Where to for Super Rugby?

[WorkingClassRugger]

Something along the lines of GRR with conferences determined by geography.

Or GRR itself. Open up eligibility for players so that as long as they are competing in of the teams in GRR then they will be consdered for the Wallabies.

 

[I like to watch]

Whether here or the RA thread is a moot point but the Where To thread is where [no pun intended] I landed.

The no Fox, issue is big news, and even if Optus come in its hard to see a similar level of support as Optus don’t like paying for the broadcasting. Meaning if they hire in the broadcast companies it will come off the bottom line. Last media deal we where told a large chunk of the deal was overseas money from Europe and I assume that is still there.

Unless something huge changes, then we seem headed for a revenue shortfall and not being on Fox will mean less News coverage.

I guess there are talks ongoing about what to do, but at its simplest, games will be down and crowds are smaller, merchant sales are down, sponsorship will fall soon as well, and stadium costs are increasing. I do wonder aloud what contingency plans are in place for a different level of revenue falls.

Say
10% fall we do ???
20% fall we do ???
30% fall we do ???
40% fall we do ???

Anything that is done will be needed to be discussed and agreed with various stakeholders otherwise to ram thu backroom plans in a panic could hurt.

At what point does RA & Super Rugby set in place plans for significant falls in revenue, and have plans agreed with key stakeholders

The no Fox deal is not cast in stone.

plenty of times they’ve announced they’ve walked away from negotiations with a myriad of sports, only to sign a deal shortly after.


they are miffed that RA is testing the market, and not taken their initial offering.

something that gives me a little more confidence in our CEO.

 

[wamberal]

What matters is not what is out in the open, what matters is the real negotiation that, as it should and always will, take place behind closed doors. All this public posturing is just clickbait.

And I wonder what Telstra thinks about the possibility of Optus getting the rights?

 

[molman]

Curious on people thoughts on this piece;

https://www.rugby.com.au/news/2020/02/11/super-brumbies-crowds

It's somewhat a reflection of some of the perception/systemic issues that Super Rugby is having with it's product but I guess I'm curious why people think watching rugby live seems to be something less and less people are opting to do?

 

[Rebels3]

It’s all about perception and winning that war. We need the media to get on board and embrace it.

 

[Ulrich]

Curious on people thoughts on this piece;

https://www.rugby.com.au/news/2020/02/11/super-brumbies-crowds

It's somewhat a reflection of some of the perception/systemic issues that Super Rugby is having with it's product but I guess I'm curious why people think watching rugby live seems to be something less and less people are opting to do?

Personally the reason I hardly watch and basically never attend is because the players just start becoming household names then they bugger off overseas.

SA has one fringe Bok lock playing in Super Rugby in Marvin Orie. This year alone we have lost RG Snyman, Lood de Jager, Eben Etzebeth and Jason Jenkins (all Boks) and Mostert was already gone before they left. That's all premier Bok locks playing overseas. Meanwhile there's two more playing for France now.

Pollard is now in his prime but I can't go watch him any longer. Same with Marx and before that it was Marcel Coetzee and Bismarck etc. Been happening for the last decade and every year you have to start learning new names again and just as you get used to them they go away.

Mbonambi is the only Bok hooker in the country, he has just been confirmed injured for the entire Super Rugby season. I can't even watch Akker van der Merwe anymore who is Bok material because he is also gone since last year. Faf de Klerk is not here, Reinach is not here. Jantjies has a chest injury. The Bok skipper is out for 6 weeks at minimum.

Serfontein, F. Steyn, Jesse Kriel are just some other names no longer here.

Would be nice if we had as many possible RWC winners rubbing shoulders with the next crop of players coming through and in the case of F. Steyn a double world cup winner.

In the meantime the Bulls and Lions brought back two 35 year olds in Morne Steyn and Willem Alberts, the latter also suffering from injuries since last year already.

Same with the good coaches. Ackerman being a prime example but you could say Jake White and Heyneke would at the very least have provided decent guidance for other coaches around here.

Pote Human of the Bulls is in his second Super Rugby season this year. All other SA Super Rugby franchises have a coach in their first year of Super Rugby.

There's no continuity in squads. The Lions kept their squad together for roughly 4 years and look what that did for them but now all those players and coaches are gone as well.

How long is it before PSdT, Am, Willemse, Nkosi, Kitshoff, Louw, Malherbe, Nyakane etc. are gone as well. I guess at best they will be here until after the Lions series.

