Where to for Super Rugby?

[Bandar]

Looks like we won't know before the end of the month what the plans are for next year.

At least RA are standing up for what's best for the Australian rugby public.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby...n-turmoil-as-nz-rugby-australia-split-emerges

 

[hoggy]

Looks like we won't know before the end of the month what the plans are for next year.

At least RA are standing up for what's best for the Australian rugby public.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby...n-turmoil-as-nz-rugby-australia-split-emerges

The game here needs to walk away from a full TT with NZ, we can't repeat the mistakes of Super rugby and sign upto something that simply is not designed to grow the game in Australia.

 

[dru]

Looks like we won't know before the end of the month what the plans are for next year.

At least RA are standing up for what's best for the Australian rugby public.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby...n-turmoil-as-nz-rugby-australia-split-emerges

Stick with it RA.

 

[Joe King]

From the article linked above:

"Rugby Australia is thought to be looking at a conference model for Super Rugby Trans Tasman, in which Moana Pasifika will join the New Zealand side of the draw and the Fijian Drua are in the Australian side – if the new franchises stack up.

The winners from each conference would then face each other in the final, guaranteeing that one side from the Australian conference would be in the final.

That would raise questions about the integrity of the competition, given New Zealand’s dominance of Super Rugby Trans Tasman, but underscores RA’s reluctance to walk away from the domestic competition that revived interest in the Australian game this year."

It almost sounds like a Super Bowl concept. I would love that, but that can't be right. Probably means play everyone in your own conference twice with just a few crossover games to fit within the window. But can't see them going for that either as it raises the unfair conference issue.

 

[Sheepie]

Assuming NZ gets a Moana Pacifika team and AU gets a Fijian Drua team ...

If the conference model includes 2 games against teams in your own conference and 1 against teams in the other conference, it'll only be 3 extra weeks over what we had this year. Reds will still face Brumbies (for example) both home & away as they did this year, and will face Crusaders (for example) once as they did this year. It simply won't be all games in AU then a mix of games in AU & NZ.

From what I'm reading the viewership numbers in SuperRugbyTT were higher in NZ than they were for SuperRugbyAotearoa, so kiwi's are likely to get higher viewership of the overall competition due to this. The viewership numebrs in SuperRugbyAU were higher in AU than they were for SuperRugbyTT, so aussies are likely to get higher viewership of the overall competition due to this. Each round we could probably have a mix of AU only and AU/NZ matches.

 

[dru]

But can't see them going for that either

So let them "not go for that". Any suggestion that we need the Kiwis more than they need us simply needs to be tested. RA should go domestic, invite in Fiji if they actually look promising. That backdrop looks far more positive in Australia than the comparison in NZ. They can stick to themselves until Australia's legitimate requirements become base spec for any TT/Super.

Completely happy to see things proceed at professional club level in the absence of NZ.

 

[Dismal Pillock]

The winners from each conference would then face each other in the final, guaranteeing that one side from the Australian conference would be in the final.

 

[Dismal Pillock]

 

[Bullrush]

So let them "not go for that". Any suggestion that we need the Kiwis more than they need us simply needs to be tested. RA should go domestic, invite in Fiji if they actually look promising. That backdrop looks far more positive in Australia than the comparison in NZ. They can stick to themselves until Australia's legitimate requirements become base spec for any TT/Super.

Completely happy to see things proceed at professional club level in the absence of NZ.

The stuck record has come back around.

Both sides need each other for different things.

Australian rugby will not improve playing a domestic comp only. If that's the road RA goes down then get rid of the Giteau Rule altogether because you will be desperate for quality players to come back and represent the Wallabies. And then they will get old and the Wallabies will stay ranked around 7th as they are right now.

NZ rugby needs the Australian market and the broadcasting dollars. If NZ doesn't making REAL efforts to lift rugby in Australia then they will end up selling the ABs away to some foreign ownership as they are already trying to do.

 

[hoggy]

The stuck record has come back around.

Both sides need each other for different things.

