Westie
Sydney Middleton (9)
That's heresy in nswru.
Exit from Super Rugby?
- Thread starter kiap
- Start date
- Status
That's heresy in nswru.
Dan54
Tim Horan (67)
Ok, fair enough Omar, I just thought without Super rugby,the rep teams would just go back under control of their Rugby Unions, without the need of a seperate organisation to run them, but when you think about it (without the benefit of a beer with mates) they would still stay the same I suppose. I just struggle to see how they will get the interest in a 5 team comp, but anyway if they do good on them!!
Omar Comin'
Chilla Wilson (44)
Well they're not really rep teams anymore. They're basically professional clubs or franchises that happen to be owned and run by state unions.
And yeah no way would a 5 team comp work. You'd need at least 6 and ideally 8 or 10. Would be difficult to do but perhaps not impossible with just under 2 years to do it. Though the ARU would need a backer or 3 and private consortiums willing to put their own money into starting new teams. I wonder if Channel 10 or 7 would be willing to put serious money on the table if they had significant input into exactly how the competition would be structured and scheduled.
But the point is the ARU need some sort of back up plan in order to push our interests a hell of a lot harder within SANZAR. That RUPA report says we're on the verge of accepting a super rugby structure that would decrease our revenue and increase costs. Not to mention it would have exactly zero chance of growing the game in Australia. For another 5 years.
Blue
Andrew Slack (58)
OK for those who were chasing Easter bunnies, here is quick summary of this thread:
1. Fuck those Saffers, we don't need them and they are so shit that we don't want to play them. Nobody gets up at 3am to watch the Lions kick the ball around. Let's not talk about the challenge of playing against a different game plan. We'll create our own reality. People want to see tries else it's boring. Look at the Tahs playing hot potato. Now that's rugby!
2. The Australian conference is SO good at the moment that it is PROOF that we can got it on our own.
3. Fuck the Kiwis. They must just shut up and follow our lead. After all, it's their fault that we negotiated such a shit deal.
4. Fuck the Saffers. They prop up the comp with at least two poor teams every year. We're gonna have our own ten teams and there won't be any bad teams in there. No sirree. We can start a Western Sydney team tomorrow and it will compete with the top teams. We have depth. Just look at the Force. It only took 6 years and a couple of Kiwi and Saffa imports. A jiffy really.
5. Let's have a Honkers team. Have you seen how full the stadium is when they play sevens? What, they are all tourists? Nah man they are locals dressed up as Kiwis, Saffas, Portuguese and Kenyayns. Love a good game of rugby, those Chinese. They have a perfect physique for it and soccer is dying in China as is basketball.
5. Let's have a team in Singapore. They play rugby on a cricket ground but the view is brilliant and they are getting sick of shopping so having a team of has been journeymen Saffas, Kiwis and Englishman wearing a jersey featuring their Lion will just go off. Imagine the queues for tickets when the Western Sydney Rams are in town or there is even a whiff of the Adelaide Swamprats are on their way. The food courts will run empty.
6. Let's have a Japanese team. They want in. Eddie Jones says so and everything Eddie Jones says is true. What? Who is this team? The teams are owned by corporations who will struggle to agree a contract structure that fits in with a schedule for the Tokyo Ramen Guzzlers against the Gold Coast Hangovers? This is too much detail. Don't cloud this issue with logic. I'm With Eddie. He said so.
7. Fuck the Saffers. They want a sixth team. So we want one too. Depth? Who needs it.
8. Fuck the Saffers. They fudge the numbers, take all the money, and make it expensive for everyone else to travel there.
9. Whatever anyone tells you, there will be enough money in a TV deal that involves only Kiwi and Aus teams. You want proof? That's too much detail. It sounds great so don't get so fucking nitpicky with all this detail.
10. Fuck the Saffers. They want quotas. We don't know what it is or whether it will even happen but its enough reason to get rid of them.
Sometimes a bad marriage just has to find a way of sticking together for the sake of the kids and because the alternatives simply don't look all that much better. Say good morning nicely, don't argue in front of the kids and family, establish some protocols and try to be functional, or at least appear be.
