Where to for Super Rugby?

[Strewthcobber]

Time zones particularly. Distance isn't as big of a factor in the travel equation without the need to traverse multiple time zones. For a domestic audience the ability to actually see games at viewer friendly times will always be preferable.

I always find it interesting how poorly the Sunwolves rate here even when playing an Aus team

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

[kiap]

I always find it interesting how poorly the Sunwolves rate here even when playing an Aus team

Do they make it into the ratings here, though?

Because games in South Africa often don't.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Everything makes the ratings. We plebs just don't get to see the numbers.

Given the timezones, what's interesting is Aus v Sunwolves games rate way better than Sunwolves v Aus games.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

[kiap]

Everything makes the ratings. We plebs just don't get to see the numbers.

You know what I mean, Strewth.

Given the timezones, what's interesting is Aus v Sunwolves games rate way better than Sunwolves v Aus games.

The games are not in the same time zone or time slots.

Although at least closer time zones means games will be at watchable hours.

It might be interesting but not surprising.

 

[half]

Unless you have stopped all news outlets today, its hard to miss the news that Steven Lowy is stepping aside from FFA.

Media reports are emerging of a united soccer, and an independent and expanding A-League.

More pressure to expand within Australia and if we don't we will pay a heavy price.

As in the Twiggy thread with the smh article, its obvious I hope by now that we need to capitalise rugby and run a competition that Australians want to watch.

While the Twiggy approach is still essentially full of non Australia teams i don't see a long term either grassroots or rating growth.

However whats is clear is how private capital and expertise can do a better job than RA executives tied to their desks with golden chains, held back by past favours that need to be repaid.

 

[Joe King]

Time to change the system.

If the current system does not change, we will always, ALWAYS get the same results with the Wallabies.

If we always get the same results, what does this mean for rugby in Oz in 10-20 years time?

We need to win the fans and future players. We need to be able to compete with league and AFL in this regard.

The Wallabies have always been our flagship to do this, but they cannot win this fight under the current system.

We need to do something different with the tier below.

I love our Kiwi cousins, but they are interested in minimal change because things are working well for them as is. They want Aussie fans to remain content and to stay hopeful, but never win. But we need to do what's best for us.

With the Inbound Tests soon to start in July, that leaves 18-19 weeks max to work with. This includes starting on the second last weekend in February, and having a weekend off before the July Tests.

At the very least RA need to take our teams: Reds, Waratahs, Brumbies, Rebels, Force + Sunwolves, and play home and away with a final between the top two (11 weeks straight). With a (almost) guaranteed winner from Australia, we begin to build interest in rugby, more fans begin to follow, and participation from aspiring players grows.

When Australia takes this step, it leaves NZ with SA and Argentina. They can play their own round robin with semis and a final (11 weeks also).

With a week off, this leaves 6-7 weeks before the July Tests. So Australia forms into 3 (state-of-origin) rep teams: NSW, Qld, and (for want of a better name) a Combined States team.

With our 3 teams, we offer to play NZ's 5 teams in a round robin format, with a traditional first past the post winner. Every game becomes vital to win.

Under this scenario, Australia gets their own (much needed) domestic comp to build interest in rugby in Australia, gaining new fans and aspiring players. We also get a comp with NZ, with less, but more competitive Australian teams. Thus, interest will be higher.

NZ don't have to deal with extra derby games. They still get to play SA and Oz teams as preparation for test rugby, and with a much fairer finals system.

SA are probably the biggest losers under this scenario, with less weeks of Super Rugby. But what choice do we have. We have to change the system somehow.

 

[Tomikin]

Time to change the system.

If the current system does not change, we will always, ALWAYS get the same results with the Wallabies.

If we always get the same results, what does this mean for rugby in Oz in 10-20 years time?

We need to win the fans and future players. We need to be able to compete with league and AFL in this regard.

The Wallabies have always been our flagship to do this, but they cannot win this fight under the current system.

