Where to for Super Rugby?

[Braveheart81]

Surely our plan B is that we form a competition with NZ. Clearly they need to be on board with that to make it happen.

The alternative is to make the level below test rugby in Australia semi-professional. I don't think there is any validity in the ARU putting significant focus on planning that. It's the outcome if everything else fails and massive step backwards, not a viable way forward.

 

[kiap]

Surely our plan B is that we form a competition with NZ. Clearly they need to be on board with that to make it happen.

We shouldn't underestimate how heavily NZ will reject this … while they can.

If a national comp is Australia's Plan C, an ANZ comp is New Zealand's Plan D.

That doesn't mean it can't happen, but three years might be too soon.

Having said that, for all NZ rugby's on-field strength (and a smarter admin than the ARU), it's not particularly strong in other areas. Small population, rugby market already saturated.

Once they've panned out the Atlantic and North Pacific options, closer doors will beckon.

But only if Australian Rugby can sort its own backyard. Best to be ready to control our own competition (even if only 5 sides + (say) Fiji) and then look to negotiate for Tasman crossover games.

 

[Braveheart81]

We shouldn't underestimate how heavily NZ will reject this … while they can.

If a national comp is Australia's Plan C, an ANZ comp is New Zealand's Plan D.

That doesn't mean it can't happen, but three years might be too soon.

Having said that, for all NZ rugby's on-field strength (and a smarter admin than the ARU), it's not particularly strong in other areas. Small population, rugby market already saturated.

Once they've panned out the Atlantic and North Pacific options, closer doors will beckon.

But only if Australian Rugby can sort its own backyard. Better to have control of our own competition (even if only 5 sides + Fiji) and then look to negotiate for Tasman crossover games.

If Super Rugby collapses do you really think NZ will look to go further afield against weaker opposition to avoid forming a competition with Australia?

I don't.

Clearly we have to sort out our own mess and that is essential regardless of what happens but I think we're still the most compelling participant in any international provincial competition NZ takes part in.

 

[wamberal]

We are compelling if we bring something to the table. Money.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

But kiap has a point, we can't just wait for nz to be interested but force both ours and others hands. If we formed our own smaller domestic comp, semi pro or pro with say Fiji you don't think nz would start to reconsider a trans tasman comp sooner, given proximity wise they rely on oz much more than they credit especially as larger economic market.

If Super Rugby collapses do you really think NZ will look to go further afield against weaker opposition to avoid forming a competition with Australia?

I don't.

Clearly we have to sort out our own mess and that is essential regardless of what happens but I think we're still the most compelling participant in any international provincial competition NZ takes part in.

Sent from my EVA-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[Highlander35]

We are compelling if we bring something to the table. Money.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Not defending the ARU at all, but SA is differently positioned, literally. The Pro 12 is in the right time zone to enable a move for their cut teams quite easily out of Super Rugby into a comp of comparable quality without too much fuss. No such option exists here unless Super Rugby ceases to be and the Kiwis agree to it - something they have thus far been not at all interested in doing. And no, sticking our teams into a Japanese league would not be the same thing. So it would be at least a 2 step process.

We might not have as good as plan b options but at least give oz Rugby a plan b....e.g. expanded national semi pro comp...This might not be the plan b but not my job to come up with it...but aru equally don't look adept to do this either. Private consortia might be better option to do this...

Sent from my EVA-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[Braveheart81]

But kiap has a point, we can't just wait for nz to be interested but force both ours and others hands. If we formed our own smaller domestic comp, semi pro or pro with say Fiji you don't think nz would start to reconsider a trans tasman comp sooner, given proximity wise they rely on oz much more than they credit especially as larger economic market.

Any remaining Super Rugby competition is a better option than that.

A domestic comp as the level below test rugby would be such a massive step back that it would take years to recover from (if we ever did). It's not an option to pursue as a stepping stone to something better.

 

[kiap]

If Super Rugby collapses do you really think NZ will look to go further afield against weaker opposition to avoid forming a competition with Australia?

I don't.

If they keep winning the Soup by 25 fixtures to nil (or close to it) they will.

This Soup has to be defined. "Super Rugby" means a full 4-6 month season of trans-national professional club competition.

If (or even, when) that falls over, one option will be to go largely domestic with a separate Champions Cup added on. Another way might be to have just a couple of Oz teams in their NZ-dominated comp.

Either of those ways, there would be a reduced Australian footprint - unless the ARU are developing our "Plan C" to keep the rest of our game alive.

There are misguided calls being made for Australian pro team/s to play a comp in Japan.

We should be including Australian pro teams in a comp in Australia.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

If Super Rugby collapses do you really think NZ will look to go further afield against weaker opposition to avoid forming a competition with Australia?

I don't.

Clearly we have to sort out our own mess and that is essential regardless of what happens but I think we're still the most compelling participant in any international provincial competition NZ takes part in.

The most likely scenario will be a re-orientation of Super Rugby to a more Asia-Pacific focused competition. But that still doesn't mean we shouldn't be looking at alternatives. Putting all your eggs in the TT basket isn't the most sound strategy imo.

We should look at a 6 team competition involving us and Fiji. We should look at supercharging the NRC and altering its dates to see if there's value in that. We should have number of plan whatever's mapped out to address any number of potential scenarios.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I agree WCR we take lower risk trials of concepts. You don't think SA on larger scale is seeing how Kings and Cheetahs entry into Pro 12 pans out as part of bigger plan to jettison Super Rugby....

