Where to for Super Rugby?

[Slim 293]

Rebels3' idea - multiple competitions along the lines of how European rugby and soccer works has merit, but obviously you can't do that with a mix of Super Rugby and NRC/ITM/Currie cup teams because that is a big confusing mess...........

You need those same team brands playing at every stage of competition, so from an Australian standpoint you would want to take the current Super Rugby brands (because they're far stronger/more identifiable than any NRC/club rugby team), bring back the Force and expand on that to have an Australian competition, with a trans tasman/pacific comp on top of that, with maybe a limited cup challenge involving the Saffas, Jaguares etc. on top of that.

And you would want some overlap with those competitions, bigger squad to handle depth etc.......... probably require a lot of money though.

 

[kiap]

casual fan who has no idea of teams or where they come from or what comp they are in.

What makes a successful product, simplicity, why is the AFL so good here, people can all relate and understand it and easily follow it.

Rugby on the other hand, that has to change.

A big factor to the AFL's success is control. One country, one boss, few timezones. Control over the schedule, control over the content, control over the rules.

You will never achieve that with Super Rugby. For week-to-week club rugby, a transcontinental competition doesn't work. It's super expensive and the viewing public aren't super interested.

• Your casual fan has no idea that the Highlanders are (mostly) from Dunedin? I get that. NZ aren't bothered, tho.

• Pain in the arse to catch games at 2 am or 8 am? I'm with you. Talk to the hand in Joburg and BA …

The problem with the comp is the inaccessible (and to many, irrelevant) games.

Rugby is largely invisible. What can they do? … try to add content for the local fans.

I agree there needs to be change. They won't make a move though until the bust is imminent.

 

[Rebels3]

I can't agree with this approach, it is part of the reason how we have got to this point. So much rugby content just confuses the market. I cannot count how many times I've watched rugby with a so called casual fan who has no idea of teams or where they come from or what comp they are in. We can't just keeping adding content in the hope that something sticks.

What makes a successful product, simplicity, why is the AFL so good here, people can all relate and understand it and easily follow it.

Rugby on the other hand, that has to change.

Trust me it’s extremely easy to follow. The worlds most popular game has absolutely 0 issues following it, I support a football team in Europe I know exactly when they are playing in the league, champions league, national cup, league cup, etc. and I am a firm believer half the problem is actually a lack of content to support your team. Fixture wise super rugby is one of the worlds shortest major professional sporting competitions, if you’re a fan of rugby league, Aussie rules, soccer, basketball, American football you are inundated with content 24/7, 365 days a year. Supporting a club is a lifestyle, it’s about watching listening to non stop rumors when the season finishes, etc. we haven’t built a connection with our clubs, fans don’t no who the clubs are not because of a city name but because they simply don’t hear a word about them till 24hrs before they play our teams. 95% of Aussies wouldn’t no where the New England Patriots are from on a map, juventus, lazio, Hibernian, hearts or the Golden State Warriors and the very famous cities they play out of or near?? As for my proposal it’d be marginally more games to what’s currently on offer.

 

[wamberal]

One thing is for sure. If we are facing the abyss, our minds will be wonderfully concentrated. Maybe, just maybe, we will all work together for a change, top to bottom, side to side, and back up again.

 

[Rebels3]

Rebels3' idea - multiple competitions along the lines of how European rugby and soccer works has merit, but obviously you can't do that with a mix of Super Rugby and NRC/ITM/Currie cup teams because that is a big confusing mess.....

You need those same team brands playing at every stage of competition, so from an Australian standpoint you would want to take the current Super Rugby brands (because they're far stronger/more identifiable than any NRC/club rugby team), bring back the Force and expand on that to have an Australian competition, with a trans tasman/pacific comp on top of that, with maybe a limited cup challenge involving the Saffas, Jaguares etc. on top of that.

And you would want some overlap with those competitions, bigger squad to handle depth etc.... probably require a lot of money though.

Yep I’d just use the Super Rugby brands, kick the NRC to to curb. South Africa is kick the Super Rugby teams to the curb and just use the traditional provincial names in the Currie Cup. NZ it’s time to admit defeat that they can’t have a pro Super Rugby competition and a pro/semi-pro NPC, one has to either go or the other needs to go amateur, so it’d keep the 5 Super Rugby franchises and run the NPC as a feeder competition at the same time, just like the NRL does with its Queensland Cup and NSWRL.

So a streamlined same clubs from South Africa play in any pro competition, same 5 teams from Australia (yes plus Force) and same 5 teams from NZ. Beauty of multiple competitions if that you can be last in one competition but a chance in another

 

[Dan54]

Yep I’d just use the Super Rugby brands, kick the NRC to to curb. South Africa is kick the Super Rugby teams to the curb and just use the traditional provincial names in the Currie Cup. NZ it’s time to admit defeat that they can’t have a pro Super Rugby competition and a pro/semi-pro NPC, one has to either go or the other needs to go amateur, so it’d keep the 5 Super Rugby franchises and run the NPC as a feeder competition at the same time, just like the NRL does with its Queensland Cup and NSWRL.