1. Fuck those Saffers, we don't need them and they are so shit that we don't want to play them. Nobody gets up at 3am to watch the Lions kick the ball around. Let's not talk about the challenge of playing against a different game plan. We'll create our own reality. People want to see tries else it's boring. Look at the Tahs playing hot potato. Now that's rugby!
2. The Australian conference is SO good at the moment that it is PROOF that we can got it on our own.
3. Fuck the Kiwis. They must just shut up and follow our lead. After all, it's their fault that we negotiated such a shit deal.
4. Fuck the Saffers. They prop up the comp with at least two poor teams every year. We're gonna have our own ten teams and there won't be any bad teams in there. No sirree. We can start a Western Sydney team tomorrow and it will compete with the top teams. We have depth. Just look at the Force. It only took 6 years and a couple of Kiwi and Saffa imports. A jiffy really.
5. Let's have a Honkers team. Have you seen how full the stadium is when they play sevens? What, they are all tourists? Nah man they are locals dressed up as Kiwis, Saffas, Portuguese and Kenyayns. Love a good game of rugby, those Chinese. They have a perfect physique for it and soccer is dying in China as is basketball.
5. Let's have a team in Singapore. They play rugby on a cricket ground but the view is brilliant and they are getting sick of shopping so having a team of has been journeymen Saffas, Kiwis and Englishman wearing a jersey featuring their Lion will just go off. Imagine the queues for tickets when the Western Sydney Rams are in town or there is even a whiff of the Adelaide Swamprats are on their way. The food courts will run empty.
6. Let's have a Japanese team. They want in. Eddie Jones says so and everything Eddie Jones says is true. What? Who is this team? The teams are owned by corporations who will struggle to agree a contract structure that fits in with a schedule for the Tokyo Ramen Guzzlers against the Gold Coast Hangovers? This is too much detail. Don't cloud this issue with logic. I'm With Eddie. He said so.
7. Fuck the Saffers. They want a sixth team. So we want one too. Depth? Who needs it.
8. Fuck the Saffers. They fudge the numbers, take all the money, and make it expensive for everyone else to travel there.
9. Whatever anyone tells you, there will be enough money in a TV deal that involves only Kiwi and Aus teams. You want proof? That's too much detail. It sounds great so don't get so fucking nitpicky with all this detail.
10. Fuck the Saffers. They want quotas. We don't know what it is or whether it will even happen but its enough reason to get rid of them.
Sometimes a bad marriage just has to find a way of sticking together for the sake of the kids and because the alternatives simply don't look all that much better. Say good morning nicely, don't argue in front of the kids and family, establish some protocols and try to be functional, or at least appear be.
rugbysmartarse
Alan Cameron (40)
it wouldn't kill you to do the dishes once in a while either
en_force_er
Geoff Shaw (53)
Blue
Andrew Slack (58)
Unless I keep getting told that it's wrong and even then I keep trying.
Not enough soap used / too little soap used. Not properly dried. Did you use fresh water to rinse these? Why did you leave it so long? These things don't belong in the drying rack! Dry them and put them where they belong!
No not there!!! The cups don't fucking go here and turn them over you idiot! The plates go there. Why are the pots at the top and the pans at the bottom?
Stop mixing spoons and knives in the drawer and there is a place for teaspoons!!! Is this the new home of our casserole dish? How am I going to find the mixing blades next time you moan that you haven't had a carrot cake in weeks?And I don't even want sexual favors.
God you are so useless I don't know why I put up with this!
It's because you love me darling. We saw the world together and made beautiful babies. I'll try harder next time. You know I will.
Omar Comin'
Chilla Wilson (44)
Blue, impressive straw man rant there! Every single point is a misrepresentation or in some cases a complete fabrication of the views of myself and others that have a different opinion to you.
The only point I'll respond to of yours is point 9.