An Asian style comp has to be the way to go for us...but start small...domestic comp with existing 5 franchises and say Fiji...maybe then a champions league type Super Rugby system....but where we only contribute top 2 sides who finish top towards that...

Yes I understand short term may seem lesser than Super Rugby option but are we not better taking short term hit to invest in something that may be more long term sustainable for growth than continuing to invest in a declining terminal product......

I would rather make the brave decisions now and if we have to go backwards to go forwards so be it...but start the investment now in a better alternative...

 

[Braveheart81]

I don't think it's a short term hit though. It would be semi-professional in terms of funding relative to what we can pay in Super Rugby.

I think it would send a generation of professional rugby players offshore because we wouldn't be able to compete financially. The competition would have little to no financial value outside of Australia which is something Super Rugby has relied on increasingly to generate money.

Financially we are nowhere near being in a position to be a first mover and then ride out the downside whilst we wait for the competition to grow.

 

[dru]

I have only just caught up with some of the changes in NRC this season. Really like seeing Papworth not just pull in his head out of his @r$* but getting Eastwood on board with the Rams. Ditto Viking with the Vikings - though it would be good to think that half of the Canberra rugby fandom didn't just pile off the bus.

Rays always were well connected to the local clubs. Interesting to see Brisbane schedule games through QPR grounds. Fiji a good inclusion.

Just perhaps, maybe, there might be a kernel of an actual proper domestic comp building.

I am another rusted on rugby nut who has been to only club rugby (subbies for me) so far in 2017. Rams may have just won me over.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I don't think it's a short term hit though. It would be semi-professional in terms of funding relative to what we can pay in Super Rugby.



I think it would send a generation of professional rugby players offshore because we wouldn't be able to compete financially. The competition would have little to no financial value outside of Australia which is something Super Rugby has relied on increasingly to generate money.



Financially we are nowhere near being in a position to be a first mover and then ride out the downside whilst we wait for the competition to grow.

I think you are missing the point that we are suggesting a semi pro national competition be invested in along the lines of current NRC format (self funding)...with broadcast dollars...start small....keep Super rugby but don't fight so hard to keep so many sides in...and preferably less sides..

I think there are better alternatives then holding onto flawed super rugby product which in reality does not bring much dollars in (read negative dollars) and if means we have wallabies players playing in overseas comp's short term so be it...

The Wallabies don't have strong foundations at levels below down to grass roots level...this is about providing stronger foundations which oz rugby compared to SA and NZ counterparts have failed to do by for too long focussing on top tier....

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I don't think it's a short term hit though. It would be semi-professional in terms of funding relative to what we can pay in Super Rugby.



I think it would send a generation of professional rugby players offshore because we wouldn't be able to compete financially. The competition would have little to no financial value outside of Australia which is something Super Rugby has relied on increasingly to generate money.


Financially we are nowhere near being in a position to be a first mover and then ride out the downside whilst we wait for the competition to grow.

i.e. braveheart your assumption is Super rugby is cash flow positive contribution....it isn't.....and providing Wallaby dollars to Super Rugby that could otherwise go to grass roots is the basic flaw of your argument....

 

[Quick Hands]

It's called evolution. Foxtel has been focusing more and more on their streaming services in the face of increased competition. That will continue.

Foxtel are pricing themselves out of business. For example, I was on the Gold Coast recently and went into one of the clubs and asked whether they were going to have the Lions v ABs game on - no was the answer because Foxtel had doubled the fees from something like $13,000 to $25,000 so the club cut Foxtel off. Anyway, so I found a pub to watch the game and went back to the club afterwards. Only FTA playing - AFL on both screens as the NRL don't have a Saturday FTA game and the ARU have no FTA presence at all. (ALthough I was able to watch the Shute Shield which seems to be broadcast nationally on 7two)

 

[Quick Hands]

i.e. braveheart your assumption is Super rugby is cash flow positive contribution..it isn't...and providing Wallaby dollars to Super Rugby that could otherwise go to grass roots is the basic flaw of your argument..

The other flaw being the NZ have stated ad nauseum that they aren't interested in a trans-Tasman model.

 

[Dismal Pillock]

Couldnt believe the tiny crowd for Brumbies game. The only chance to see an Aus team in the playoffs and there was absolutely not a single fuck given in Canberra. How can they whinge about a potential merger with Melbourne/etc when only 637 people give half a shit about watching the team live?

Somehow you got to 750 posts without an avatar, which is just not on (we used to enforce this, so I am resurrecting the process). So you have been updated. Feel free to choose a better one!

potential option:

some really stupid mistakes were made, like trying to rely on just a non-specific team name (no geographical markers at all), and allowing the Auckland team to use the name "Blues", when that colour really should have been quarantined because of its meaning in the Australian context.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Yes a crowd of less 10k says it all where professional rugby is at the moment. Just loss of interest.

How do we get it back.....? Serious question....

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Yes a crowd of less 10k says it all where professional rugby is at the moment. Just loss of interest.

How do we get it back...? Serious question..

If I lived in Canberra Id be inclined to sit at home with a few beers and the fire raging watch in on TV rather than go and sit in the freezing weather. The only drawback is listening to Kearns blather and Kafer's dewometer.