Australian Rugby / RA

[half]

Super Rugby travel has always been a tournament cost funded by SANZAAR, not a cost on individual teams.
I would assume that is still the case under the new SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) (Super Rugby Pacific) design.

They still have home match day costs and away costs always have extras not covered.

But my point that they need to hit the ground running is not wrong. They don't wants be say 2 mil further in the red at seasons end

 

[dru]

Rugby Centre Of Excellence one step closer

sport.vic.gov.au

Rebels announce new government package

Rebels announce new government package

www.rugby.com.au

That was all under Labor

Stoff do you know what steps have happened since? That looks awesome but I certainoy didnt know about it.

 

[Members Section]

Agree with everything you say BH, MCG is 100% the best big event stadium in the country all factors considered (by a distance IMO) oval be damned. But there is something that just grates a little about having a World Cup final in a city (and most relevantly for me, a government) that has shown little support for rugby over the years. The government is really doing the heavy lifting there. Why should we reward the Labour mob in power when they don't give a stuff about our sport.

I fully understand there is a rugby community there that cares before certain forum members jump down my throat. And most of my annoyance is because it would be nice to have the final in my backyard. But equally it would be nice to have one of the rugby states acknowledged.

Having said all that, I can't be too what-about-me about it, MCG is just objectively the biggest and most iconic stadium in the country. And as you say as a city do big events better than the other states. Suncorp brings a lot of similar benefits overall but is unfortunately not big enough for the liking of the WR (World Rugby) (World Rugby) bigwigs.

Your kidding me arn't you? they signed the biggest cheque to ra from any state 6 years out from the lions series just to get a test & host 2 bleds in that time. Litterly paid for the Rebels to get through the 1st yr of covid. They cant have done much more.

 

[Sully]

You're a cheery little soul Sully

What is there to be cheerful about. Brumbies haven't won since 2004, that's 20 years, Reds haven't won since 2011, Tahs since 2014. It's a shit show and Brumbies trotting out line like we're the most successful Australian team like it matters doesn't make things better.

 

[Adam84]

But my point that they need to hit the ground running is not wrong. They don't wants be say 2 mil further in the red at seasons end

#HotTip

 

[Adam84]

What is there to be cheerful about. Brumbies haven't won since 2004, that's 20 years, Reds haven't won since 2011, Tahs since 2014. It's a shit show and Brumbies trotting out line like we're the most successful Australian team like it matters doesn't make things better.

Yeah I think people are conflating ‘most successful’ and ‘most competitive‘..

Perhaps we need to define what success in this case is, but I’d argue success is actually winning the competition, been consistently competitive, strong engagement from fans through crowds and ratings, and been financially viable. In which case, none of the Australian teams can claim to be successful and have varying marks against those metrics.

Brumbies carry the tag of been consistently the most competitive, but claiming most successful is a bit of a disingenuous for the current situation.

 

[Slim 293]

What is there to be cheerful about. Brumbies haven't won since 2004, that's 20 years, Reds haven't won since 2011, Tahs since 2014. It's a shit show and Brumbies trotting out line like we're the most successful Australian team like it matters doesn't make things better.

Those 2011 and 2014 wins have an asterisk next to them due to the conference system, remember?

I guess that still makes the Brumbies the only successful Australian team… ever.

Sad.

 

[stillmissit]

Stoff do you know what steps have happened since? That looks awesome but I certainoy didnt know about it.

Has there been any building started yet on the 22 announcement, governments like to make announcements but are not so keen on building them. Also what significance does a 2018 government assistance package mean to the current situation?
Don't think the board gets out of this one easily.

 

[LeCheese]

What is there to be cheerful about. Brumbies haven't won since 2004, that's 20 years, Reds haven't won since 2011, Tahs since 2014. It's a shit show and Brumbies trotting out line like we're the most successful Australian team like it matters doesn't make things better.

Saying the Brumbies are Australia's most successful Super team is like saying John Pearce is the most successful member of Justice Crew

 

[Slim 293]

Saying the Brumbies are Australia's most successful Super team is like saying John Pearce is the most successful member of Justice Crew

But, he clearly is…

 

[stillmissit]

Yeah I think people are conflating ‘most successful’ and ‘most competitive‘..

Perhaps we need to define what success in this case is, but I’d argue success is actually winning the competition, been consistently competitive, strong engagement from fans through crowds and ratings, and been financially viable. In which case, none of the Australian teams can claim to be successful and have varying marks against those metrics.

