Where to for Super Rugby?

[WorkingClassRugger]

Or Scotland, et al .

But fewer than Hong Kong.

Would be interesting.

That wouldn't be the worst idea in terms of amalgamating the current Unions. Reckon Forrest would be willing to fund the Black Falcons and Mozzies participation in the Perth Comp?

 

[kiap]

As a first choice, I suspect not. There is some raw talent in SA tho.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

As a first choice, I suspect not. There is some raw talent in SA tho.

Have always thought there should have been something formal in place that brought both SA and NT under the auspices of the Force.

 

[Dan54]

My point Dan options are slim - ideal is get nzru to agree trans tasman with us having 5 teams and significantly more open borders policy to create more franchise team model in each location able to attract players not limited to their own borders (and able to still be selected for national honours of their country of origin) that facilitates establishing decent footprint and that levelling the playing field, improves quality of product across the region for teams/ locations involved and grow fan interest and appeal. All of this of course is then predicated on private equity investment to fund which i reckon this franchise model would more appeal to.

To me the biggest constraint holding this back is NZRU lacking any ability to see this vision for a successful regional rugby product that is win win for all parties due to their myopic focus on a competition that serves nothing more then there interests in All Black Development League.

NZRU for all its noise has been really as much part of the wider key part of the problem why the Asian Pacific region has not fully leveraged the strength and growth of the world game.

I know what your point is RN, for it to work we need NZR to carry Aus on it's back, you know develop players and then make them available to Aus. I find is most interesting that it is NZR holding back rugby in area because they say ABs have to play in NZ and Aus have the same policy and are the injured party. Do you not think Super rugby is seen as development for Wallabies or the Boks etc? Really? Of course NZ and Aus etc make their test teams their priority, it is what pays for most of rugby below test level. There is a reason that Wales, England etc have the same rules, play for someone else even in same comp and you are no longer in test calculation. Somewhere in a perfect world, Rugby unions would not have to use their test tems to earn the required money, but the reason we have so many tests is exactly that reason! It is why Aus want to keep control of their test players too, they need them for the money!

 

[Dan54]

It isnt exactly about making NZ players available to Australia - though that is certainly the impact under current scenarios. What you want is a cohesive competition that is somehow intended to level available talent.

To set that out you would need to agree rules around it. If your above is part of the rules then I'd expect the comp to come down hard on any breaches. No problem.

Also note, that as many have noted, you are not going to see ABs jumping quickly to Australia. What you would hope is that talent missing first 15 opportunities in NZ, would not be put off considering Australian teams due to the AB door closing. Over time though, you would expect the occassional AB to be Australian based. Not going to happen quickly.

Wrt your second item, it depends on how they have been signed up. There are ex-pat NewZealand bred players who have ended up playing for Australia. But you would imagine that a player being held back from joining an Aus comp would be happy to commit up front to being NZ available.

If a young fella from NZ plays in a super team thinking it ok in a few years I will be an AB, and then after 5 years he hasn't made it Aus can cap him can't they? I see your thinking!

 

[KOB1987]

Or Scotland, et al .

But fewer than Hong Kong.

Would be interesting.

I like it but I reckon WA would get the lead role - WANTSAR

 

[Derpus]

Lets say NZR is willing to completely open player movements, or at least from NZ to Aus. For those for who have player movement as an absolute requirement from an Australian POV, what are your thoughts on the likely requirements from an NZ POV:

• Abiding by the NZR conditioning requirements (i.e. mandated rests)
• Agreeing not to poach NZ players for test rugby

Admittedly the former is really only applicable to regular All Blacks, who may not actually be that high up the shopping list, but the latter would definitely be a concern NZR would need to see addressed.

EDIT: And what about revenue sharing/splitting? Will you be expecting Australia to get an even split despite likely (at least at first) providing a smaller percentage of the players? If it's weighted by player percentages -- something I think would be reasonable in such a setup -- what about the potential positive feedback loop it generates (NZR gets more money -> invests more money into player development -> more NZ players enter the league -> NZR gets more money)?

I don't think freedom of movement will work. But if they were to give it a crack i see no issue with mandated rest periods. The teams will know what they will be getting going in. If they spend big on a tenured AB they arent going to have them playing every game.

The revenue split issue isn't really a big deal IMO. If NZR are serious about it being a level playing field then an even split in revenue is the only reasonable option. Or say a majority even split with an additional pot scaled on final league position as a further incentive to perform. NZ will probably bring both better players and more eyeballs, initially. But if the comp is a success Australia will ultimately bring in more revenue.

Freedom of movement, salary cap and evenly distributed revenue should generally ensure a pretty even field.

I also think Super Rugby contracts and test contracts should be completely independent except maybe that a player needs a Super Rugby contract to qualify for a test contract.

A lot of ifs.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I don't think freedom of movement will work. But if they were to give it a crack i see no issue with mandated rest periods. The teams will know what they will be getting going in. If they spend big on a tenured AB they arent going to have them playing every game.

