1. Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Where to for Super Rugby?

Discussion in 'Rugby Discussion' started by Quick Hands, Mar 5, 2017.

  1. WorkingClassRugger Andrew Slack (58)

    Likes Received:

    Lang Walker is apparently a Rugby fan. As are the guys behind the F45 franchise. They already have two teams in MLR. That's potentially four.
  2. Omar Comin' Desmond Connor (43)

    Likes Received:
    It's not exactly the same, but there was a similar call for bids before the NRC started and that was not a huge success (remember the Sydney Stars!).

    I don't think you want too many new entities. We have 5 professional rugby franchises/brands in this country, I think it would be silly not to base a domestic competition around them. But even if you go for a national club competition instead I think most if not all of the teams should be existing clubs or amalgamations of them (like the North Harbour Rays) that have the ability to professionalise.

    Or it could be a mix of both (e.g. keep the Rebels, Brumbies and Force, plus 3-6 clubs in NSW and 2-4 in QLD).
  3. WorkingClassRugger Andrew Slack (58)

    Likes Received:

    Kind of different. This would be the professional tier of the game in this country. NRC was always sold as a developmental tier. Which makes things a little difficult in terms of being able to generate interest.
  4. Aurelius Ted Thorn (20)

    Likes Received:

    If the Force are going to be included in a new national comp, then I think there's a huge moral case for bringing in the GRR teams too. Otherwise we'd just be abandoning them after stringing them along with the promise of new professional opportunities and funding, which would be just as bad as what was done to us.

    Besides, you'd have to think teams from Fiji and Samoa would be at least as competitive as club teams from New South Wales and Queensland.
  5. half Colin Windon (37)

    Likes Received:

    The logic still applies private investors are the way to fund the competition, however today many business are affected by the coronavirus meaning we need to show we still have a competition / product worth investing in.

    Interestingly when I called for a privately funded competition based on the US franchise models maybe two years ago, specifically the MLS, which MLR is copied from it was widely ridiculed. Many today say it’s the way forward. The MLS is the better system to follow.


    I said we need to go to private ownership before most, doubt anyone called to scrap SR before me, and only a handful of people even three years ago called into question SR variability.

    My belief on SR always had a caveat, which was, there had to be a transition of roughly 4 to 5 years to a national domestic competition, to entice the private investors and unite rugby behind it.

    I feel frustrated by the many attempts to rejig or create something a new on the forum with pre- coronavirus thinking.

    The logic for a transition period today is more important than ever.

    The reasons are simple, rugby does not have neither a wide spread or large playing base. In addition, rugby has very few if any heart land areas anymore where rugby is king. A sorta a fortress to expand and grow from, akin to AFL in the southern states and say soccer in south western Sydney.

    Further the new viewing patterns are not being used in many analyses.

    This is from the person who has called for the scrapping of SR for 20 odd years. We need to keep for the next two years post pandemic SR. To prove we have something for the private investors to buy into.

    Fox and the FTA’s will be on their knees after this. Streaming is the logical step with a telco.

    The telco will be after rugby people who simply want rugby and for that the best product, we have is SR.

    Its then critically important to develop a structure that leads people from SR to a national domestic competition during the first streaming contract.
    Most of all we need unity and for this we need a leader who can command respect rather than demand respect.

    Personally, my nominee for the head of RA would be Matthew Bourke; - young, media savvy, connection via Eastwood to old rugby, also connection to new rugby via SR, speaks well, looks good, respected in rugby circles, well known outside rugby. He would need a team around him but I can think of few that have his overall package.

    BTW and totally forum related did anyone notice this last night see a copy of the forum page last night or the SR bit anyway. The 892, 892 number with the second three number the same, OK I am sad.
    1. Where to for Super Rugby?
    Quick Hands, Mar 5, 2017 . 730 731 732
    Yesterday at 9:27 PM
  6. WorkingClassRugger Andrew Slack (58)

    Likes Received:

    My ideal scenario would be a merging of our SR franchises with GRR alongside eligibility being loosened to having to play in GRR (or whatever it would be called) and going from there.
  7. WorkingClassRugger Andrew Slack (58)

    Likes Received:

    MLR is modelled off MLS and the NHL actually. It's a combination of both. This is just one scenario that could work out. The other being my prefered. A merger with GRR.
  8. Omar Comin' Desmond Connor (43)

    Likes Received:
    I'd be all for including the Fijian and Samoan GRR teams. But I'd be less enthused about the South African / Malaysian team, Hong Kong and the China Lions/Bay of Plenty. Maybe keep Hong Kong as at least they have a real union and rugby community, but I don't think they'd be much of a draw.

