Where to for Super Rugby?

[Omar Comin']

All good reasons why we need to urgently cut back/out and re-assign (a) the obvious $ millions wasted in meaningless and impact-less ARU corporate overheads and (b) the obvious $ millions totally wasted via the large quantum of unnecessarily duplicated overheads of 5 Super rugby teams and 5 State RUs.

These funds in part must, in some carefully considered form, be allocated to higher effective salaries for our (say) c.200 best players. And such will be a genuinely productive use of resources instead of just pouring thousands of $100 bills down the drain as we presently do, gaining zero value from it.

To survive, Australian rugby needs radical, very radical, changes.

I just struggle to see a scenario where rugby doesn't end up like soccer in Australia - where most of our best players are playing overseas, and we build our own A League type competition.

But in recent months I've been thinking maybe that's not so bad. While we'd lose the very best players we'd keep many very good players and also attract very good players from overseas, because there really isn't that many decent paying professional rugby contracts in the world.

 

[Dave Beat]

1.The whole we dont have enough depth for 5 teams theory is a complete fallacy. As is the whole we started to go down hill when we introduced 5 teams theory.Since the introduction of the Rebels , both the Reds and Tahs won the thing for the first time as well as the Brums making a final. The key point to our malaise on the field imo is the 60 odd Super quality Australian players plying their trade os including over 30 who have played for the Wobs. This situation was actually manufactured by the ARU loosening their position on keeping the best players in the country. I know from experience in the pre Pulver days this was a massive priority for the ARU.
2. So with the general weakening of our teams the quality of our Super rugby has totally regressed.Cant avoid also what appears to be a real failure of coaching .Remember we used to have Cheika, White , EMac and Macqueen as the standard of our coaching . Compare this to the current crop.

yep

 

[Dave Beat]

I don't personally think the guiteu rule has been a bad thing, in fact I believe it's (and I'm amazed to say this) been a blessing. It would of kept more than lost, if it wasn't the case. Those players moving overseas barring 2/3 players aren't qualified to play for Australia, so they would of moved guiteu rule or not. The only 3 players that have moved overseas that has the 60caps threshold (AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper), genia and Beale) with one coming back. What we should be doing is pushing the French and English clubs to tighten their eligibility rules for amount of overseas players that can play for a club. It's the players moving pre guiteu rule qualified that are making the big difference. Imagine the reds backrow with higgers at 6, gill at 7 and smith at 8, that's as good as any in the comp, then add Greg Holmes and their scrum is more than solid. Add mike Harris at 10 and hugh Pyle and Luke jones at lock, PAE at prop for the rebels and suddenly they are a mid table team. To'omua at 12, mowen at 8, tomane at 11 and mogg at 15 for the brums and they convert 1/2 close losses to wins. Dave Dennis at 6 for the tahs, pushes Hanigan to their troublesome lock spot or sitaleki Timani back to add some grunt. JOC (James O'Connor) playing wing for the Force and suddenly they have 2 quality wingers (peni and JOC (James O'Connor)) capable of changing a game. It's the players not guiteu qualified that's killing us, the money is too great over there. There needs to stricter rules on the other end to deter this

Was about to like then JOC (James O'Connor) was referenced.

 

[NTT]

All good reasons why we need to urgently cut back/out and re-assign (a) the obvious $ millions wasted in meaningless and impact-less ARU corporate overheads and (b) the obvious $ millions totally wasted via the large quantum of unnecessarily duplicated overheads of 5 Super rugby teams and 5 State RUs.

These funds in part must, in some carefully considered form, be allocated to higher effective salaries for our (say) c.200 best players. And such will be a genuinely productive use of resources instead of just pouring thousands of $100 bills down the drain as we presently do, gaining zero value from it.

To survive, Australian rugby needs radical, very radical, changes.

This would be a great first step in the reforms desperately needed for the future of rugby in Australia. Only trouble is, the mere mention of the word centralisation, like the Alliance Agreement RugbyWA sought from the ARU to reduce costs, will just run into the same opposition any proposed reforms run into, the state based old boys network just vetoes anything that sees them lose the gravy train. 5 strong franchises sharing resources, running dedicated academies and striving towards a singular goal is what we need. The money freed up from cutting duplicate costs will be enough to start redressing the grassroots funding.
Im having flashbacks to when i started posting about centralisation in 2014 ....

 

[Twoilms]

I just struggle to see a scenario where rugby doesn't end up like soccer in Australia - where most of our best players are playing overseas, and we build our own A League type competition.

