One might say, that they are unable to even fight on one front with effectiveness.

 

[Quick Hands]

The "distraction" excuse is the best sugar coating the Fox team can come up with given the total lack of anything nearing quality from the Australian sides since blaming dew every week the whole season makes one look like a dick (please take note Tim Horan and George Gregan)

You'd like to think that after playing super rugby night games for over 15 years, that we'd have worked out a way to combat the dew by now.

 

[Quick Hands]

The dew is more kafe's go, isn't it?
This is too depressing.

Even Kafer and Kearns gave up trying to make excuses during the Waratahs v Kings match. Kafe didn't even exhibit the usual Waratah hatred - he clearly doesn't believe in kicking people when they are down.

 

[mudskipper]

Whilst Cox might be open to the idea, it also would require the Brumbies to agree to it and I can't see them doing that anytime soon.

It's starting to sound like Cox bought something without due dilligence.

Yep

 

[mudskipper]

Australian rugby 2017-version:

Every bastard thinks they're better than they really are, and every bastard puts their hate of some other bastard ahead of figuring out how to properly save themselves, in partnership or otherwise.

Not in Brumbies land...

The ARU moved the Brumbies into a safe zone on April 10, guaranteeing their existence as a "sustainable presence" after a review of club finances, high performance, sponsorship and governance.

 

[Quick Hands]

Not in Brumbies land.

The ARU moved the Brumbies into a safe zone on April 10, guaranteeing their existence as a "sustainable presence" after a review of club finances, high performance, sponsorship and governance.

I wonder if the same criteria were applied to all 5 franchises?

 

[mst]

Whilst I hate this decision to cut a team, it baffles me why the Brumbies have been excluded from the discussion.. All teams should realistically be on the chopping block including Reds and Tahs.

Each team should be asssesed through a combination of economic feasibility, opportunity cost and ability and willingness for cultural reform. It's fair to say that NSW and QLD would be retained purely on opportunity costs for Rugby Union pathways and the economic costs to the broadcasters, but it should still be examined case by case.

How did the ARU come to the decision that it was purely between the Force and Rebels, why were no other options considered?

IMHO if you are going to go down the criteria line than I think its fair to actually consider and examine the criteria and its relevancy to the issues.

Bottom line is that the consideration around cutting a Super Rugby team is wholly about Super Rugby, nothing more or less. This is about attendance, rating, support base and economic viability.

When it comes to cultural reform, based on the economic situation Rugby finds itself in it is arguable that the two powerhouse unions would benefit the most from reforms that could potentially yield better results for the game overall. Willingness to change in Rugby is like Trump and reality. They don't go together and unlikely they ever will.

As far as opportunities, VIC, ACT, and WA are far more dependant on their Super Rugby franchise to support their grassroots and competitions unlike both NSW and QLD who have competitions that are far less, if at all reliant on the Super Rugby franchises and would continue largely unaffected below Super Rugby and could still feed Super Rugby teams and have NRC teams.

Lets be honest, the criteria is a joke. The simple equation is this. If the ARU cut one franchise they get more home derbies and it yield a higher financial return via ratings and gate takings. on top of the saving from financially supporting one less franchise. Its all banker wanker stuff - savings; its the easy way out as we cant find any way to generate sufficient income without any risk or work.

So working on those criteria the TV ratings from the Brumbies are always quite good, and really either of the other will remain fairly static if you cut one. The Reds and Tahs are the lynch-pin in any TV deal atm.

Now its about the gate takings. The Reds have good crowds, and the Tahs get a free pass on this one only as they are needed for the TV deal atm (shit but a reality) and the relocation of the Tah based Wallaby players would be too costly and the civil war with NSWRU and its factions would be unbearable. The Brumbies crowds (pre and hopefully post board idiocy) are fairly healthy and the Force also have a good gate, so that leave the Rebels the most likely candidate - until the ARU did the stupid deal.

So really its now about who we can be cut and the criteria is merely based on who can be cut with the least damage.

The worst part is with the ratings and attendances diving due to the way this is all happening, the financial benefits of the gate is now compromised and the irony is they may have been better to suck it up and stick with 18.

This ride will not stop, nor the angst and uncertainty, decision or no decision, for Australian rugby until 2020; regardless of what happens in the next 12-18mths. We are simply not the master of our own destiny and never will be while we are on the Super Rugby train. But we need it for the money.

The SANZAAR deal will always mean we are one year away from no TV deal. All it takes is one union to have an "issue" and the plug can be pulled as required. This is the example right now.

 

[GaffaCHinO]

I wonder if the same criteria were applied to all 5 franchises?

The only criteria that is being used is

'are they the Force? '
if no 'safe'
if yes 'cut cut cut'.

 

[Gnostic]

Not in Brumbies land.



The ARU moved the Brumbies into a safe zone on April 10, guaranteeing their existence as a "sustainable presence" after a review of club finances, high performance, sponsorship and governance.

How could they review the finances as some reports and documents are covered by Supreme Court Suppression Orders?

Or did they only look at the finances since the payout of the last CEO that shows, Zero tangible assets, zero debt currently, a massive forward payment on a depreciating asset which they do not own, but have to exist to make use of...........

 

[KOB1987]

How many fronts do you think they can fight on at once?

no it's about the course of least resistance

 

[Killer]

i am trying to tell you that these are not "unenforceable promises" - http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/promissory_estoppel.asp.
You should not assume that the ARU is free to turn their attention to the brumbies as a means of avoiding litigation: they are not.

yes but if it is about justice and fairness then the ARU would have to detail why The Brumbies were deemed sustainable.
Then in all likelihood, at least the WF and probably the Rebs would also pass the ARU's dodgy sustainability test.
So then we start again, all teams being equal except the WF and the Rebs have a signed contract out to 2020 at least.
By about this time Bill P will be in a straight jacket.
Who knows, I don't, the ARU just continue to lurch from one disaster to the next. It's probably very entertaining for those not directly involved.

 

[KOB1987]

Dragging on..

http://www.rugby.com.au/news/2017/04/26/10/40/force-aru-meeting

 

[RedsHappy]

Not in Brumbies land.

The ARU moved the Brumbies into a safe zone on April 10, guaranteeing their existence as a "sustainable presence" after a review of club finances, high performance, sponsorship and governance.

'Governance'........and so on

Very amusing; at long last the ARU assembles, in the midst of its own breaking storm, a momentary sense of humour.