We need to do something different with the tier below.

I love our Kiwi cousins, but they are interested in minimal change because things are working well for them as is. They want Aussie fans to remain content and to stay hopeful, but never win. But we need to do what's best for us.

With the Inbound Tests soon to start in July, that leaves 18-19 weeks max to work with. This includes starting on the second last weekend in February, and having a weekend off before the July Tests.

At the very least RA need to take our teams: Reds, Waratahs, Brumbies, Rebels, Force + Sunwolves, and play home and away with a final between the top two (11 weeks straight). With a (almost) guaranteed winner from Australia, we begin to build interest in rugby, more fans begin to follow, and participation from aspiring players grows.

When Australia takes this step, it leaves NZ with SA and Argentina. They can play their own round robin with semis and a final (11 weeks also).

With a week off, this leaves 6-7 weeks before the July Tests. So Australia forms into 3 (state-of-origin) rep teams: NSW, Qld, and (for want of a better name) a Combined States team.

With our 3 teams, we offer to play NZ's 5 teams in a round robin format, with a traditional first past the post winner. Every game becomes vital to win.

Under this scenario, Australia gets their own (much needed) domestic comp to build interest in rugby in Australia, gaining new fans and aspiring players. We also get a comp with NZ, with less, but more competitive Australian teams. Thus, interest will be higher.

NZ don't have to deal with extra derby games. They still get to play SA and Oz teams as preparation for test rugby, and with a much fairer finals system.

SA are probably the biggest losers under this scenario, with less weeks of Super Rugby. But what choice do we have. We have to change the system somehow.

Combinedstate of origin just wont work or win.. who pays the players.. your talking about combine teams on 1 week prep to play the crusaders..never going happen, your better off having top 2 - 3 aus tesms enter a champions league and bottom teams in a plate. We can SA with this model.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

[hoggy]

Combinedstate of origin just wont work or win.. who pays the players.. your talking about combine teams on 1 week prep to play the crusaders..never going happen, your better off having top 2 - 3 aus tesms enter a champions league and bottom teams in a plate. We can SA with this model.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

The other problem you have is it just continues the mish-mash of a season we have. it is hard to attract a new fan base when you have so many entities. The season goes from Feb-Nov, but people have no idea who half the f ---g teams are.

 

[half]

I mentioned this On the Wallaby thread other codes are getting the better athletes having only four teams is really hurting in player recruitment of a higher standard of player.

 

[hoggy]

I mentioned this On the Wallaby thread other codes are getting the better athletes having only four teams is really hurting in player recruitment of a higher standard of player.

Rugby is not really a viable option as a professional in Australia unless you are a Wallaby, the RA are trying to spur growth through one team, the Wallabies and consigning 99% of its resources into that strategy.

But it has not worked for a long time now.

The problem is, the only solution they ever advocate is to double down on the current strategy. They completely ignore the domestic market hoping somehow a Wallaby win will somehow turn things around.

What they don't realize is those lost fans are not coming back regardless. You cannot build a code from the top down, it will never work.

 

[half]

Rugby is not really a viable option as a professional in Australia unless you are a Wallaby, the RA are trying to spur growth through one team, the Wallabies and consigning 99% of its resources into that strategy.

But it has not worked for a long time now.

The problem is, the only solution they ever advocate is to double down on the current strategy. They completely ignore the domestic market hoping somehow a Wallaby win will somehow turn things around.

What they don't realize is those lost fans are not coming back regardless. You cannot build a code from the top down, it will never work.

I post this with the hope the hhhhmmmm rrrrrr agggrreerrr more sensitive posters will read for the meaning its suppose to get across and not read anything other than look we are missing heaps of athletic talent by having only four teams.

I am using the Central Coast because that were I live today and my wife is a hard core rusted on Mariner fan so I know this stuff as I am living it.