The same can be said for teams across the ocean too.

I want to see the Reads and the Barrets and the Skeltons. You know, the players that put the Super in Super Rugby.

Given all of the above it is no wonder the quality of rugby has been getting worse and fans have been voting with their feet. It started in the Currie Cup first but it has fully transformed into Super Rugby as well now and now, even NZ franchises are being depleted at an accelerated rate.

 

[qwerty51]

I thought Mbonambi was a 6-8 week injury!?!!

 

[RebelYell]

Personally the reason I hardly watch and basically never attend is because the players just start becoming household names then they bugger off overseas.

SA has one fringe Bok lock playing in Super Rugby in Marvin Orie. This year alone we have lost RG Snyman, Lood de Jager, Eben Etzebeth and Jason Jenkins (all Boks) and Mostert was already gone before they left. That's all premier Bok locks playing overseas. Meanwhile there's two more playing for France now.

Pollard is now in his prime but I can't go watch him any longer. Same with Marx and before that it was Marcel Coetzee and Bismarck etc. Been happening for the last decade and every year you have to start learning new names again and just as you get used to them they go away.

Mbonambi is the only Bok hooker in the country, he has just been confirmed injured for the entire Super Rugby season. I can't even watch Akker van der Merwe anymore who is Bok material because he is also gone since last year. Faf de Klerk is not here, Reinach is not here. Jantjies has a chest injury. The Bok skipper is out for 6 weeks at minimum.

Serfontein, F. Steyn, Jesse Kriel are just some other names no longer here.

Would be nice if we had as many possible RWC winners rubbing shoulders with the next crop of players coming through and in the case of F. Steyn a double world cup winner.

In the meantime the Bulls and Lions brought back two 35 year olds in Morne Steyn and Willem Alberts, the latter also suffering from injuries since last year already.

Same with the good coaches. Ackerman being a prime example but you could say Jake White and Heyneke would at the very least have provided decent guidance for other coaches around here.

Pote Human of the Bulls is in his second Super Rugby season this year. All other SA Super Rugby franchises have a coach in their first year of Super Rugby.

There's no continuity in squads. The Lions kept their squad together for roughly 4 years and look what that did for them but now all those players and coaches are gone as well.

How long is it before PSdT, Am, Willemse, Nkosi, Kitshoff, Louw, Malherbe, Nyakane etc. are gone as well. I guess at best they will be here until after the Lions series.

The same can be said for teams across the ocean too.

I want to see the Reads and the Barrets and the Skeltons. You know, the players that put the Super in Super Rugby.

Given all of the above it is no wonder the quality of rugby has been getting worse and fans have been voting with their feet. It started in the Currie Cup first but it has fully transformed into Super Rugby as well now and now, even NZ franchises are being depleted at an accelerated rate.

Absolutely nailed it. You can sub those names out and replace with Australians or Kiwis, or even the Japanese in the case of the Sunwolves. Mid-tier depth is gone too - they've realised that international recognition is not forthcoming, and that they're best to earn the extra money overseas. You're left with Under 24s, few people who just love living and playing in Aus, and people who aren't good enough to get a top division contract in England/France.

 

[Sully]

Let me start by saying that the Brumbies have a record that all Australians can be proud of.

But, for me, they are one of my least favourite teams to watch. I'd like to think it's just because they are not my team, but I watch lot's of other sides that aren't the Reds with no problem.

They do it by technically doing a lot right. The stop the other side from playing their game with a defensive line that strangles all attacking flair out of the opposition. In attack they tend to overpower the opposition through the forwards play. Although their new flyhalfs pass to set up banks last week was special.

While all this is great rugby for me it's not that interesting to watch. I'm sure if you're a brumbies fan all this is irrelevant but it may be keeping some casual fans away.

 

[RoffsChoice]

I think the variety of playstyles at the Super Rugby level is one of the things which made it a success in the first place. I can't try and talk Sully out of not liking how the Brumbies play, but I think it's a good thing that there are teams out there that play in a style which different groups of people can feel an affinity for.

Over the years, I've stopped trying to sell Rugby to casual fans using Tahs, Rebels, Hurricanes, or Blues games. The casual fan wonders why the hell those teams do something so stupid and basic that the opposition gets to score against them as a result, or why they get into an area of the field to take points and actively turn them down. They don't understand why the scrums and lineouts are worse than the other teams and explaining it to them takes them out of the game and makes the whole thing seem too technical and arcane.

