Where to for Super Rugby?

[Derpus]

The reality is EPL, UK and French rugby pro comps provide the blueprint for what makes a successful pro competition so if super rugby is to ever work the open borders Philosophy regarding selecting players for national teams from super rugby teams play for regardless which country super rugby team aligned to.

Common sense and Commercial sense dictates this

No, these comps are generally driven by private equity. Generally at a loss. Hell NRL is more sustainable. But if you want a big tome european league to base your comp off you should look to the Bundesliga (Bayern and their ill gotten gains aside).

 

[Derpus]

Gotta come down on the side of more teams. More spaces means in time more players trying to get in tis a way of expanding the player base. As for overseas players yes yes yes as many have mentioned tis the way all major and even minor competitions operate world over, we are living in dark ages scared of our own shadow.

Totally out of left field, and no one has ever done this, but yonks back in league a Balmain player called Denis Tutty took league to court for control of where he played. I think it was in the early 90's a European football player called Bowman beat FIFA on a player controlling where they played. Again I think it was the 90's when Kevin Ryan in league stopped league establishing a draft similar to the AFL. Many legal experts have said if an AFL player took the AFL to court their draft system would be seen to be in breach of the "Trade Practices Act" as was the verdict in the league case that Ryan won in his league case.

So based on all this I do wonder aloud if a player wanted to play in say France for more money but still wanted to play for the Wallabies, are or is RA in breach of the Trade Practices Act in ruling a player out. As being a national representative can and often leads to sponsorship's. As I said totally out of left field.

Bosman not Bowman. Joise. It was a seminal case. It just meant that once a player was off contract they could go wherever they liked regardless of a restraint of trade clause and without a transfer fee. And clearly no. RA can choose whoever they like to play.

Restraint of trade is an issue because we dont want, generally, skilled professionals becoming homless because their former employees are worried about competition.

You cant force someone to employ you because if they dont its a restraint of trade? Thats would be silly.

 

[Quick Hands]

It seems increasingly likely that the level below the Wallabies will be semi-professional. That being the case then both Super Rugby and TT are off the table as it simply isn't viable to be flying semi-pro teams to and from NZ on a week to week basis with all the expense that involves. In this scenario a domestic league is the only thing which works.

But bigger problems loom for the game, which does not yet have a competition structure for Super Rugby - or whatever takes its place - next year. Without that model, RA cannot sign a broadcast deal, which means it is impossible to make projections about player contracts and Super Rugby funding arrangements for 2021.
Whatever happens, the tight balance sheet of current broadcaster Foxtel means it is highly unlikely the code will be able to maintain its current player contracting and funding levels.

That could leave Johnson, Clarke and the RA board with a stark choice: ask all players to take a cut on the value on their contracts in 2021 or ring-fence a group of 25 to 30 Wallabies and a second group of elite juniors, pay them full freight and allow market forces to dictate what happens to Australia's middle tier.
https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-...super-rugby-opening-week-20200626-p556ki.html

 

[Slim 293]

It seems increasingly likely that the level below the Wallabies will be semi-professional.

I don't think it's increasingly likely, just the worst case scenario.........

 

[Quick Hands]

I don't think it's increasingly likely, just the worst case scenario...

So what's the scenario which enables RA to fund 3, 4 or 5 fully professional rugby teams plus the Wallabies?

Broadcast money significantly reduced, sponsorships likely to follow (Qantas have already reduced annual $ from $5m to $3m) and the governing body relying on advances and loans from WR (World Rugby) to survive.

 

[Slim 293]

So what's the scenario which enables RA to fund 3, 4 or 5 fully professional rugby teams plus the Wallabies?

Broadcast money significantly reduced, sponsorships likely to follow (Qantas have already reduced annual $ from $5m to $3m) and the governing body relying on advances and loans from WR (World Rugby) to survive.

I guess we'll find out when a competition format is agreed to and a broadcast deal worked out based on that.........

 

[Quick Hands]

I guess we'll find out when a competition format is agreed to and a broadcast deal worked out based on that...

So you have no idea how your favoured option would/could work? You should run RA

 

[pnut]

Well balanced as always QH. If someone doesn’t agree turning the game back 30 years to the amateur era is the answer. There just fools??
People are entitled to their opinions.
Plus if RA don’t follow your suggestions then you will have enough to bitch about for another couple of thousand posts.

 

[Slim 293]

So you have no idea how your favoured option would/could work? You should run RA

That doesn't make a lick of sense.........

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

What's the total cost of running a Super Rugby franchise in Straya? I know the salary cap is $5.5Mn but with support staff & back office it's gotta be way more than that, say $7.5Mn as a ballpark average?

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

What's the total cost of running a Super Rugby franchise in Straya? I know the salary cap is $5.5Mn but with support staff & back office it's gotta be way more than that, say $7.5Mn as a ballpark average?

More from what I've seen in regards to annual reports.

 

[Quick Hands]

Well balanced as always QH. If someone doesn’t agree turning the game back 30 years to the amateur era is the answer. There just fools??
People are entitled to their opinions.
Plus if RA don’t follow your suggestions then you will have enough to bitch about for another couple of thousand posts.

Except that I haven't said this at all, or even used the word fool?

Yes, everyone is entitled to their opinion and I have never said otherwise. It's you who seem very threatened by views which don't accord with your own. You seem to be getting quite hysterical.

And I've never said we should return to the amateur era either. I'm not sure whether or not you actually read articles on this site, but it was RugbyReg who wrote a considered article expressing the view that we will end up with Wallabies and club rugby.