Australian rugby will not improve playing a domestic comp only. If that's the road RA goes down then get rid of the Giteau Rule altogether because you will be desperate for quality players to come back and represent the Wallabies. And then they will get old and the Wallabies will stay ranked around 7th as they are right now.

NZ rugby needs the Australian market and the broadcasting dollars. If NZ doesn't making REAL efforts to lift rugby in Australia then they will end up selling the ABs away to some foreign ownership as they are already trying to do.

But whos listening to the stuck record.

Why hasn't Aus rugby improved over the last 20 years since we've been stuck to the hips of NZ rugby every weekend.

The Australian broadcast market for rugby with a TT could soon match 2am infommercials. NZ aren't interested in Super rugby they just want someone to help pay for there All Black trial teams, the Australian teams and soon to be Pacific teams are just there to make up the numbers.

 

[Derpus]

a work of art.

Edit: Page 12 was four fucking years ago. Jesus.

 

[sunnyboys]

Australian rugby went backwards playing in an international provincial comp. No one can claim with certainty that only playing domestic means they wont improve. We had seasons with a worse record vs NZ teams after playing them for 20 years.

The "play the best to be the best" is a con. "Playing the best" has driven fans away from the sport - leaving it financially weak.

There are so many other factors that decide the performance of our Test team, that the fact of whether we play provincial rugby against NZ makes not one bit of difference. (As an example, I would say the standard of our coaching at Super Rugby level and our inability to grow our own top coaches is bigger issue. As are our pathways.)

What we do know is that SRAu was a success for Australian rugby in terms of tv ratings and fan engagement. The first real success in building the fanbase in a long time! TT was not. RA ignores this fact at its own peril. Building the sports fan base and sustainable financial footing is paramount. And will contribute more to the long term success of the sport than playing in a TT comp.

(and a conference idea robs SRAu of its most important facet - the chance to have an Australian Final. Watched by over 400k! you'd be mad to walk away from that.)

 

[Oldschool]

So let them "not go for that". Any suggestion that we need the Kiwis more than they need us simply needs to be tested. RA should go domestic, invite in Fiji if they actually look promising. That backdrop looks far more positive in Australia than the comparison in NZ. They can stick to themselves until Australia's legitimate requirements become base spec for any TT/Super.

Completely happy to see things proceed at professional club level in the absence of NZ.

Aussie should go it alone. NZ has the population of greater Sydney and fuck all corporate $$$

Team NZ Americas cup is going to go off shore probably to Italy as they haven't the $$$ to hold it in NZ.

So forget this got to play the best BS. (That can be at representive level.) Just look at the NH comps they don't seem to need to play the Crusadists or Blues.

The interest in the AU comp was great and a good foundation to grow the game. QLD and NSW could easily handle two franchises.

 

[Teh Other Dave]

Australian rugby went backwards playing in an international provincial comp. No one can claim with certainty that only playing domestic means they wont improve. We had seasons with a worse record vs NZ teams after playing them for 20 years.

The "play the best to be the best" is a con. "Playing the best" has driven fans away from the sport - leaving it financially weak.

There are so many other factors that decide the performance of our Test team, that the fact of whether we play provincial rugby against NZ makes not one bit of difference. (As an example, I would say the standard of our coaching at Super Rugby level and our inability to grow our own top coaches is bigger issue. As are our pathways.)

What we do know is that SRAu was a success for Australian rugby in terms of tv ratings and fan engagement. The first real success in building the fanbase in a long time! TT was not. RA ignores this fact at its own peril. Building the sports fan base and sustainable financial footing is paramount. And will contribute more to the long term success of the sport than playing in a TT comp.

(and a conference idea robs SRAu of its most important facet - the chance to have an Australian Final. Watched by over 400k! you'd be mad to walk away from that.)

You know Australia also went through its golden age playing in an international provincial comp, don't you?

Also, the last full super rugby home final the Reds played in completely filled Lang Park and had people viewing in pubs across the country.

A domestic-only comp in the short term will water down the playing standard substantially and drive down player wages substantially. It will result in more players going overseas to either prove theirselves in quality competition, or to earn money during their narrow earning window.