Brumbies carry the tag of been consistently the most competitive, but claiming most successful is a bit of a disingenuous for the current situation.

Adam, I agree with the words you suggest and I think I take the can for using the 'successful' word.

Turning this situation around is going to take some work and getting a great Wallabies coach who can provide a 'success' rate of 50%+ won't fix the systemic problems at the grassroots, schools, Super Rugby and coaching areas. It is going to take 2-4 years of total focus and a lot of work I am guessing.

 

[LeCheese]

But, he clearly is…

Yeah, but it's exceptionally weak sauce

 

[Slim 293]

Yeah, but it's exceptionally weak sauce

No doubt, but now he’s the ripped song and dance fantasy of young mums (and dads) everywhere…

 

[Slim 293]

Getting back to the MCG...

Thankfully the date of the final sits between AFL and cricket seasons so I'm hoping they're figuring out a way to fill in the space on the field to maximise attendance and bring crowds closer to the action.

100,000+ for a rugby world cup final would be pretty special.

 

[Ignoto]

Perhaps we need to define what success in this case is, but I’d argue success is actually winning the competition, been consistently competitive, strong engagement from fans through crowds and ratings, and been financially viable. In which case, none of the Australian teams can claim to be successful and have varying marks against those metrics.

Outside of the Crusaders and maybe the chiefs, you could say the same thing for most of the Kiwi teams.

Auckland have been so inconsistent over the decade and bugger all people go and watch them, same with the canes and the highlanders are propped up by uni students wanting to party and there being nothing else to do in the middle of winter when you can see Antarctica.

Success by these metrics would mean most super rugby teams fail.

So what does that tell us about the product rather than individual teams?

 

[dru]

Apols in advance possibly for splitting hairs.

I'd measure success in a combination of issues that include:
1. Solid commercials, finance and marketing support - a strong bank balance
2. Strong grass roots
3. Strong pathways with a good expectation of future development in terms of locally bred talent
4. Good results on the field
5. High fan engagement and growing fan number trend.

I'd suggest that there are a few issues here for every Australian franchise, though I've been hopeful with how the Reds have started travelling on some of these. Brumbies meet a few and not others. I'd suggest right now Rebels and Waratahs are the most vexing.

Grand final success is the ultimate expression of being competitive.

 

[stillmissit]

Apols in advance possibly for splitting hairs.

I'd measure success in a combination of issues that include:
1. Solid commercials, finance and marketing support - a strong bank balance
2. Strong grass roots
3. Strong pathways with a good expectation of future development in terms of locally bred talent
4. Good results on the field
5. High fan engagement and growing fan number trend.

I'd suggest that there are a few issues here for every Australian franchise, though I've been hopeful with how the Reds have started travelling on some of these. Brumbies meet a few and not others. I'd suggest right now Rebels and Waratahs are the most vexing.

Grand final success is the ultimate expression of being competitive.

To add to your first point, the Super Rugby clubs need solid corporate support from stable and wealthy Australian Companies. This should be done on an Australian-wide basis and the clubs should pick some extra $$ from local support.

 

[Sword of Justice]

Those 2011 and 2014 wins have an asterisk next to them due to the conference system, remember?

I guess that still makes the Brumbies the only successful Australian team… ever.

Sad.

You are obviously trolling. In 2011 the Reds only dropped one game outside of the Aus conference. Ironically qld played its worst rugby against Aus teams that year.

On the other hand Brumbies were wearing cotton jerseys the last time they won I'm pretty sure.

 

[Dan54]

Outside of the Crusaders and maybe the chiefs, you could say the same thing for most of the Kiwi teams.

Auckland have been so inconsistent over the decade and bugger all people go and watch them, same with the canes and the highlanders are propped up by uni students wanting to party and there being nothing else to do in the middle of winter when you can see Antarctica.

Success by these metrics would mean most super rugby teams fail.

So what does that tell us about the product rather than individual teams?

Yep you can't just use winning comp as only metric, if you followed that there would be very few successful teams in many sports around world, as it tends to go in cycles etc.
I would say @dru has hit proverbial nail etc. There is a bigger measure to being a success/failure than titles won

 

[GeoffL]

Yep you can't just use winning comp as only metric, if you followed that there would be very few successful teams in many sports around world, as it tends to go in cycles etc.
I would say @dru has hit proverbial nail etc. There is a bigger measure to being a success/failure than titles won

you've got me.. what's an example of a "successful" team that hasn't/doesn't win anything?