The evidence that an Australia/NZ competition would leave Australian rugby better off financially is the fact that's what the ARU want, it's what the Australian super rugby team CEO's want and it's what RUPA want. To the point where people in the latter two groups are suggesting we would be better going off on our own than accepting the proposed super 17/18 expansion plan. It's also quite a logical conclusion to make because what broadcasters pay for is content that rates...and a Trans Tasman competition would have a lot more of the content that rates in Australia (and Australian broadcasters spend a lot more money than South African broadcasters do).
People are ignoring the fact that Australian rugby is in a financial mess and in almost every metric of fan support and popularity it is slipping in Australia in comparison to competing sports. Yet people want us to sign up for more of the same!! We don't need a divorce. We just need separate houses for most of the year and an open relationship.
The only point I'll respond to of yours is point 9.
The evidence that an Australia/NZ competition would leave Australian rugby better off financially is the fact that's what the ARU want, it's what the Australian super rugby team CEO's want and it's what RUPA want. To the point where people in the latter two groups are suggesting we would be better going off on our own than accepting the proposed super 17/18 expansion plan. It's also quite a logical conclusion to make because what broadcasters pay for is content that rates...and a Trans Tasman competition would have a lot more of the content that rates in Australia (and Australian broadcasters spend a lot more money than South African broadcasters do).
People are ignoring the fact that Australian rugby is in a financial mess and in almost every metric of fan support and popularity it is slipping in Australia in comparison to competing sports. Yet people want us to sign up for more of the same!! We don't need a divorce. We just need separate houses for most of the year and an open relationship.
Blue
Andrew Slack (58)
Uhm. Relax. It's meant as a joke with the odd poke.
What do you base that on? Have they all actually come out and said we want to end Super Rugby? We don't want part of it. Has RUPA said its members are tired of playing Saffa teams and want out?
And I would be very careful to base decision making solely on what the CEO's want. Input by all means.
How can you say that more of the same (Trans Tasman content that is) will carry more value? Based on what? TV ratings already struggle. Now you put up more of the same product? That is just speculation.
Again so you want to take a part of the existing product and multiply it. How can you just assume that the TV audience want that?
I don't think anyone on this boards is ignorant to the above fact. I get you're new here but I assure you the bulk of people here get it. Even though some of us appear to be, we'll, a bit barmy.
I tell you what this is. Pulver is simply calling a bluff. He is doing EXACTLY what SARU always does before negotiations: threaten to walk and talk up some arbitrary other comp they'll walk to. I would be absolutely AMAZED if super rugby does not continue with all three parties.[/quote]
brokendown
Vay Wilson (31)
Omar Comin'
Chilla Wilson (44)
Bill Pulver in his Q&A at the Roar said their preferred option was a trans tasman conference linked with Asia that would not play South African teams until playoffs. NZ and SA were both against it.
The article at the start of this thread, and others have referred to the Australian Super Rugby team CEO's views.
And a couple of articles from Roy Masters among others have information from RUPA funded research that suggests the proposed expansion model will make Australian rugby broke very soon. Greg Harris from RUPA has been pushing hard for a closed Trans Tasman conference.
1/3rd of the current competition is played in the middle of the night in Australia. No one watches those games. Even when the Australian teams are playing they get 20k viewers max. There are 10 teams in Australia and NZ and they play 20 games between them when no one watches. If all those matches (and more) were played at decent times there would be more people watching. Obviously you can't prove anything until it happens, but the success of the other codes in Australia suggests that fans will watch if matches between familiar teams are on at a decent time every week.
The South African teams have very little awareness among casual fans. Even big rugby fans in Australia will struggle to name 5 players in every South African team. It's because they are invisible for most of the season.
Because it works for every major sporting league in Australia and the rest of the world.
It's not Pulver calling a bluff. Pulver is on side with SANZAR and ready to sign a deal. He recently said that not every decision the ARU makes is in the interests of Australian rugby. What is happening is that other stakeholders in Australian rugby - especially RUPA and the Super rugby franchises are saying no wait, hang on a minute, this isn't going to work for us.
T
Train Without a Station
Guest
For the long term financial good of Australian rugby, and potentially NZ rugby a Trans Tasman comp would be the way to go. From a performance and development point of view it would be extremely detrimental. Problem is that I don't think we can currently afford to do what is best for us on the park though.