So a streamlined same clubs from South Africa play in any pro competition, same 5 teams from Australia (yes plus Force) and same 5 teams from NZ. Beauty of multiple competitions if that you can be last in one competition but a chance in another

So we now on Gagger not only telling RA how to run gamre but NZ and SA too???
I actually like some of the ideas but I a little surprised that some now seem to think we know better than administrators in other countries too!!

 

[Bandar]

I think the administrators in other countries are looking after their national interest, we have bowed down to them and now are in a mess

 

[Braveheart81]

I think the administrators in other countries are looking after their national interest, we have bowed down to them and now are in a mess

I am still unsure what Australia would have done differently and at which points if we were to have purely looked after our own interests.

Clearly a lot of people are in favour of a long running national domestic comp with privately backed teams. There's a lot of steps to overcome to make that happen.

When rugby went professional there was one offer on the table and largely that was decided by the players. They were always going to take the money. There was no option for the ARU to go in a different direction because they would have been trying to do it without all their best players. Player power is something most people underrate in terms of how much it will always drive decision making. The talent are never going to take a huge pay cut in the hope that rugby in Australia will be stronger in future generations.

I'm also confused as to which sporting league anywhere isn't reliant on their broadcast deal. It's a huge component of revenue for sport around the world.

Clearly if Foxtel doesn't make a bid on the next TV rights deal then an alternative needs to be found.

 

[Quick Hands]

So we now on Gagger not only telling RA how to run gamre but NZ and SA too???
I actually like some of the ideas but I a little surprised that some now seem to think we know better than administrators in other countries too!!

Perhaps some Dan, but I think that we have enough problems in Australia without worrying about what NZ and SA are doing. We face completely different problems to either and we need different solutions.

 

[dru]

So we now on Gagger not only telling RA how to run gamre but NZ and SA too???
I actually like some of the ideas but I a little surprised that some now seem to think we know better than administrators in other countries too!!

This is key. We keep seeing TT here as the “great white Hope” but it can’t happen without NZ and should they ever re-consider the proposal would hardly be geared around Oz requirements. It is fools gold.

 

[Quick Hands]

I can't agree with this approach, it is part of the reason how we have got to this point. So much rugby content just confuses the market. I cannot count how many times I've watched rugby with a so called casual fan who has no idea of teams or where they come from or what comp they are in. We can't just keeping adding content in the hope that something sticks.

What makes a successful product, simplicity, why is the AFL so good here, people can all relate and understand it and easily follow it.

Rugby on the other hand, that has to change.

I think if nothing else it's become obvious that there is neither enough interest, nor the depth of players, nor the money in Australia to support an NRC and Super Rugby.

Given that everyone seems to accept that international rugby is where all the profit comes from in professional rugby (even fervent super rugby supporters seem to acknowledge this), then Australia can only support one professional level below this. That level has to be a national domestic competition, with Pacific Island teams included (but playing most of their home games in Sydney or Brisbane where there are significant PI communities).

Not only can't super rugby make a profit, but much more importantly it can't generate interest in the Australian sporting market. In the space of a decade we've seen crowds at games decrease by over half and in some cases by two thirds, the standard (of Australian teams anyway) fall dramatically and now the broadcasters are questioning the value of their investment. We've even had the spectacle of players being rested in March and April for a tournament in October - imagine if someone said to Craig Bellamy or Wayne Bennett that they need to stand players down from games now so that they would be better prepared for the semi-finals in September/October.

In the 21st century sports market in Australia, what succeeds is a domestic competition where long time supporters can follow a local team, which can attract new followers because there is a team representing them and can also appeal to the casual sports follower who will sometimes tune in or even go to games with their social group/friends. Super rugby fulfils none of these and while it may have been a great innovation when it started, and while it served a need when rugby moved from amateur to professional, it's time has come. Time to move on and have a chance of prospering or stay with the status quo in its current death spiral.

Simple blue print for Australian rugby:

Wallabies (including female national team)

National club competition (professional) - male and female

Club and subbies rugby (amateur) - male and femal

juniors and schools - male and female

 

[dru]

I'm also confused as to which sporting league anywhere isn't reliant on their broadcast deal. It's a huge component of revenue for sport around the world.

For god’s sake, man. Have a look at it. The hot gossip is that we do NOT have a broadcast deal coming.

 

[Braveheart81]

For god’s sake, man. Have a look at it. The hot gossip is that we do NOT have a broadcast deal coming.

Yes, it is a massive issue.

My point was around the suggestion that we shouldn't have been reliant on our broadcast deal in the past. What was the alternative?

