• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Reds 2019

southsider

Arch Winning (36)
Is Pasitoa one of those players like Beale, Pocock, O’Connor who may be capable of playing super rugby straight out of high school?

If so massive loss and possibly not a lot of foresight from the reds given Duncan and Kerevi
 

Cancelled Account

Desmond Connor (43)
Thinking Pasitoa may be back in coming years playing 12. Brumbies have some upcoming talent signed playing 10 with Bayley Kuenzle, Tom Wright and Will Goddard. They also have Noah Lolesio as an upcoming 12. Not too sure where they are going to fit Pasitoa in. Pasitoa is big in the GPS arena but lacks basic skills. Let’s hope they build his skills and send him back as a 12 playing alongside Carter Gordon. That’s a great combination when both are turned on. Move Stewart back to 15, Petaia at 13 and McDermott at 9. A good winger coming through in the development squad . 2020 and 2021 looking impressive. And there is Lucas at bench 10/12.
 

TSR

Mark Ella (57)
With regards to the player departures, it wasn’t that long ago that people were posting there was going to be mass exodus from the Reds this year. I’m not saying anything printed on here is wrong, but nor am I going to loss sleep on speculation.

By the same token, whilst I am happy that there are some talented young guys coming through all these guys are at the moment is promising kids. If we haven’t seen yet the folly in assuming that talent at school level will equate to stardom at senior level then we haven’t been paying attention.

I wish Duncan all the best, but I hope that we have a strategy to retain the nucleus of the squad and that that strategy includes Kerevi.
 

RebelYell

Arch Winning (36)
I wish Duncan all the best, but I hope that we have a strategy to retain the nucleus of the squad and that that strategy includes Kerevi.

The precedent has been set - if I am Kerevi, I am asking for 4 years (in line with Hooper + Ala'alatoa) and I'm wanting to be one of the top half dozen paid players in the country. If not, see ya. It's a business decision and he has a limited window playing professionally.
 
G

GingerBreadCrab

Guest
With regards to the player departures, it wasn’t that long ago that people were posting there was going to be mass exodus from the Reds this year.
Well, I mean, there was
 

Derpus

George Gregan (70)
The precedent has been set - if I am Kerevi, I am asking for 4 years (in line with Hooper + Ala'alatoa) and I'm wanting to be one of the top half dozen paid players in the country. If not, see ya. It's a business decision and he has a limited window playing professionally.
He's not in the best half dozen in the country. He's not even the best in his position in the country. We don't even know what his best position is.

So he's not on par with Hooper, Pocock or AAA and i don't think this decision relates to that precedent. But yeah he can obviously demand more overseas. Pretty much anyone who plays in Aus can get more in Europe.
 

TSR

Mark Ella (57)
Well, I mean, there was
Fair point - but across various forums I read that Salakaia-Loto, Rodda, Higgers, Petaia, Kerevi, the Smith Brothers & I’m pretty certain a few others were definite departures because of toxic culture at the Reds. Some of these comments suggested that these movements were all done deals.

I am just saying I think these forums can lead to a certain level of exaggeration from people as to their knowledge of the movements of players. Especially when fans are already pissed.

This is not meant to denigrate the comments of any particular individuals - if they genuinely have the good oil it will be confirmed in time - but there has definitely been some claims put up on various forums around which have proven to be baseless.
 

sunnyboys

Bob Loudon (25)
anyone hopeful of a re-development and/or return to Ballymore wont enjoy the Final report from Stadiums Queensland.

Basically says its 'land locked' location makes it an inappropriate venue for major events.

recommends demolition of grandstands - returning the ground to a training and admin facility, with small capacity for community level games - open to discussions on use of some land (cites changes to deed required) to fund works to remove grandstands and upgrade training and admin hub capabilities.
 
G

GingerBreadCrab

Guest
anyone hopeful of a re-development and/or return to Ballymore wont enjoy the Final report from Stadiums Queensland.

Basically says its 'land locked' location makes it an inappropriate venue for major events.

recommends demolition of grandstands - returning the ground to a training and admin facility, with small capacity for community level games - open to discussions on use of some land (cites changes to deed required) to fund works to remove grandstands and upgrade training and admin hub capabilities.

That’s not ideal. Stadiums Queensland have notoriously been a paper tiger though, if the plan for making Ballymore the Australian base for Women’s rugby and Sevens goes ahead then I can’t imagine them blocking it.
 

sunnyboys

Bob Loudon (25)
They mention that and are supportive. Hence why they are open to changes to the Deed to allow some land to used to raise funds to develop its training admin hub capabilities.
 