The revenue split issue isn't really a big deal IMO. If NZR are serious about it being a level playing field then an even split in revenue is the only reasonable option. Or say a majority even split with an additional pot scaled on final league position as a further incentive to perform. NZ will probably bring both better players and more eyeballs, initially. But if the comp is a success Australia will ultimately bring in more revenue.

Freedom of movement, salary cap and evenly distributed revenue should generally ensure a pretty even field.

I also think Super Rugby contracts and test contracts should be completely independent except maybe that a player needs a Super Rugby contract to qualify for a test contract.

A lot of ifs.

There shouldn't be a thing such as a test contract. We need to make Tests a performance based incentive. Test representation should be purely match payments. The whole Test contract implies obligation to select players based on an attempt to garner a return of investment on the monies paid to a player in a Test contract.

 

[Derpus]

There shouldn't be a thing such as a test contract. We need to make Tests a performance based incentive. Test representation should be purely match payments. The whole Test contract implies obligation to select players based on an attempt to garner a return of investment on the monies paid to a player in a Test contract.

Sure - sounds alright to me. Except that it probably means those juicy European and Japanese contracts become even more enticing.

 

[kiap]

I like it but I reckon WA would get the lead role - WANTSAR

Was going for a Sanzar-like acronym when I did it a year or two back.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Sure - sounds alright to me. Except that it probably means those juicy European and Japanese contracts become even more enticing.

The money that would otherwise used in those contracts could be redirected to to the franchises in order to raise the salary cap and alleviate some of that issue. Outside of that. I'd widen the selection eligibility by allowing players to pursue Japanese opportunities while remaining eligible. The spend on the Wallabies is around $20m annually. If you go to a match fee's system if you maintain squad of 30 and pay them $10k a game that's a significant savings.

 

[rugboy]

The money that would otherwise used in those contracts could be redirected to to the franchises in order to raise the salary cap and alleviate some of that issue. Outside of that. I'd widen the selection eligibility by allowing players to pursue Japanese opportunities while remaining eligible. The spend on the Wallabies is around $20m annually. If you go to a match fee's system if you maintain squad of 30 and pay them $10k a game that's a significant savings.

Players on RA top ups already receive 10k per wallabies game in addition to their top up.

 

[Derpus]

The money that would otherwise used in those contracts could be redirected to to the franchises in order to raise the salary cap and alleviate some of that issue. Outside of that. I'd widen the selection eligibility by allowing players to pursue Japanese opportunities while remaining eligible. The spend on the Wallabies is around $20m annually. If you go to a match fee's system if you maintain squad of 30 and pay them $10k a game that's a significant savings.

I ultimately think we'll lift eligibility requirements entirely - but in the medium term i don't see why we shouldn't allow players to leave for, say, a 1 year period and remain eligible.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Players on RA top ups already receive 10k per wallabies game in addition to their top up.

Yes. I'm suggesting doing away with those top ups and redirecting that money to the franchises to help bolster the salary cap somewhat as well as retain emerging talent. Say boosting the salary cap to $6m each. Would also allow RA to further bolster the fighting fund and retain even more of our young talent.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I ultimately think we'll lift eligibility requirements entirely - but in the medium term i don't see why we shouldn't allow players to leave for, say, a 1 year period and remain eligible.

One year eligibility deals could be an option. I'm just going from what I've read in regards to the suggested earnings that could be on offer in Japan that you could allow Wallaby regulars the opportunity to chase their value in Japan for a few seasons while still being eligible for national honours. Though, I would suggest that they'd have to be playing in the 1st division.

 

[dru]

If a young fella from NZ plays in a super team thinking it ok in a few years I will be an AB, and then after 5 years he hasn't made it Aus can cap him can't they? I see your thinking!

Look, your logic IQ is poor. But I'm not going to keep discussion up.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

 

[KOB1987]

If anyone still backs the theory that SRNZ is god’s gift to rugby then watch the CRU v CHI game just winding up. More errors than my kids science exam and appalling reffing. While I’m at it, I have no problem with chics covering rugby in the media, in fact I like it. Actually being the commentator though, nah, doesn’t work.

 

[zer0]

While I’m at it, I have no problem with chics covering rugby in the media, in fact I like it. Actually being the commentator though, nah, doesn’t work.

Why?

 

[Wilson]

While I’m at it, I have no problem with chics covering rugby in the media, in fact I like it. Actually being the commentator though, nah, doesn’t work.

Why on earth would you have an issue with this?

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Why on earth would you have an issue with this?

There's no reason why a woman cannot have the same level of insight into what's happening on field during the game as her male counterparts. I thought the commentator for the Chiefs/Crusaders game was passable. Certainly no worse than the others. I was actually watching the Shute Shield game today and thinking how I'd like them to utilise Lou Ransom more from the sideline.