There was no comparable FTA deal that was turned down at any point or any suggestion that a FTA deal would have been more reliable for longer.

Clearly we are going to be reliant on a broadcast deal into the future as well. If it doesn't come from Foxtel we need to determine what the best alternative is.

 

[Quick Hands]

I am still unsure what Australia would have done differently and at which points if we were to have purely looked after our own interests.

When it started super rugby was the right vehicle for Australian rugby to make the transition from anateur to professional rugby. It had good support, the product was good, the coverage was good (although limited to pay TV).

But things have changed, it's now a millstone around our necks.

Right now the right thing is a national domestic competition - which won't make a profit, a least not immediately, but as you've observved previously that level of the game is a loss maker everywhere. So given that the competition will make a loss whether it's super rugby or a domestic competion, a domestic competition clearly gives rugby the chance to find a place in the 21st century sports market. As it stands, we're almost invisible - which is worse than running at a loss.

 

[hoggy]

I am still unsure what Australia would have done differently and at which points if we were to have purely looked after our own interests.

Clearly a lot of people are in favour of a long running national domestic comp with privately backed teams. There's a lot of steps to overcome to make that happen.

When rugby went professional there was one offer on the table and largely that was decided by the players. They were always going to take the money. There was no option for the ARU to go in a different direction because they would have been trying to do it without all their best players. Player power is something most people underrate in terms of how much it will always drive decision making. The talent are never going to take a huge pay cut in the hope that rugby in Australia will be stronger in future generations.

I'm also confused as to which sporting league anywhere isn't reliant on their broadcast deal. It's a huge component of revenue for sport around the world.

Clearly if Foxtel doesn't make a bid on the next TV rights deal then an alternative needs to be found.

Much of what you say is correct, but the problem has always been that it is the RA have always been paying the wages. It is the lack of any structure that allows private investment into the game here to soak up some of those costs.

The game here is the one that has allowed player power to rule, The players have all been paid by a product not earning those wages and an employer who is not earning enough to pay those wages, the game has been living on a credit card.

Foxtel will bid on the next TV rights what they think they are worth, the real issue is can the RA find a way that it is not the only organization paying all the bills.

 

[Braveheart81]

Right now the right thing is a national domestic competition - which won't make a profit, a least not immediately, but as you've observved previously that level of the game is a loss maker everywhere. So given that the competition will make a loss whether it's super rugby or a domestic competion, a domestic competition clearly gives rugby the chance to find a place in the 21st century sports market. As it stands, we're almost invisible - which is worse than running at a loss.

The challenge to make this at all viable is monumental. I'm not saying it's impossible or that it's the direction we need to go in but we can't ignore the fact that if we are trying to run 8 teams we need to budget for the fact that expenses are going to be double what they are now.

If we are looking at a reduced broadcast deal and using teams that aren't largely backed by somewhat stable membership bases providing a lot of their matchday revenue, the revenue side is also likely to be heavily reduced.

 

[Strewthcobber]

For god’s sake, man. Have a look at it. The hot gossip is that we do NOT have a broadcast deal coming.

Isn't the goss that we may be a Kayo only sport, or at least one that isn't guaranteed to be on Foxsports 1 to 4 for every match.

There's still scope for money from Foxtel (and maybe relatively significant money).

They are only paying around $25m a year at the moment, which only means 25,000 Foxtel subscribers. I reckon we have that covered as a sport. Foxtel still need subscribers.

It does mean 100,000 Kayo supports though, which will be the issue.

 

[Braveheart81]

Much of what you say is correct, but the problem has always been that it is the RA have always been paying the wages. It is the lack of any structure that allows private investment into the game here to soak up some of those costs.

The game here is the one that has allowed player power to rule, The players have all been paid by a product not earning those wages and an employer who is not earning enough to pay those wages, the game has been living on a credit card.

Foxtel will bid on the next TV rights what they think they are worth, the real issue is can the RA find a way that it is not the only organization paying all the bills.

Where exactly does player power not rule?

 

[Samson]

I think if nothing else it's become obvious that there is neither enough interest, nor the depth of players, nor the money in Australia to support an NRC and Super Rugby.





Simple blue print for Australian rugby:



Wallabies (including female national team)



National club competition (professional) - male and female



Club and subbies rugby (amateur) - male and femal



juniors and schools - male and female

I like this format. Would have QLD, NSW, VIC and WA teams selected from the national club comp to play against each other home and away.
Would also require each home team in national comp to live stream matches.

 

[hoggy]

Where exactly does player power not rule?

Maybe I didn't make my point clear, player power will always rule. But who's paying the bills, lets look at England and Australia.

Saracens compared to the Waratahs. Yes theirs all sorts of TV money and deals, but essentially a private owner is paying for those Saracen wages and costs, over here the RA are essentially funding the Waratahs wages and costs.

Regardless of scale, until that issue is addressed then rugby here is going backwards at a steady rate.