Australian Rugby / RA

[Quick Hands]

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.

Maybe the American billionaire who owns Carnival Cruises would like to buy Australian rugby?

 

[cyclopath]

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.

Yep, that has been my take on it all along. We had the smarts early on in the pro era and stopped adapting when others caught up. And that's not to say we should accept being rubbish, and cannot aspire to be better, but we have mostly been a mid-ranking team at best. And not improved by having deadwood like Kafer drawing a wage for simply "being". The Scotty Cam of rugby pundits!

 

[cyclopath]

Maybe the American billionaire who owns Carnival Cruises would like to buy Australian rugby?

The Coronavirus Wallabies - Not as bad as some think, worse than others believe.........

 

[RugbyReg]

Only, that's ONLY, if the international partners are able to accept the necessities is Aus. If so then welcome. But only then.

I'm not thinking this model for 2020. I'm thinking something more permanent in 2021 and beyond.

 

[Jimmy_Crouch]

Yep, that has been my take on it all along. We had the smarts early on in the pro era and stopped adapting when others caught up. And that's not to say we should accept being rubbish, and cannot aspire to be better, but we have mostly been a mid-ranking team at best. And not improved by having deadwood like Kafer drawing a wage for simply "being". The Scotty Cam of rugby pundits!

Women's 7s also.

 

[TSR]

The gist of his comment is fair enough. We DO need to address the systemic issues in the game.

My issue is that, personally I felt Castle was at least prepared to make an attempt at that. One of those issues was the fact rugby was only on Fox and the game has suffered badly through lack of exposure.

Whatever truth there is in Kafer’s message is lost on most because he is very much conflicted and the hatchet job going on from Fox is as unhelpful as it is crude.

 

[Quick Hands]

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.

Sadly it already is an irrelevancy. Unfortunately it's far from harmless as it has diverted resources and funding which could have been better used in other models.

 

[Quick Hands]

The gist of his comment is fair enough. We DO need to address the systemic issues in the game.

My issue is that, personally I felt Castle was at least prepared to make an attempt at that. One of those issues was the fact rugby was only on Fox and the game has suffered badly through lack of exposure.

Whatever truth there is in Kafer’s message is lost on most because he is very much conflicted and the hatchet job going on from Fox is as unhelpful as it is crude.

It's not Fox's fault that no FTA network wanted to televise rugby. Even Wallaby tests are just marketable from an FTA perspective. It's on channel 10 because 9 and 7 believe that NRL and AFL will rate better, it's a commercial decision The ARU tried for years to get Super Rugby on FTA, but couldn't give it away.

Do you honestly think that signing with Optus (which was never even a finalised deal by the way) will be any different? Super Rugby isn't on FTA because the networks believe (with some justification) that nobody will watch it.

As for the NRC, the whole thing was funded by Fox and would not have even existed without that funding, so I'm a little confused about the Fox hate coming from some quarters. Usually from people who are NRC advocates.

Fox aren't perfect, but the idea that any other broadcaster would be some sort of benevolent grandfather for rugby is delusional thinking. (I'm not saying that you believe this by the way )

Back to you opening sentence, yes we definitely need to address systemic issues in the game and it's my strong belief that neither Super Rugby or the NRC form any art of a successful future for rugby in Australia.

 

[Froggy]

QH what you say is generally absolutely correct, the FTA channels are not interested in Super rugby or the NRC, and I don't have a problem with Fox being the broadcaster.
However, I also see it as perfectly reasonable for RA to seek some sort of competitive tender for the broadcast rights, as would any other business selling a product of this nature. I also think it is extremely unethical of News Ltd (owner of Fox) to then go about a massive slander campaign aimed at bringing down the CEO because she had the gall to seek competition in the marketplace. That's how a market based economy works, something usually championed by the Murdoch empire.

 

[wamberal]

Some of this Trump-esque 'make rugby great again' includes a fair bit of delusion as to what rugby in Australia ever was.

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.

Absolutely right on the money. Those of us who have been around for longer than the last twenty years understand the full historical background.


I have said this a number of times: To achieve anything, the first step is to set the right (achievable) objectives. The second step is to understand your own strengths and weaknesses, and those of your competitors. Then ensure that you have the right resources. Finally, plan your campaign and execute it intelligently, which will mean making modifications to both strategy and tactics as the opposing forces change their attack and defense.