But in recent months I've been thinking maybe that's not so bad. While we'd lose the very best players we'd keep many very good players and also attract very good players from overseas, because there really isn't that many decent paying professional rugby contracts in the world.

Yeah a lot of the shit slinging these last few months has really missed the bigger picture. Yes there has been mismanagement etc etc. but nothing could really have prevented the inevitable talent drain to Europe. Literally nothing. New Zealand have done a much better job staving it off but they are gradually losing the battle as well. They just mask their losses better because of the sheer quantity & quality of production (which we will NEVER achieve).

Money has it's own kind of gravitational pull and it's center is Europe. Europeans spend more on sport, watch more sport and are generally better at managing sport than anyone else.

The blueprint has already been laid out in Football. A previously impressive international game that has now been eclipsed by the Club form of the game. Ask many players if they'd rather a World Cup or a Champions League and damn near most would say the latter. Nations that naturally produce the most talented players worldwide can't hold onto those players because their club competitions couldn't dream of competing with the marketing gods that are the EPL, La Liga etc. Best player in the world (Messi) has spent his entire career in Spain. He is not even from the same continent.

The only possible way of staving off this bullshit was to try and make Super Rugby THE Rugby competition. Make it generate fuckloads of revenue and be popular in a wide variety of countries so we can throw all of that money at players. I think SANZAAR knew this and took a stab at making it top shit by expanding. Sadly it failed massively.

The demise is inevitable.

 

[kiap]

I have come to the unfortunate conclusion that through both internal and external factors ( ARU),the Rebels are probably too far gone. I pray Im wrong but I know how hard it is to make this business model work. If the rebs survive given the hand they have been dealt I cant see anything but continued at least mediocrity for the foreseeable future.

I would say this:

Focus on making the Rebels stay alive.​

Super Rugby is not going to survive long.​

The comp will be rejigged now as they try to resuscitate it but what happens after Soup is gone would see the Rebels in much clearer air.

Saffer teams, like the Lions, stunk up the bottom of the log for most of the history of the comp. Who cares, they survived and had something to build on. Australian teams are entitled to do the same.

Even if, in 2021, we move to a better structure.

 

[wamberal]

If we live that long.

 

[RedsHappy]

This would be a great first step in the reforms desperately needed for the future of rugby in Australia. Only trouble is, the mere mention of the word centralisation, like the Alliance Agreement RugbyWA sought from the ARU to reduce costs, will just run into the same opposition any proposed reforms run into, the state based old boys network just vetoes anything that sees them lose the gravy train. 5 strong franchises sharing resources, running dedicated academies and striving towards a singular goal is what we need. The money freed up from cutting duplicate costs will be enough to start redressing the grassroots funding.
Im having flashbacks to when i started posting about centralisation in 2014 ..

NTT - to save rugby in Australia, there is no alternative to active, urgent centralisation in some form.

You note some well-described blockages above.

An equally large one is that the better persons we have out in the clubs and RUs very much get the need for centralisation however they recoil in abject objection to it, not as a sound principle of organising the code, but rather as a matter of practical implementation as they see highly incompetent, poorly qualified persons in the existing ARU that in no way could be trusted as the central management team/expertise/drivers.

These ARU persons can't even add value to a largely decentralised system, let alone provide the higher level of skill intrinsically required to run a far more active, controlling, centralised one.

Hence the required centralisation MUST of necessity be accompanied by a revolution in the quality and experience of the persons appointed to run such a newly centralised system.

Therein lies the key problem entailed in the proper fixing of Australian rugby.

There is no logical, clear, legally available path to eject our proven-as incompetent senior central personnel as they are today as these persons are secured in power by an almost equally ordinary bundle of State RU NSW and QLD directors that effectively permit the ARU board to remain in place and, non-co-incidentally, vice versa.

As I have commented many times here, the Australian rugby governance system only exists to self-perpetuate those who have cunningly or via 'prestigious' connections climbed its upper ranks, and not to serve those who pay rugby's bills, the fans, the viewers, the players, the broader rugby community.

And the ultimate calamitous results of such a wantonly detached and irresponsible system are there today, for all to see.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I just struggle to see a scenario where rugby doesn't end up like soccer in Australia - where most of our best players are playing overseas, and we build our own A League type competition.

But in recent months I've been thinking maybe that's not so bad. While we'd lose the very best players we'd keep many very good players and also attract very good players from overseas, because there really isn't that many decent paying professional rugby contracts in the world.

