• 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.

Australian Rugby / RA

formerflanker

Ken Catchpole (46)
Similar types were at the helm during our boom years. The biggest boomer of all, JON was the archetypal banking high flyer.
I wish I could remember where I read this - can't do so and can't find it with a search; JON took over the ARU with a full time staff of only 5 and a their salary was a headache. He personally guaranteed the bank loan that was used to pay staff.
If true, he certainly took one for the team there.
 

Rebels3

Jim Lenehan (48)
News Ltd tried owning a sport once and did billions on it.

Why would anyone want to own RA?

In the space of 15 years they've gone from $31 million in the bank to the verge of being in administration. With, I might add, almost no prospect of turning it around. Certainly no prospect if they keep with the current business model.

No money in the bank

No assets to speak of

No income in the current environment - profit only coming during home world cups, BIL tours and NH series (which are played as a series - might be something in that;))

No prospect of any international rugby this year - even a series against NZ unlikely
You can’t own RA. Best newscorp could do is own an asset something like a league, which is essentially what they tried to do under the guise of Super League back in the 90s with RL. That would no doubt bring about great influence
 

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
You can’t own RA. Best newscorp could do is own an asset something like a league, which is essentially what they tried to do under the guise of Super League back in the 90s with RL. That would no doubt bring about great influence

Surely nobody would buy Super Rugby?

There are cheaper ways of gaining influence than either buying a game or a competition. Note the influence of major sponsors in recent times.
 

Derpus

George Gregan (70)
Surely nobody would buy Super Rugby?

There are cheaper ways of gaining influence than either buying a game or a competition. Note the influence of major sponsors in recent times.
I read what i assume was a marketing piece in the SMH about how there are US investors (bored billionaires?) keen to buy up teams and leagues in Australia. The 'murcans have a pretty spotty record of foreign investment in sport, ruining teams as often as they pull off a Liverpool, but their own sports are better run than any here. Except maybe AFL. Apparently we a looking pretty vulnerable at the moment.
 

formerflanker

Ken Catchpole (46)
A hint of good news:

While the details are being kept a close secret, The Australian understands the sport’s global governing body is preparing to offer RA a low-interest loan to ensure it isn’t declared insolvent.The exact figure has not been decided or even discussed yet, but would likely be millions of dollars after World Rugby generated a massive profit — believed to be in excess of $320m — from last year’s successful World Cup in Japan.
 

kiap

Steve Williams (59)
I think RA will secure some loans/funds going cap-in-hand to WR (World Rugby) and/or government. The lifeliners(s) will get some say in the course of the shipworm-riddled hulk in exchange. RUPA negotiations will drag on in the meantime because both sides know a deal could crystallise an untenable position.

If that pans out, they still need to overhaul their model of doing business, lest pro rugby finally sinks the organisation proper.
 

RugbyReg

Rocky Elsom (76)
Staff member
This post needs more recognition!

Reg, are you sure? I only ask because I had thought the unions would survive as RA drowned. The unions failing is another matter altogether. RA pretty much becomes irrelevant at that point, though we should probably respect the unions with no Super franchise - and not just WA.

I presume that the clubs would mostly stand but how that works is another matter.

This is a VERY scary prediction.

That's how I read, particularly with World Rugby now offering a loan. RA are in a much better position to get funds (even loans) than the Super Rugby teams.

I don't think RA becomes irrelevant. They probably become more relevant and we could end up moving closer to a one management model of rugby in Oz/
 

wamberal

Phil Kearns (64)
That's how I read, particularly with World Rugby now offering a loan. RA are in a much better position to get funds (even loans) than the Super Rugby teams.

I don't think RA becomes irrelevant. They probably become more relevant and we could end up moving closer to a one management model of rugby in Oz/



Which, like every organisational structure, would have its strengths and its weaknesses.
 