But above all, set the right objectives. At the risk of the usual round of castigation from the usual subjects, that does mean understanding what and where our strengths are as a code in Australia, and using those strengths as a continuing source of sustenance. We are not and never will be a genuinely national professional code, capable of comparison with the NRL and AFL.

 

[Derpus]

But above all, set the right objectives. At the risk of the usual round of castigation from the usual subjects, that does mean understanding what and where our strengths are as a code in Australia, and using those strengths as a continuing source of sustenance. We are not and never will be a genuinely national professional code, capable of comparison with the NRL and AFL.

I dunno, the game was growing well in Perth and we never really looked at any other potential areas of growth, if we are being honest. We threw the kitchen sink at Melbourne instead - despite the existing evidence from the NRL that it would only ever net meager gains even with a high degree of success (and we saw how that went).

I think it's possible to have a relatively national professional competition. Not soon, not in this economic climate and not under this management. But it's possible.

 

[wamberal]

I dunno, the game was growing well in Perth and we never really looked at any other potential areas of growth, if we are being honest. We threw the kitchen sink at Melbourne instead - despite the existing evidence from the NRL that it would only ever net meager gains even with a high degree of success (and we saw how that went).

I think it's possible to have a relatively national professional competition. Not soon, not in this economic climate and not under this management. But it's possible.

One point that I might make about Melbourne, is that it actually has a long history of pretty significant depth in our game, before WW2 Victoria actually beat NSW! Plus of course the time zone is very friendly for our major domestic market. Ewen McKenzie was a product of Scotch College.



WA won the bid because they appeared to have very significant domestic support. That evaporated, along with that horribly tainted Firepower money.


Twiggy's money is very attractive of course, but it appeared too late to save the Force from the chop.


It was the devil or the deep blue sea.



The NRL appears to be pretty happy with the Storm's successes over the years and local support seems to have risen. On the other hand, they have turned their back on Perth repeatedly. Again, the time difference is pretty significant as a factor.

 

[Ignoto]

Fox aren't perfect, but the idea that any other broadcaster would be some sort of benevolent grandfather for rugby is delusional thinking. (I'm not saying that you believe this by the way )

QH, you make some good points. But quite frankly, any good will that Fox built with Rugby Union in Australia has been lost in the last couple of months in my eyes. Certain editors, writers and commentators have done nothing but devalue our game even further and keep kicking the game whilst it's down.

I do think you're looking back at the last 20 odd years of Foxsports with some pretty rose coloured glasses. If you were to pull up a random game from 1996, 2006 and 2020. Could you tell me any differences (outside of the pixels) that the FoxSports team has done for showcasing our game? Fox have not been innovative whatsoever in this time and rely on the same formula; A pre-game of the teams asking the same questions, the same commentators during the game, a post game run down of what happened asking the same questions. During the week, we got served up a pretty woeful 60 minute 'Rugby Show' that was canned a couple of years ago.

They did it for 20 years and they'll want to do it for the next 20 years and in my eyes, they do the bare minimum.

 

[The Honey Badger]

It's not Fox's fault that no FTA network wanted to televise rugby. Even Wallaby tests are just marketable from an FTA perspective. It's on channel 10 because 9 and 7 believe that NRL and AFL will rate better, it's a commercial decision The ARU tried for years to get Super Rugby on FTA, but couldn't give it away.

Do you honestly think that signing with Optus (which was never even a finalised deal by the way) will be any different? Super Rugby isn't on FTA because the networks believe (with some justification) that nobody will watch it.

It is a Vicious Cycle of Doom. There is no FTA (never has been) for Super Rugby therefore No promotion of the game to the masses therefore NO INTEREST, No VALUE.

Same could have been said about televising Women's sports. The reason it was never done was it was thought no one would watch it. It gets some FTA and promotion and it starts to rate.


The advent of Super Rugby came after the advent of Pay TV. It was never part of the anti siphoning legislation to stop Pay TV operators taking content off FTA. This allowed Fox the have all the rights and lock the product behind a paywall.