It would be a bit of a bitter pill for some to swallow but I wouldn't mind it if it were to go down this route.

I'd go about it by taking the Spirit, Rising, Rams, Vikings and then opening up spots for any other organisation such as the clubs to fill another 6-8 slots. All bids have to meet strict criteria regarding finances, facilities etc.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

If someone offered you 2 times the money you're on now to do the same job in England or France would you say no?

Some might, what about 3 times the money, or 4? And yeah you'll play a few more games but you won't be on the road so much. After most games you'll be home for dinner.

Depends how much I want to be a Wallaby.
I must say when I was of an age for that to be a possibility money meant nothing to me

 

[Omar Comin']

I'd go about it by taking the Spirit, Rising, Rams, Vikings and then opening up spots for any other organisation such as the clubs to fill another 6-8 slots. All bids have to meet strict criteria regarding finances, facilities etc.

Why the Spirit, Rising and Vikings and not the Force, Rebels and Brumbies, as well as the Reds and Waratahs?

The Waratahs just have to have a cross town rival or two. They would be the perfect villain team in Sydney as they just can't shake their elitist image. And with a Sydney rivalry they could embrace it. I don't think it would take too long to build a passionate and tribal rivalry between the Waratahs and a 2nd Sydney team - or perhaps 2 other teams.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

A League type competition.

But in recent months I've been thinking maybe that's not so bad.

I take it you didn't watch the grand final - not sure why I did: a very odd mixture of low skill levels, apparent brutality and blatant diving.
I would fear for the development of our game in this country if we became cut off from the powerhouse we have living to our right and to a lesser extent to our left: my take on the A league is that it is disconnected from the way the game is played in every other country - that could happen with Rugby.

 

[Micheal]

I just struggle to see a scenario where rugby doesn't end up like soccer in Australia - where most of our best players are playing overseas, and we build our own A League type competition.

Do we really need our best players?

The modern games emphasis on insanely agile and athletic 100kg+ monsters, alongside really effective defensive patterns, has taken most of the space out of the game and only really NZ (and the Lions) have shown in the last two years that they can match that with equally exciting attack.

Before that the 2014 Waratahs and the 2011 Reds did likewise, but these are exceptions, not the rule.

In terms of actual footy, the NRC is probably a better product, and it certainly doesn't resemble our best players.

 

[Omar Comin']

Depends how much I want to be a Wallaby.
I must say when I was of an age for that to be a possibility money meant nothing to me

Being a regular Wallaby is not realistic for many players. And if you want to keep top Wallabies in Australia you really also need to keep those guys on the fringes of selection and just under that level. But this is very difficult to do when Super Rugby is almost like a half season compared to European rugby. The majority of top level professional sports people will never make more money than they do in their 20's and early 30's so it's different to most people who can expect to earn more in their 30's, 40's and 50's.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Being a regular Wallaby is not realistic for many players. And if you want to keep top Wallabies in Australia you really also need to keep those guys on the fringes of selection and just under that level. But this is very difficult to do when Super Rugby is almost like a half season compared to European rugby. The majority of top level professional sports people will never make more money than they do in their 20's and early 30's so it's different to most people who can expect to earn more in their 30's, 40's and 50's.

You make sense - more sense than a full house to watch that drivel on Sunday

 

[Highlander35]

Depends how much I want to be a Wallaby.
I must say when I was of an age for that to be a possibility money meant nothing to me

Very interesting.

I'd argue that there's a lot of pessimism about the future involved in the 16-25ish plus age group nowadays, which doesn't leave a lot of room for romance in the choice of career.

If I'm 21-23 and on the fringes of a Super Deal ~ at approx $40k AUD (The figure Sefa Naivalu was first signed on at for the Rebels), and I get a 2 year offer to play ProD2 for €60Kish, that's a very tempting offer.

I get to live in Europe for a couple of years, I get more money than I would in Australia, by playing more top level Rugby I gain exposure and development that could see me pick up big contracts at the very good sides, it's a 2 year deal instead of a rolling development contract until it's decided I'm good enough or not good enough. The inventives also look so much more valuable if you've got someone to support, whether it's children, or a wife, or a long term Girlfriend, or a family somewhere else.

On top of that, if I do end up making it as a player, it's not as if a Wallabies Cap in the Twilight of my career is impossible. A number of players are now returning from Overseas Careers to make charges at Caps, Fardy did it, DHP did it, Meekes and Houston are trying​ to do it.