Context explained, so to my point I am going to post 2 30 second youtubes, of two Mariners players who have both moved to new clubs. Both are tall, both are strong, and the Trent Boys as he is know locally is beyond fast like he is the second or third fastest in Australia over 100 meters. Lockie is also fast by most standards its just the Trent kid is arguably the fastest player across all the codes.

Hoggy both union & league have missed out on these two kids, now watch the vid and see their size and build. Look at their build and size. Take this example Australia wide and imagine the team we could have if we had say 10 to 12 domestic teams.

Trent first then Lockie who comes in late, but when he stands at the end I see a centre.

 

[Braveheart81]

Context explained, so to my point I am going to post 2 30 second youtubes, of two Mariners players who have both moved to new clubs. Both are tall, both are strong,

Neither of them are over 6 foot from what I can work out.

Soccer players in general are tiny.

Obviously you need to be light and fast to play soccer. If they were trying to play rugby they'd have to be 10+kg heavier. If you don't have the build to carry that weight you might lose most of your athleticism if you bulk up that much.

Look at the Socceroos strikers, Tom Rogic and Tomi Juric who are big players in soccer. Those guys would be smaller than most of our current backs both in height and most definitely in weight.

The body types are so different. I don't think we're really losing out on players who would otherwise have taken up a contact sport and progressed to the elite level.

 

[half]

Sigh, you win mate, you may even be correct on their height, and I had no idea they would have to bulk up to play rugby thanks for pointing that out.

What about the core issue, that with four teams, mostly hidden away on subscription TV we are not getting the same quality of players we used too.

Lets not worry that I think the third fastest in Australia over 100 meters, in a formerly league / union strong hold never considered union. Should we not know why. Or its unimportant

In Western Sydney it’s the same, Twiggy has realised this.

 

[Braveheart81]

Sigh, you win mate, you may even be correct on their height, and I had no idea they would have to bulk up to play rugby thanks for pointing that out.

What about the core issue, that with four teams, mostly hidden away on subscription TV we are not getting the same quality of players we used too.

Lets not worry that I think the third fastest in Australia over 100 meters, in a formerly league / union strong hold never considered union. Should we not know why. Or its unimportant

In Western Sydney it’s the same, Twiggy has realised this.

I absolutely agree that we need to create more opportunity for our players.

I don't think it is true that we aren't getting the same quality of players that we used to.

We need to do better in Western Sydney.

Also, a google search suggest Buhagiar's 100m sprint time was 10.8 seconds which wouldn't put him in the top 50 in Australia last year.

I have no issue with the broader themes of your posts and that rugby needs to do a lot better in many areas. Hopefully Twiggy spending money in some of them helps.

I just think some of your statements like this one in picking a player who is physically not really suited to rugby, claiming that he is tall and strong (and where he might be for soccer, he sure isn't for rugby) and then massively overstating how quick he is. It's just pointless.

 

[half]

O FFS, i relied on the local paper on his speed and where he was placed in Australia, but if is very fast.

You totally miss my point, he is the build he is because he plays soccer, that is a given. He could bulk up thats not impossible.

The question still remains, why do we not attract the quality of player we used too.

AFL have taken many talented players, as has soccer and as has league.

The broader question is why. I suggest a large part of the why question is because we have so few teams, which is further complicated by time zones and team names.

Part of the Super Rugby dilemma is rugby's falling % of the sporting market place. We need to grow the game and for that you need quality players, and a lot of them. plus a competition to shown them in.

I have mentioned this before but my observations over the past two or so years is all levels aside from womens rugby, we have falling standards, coaching, quality players signing up,

Roughly a month ago I sat on the sidelines watching a game and got to talking to a fellow roughly my age. His son was playing and he had come to watch him play. Over a sausage sandwich complete with egg and onion we chatted about rugby. To say this bloke knew his rugby would be an understatement his knowledge of players, systems, styles etc was the best I have ever seen. I asked him about the future, he said unless something changes we will be reduced to good park teams.