What RA do moving forward will be judged on results, if what they do works it deserves praise, if what they do fails they deserve criticism.

 

[Quick Hands]

What's the total cost of running a Super Rugby franchise in Straya? I know the salary cap is $5.5Mn but with support staff & back office it's gotta be way more than that, say $7.5Mn as a ballpark average?

I think that's about right.

 

[KOB1987]

I don't think it's increasingly likely, just the worst case scenario...

I don’t think it is actually. I think the absolute worst case scenario is that we have 2 pro teams in a provincial comp. A more likely worst case scenario is that we have 3.

 

[hoggy]

I don’t think it is actually. I think the absolute worst case scenario is that we have 2 pro teams in a provincial comp. A more likely worst case scenario is that we have 3.

The thing is we're only a step or two away from that worst case scenario, especially as they have already stated they are going to ring fence the Wallabies, you end up going down to 2 at most 3 professional teams. With the top 20/25 players getting Wallaby top ups, 3 teams would suit a NZ TT model nicely (essentially nothing changes for the Kiwis).

Its probably the only realistic option facing the RA whose adherence to a top down model pretty much guarantees there compliance.

It must be ironic to all those club based advocates constantly accused of trying to turn the clock back 30 years.

 

[KOB1987]

Unless we go down the private equity road, which is obviously something McLennan is investigating. I would buy into the Tahs if the opportunity presented itself, I’m sure many others would too.

Let’s say we did go to 2 pro franchises. Club rugby would become semi-pro and the third tier would effectively become rep footy. You’d have 2 pathways into the pro tier, the development pathway through the U20s, and the club-rep pathway for the late bloomers, imports, etc. It wouldn’t be disastrous, the tribalism would exist at club level and someone would pick up the rights to stream or broadcast the top comps, at least a few games a week anyway. It’s a rebuild.

 

[hoggy]

Sort of contradicting myself, but just looking at some Kiwi press re; Super Aotearoa, its ticking a lot of boxes with fans, crowds and viewing numbers (and shit the rugby's bloody good) and with a 5 team comp, it does allow for regular bye's alleviating some of the burnout/injury concerns held by the Kiwis.

But i'm just wondering whether they are more inclined now to push for closed domestic (super comps) with possible cross/over championships.

If that happens, just not sure where that leaves a third tier over here or what options we would have, you can't have just 2 pro teams with a local Super comp and with a possible 5 teams, its hard to have any pro-level below that.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Sort of contradicting myself, but just looking at some Kiwi press re; Super Aotearoa, its ticking a lot of boxes with fans, crowds and viewing numbers (and shit the rugby's bloody good) and with a 5 team comp, it does allow for regular bye's alleviating some of the burnout/injury concerns held by the Kiwis.

But i'm just wondering whether they are more inclined now to push for closed domestic (super comps) with possible cross/over championships.

If that happens, just not sure where that leaves a third tier over here or what options we would have, you can't have just 2 pro teams with a local Super comp and with a possible 5 teams, its hard to have any pro-level below that.

We could do a 5 even a 6 team competition easily enough. It would just require a restructure of the professional game beyond that of the HP units. We'd have to see the admin of the game move more to a single entity model with the 'league' running day to days and not the individual Unions to remove duplication and expenses. Players could still sign with the teams but would be contracted directly contracted to the league and could be distributed among the teams. Similar to MLR. If done right we could manage a drop in revenue but maintain our current player spend across 5 teams. The 6th would be the Drua.

From there. We could look at some kind of crossover with the Kiwis.

 

[hoggy]

We could do a 5 even a 6 team competition easily enough. It would just require a restructure of the professional game beyond that of the HP units. We'd have to see the admin of the game move more to a single entity model with the 'league' running day to days and not the individual Unions to remove duplication and expenses. Players could still sign with the teams but would be contracted directly contracted to the league and could be distributed among the teams. Similar to MLR. If done right we could manage a drop in revenue but maintain our current player spend across 5 teams. The 6th would be the Drua.

From there. We could look at some kind of crossover with the Kiwis.

That would be my preference as well, we run our domestic competition along the same time frame as the Kiwi's and look at some form of crossover (champ league style).

The advantage of this would at last be some sort of independence, we can finally structure the comp along lines that would work in Australia, if we go with 5 teams against the Kiwis in a TT comp, reality is we will simply not be competitive, which is highlighted when playing week on week, yet a champion league will allow us to mask that by a certain amount.

It also gives us a winner every year, will encourage PE, also can be structured along cost lines that we can afford, and maybe allow expansion that can benefit growth ie; a 2nd NSW team. it ticks a lot of boxes.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

Sort of contradicting myself, but just looking at some Kiwi press re; Super Aotearoa, its ticking a lot of boxes with fans, crowds and viewing numbers (and shit the rugby's bloody good) and with a 5 team comp, it does allow for regular bye's alleviating some of the burnout/injury concerns held by the Kiwis.

But i'm just wondering whether they are more inclined now to push for closed domestic (super comps) with possible cross/over championships.

If that happens, just not sure where that leaves a third tier over here or what options we would have, you can't have just 2 pro teams with a local Super comp and with a possible 5 teams, its hard to have any pro-level below that.

Absolutely SRA is ticking a lot of boxes but it's almost literally the only game in town right now (other than basketball which is running with a two games a night, five nights a week at one venue format & netball who are also running a single venue with only a small number of fans catered for) what with the Warriors in Australia (& barely troubling the scoreboard let alone the leader board) & the Phoenix about to be.

Longer-term I still think NZR's preference is for a trans-Tasman comp, with parallel dmestic comps & a Champions League to follow very much the Plan B.