I dont know about your claim that ARU shopped Super Rugby for a FTA partner. I think Fox had all the rights to live games and there were only replay options left for FTA. (Seem to remember Gordon Brays cornflake rugby on a Sunday morning). The games that would rate would be the home games and local derbies. The same ones that are high value to Fox and motivate us to subscribe to Pay TV.

I dont think you can say there is no interest in these games for FTA. We know they can rate, Tahs did sell out ANZ Stadium not too many years ago.

Rugby need a committed FTA partner for our Provincial and National game to get the masses interest and those casual viewers. It will help grow the game and that will benefit the Pay TV partner as well.

I think what has really pissed of Fox, is not so much the competitive tender aspect (they say its been done before) but the fact that RU structured with a FTA component which would have cherry picked the best games onto FTA.

Pity Fox didnt get their act together when they had an interest in channel 10 and cross promote.

Good riddance to them.

 

[Quick Hands]

QH, you make some good points. But quite frankly, any good will that Fox built with Rugby Union in Australia has been lost in the last couple of months in my eyes. Certain editors, writers and commentators have done nothing but devalue our game even further and keep kicking the game whilst it's down.

I do think you're looking back at the last 20 odd years of Foxsports with some pretty rose coloured glasses. If you were to pull up a random game from 1996, 2006 and 2020. Could you tell me any differences (outside of the pixels) that the FoxSports team has done for showcasing our game? Fox have not been innovative whatsoever in this time and rely on the same formula; A pre-game of the teams asking the same questions, the same commentators during the game, a post game run down of what happened asking the same questions. During the week, we got served up a pretty woeful 60 minute 'Rugby Show' that was canned a couple of years ago.

They did it for 20 years and they'll want to do it for the next 20 years and in my eyes, they do the bare minimum.

From where I've sat, my perception is that the Fox commentators have largely operated as an ARU/RA cheer squad and have papered over the obvious shortcomings in the administration ad nauseum. The Rugby Show was an even more sychophantic hour of low quality TV.

I watch a fair bit of league, union and Aussie Rules on TV in the winter and you could make many of the same comments re the formulaic presentation in any of those. I must admit that I haven't watched a game of Super Rugby for two and bit years - nothing to do with the coverage, it's just that the quality of the product is abysmal.

Castle is a pretty ordinary administrator is the kindest thing I can say about her and no, there's nothing wrong with RA taking its TV rights to the market. But, all sports have taken and/or are about to take a haircut regarding broadcast deals (before coronavirus arrived), and so I don't think that rugby was in the strongest position to reject the status quo for something in the never never. It's not as if Optus is a world leader in sports coverage.

Fox outlets are laying in, but discerning people can see through that just as discerning people can see how Fairfax/9 are laying into Todd Greenberg because they want to renegotiate the TV rights for a lower amount. That's a lower amount moving forward, not just for 2020. League being asked to accept a lower amount doesn't sound too encouraging for those wanting and increased amount for rugby.

I really don't care who gets the super rugby or NRC rights as I have no intention of watching either. Tests will be on FTA, what I most annoyed about is that the Sydney RU made a grave tactical error in allowing their games to be lumped in with the whole of rugby meaning that the SS match of the round on a Saturday could go.

 

[Braveheart81]

Sydney RU made a grave tactical error in allowing their games to be lumped in with the whole of rugby meaning that the SS match of the round on a Saturday could go.

They probably didn't have a lot of options given they have been unable to fund the broadcast for the last few years and required RA to pay the agreed fee.

 

[Quick Hands]

I dont know about your claim that ARU shopped Super Rugby for a FTA partner. I think Fox had all the rights to live games and there were only replay options left for FTA. (Seem to remember Gordon Brays cornflake rugby on a Sunday morning). The games that would rate would be the home games and local derbies. The same ones that are high value to Fox and motivate us to subscribe to Pay TV.

I never make a claim that I can't substantiate. There's always been an FTA partner, they've just declined to show super rugby:
2015 deal for 2016-2020

Network Ten will remain the Australian free-to-air broadcaster, finalising a deal with FOX SPORTS to simulcast all Qantas Wallabies domestic Tests, the Bledisloe Cup, and all matches played by the Qantas Wallabies in The Rugby Championship.