    My ideal would be something like:

    Waratahs, Reds, Brumbies, Rebels, Force, Fiji, Samoa/Pacific Island Warriors, plus a new Western Sydney team.
    Joe King likes this.
  9. The torpedo Peter Fenwicke (45)

    Likes Received:
    What about:

  10. WorkingClassRugger Andrew Slack (58)

    Likes Received:

    Include Hong Kong and ideally a 10th team.
  11. WorkingClassRugger Andrew Slack (58)

    Likes Received:

    The Sunwolves are done. Look to find a 6th Aus team and may be that would work. Change Apia and Nuku'alofa to Samoa and Tonga and that'll be better.
  12. Micheal John Solomon (38)

    Likes Received:
    Western Sydney.

    I live in the East and I'll never head to a Tahs game in the West, Sydney is just far too big.
  13. Rebels3 Chilla Wilson (44)

    Likes Received:
    Japan doesn’t need a single entity as a team. It’s done almost nothing for Argentina (infact their record has gone backwards) and funnily enough did almost nothing for Japan as all their players didn’t play last year prior to WC. They have their competition in the top league and need to stop trying to leach off their money as a source to prop up ours.

    If Japan or any nation is to be included it needs to be to provide them with multiple opportunities and better opportunities than their current system already provides. That’s either financially, quality and content within a market. Unless all those can be ticked we should forget it
    Joe King and Dismal Pillock like this.
  14. Dismal Pillock John Hipwell (52)

    Likes Received:
    Michael, instead of mugging for the camera, check the dash. I think you've got a button for these things.

    Silverado likes this.
  15. dru Mark Ella (57)

    Likes Received:
    Half - always love your contribution.

    But here is something to add to your equation. I dont think that the border restrictions are going to be released until we have nailed corona and that means a vaccine. Which in turn means 12-18 months, but think 18 months. As we get the case number down ScoMo will start releasing the restrictions, then bounce them back as the corona number increases. Sort of bubbling along based o how we travel. The best case scenario is all restrictions released and international incoming being subject to a 2 week isolation.

    It means this season and next (and likely the one after) not being workable for Super OR GRR.

    It's time to get domestic.
    Joe King likes this.
  16. Mr Wobbly John Solomon (38)

    Likes Received:
    I reckon 9 teams is the right number. 16 rounds, home and away, then two weeks of finals.

    Could have a Friday night game, 5:30 and 7:30 games on Saturday, and a Sunday arvo game. One team would have a bye each week.
  17. WorkingClassRugger Andrew Slack (58)

    Likes Received:

    I suppose. A minimum of 8 would work as well I guess. But 16 rounds would be fine to.
  18. WorkingClassRugger Andrew Slack (58)

    Likes Received:

    I tend to think we'll refine our treatment of the virus well before we get a viable vaccine in place. So we're looking at around 12 months of having to focus internally at the least.
    dru likes this.
  19. Bandar Alfred Walker (16)

    Likes Received:
    I think we are really limiting our player numbers by doing this. I believe we should pick an uncapped player from anywhere but one selected then their next contract must be in Aus to remain eligible.

    It would allow the like of Mike Aaaaa or Micheal Lynah’s son to be picked it we want before they are capped elsewhere.
  20. Forcefield Peter Fenwicke (45)

    Likes Received:
    I've always enjoyed watching NRC, but the biggest flaw to the system, to me, is that the deck is strongly stacked towards teams directly backed by a GRR or SR franchise. It also pales in importance to Super Rugby. But if there was no Super Rugby, I think both those problems would be solved. You could go back to having 3 NSW teams and they could all be competitive because WA, ACT and VIC wouldn't be tapping that pool for stronger competitions (GRR/SR). There is not half the money in domestic rugby as Super Rugby, so there would be some short term pain and we'd lose some talent overseas (could temporarily change Wallaby eligibility), but in time the system would stabilise. Reckon this crisis is an opportunity to rebuild from the ground up.
    dru likes this.

Share This Page