Omar Comin'
Chilla Wilson (44)
I don't think it would be extremely detrimental to player development. There'd still likely be exposure to South African teams, just not in the regular season. It would be more special.
And Australian rugby has already shown itself quite adept at recruiting South African players and expertise into our own teams. Look at the Force! Or Jake White at the Brumbies or Potgieter at the Waratahs. Most people don't really care where players come from so long as they have a locally based team to support week to week that plays some good footy.
An expanded competition in Australia and NZ could recruit rugby talent from around the world. Players, coaches, administration, support staff etc. It could be just as good or better for development and performance. There's no reason why we should be so protectionist as long as we have at least the same number of opportunities for Australian players that we do now.
And Australian rugby has already shown itself quite adept at recruiting South African players and expertise into our own teams. Look at the Force! Or Jake White at the Brumbies or Potgieter at the Waratahs. Most people don't really care where players come from so long as they have a locally based team to support week to week that plays some good footy.
An expanded competition in Australia and NZ could recruit rugby talent from around the world. Players, coaches, administration, support staff etc. It could be just as good or better for development and performance. There's no reason why we should be so protectionist as long as we have at least the same number of opportunities for Australian players that we do now.
Slim 293
Stirling Mortlock (74)
Roy Masters is not a credible source on information relating to rugby union.........
Omar Comin'
Chilla Wilson (44)
As nice as it would be if he'd made it all up, Wayne Smith from the Australian wrote a similar story with direct quotes from Greg Harris a few weeks ago.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...frica-sidelined/story-e6frg7o6-1226873979713#
So let me get this straight. RUPA would like to play in a competition which doesn't involve much travel but still rewards all the players handsomely.
Well knock me down with a feather. I couldn't have guessed that.
The reality of the situation is that any competition that involves the ARU splitting away from SANZAR will require a large amount of capital to get off the ground which the ARU doesn't have. The danger of an expansion involving private teams in non-traditional rugby places like Singapore and to a lesser extent Hong Kong is that if the capital walks because the owners tire of losing money, what happens? It seems risky to have teams based entirely around imported players from other countries with no structures to support that.
One of the major problems the ARU has in convincing the NZRU to have a Trans Tasman comp is that it would mean even more local derbies. NZ and SA thanks to having strong domestic competitions are after more international games rather than more local games. Routinely, both countries suggest that they would prefer a single round, round robin as the format for Super Rugby.
Australia will always have the issue that we are competing against other football codes that SA and NZ don't have to worry about.
The whole discussion regarding the creation of a new competition also assumes that there are more rugby fans to be gained through a different competition than there are to be lost by doing away with Super Rugby.
Well knock me down with a feather. I couldn't have guessed that.
The reality of the situation is that any competition that involves the ARU splitting away from SANZAR will require a large amount of capital to get off the ground which the ARU doesn't have. The danger of an expansion involving private teams in non-traditional rugby places like Singapore and to a lesser extent Hong Kong is that if the capital walks because the owners tire of losing money, what happens? It seems risky to have teams based entirely around imported players from other countries with no structures to support that.
One of the major problems the ARU has in convincing the NZRU to have a Trans Tasman comp is that it would mean even more local derbies. NZ and SA thanks to having strong domestic competitions are after more international games rather than more local games. Routinely, both countries suggest that they would prefer a single round, round robin as the format for Super Rugby.
Australia will always have the issue that we are competing against other football codes that SA and NZ don't have to worry about.
The whole discussion regarding the creation of a new competition also assumes that there are more rugby fans to be gained through a different competition than there are to be lost by doing away with Super Rugby.
Blue
Andrew Slack (58)
Where's the money going to come from?
T
Train Without a Station
Guest
And the support Blue. Filling roster spots is the least of our concern when you consider the Australians who are playing internationally. Getting people to watch and where we struggle and why they're there.
That's the best part about this argument. You just say that the TV deal will be much greater and massive amounts of private capital will be injected into Australian Rugby through private ownership.
Apparently the pathway out of Super Rugby is paved with gold.
- Status