Dan54

Tim Horan (67)
And the WR (World Rugby) loan is one of my reasons that I keep saying we in Australia should not look at ideas of saying we just have our own comp, because it suits us, and bugger anyone else,we have an international sport that we have to be part of, if we really want to survive properly.
 

hoggy

Trevor Allan (34)
And the WR (World Rugby) loan is one of my reasons that I keep saying we in Australia should not look at ideas of saying we just have our own comp, because it suits us, and bugger anyone else,we have an international sport that we have to be part of, if we really want to survive properly.

What part of having a domestic sporting competition is saying bugger of to anyone.
 

Derpus

George Gregan (70)
And the WR (World Rugby) loan is one of my reasons that I keep saying we in Australia should not look at ideas of saying we just have our own comp, because it suits us, and bugger anyone else,we have an international sport that we have to be part of, if we really want to survive properly.

Yeah i don't think those calling for a viable domestic competition like Mitre 10 or Curry Cup are saying we tell everyone else to piss off. I think they are just suggesting Super Rugby be done away with given how unsustainable it is.

Internationals would be unaffected (except by our dramatic drop in quality).
 

Dan54

Tim Horan (67)
What part of having a domestic sporting competition is saying bugger of to anyone.
Yeah i don't think those calling for a viable domestic competition like Mitre 10 or Curry Cup are saying we tell everyone else to piss off. I think they are just suggesting Super Rugby be done away with given how unsustainable it is.

Internationals would be unaffected (except by our dramatic drop in quality).

Not suggesting NRC etc be dropped, but still think we need to be on International stage more that just tests if we can.
 

wamberal

Phil Kearns (64)
I am sorry to say this, but the NRC will be a harmless irrelevancy for the forseeable future. I really wish it could be otherwise. Now if we had stuck with the ARC, think how much further down the road to relevancy we might be.
 

Ignoto

John Thornett (49)
I am sorry to say this, but the NRC will be a harmless irrelevancy for the forseeable future.

If anything, the Super Rugby format and internationals will be off the cards for the next year or so and the NRC/Trans Tasman will be the only thing we can play. (That's if both Australia and NZ can obtain the 0/low covid cases).
 

dru

Tim Horan (67)
If World Rugby insist on Fiji, Tonga and Samoa playing in a national comp (perhaps TransTasman) as a result of the loan I wouldn't be upset.

Reg, when do you expect international borders and the 2 week quarantine to be dropped? Let's think this through. I imagine it to be the last restriction to drop and not likely before a vaccine is available and implemented. Internally let's hope that restrictions are eased much earlier than that.

Are we prepared to wait that long before pro-rugby? If not reality bites and we need to look in the first instance to an internal comp.

AND if we are to do that, it would be missing a major opportunity unless we implement something that possibly leads to a domestic comp. And perhaps a comp with others. But to avoid the first is to spite ourselves.
 

Froggy

John Solomon (38)
Correct Cyclo, he had some sort of gig there, it was never explained clearly to me what his role was meant to be, and I failed to see any evidence that he'd done anything at all.

Some of this Trump-esque 'make rugby great again' includes a fair bit of delusion as to what rugby in Australia ever was. People of Kafer's era think of that 1997 to 2001 period, when we held the Bledisloe for five consecutive years, won the WC, tri-nations etc. That period was actually the outlier, we have never, at any other time, had that sort of success. I think the Bledisloe has been contested something like 59 times (I stand corrected on these figures, haven't bothered to check them but they will be pretty close) and we've won something like 14 of them. Throughout the 50's, 60's and 70's I know we didn't win it once!
Yes, the last few years have been disappointing, but for my 65 years we have always played a poor third to NRL and AFL, and around third to fifth in the world has been about our normal standing.

That's not to say all is well and nothing can be improved, but if you base your opinion of Castle on the fact that we're not number one in the world, with packed stadiums every week and broadcasters throwing themselves at our feet begging for rights, you're delusional.
 
Top