Where to for Super Rugby?

[Teh Other Dave]

They'll have to apologise to the pith helmet brigade about Burma for a start

That's about as likely as you apologising for your war crimes.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Plus we've played a number of Tests in Japan over the years. Far more than in the Pacific Islands!

There's definitely scope for another look at the Rugby Championship, at very least to see if Japanese involvement would drive up TV revenue.
.

It would be better if Fiji and japan were added but commercially without world league type set up can’t see Fiji added

 

[Adam84]

Plus we've played a number of Tests in Japan over the years. Far more than in the Pacific Islands!

There's definitely scope for another look at the Rugby Championship, at very least to see if Japanese involvement would drive up TV revenue.
.

And Australia supported their bid for the RWC as well I believe

 

[Joe King]

Super Rugby doesn't look like it can grow the game beneath test level. And it doesn't look like the Unions are prepared to shift it's structures so that can be something more than a fill-in and prep for test rugby. If that's the case, then perhaps Australia should revert to its 3 original teams assuming that the Rebels can move across to GRR.

This would strengthen the teams in our main rugby areas. And it would produce better player combinations for test rugby preparation.

 

[Joe King]

If the NZRU was happy to pick test players from Australian teams, we could have a competition with more Australian teams involved because they would be more competitive. Interest would increase dramatically.

The problem is, the NZRU want to be able to control the management and conditioning of their own players for the sake of the AB's, which is fair enough. They do this so much better than Australia.

But is there a way for the NZRU to still have control of their players in this way, even if they allow NZ players to also play for Australian teams? Is there a way for Australian teams to do just as good a job at conditioning and developing their players as the NZ teams so that the NZRU could be fully confident in this idea.

If this problem could be solved - tough, though it is - it could be key in revolutionising Super Rugby for the better.

If this idea can't be achieved, then is it possible for our Super Rugby teams, the GRR teams and Japan's revamped comp to join forces? Australia could then possibly grow the game under test level by expanding its market - assuming that combining with Japan brings enough revenue.

NZ and SA could continue in a form of Super Rugby because that structure suits them, and we could all meet in the RC at test level, including Japan and Fiji.

 

[Joe King]

All Blacks great Andrew Mehrtens has called for Super Rugby to be disbanded, encouraging New Zealand and Australia to dump South Africa and Argentina and link with Asia to save the game in this region.

Mehrtens believes a successful link with Asia would also allow All Blacks to play offshore and still be selected for New Zealand.

He's also frustrated that the huge spread of time zones that hit Super Rugby.

Mehrtens, the former Crusaders and All Blacks first-five, believes increasing a competition with Asian involvement can help counter the growing exodus of players to Europe where wealthy competitions in Great Britain and France utilise Kiwi talent.

It could also see a relaxation of the strict rules that say a New Zealand player must be involved in a New Zealand competition to be eligible to play for the All Blacks.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby...-zealand-to-dump-super-rugby-and-head-to-asia

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby...-zealand-to-dump-super-rugby-and-head-to-asia

The ratings support such a move. The question is whether admin are brave enough to pull the trigger. I don't like the language of 'dumping' SA or Arg. as I believe no matter what the RC should be guaranteed. But I think a shift northward for both SA and Arg would help long term in regards to time zones.

A move to Asia from an Aus/NZ point of view could involve a merger of GRR (Force, Fiji plus 1 more) and Super Rugby plus say 6 Japan based squads.

 

[Mr Wobbly]

The ratings support such a move. The question is whether admin are brave enough to pull the trigger. I don't like the language of 'dumping' SA or Arg. as I believe no matter what the RC should be guaranteed. But I think a shift northward for both SA and Arg would help long term in regards to time zones.

A move to Asia from an Aus/NZ point of view could involve a merger of GRR (Force, Fiji plus 1 more) and Super Rugby plus say 6 Japan based squads.

TBF to Mehrtens though, he may not have used the word "dumping". Probably a bit of added colour by the reporter.

Six Japan based squads would be pretty unlikely, what with their revamped league and all. I think a 17 team competition could work. Play each team once over 16 weeks then three weeks of finals. 5 x Aus + 5 x NZ + Fiji, + Sunwolves, no idea who the other five would be other than a couple of the GRR sides.