I've found Brumbies, Highlanders, and Jaguares games are the best for casual fans. They can appreciate a team that wins the ball at their own set piece because it makes sense to them that team throwing ball in = team getting ball out. They appreciate big men running through smaller men at speed because it just physically makes sense. They understand why a team wants to kick the ball to the other end of the field because they have a stronger association between territory and control of the game.

Heaps of reasons why I've used those games to win over rugby fans. To my shame, at least half the people I've got to enjoy rugby are Tahs fans because they live in Sydney, haha, but it was the Brumbies and Highlanders in particular which got them into the game.

At higher levels, this doesn't really happen, because most test teams are both conservative and trying to follow the current zeitgeist of test rugby, so teams end up playing remarkably similar to each other. At lower levels, it's pretty easy to get people caught up in the emotion of a club rugby team, but the quality of play isn't there to the same extent and casual fans get annoyed at basic errors far more quickly than less-casual fans.

So I really hope we don't try and mandate style of play for teams, or drive them in certain directions, because we're better at winning over casual fans when they're able to find a team which plays in a way they understand.

 

[Ulrich]

I think the variety of playstyles at the Super Rugby level is one of the things which made it a success in the first place. I can't try and talk Sully out of not liking how the Brumbies play, but I think it's a good thing that there are teams out there that play in a style which different groups of people can feel an affinity for.

Over the years, I've stopped trying to sell Rugby to casual fans using Tahs, Rebels, Hurricanes, or Blues games. The casual fan wonders why the hell those teams do something so stupid and basic that the opposition gets to score against them as a result, or why they get into an area of the field to take points and actively turn them down. They don't understand why the scrums and lineouts are worse than the other teams and explaining it to them takes them out of the game and makes the whole thing seem too technical and arcane.

I've found Brumbies, Highlanders, and Jaguares games are the best for casual fans. They can appreciate a team that wins the ball at their own set piece because it makes sense to them that team throwing ball in = team getting ball out. They appreciate big men running through smaller men at speed because it just physically makes sense. They understand why a team wants to kick the ball to the other end of the field because they have a stronger association between territory and control of the game.

Heaps of reasons why I've used those games to win over rugby fans. To my shame, at least half the people I've got to enjoy rugby are Tahs fans because they live in Sydney, haha, but it was the Brumbies and Highlanders in particular which got them into the game.

At higher levels, this doesn't really happen, because most test teams are both conservative and trying to follow the current zeitgeist of test rugby, so teams end up playing remarkably similar to each other. At lower levels, it's pretty easy to get people caught up in the emotion of a club rugby team, but the quality of play isn't there to the same extent and casual fans get annoyed at basic errors far more quickly than less-casual fans.

So I really hope we don't try and mandate style of play for teams, or drive them in certain directions, because we're better at winning over casual fans when they're able to find a team which plays in a way they understand.

Better keep those fans away from watching the Bulls then. Last weekend Morne and the Bulls probably had 5 opportunities to slot 3 pointers and they ended up losing the game with a big fat 0 because they kept kicking for the line.

There has to be balance between taking the 3 and going for glory. If going to the line has not paid off by the second attempt, rather build scoreboard pressure in increments of 3 and then later have another go at the line.

 

[Rebels3]

It all comes down to perception and the rhetoric the media is running with. You could have the Harlem globetrotters equivalent of a super rugby team atm and it wouldn’t make a difference.

The competition builds no momentum, has no consistency, there is nothing special about any of the teams outside of their own markets (maybe except the Crusaders) and the media struggles to get engaged. Nothing will change till any of this is fixed. A round robin won’t the slightest of difference.

They can start by pointing the finger at SANZAAR and their abysmal promotion of the game and trying to cram different countries with polar opposite needs into the one comp.

Only way to make it special again would be to destroy it all, play in our own timezones with our own needs catered for, then relaunch super rugby like a champions league competition where the nights that other teams come to town is a little special but not your bread and butter.

 

[mst]

Let me start by saying that the Brumbies have a record that all Australians can be proud of.

But, for me, they are one of my least favourite teams to watch. I'd like to think it's just because they are not my team, but I watch lot's of other sides that aren't the Reds with no problem.

They do it by technically doing a lot right. The stop the other side from playing their game with a defensive line that strangles all attacking flair out of the opposition. In attack they tend to overpower the opposition through the forwards play. Although their new flyhalfs pass to set up banks last week was special.