In short, it will be as boring as the NRL, with the mediocrity of the A-League.

 

[sunnyboys]

You know Australia also went through its golden age playing in an international provincial comp, don't you?

Also, the last full super rugby home final the Reds played in completely filled Lang Park and had people viewing in pubs across the country.

A domestic-only comp in the short term will water down the playing standard substantially and drive down player wages substantially. It will result in more players going overseas to either prove theirselves in quality competition, or to earn money during their narrow earning window.

In short, it will be as boring as the NRL, with the mediocrity of the A-League.

You prove my point. Playing in Super Rugby has seen us number 1 in the world and number 7 in the world. so the same cause gave us two very different effects. hence why I suggest its perhaps other factors.

Super Rugby has already watered down the playing standard. it has already driven down wages. it resulted in more players going overseas. What you are describing has been the reality for the past 10 years.

give me 30k at an Australian final every year vs a sold out sign once every decade.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

a work of art.

Edit: Page 12 was four fucking years ago. Jesus.

Well we had acknowledgement from Hamish in the media that nzru and RA are poles apart on what they want from super rugby...I think that is the only conclusion we can all agree on was expected. Hey to say I told you so but does anybody really think they will ever be on the same page as just want different things (refer to page 883)

 

[dru]

You know Australia also went through its golden age playing in an international provincial comp, don't you?

Also, the last full super rugby home final the Reds played in completely filled Lang Park and had people viewing in pubs across the country.

A domestic-only comp in the short term will water down the playing standard substantially and drive down player wages substantially. It will result in more players going overseas to either prove theirselves in quality competition, or to earn money during their narrow earning window.

In short, it will be as boring as the NRL, with the mediocrity of the A-League.

What was good for a golden age in a different era, might be less than good for the long term health of the game in the long run - and in a different era. Right?

What drives player wages is revenue. Were had better broadcast and following under the domestic than the TT. Higher quality does not necessarily lead to better wages and lessor quality not necessarily the opposite. Devil is in the detail.

Your in short summary, is I guess a valid opinion. Other opinions take a different conclusion.

 

[dru]

Both sides need each other for different things.

No, not really. Each side requires different things. Those things if answered fully for both can't exist in the same comp. Australia is not in a position that it can compromise. NZ may well be the same.

Which means a full TT is not an option - if you need those "different things" catered for.

NZ rugby needs the Australian market and the broadcasting dollars. If NZ doesn't making REAL efforts to lift rugby in Australia then they will end up selling the ABs away to some foreign ownership as they are already trying to do.

Short of platitudes, NZR has consistently worked to ignore Australia seemingly on the presumption that Australia will get on board because they have no alternative. A broader competition that levelled the field and gave Australian fans the chance to get behind a competitive team would indeed go a long way toward gaining interest.

But on it's own it doesn't solve the (Australian) issue. We need back to grass roots, with domestic professional opportunity over a sustained period to allow the game to rebuild here.

I doubt that RA are going to give us what I think we need. Gratefully, RA does not seem to be getting ready to acquiesce to NZR either. Something interesting may come yet.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

You prove my point. Playing in Super Rugby has seen us number 1 in the world and number 7 in the world. so the same cause gave us two very different effects. hence why I suggest its perhaps other factors.

Super Rugby has already watered down the playing standard. it has already driven down wages. it resulted in more players going overseas. What you are describing has been the reality for the past 10 years.

give me 30k at an Australian final every year vs a sold out sign once every decade.[/
I would be fine doing something with nzru and RA could align but let’s face it nzru see TT as a nzru designed competition for nzru top down interests and agendas. I think we almost have no choice but to go it alone. Again I would rather not but I just don’t think nzru will give us a choice with their demands for their competition.

 

[Joe King]

And it doesn't have to be no TT games at all. But we now know it can't be Super Rugby TT again or a full season TT. Both would be bad for Australian rugby. But there are other options. A truncated champions league with the top Japanese teams involved for instance.