 

[hoggy]

The ratings support such a move. The question is whether admin are brave enough to pull the trigger. I don't like the language of 'dumping' SA or Arg. as I believe no matter what the RC should be guaranteed. But I think a shift northward for both SA and Arg would help long term in regards to time zones.

A move to Asia from an Aus/NZ point of view could involve a merger of GRR (Force, Fiji plus 1 more) and Super Rugby plus say 6 Japan based squads.

The problem is we have never had the admin capable or with the desire to really push what is the obvious option, to may vested interests dependent on the current set-up, unfortunately not enough private involvement.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

TBF to Mehrtens though, he may not have used the word "dumping". Probably a bit of added colour by the reporter.

Six Japan based squads would be pretty unlikely, what with their revamped league and all. I think a 17 team competition could work. Play each team once over 16 weeks then three weeks of finals. 5 x Aus + 5 x NZ + Fiji, + Sunwolves, no idea who the other five would be other than a couple of the GRR sides.

This would be in stead of their new league as opposed to running alongside it. You could also change the rules by allowing players to to be national team eligible regardless of which team they play in as long as it's for one of the teams in this competition. But you mandate that for the Aus/NZ/Fiji teams that at least 65% of their game day squad have to be national duty committed. It doesn't have to be 6 Japanese teams. Could be four plus say HK and Shanghai. You give those teams free reign to sign players where they see fit. Could also mandate exclusive squad places for PI talent.

 

[Dan54]

Merhts has said this before, he does or did work for Kearnsie in Sydney so is probably fairly heavily influenced by him. Nothing wrong with that he is entitled to his opinion , as is everyone else here etc, just I not sure any of us have any clue on how it will work out in the finances etc, and I would be personally disappointed if SA wasn't part of comp, just for what they add to rugby styles etc. I think it would weaken Aus and NZ rugby myself. And there no advantage to NZ public anyway, as I have said a few times, games played in Australia are not much better time for NZ than games in SA.

 

[barbarian]

The issue with the Asia/Pac comp is the effect it might have on TV revenue. While Japan is a growing market, it's not as lucrative as Europe.

South Africa, for all their faults, bring eyeballs in their own right (far more than Aus or NZ), and games in a Euro-friendly timezone.

Other than that flaw, it's the most obvious choice for RA in the future though the drawback has always been the Kiwis.
.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Very pleased to see Merhtons comments as I agree as long term vision our future is in Asia but that is not something that happens overnight so at this point we can't jettison SA.

And most definitely what I do agree is with his view that the new Asia competition should not have restrictions on representing your country as long as you play in the competition, as by making players more fluid within this competition will imho create more interest in teams (with good marquee players) and help level the playing field. As think about domestic comp's of England and France unbounded by such restrictions which makes the competition much more attractive. Equally the relegation / promotion also creates interest. Ok probably not big enough market to create the latter....

If we are to get serious about growing the game in Asia then yes NZ who has the bulk of the talent needs to open its borders to teams playing in the same competition. Obviously usual quota restrictions similar to what WCR suggested has to be in place of course.

Most pundits would know this is the future but rugby in this region is so bureaucratic and staid that I doubt such change can be driven by the SANZAARs or rugby boards of OZ and NZ etc....this is why GRR and the Twiggy's of the world are fantastic with their more disruptive approach. I just truly hope OZ and NZ rugby boards, and SANZAAR see GRR and twiggy as an enabler and not as a threat. As the latter would be only the case if they are looking to protect their own positions and self interest which does not correlate to broader interests of growing the game and the professional side in Asia. But reality is the burecracy, inertia and status quo in rugby is pretty powerful and very undynamic so I still am not optimistic here. But happy to be proved wrong....

 

[Rugbynutter39]

TBF to Mehrtens though, he may not have used the word "dumping". Probably a bit of added colour by the reporter.



Six Japan based squads would be pretty unlikely, what with their revamped league and all. I think a 17 team competition could work. Play each team once over 16 weeks then three weeks of finals. 5 x Aus + 5 x NZ + Fiji, + Sunwolves, no idea who the other five would be other than a couple of the GRR sides.