It won't be the case for everyone for sure. But with an unstable economy, ever growing property prices and rife underemployment, I think European money, whether to set yourself up for the long term, or just a short term foray to see if you really are good enough is the correct decision from a life POV.

 

[Omar Comin']

I take it you didn't watch the grand final - not sure why I did: a very odd mixture of low skill levels, apparent brutality and blatant diving.
I would fear for the development of our game in this country if we became cut off from the powerhouse we have living to our right and to a lesser extent to our left: my take on the A league is that it is disconnected from the way the game is played in every other country - that could happen with Rugby.

Well I saw it sold out the SFS and had way better TV ratings than any Super Rugby game will have until the next time the Reds or Waratahs make a Super Rugby final. And that's despite the A League being probably outside the 50 highest quality soccer leagues in the world. Tribalism matters.

On the development of our game in this country it really depends what you mean. I've asked this before here, but where do you think rugby is stronger, in France or in Australia? I'd say rugby in France is much, much stronger despite the fact the Wallabies have been better than France for almost all of the professional era.

 

[RedsHappy]

Yeah a lot of the shit slinging these last few months has really missed the bigger picture. Yes there has been mismanagement etc etc. but nothing could really have prevented the inevitable talent drain to Europe. Literally nothing. New Zealand have done a much better job staving it off but they are gradually losing the battle as well. They just mask their losses better because of the sheer quantity & quality of production (which we will NEVER achieve).

..............

Money has it's own kind of gravitational pull and it's center is Europe. .......
The demise is inevitable.

I cannot agree with the word 'nothing' above.

This emerging monetary imbalance re player salaries, local tax breaks etc and this general trend line have been known about for years now.

If as part of a well and thoroughly conducted strategic analysis a major code manager like the ARU can clearly see 'we will have to allocate more funds to elite player salaries or we will see a collapse of our local product quality over X period and that collapse could imperil the entire code's viability so dealing with this issue is one of our highest priorities'..........

......then, as responsible leaders, you must take pro-active, comprehensive action to fix that issue. It's called 'good executive leadership'.

There are numerous avenues to so fix in this case:

(a) you are utterly ruthless re priorities and cull all expenses that are not consistent with them and allocate the savings to code-saving priorities only. E.g, you cull 7s programs completely, you cull failing franchises that require large amounts of cash subsidy but induce no compensating incremental income or game success outcomes, zero corporate overheads that are not demonstrably productive or essential, etc.​

​

(b) you ensure you have an extremely efficient Target Operating Model code-wide that culls all unnecessarily duplicated costs so that, amongst other key priorities, elite player income can be maximised not unduly constrained​

​

(c) you ensure you build excellence in your carefully selected number of elite teams so that team success over time induces positive revenue flows (esp from major sponsors) that can in turn permit greater income allocation to, inter alia, elite player salaries​

​

(d) you have well-managed and very well-coached franchises inducing consistent excellence in team cultures and therefore a greater likelihood of elite players wanted to stay and develop within those cultures (noting (c) and (d) cross-reinforce each other)​

​

(e) fed by a reasonable quantity of operating and fan success as a code you skilfully play to regional governments to maximise grants and such like govt income by furthering these governments' desire for a range of well-profiled sports seated in their communities​

....and there are more I could list.

Our ARU and State RUs have effectively done, or achieved, 'none of the above'.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Well I saw it sold out the SFS and had way better TV ratings than any Super Rugby game will have until the next time the Reds or Waratahs make a Super Rugby final. And that's despite the A League being probably outside the 50 highest quality soccer leagues in the world. Tribalism matters.

On the development of our game in this country it really depends what you mean. I've asked this before here, but where do you think rugby is stronger, in France or in Australia? I'd say rugby in France is much, much stronger despite the fact the Wallabies have been better than France for almost all of the professional era.

FRANCE - but they are creating their own problems and seem interested - up to a point - in solving them which would get us some relief from their attraction.
Maybe the penny is dropping in NZ:

The same problem exists with the Sunwolves. Next year they will play in the Australian Conference and the logistics of that are going to be tedious. How much it's going to cost flying so many times between Australia and Japan is also a serious concern. Best guess is that it is the better part of $180,000 a time to shift a team long haul.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11852587&ref=NZH_FBpage

 

[Twoilms]

I cannot agree with the word 'nothing' above.

It's perfectly feasible that all of the above suggestions were taken and the possible salaries for players would still fall well short of what Europe can offer.

Actually, i would go further and say they would still fall well short.