While all this is great rugby for me it's not that interesting to watch. I'm sure if you're a brumbies fan all this is irrelevant but it may be keeping some casual fans away.

The reality is it is an entertainment product. if its boring or does not appeal it won't be watched. Its like movies; a good story does not means good box office returns. But spectacular rubbish can make a fortune if it appeals.

The other interesting part of this story that came via the CBR times is that people still point at the board room war as a pivotal moment in their history that changed the Brumbies brand and reputation forever. In some respects I can get this as its like the Izzy thing; gone but it won't be forgotten quickly and it will always be the skeleton in the closet for many. Its something all Super Rugby boards need to really stop and think about.

 

[Joe King]

It all comes down to perception and the rhetoric the media is running with. You could have the Harlem globetrotters equivalent of a super rugby team atm and it wouldn’t make a difference.

The competition builds no momentum, has no consistency, there is nothing special about any of the teams outside of their own markets (maybe except the Crusaders) and the media struggles to get engaged. Nothing will change till any of this is fixed. A round robin won’t the slightest of difference.

They can start by pointing the finger at SANZAAR and their abysmal promotion of the game and trying to cram different countries with polar opposite needs into the one comp.

Only way to make it special again would be to destroy it all, play in our own timezones with our own needs catered for, then relaunch super rugby like a champions league competition where the nights that other teams come to town is a little special but not your bread and butter.

Which is what they should have done from the very beginning back in the mid 90's.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Seeing today’s Sunwolves game with the usual packed out home stadium that other super rugby sides would never see reminds me just how sad a state of affairs it is that we won’t see the Sunwolves next year. To not make the Sunwolves work and be a part of a pro rugby competition for a region very time zone friendly just does not make sense.

 

[Joe King]

It's not just that Aussies love to back a winner, but every time an Australian team loses it feels like another nail in the coffin of the whole sport in Australia. I don't think kiwis quite understand that feeling.

 

[Joe King]

We have a good player pool, but so many players have gone off-shore since we increased the number of our teams. Is it better to have 4 teams that will - let's face it - mostly lose to non-Australian teams, or to have 3 stronger teams that might have a better chance of winning?

Or what about if we pooled our best players into 3 teams, and allowed a lot more overseas players into the fourth Oz team?

I would be glad if the NZRU saw it as an opportunity to trial picking NZ players from our fourth team, and even had an arrangement for them to have better control of their players from that team as well. It could be a step towards them trusting the idea of picking o/s based players, which would be a game-changer for Super Rugby.

 

[Ulrich]

Seeing today’s Sunwolves game with the usual packed out home stadium that other super rugby sides would never see reminds me just how sad a state of affairs it is that we won’t see the Sunwolves next year. To not make the Sunwolves work and be a part of a pro rugby competition for a region very time zone friendly just does not make sense.

They did not want to pay their fair share to participate. Can't expect the other member unions to foot the bill for them.

 

[dru]

They did not want to pay their fair share to participate. Can't expect the other member unions to foot the bill for them.

Bollocks. They were asked to pay well more than their fair share, well more than anyone else. AND they had to start sharing home ground outside of Japan.

Never had a chance.

 

[Mr Wobbly]

They did not want to pay their fair share to participate. Can't expect the other member unions to foot the bill for them.

That's an interesting take.

The Sunwolves, and the Jags, were brought in to Super Rugby to appease the SARU's demands for a 6th team. And it could have worked really well, if one of each of those new teams went to the Aus and NZ conferences. Three, six team conferences would have been straightforward and easy to understand. Could have had the top two from each conference play the finals, not particularly fair but simple. Could have made it an eight team final with two wildcards to appease the Kiwis.

But no, the SARU wanted to have two SA conferences. Then the SA teams didn't want to travel so much forcing the SW to play half of their "home games" in a foreign country closer to SA. So, we end up with the bizarre and convoluted system we got, that no one could understand, starting Super Rugby's death spiral.

Then the SARU demand that the SWs pay their teams' travel expenses so SANZAAR try to charge the JRFU a "participation fee", reported to be one billion yen per season, (TBF, that amount was probably SANZAAR's opening gambit). No other teams have been asked to pay such a fee.

And you claim the Sunwolves don't want to do their share.

The Sunwolves have been royally fucked over by SANZAAR, since day one.