We so need Japan in whatever competition NZ, OZ and others in Asia play in but curve ball been new Japan pro comp which may make this difficult. We have to find someway to involve Japan as size of the prize too great to ignore.

 

[Joe King]

Merhts has said this before, he does or did work for Kearnsie in Sydney so is probably fairly heavily influenced by him. Nothing wrong with that he is entitled to his opinion , as is everyone else here etc, just I not sure any of us have any clue on how it will work out in the finances etc, and I would be personally disappointed if SA wasn't part of comp, just for what they add to rugby styles etc. I think it would weaken Aus and NZ rugby myself. And there no advantage to NZ public anyway, as I have said a few times, games played in Australia are not much better time for NZ than games in SA.

I use to think playing against SA and NZ regularly would improve how Australians play rugby, but I don't think it's helped Australia very much at all, at either national or provincial level.

 

[Dan54]

I use to think playing against SA and NZ regularly would improve how Australians play rugby, but I don't think it's helped Australia very much at all, at either national or provincial level.

Fair enough Joe, do you really think that Australian teams would of been better by playing each other or even a few weak teams from Asia, that I tend to think only lowers your need to improve. I personally would fear for Wallabies if they went into test matches with players who only had this experience.

 

[hoggy]

Fair enough Joe, do you really think that Australian teams would of been better by playing each other or even a few weak teams from Asia, that I tend to think only lowers your need to improve. I personally would fear for Wallabies if they went into test matches with players who only had this experience.

Yes, but you just as easily can turn that around and say if we had spent more time working on a greater domestic agenda we would have a far more popular game, which in turn would have led to more athletes/players to choose from. That fear factor for the Wallabies, like the Vietnam war, so busy with a body count you end up losing the war.

 

[Dan54]

Yes, but you just as easily can turn that around and say if we had spent more time working on a greater domestic agenda we would have a far more popular game, which in turn would have led to more athletes/players to choose from. That fear factor for the Wallabies, like the Vietnam war, so busy with a body count you end up losing the war.

No argument hoggy, perhaps as you say the way to greatness isjust making sure your team wins, so playing against weaker opposition maybe the answer, I not saying I right, just that I believe the way to improve is to always play against the best that you can. I admit to not being in Australia when Aussie teams just played each other, so I not in position to say, obviously I need to bow to those of you that been here longer than I.

 

[Joe King]

Fair enough Joe, do you really think that Australian teams would of been better by playing each other or even a few weak teams from Asia, that I tend to think only lowers your need to improve. I personally would fear for Wallabies if they went into test matches with players who only had this experience.

I do think there is truth in what you say, but I just think the argument is over-stated.

I'm inclined to think that the AB's recent dominance, and the continual improvement of NZ's provincial teams, has been more to do with other factors, and less to do with playing against SA provincial teams.

But I do agree that SA teams bring a unique style.

 

[half]

The Super Rugby model is under extreme pressure.

For Australian Rugby if Super Rugby fell over then there is nothing to replace it.

As it stands there are fourth general scenarios, first is all things remain the same with a 14 team competition hope for the best, second broadcast revenue falls dramatically, third is South Africa leaves for the northern hemisphere and an Australian / NZ competitions is formed, fourth is South Africa is replaced with the introduction of Japan & Argentine .

All of these options aside from the number 3 is essentially Australian Rugby relying on overseas nations to bring in the dollars. Even 3 has NZ.

I would argue Australian Rugby’s biggest issue is the falling participation rate especially of quality young sports people. As an aside to this so few professional rugby teams mean’s any aspiring young athlete will more than likely choose, League, AFL, Football, Basketball & Cricket over rugby simply because of the professional player numbers in these codes.

Whether this is possible allowing for internal power struggles and ego’s being bruised. Privatise say 12 Australian teams and let them play out of small grounds.

Neither RA or the State Unions have the enterprise or capital to get us out of the hole we are in.

Before you answer my post, answer this question first, would you cancel your Fox subscription if we moved to 12 local teams.