I through I was touch on RA or the ARU. He told me they mean nothing but trouble to his way of thinking and he watched some test rugby but his interest even in the shute shield was gone because of what he termed its falling standard. So for him he would just enjoy watching his son play and was almost removing himself from rugby conversations.

We have an issue in player recruitment, maybe it starts at GPS schools being where our major junior training academies are today with few local district clubs offering any training.

Out of left field the bloke I shared the sandwich with had an idea which makes sense to me although I have given it a lot of analysis as yet.

His idea was to take roughly six million out of the media deal, and pay it directly to the local district unions. Each district with the money would appoint a coaching director who would oversee the training programs of all the rep sides, thus creating heaps of reasonable local high quality training academies.

 

[Quick Hands]

O



His idea was to take roughly six million out of the media deal, and pay it directly to the local district unions. Each district with the money would appoint a coaching director who would oversee the training programs of all the rep sides, thus creating heaps of reasonable local high quality training academies.

Which is pretty much along the lines (in simple terms) of what the RFU do in England.

 

[hoggy]

surely its days are numbered

https://www.smh.com.au/business/com...ikely-grassroots-revival-20180820-p4zyjm.html

 

[RugbyReg]

surely its days are numbered

https://www.smh.com.au/business/com...ikely-grassroots-revival-20180820-p4zyjm.html

This GF and NSO gets bigger by the article. Every time I see it referenced the quoted crowd size gets bigger.

How were the crowds at other grounds?

I reckon the crowd at the Brisbane Club GF was about 6,000. Not overly gangbusters.

Isolated examples don't prove a point

 

[kiap]

This GF and NSO gets bigger by the article. Every time I see it referenced the quoted crowd size gets bigger.

How were the crowds at other grounds?

I reckon the crowd at the Brisbane Club GF was about 6,000. Not overly gangbusters.

Isolated examples don't prove a point

TBF, neither does isolating a few paragraphs and blinkering out most of the rest.

Only around 20% was on club rugby, a fair chunk more was aimed at the top end of the game including soup. It's not necessary to like O'Neill (and I don't) to know that he's right.

"We need to create a new competition, not just tweak the old one," he says. "Something exciting and innovative."​

​

… <snip> … billionaire mining magnate Andrew Twiggy Forrest … <snip> … is now planning a breakaway competition to rival Super Rugby. It could bring together teams from Australia, Fiji, Hong Kong and Singapore.​

​

"The leadership of rugby Australia should engage directly with Twiggy Forrest," says O'Neill. "Two sub-optimal competitions … is not what rugby needs right now."​

​

… <snip> … O'Neill says Australia should walk away from Super Ruby, or remodel it so it only includes teams from a favourable time zone for Australian TV audiences. Which means kicking out South Africa.​

​

Sources close to Rugby Australia suggest that wouldn't be sustainable financially, because South Africa provides most of the broadcast revenue in the existing deal.​

​

O'Neill disagrees. "It's entirely viable," he says. "We went within a smidgen of doing it in 2009 … but New Zealand blinked."​

​

The revamped competition he is proposing should also have a free-to-air presence. And if New Zealand don't agree to sever ties with South Africa, then Australia should go it alone, he says. "The reality, is to compete with the AFL, NRL and A-League, we need prime-time content."​

​

"And if New Zealand say we are not interested, then Twiggy becomes imperative".​

Thing is, it's moving towards a stage where many decisions will be out of RA's hands. They're not far off being farrrrrked.

 

[Quick Hands]

The ghost of Christmas Past JON appears out of the ether.

I generally agree with his observations (and I have read the full article).

I would note, however, that he laid the foundations for the predicament in which we currently find ourselves. (The top down policy of development - which is akin to the discredited trickle down economics))

Results such us Bledisloe 1 and 2 were entirely foreseen and foreseeable, as is the current state of the game.