G

GingerBreadCrab

Guest
Do you have a link handy to the report?

Further to Womens Rugby - NSW Women have been training alongside their male counterparts and Academy program for a while now. The newly updated facilities are fantastic and look professional. They’re getting the exposure and resources they need to grow and they are looking sharp. In stark contrast, QLD have been very slow to begin their campaign and are at serious risk of losing all the momentum built following the Global 10’s title and the enthralling double-extra-time Super W final. You can’t help but feel that RugbyAU have set them up for failure with a coaching change-up and a very rushed and disorganised program.
 

sunnyboys

Bob Loudon (25)
Full report here http://www.hpw.qld.gov.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/StadiumTaskforceReport.pdf

Ballymore section starts page 151.


Ballymore as a Major Events Venue
The Taskforce is aware of the venue’s history which includes obtaining Development Approval from Brisbane City Council for National Rugby Academy. The Development Approval includes scope to return the stadium asset to a functional major event venue.

Finding 11.17
The Queensland Rugby Union has a development approval to build a 24,000-seat stadium at Ballymore.

As a major event destination, the Ballymore site does not meet contemporary standards that the Taskforce has identified as preferred for major sports facility development in Queensland, as it is land locked, located in a residential neighbourhood and has limited potential for high frequency and multi-modal public transport. Further to those constraints, to bring the infrastructure on-site up to modern standards would require a significant capital investment that would not alleviate the underlying location issues the site contains. The Taskforce recommends the Ballymore site should remain as a Tier 3 stadium and not be considered a major stadium facility (eg. Tier 1 or 2 under the Queensland venue responsibility matrix), either now or into the future.

Finding 11.18
The Ballymore venue is not ideal as a location for a major stadium facility as it does not meet contemporary standards for a major stadium facility including, limited road access to the site, close proximity to the residential neighbourhood and no access to scheduled high frequency and multi-modal public transport. The Ballymore venue is more aligned to being a training, club participation and administrative hub for rugby and compatible sports as opposed to being a location for a major stadium.

Recommendation 11.6
The Queensland Government to continue talks with Queensland Rugby Union around the intended future scope of the Ballymore site, in-particular the scale of developments to help fund the development of a sport and community centre. Consideration should also be given to any limitations that result from the current conditions of the Deed of Grant in Trust (DOGIT).

QRU Ballymore Vision
The QRU has a contemporary vision for the future configuration of Ballymore, which is to redevelop the site into a National Rugby Training Centre with particular emphasis on Rugby 7s. The Taskforce considers this a more palatable and appropriate future use of the Ballymore site as it more aligns with being a training and local use facility in the longer term. It is a central location in Brisbane which is attractive to training camps, sport specific expertise, local and regional competition and administrative bases. However, there is still a significant potential cost associated with this vision for the site.

Finding 11.19
To help fund the Ballymore redevelopment, the Queensland Rugby Union has a preference to unlock some of the land value on the site through residential and commercial development sympathetic with the local area, while retaining a majority use of the precinct for sport and recreation.

To enable the proposed associated residential or commercial development on parts of the Ballymore site, the QRU would seek ability to utilise parts of the land parcel that are currently controlled through the DOGIT. To further minimise ongoing and capital costs for any future refurbishing of the site, the Taskforce recommends the QRU seek ways to minimise ongoing and redevelopment costs, such as demolishing ageing stands on site and containing the main oval to a community and training venue with capacity for small, community matches.

Recommendation 11.7
That the current Ballymore grandstands be demolished and a community facility be constructed that caters to training and local community rugby union matches.
 
G

GingerBreadCrab

Guest
close proximity to the residential neighbourhood

It's as though the suburb of Herston is brand new. Are these the same residents that move in nearby then call the police when they can hear the gym music during the day?

redevelop the site into a National Rugby Training Centre with particular emphasis on Rugby 7s

That's a new one. A heavy emphasis on 7's doesn't do much for the majority of the rugby public - there are already lots of facilities out there that do that. Perhaps that's worded poorly, but surely it will be based on what the Reds need and what their Academy needs?
 

Scoey

Tony Shaw (54)
He's not in the best half dozen in the country. He's not even the best in his position in the country. We don't even know what his best position is.

So he's not on par with Hooper, Pocock or AAA and i don't think this decision relates to that precedent. But yeah he can obviously demand more overseas. Pretty much anyone who plays in Aus can get more in Europe.


I just had to come out of hibernation to point out the irony in these statements.
 
Top