For the first time in the history of the competition, Network Ten will show a full replay of the Australian Super Rugby match of the round each Sunday morning with a start time between 8am and 11am and a one-hour Super Rugby highlights show each Monday night. Network Ten will also broadcast full replays of all Asteron Life Super Rugby finals matches featuring an Australian team.
https://www.rugby.com.au/news/2016/...s-new-media-rights-arrangements-for-2016-2020
2010 deal for 2011-2015
The agreement which covers, the five-year period from 2011-2015 represents a 35 per cent increase on the current five year agreement, with the Australian Rugby Union getting a 30 per cent increase in its share.
South Africa, New Zealand, Australia Rugby (SANZAR) reached agreement with pay television operators Fox Sports (Australia), Supersport (South Africa) and Sky Sports (New Zealand).
The Nine Network has been confirmed as the new free-to-air rights holder in Australia and will simulcast the Wallabies' June Test and Tri-Nations matches in addition to broadcasting a weekly one-hour highlights program of Super Rugby.

 

[Ignoto]

From where I've sat, my perception is that the Fox commentators have largely operated as an ARU/RA cheer squad and have papered over the obvious shortcomings in the administration ad nauseum. The Rugby Show was an even more sychophantic hour of low quality TV.

I disagree. The FoxSports commentators know who their daddy is and act as another mouth piece. Have a look at how much Kafer has been in the news. He's the same idiot who was brought by RA in to assist with developing the coaching ranks, did SFA and is now moaning about the state of affairs.

I watch a fair bit of league, union and Aussie Rules on TV in the winter and you could make many of the same comments re the formulaic presentation in any of those. I must admit that I haven't watched a game of Super Rugby for two and bit years - nothing to do with the coverage, it's just that the quality of the product is abysmal.

That sounds about right. So why are we rewarding them with keeping the status quo?

so I don't think that rugby was in the strongest position to reject the status quo for something in the never never. It's not as if Optus is a world leader in sports coverage.

I disagree again. How can we expect to grow the game if we constantly do the same thing? The change in broadcasting rights gave/gives Australian Rugby the opportunity to try something new to get more Rugby in our time zone for people towatch.

I really don't care who gets the super rugby or NRC rights as I have no intention of watching either. Tests will be on FTA, what I most annoyed about is that the Sydney RU made a grave tactical error in allowing their games to be lumped in with the whole of rugby meaning that the SS match of the round on a Saturday could go.

Or you know, rugby could grow to be something more and allow for a truly national club competition to be put in place.

 

[Braveheart81]

I dont think you can say there is no interest in these games for FTA. We know they can rate, Tahs did sell out ANZ Stadium not too many years ago.

They don't rate though. Taking a Super Rugby grand final (that didn't go close to selling out - I believe the crowd was about 62k) isn't really a good example.

The average Super Rugby game is an order of magnitude less popular than the lowest rating Wallabies test (Australia vs Argentina) which already doesn't have sufficient numbers to make it viable on a FTA channel in prime time.

 

[The Honey Badger]

They don't rate though. Taking a Super Rugby grand final (that didn't go close to selling out - I believe the crowd was about 62k) isn't really a good example.

The average Super Rugby game is an order of magnitude less popular than the lowest rating Wallabies test (Australia vs Argentina) which already doesn't have sufficient numbers to make it viable on a FTA channel in prime time.

The point I was trying to make is that Super Rugby has NEVER been LIVE on PRIME TIME FTA.

Had we had a committed FTA partner promoting and showing a Match of the round LIVE from the beginning maybe Rugby would be a popular sport and still rate.

We will never know, because it didn't happen.

But IMO, locking the game behind a paywall was a massive handbrake and then add in foreign teams in unsavory time zones then the appeal was always going to wane.

I agree that Raelene Castle was at best an odd choice for CEO, clearly the appointment was about trying to break the Old Boys club from GPS schools running the show. That much I get. I think she has handled some things badly and struggled at times to grasp all the complexities of the sport. But I will pay her credit for trying to get some Super Rugby onto FTA and get some more eyes watching the game. And I liked the whole of sport pitch and at least starting to make noises about a National club competition. I hope she stays long enough to see this through, as this is a change in the right direction.