Where to for Super Rugby?

[Rugbynutter39]

​

Dismal you are so wrong but so right for this place...

 

[wamberal]

Dismal you are so wrong but so right for this place.

I still don't get the joke.

 

[Braveheart81]

I still don't get the joke.

A swing and a miss I guess, or swing with the Miss, whatever your predilection.

 

[brokendown]

the keys give it away

 

[Lindommer]

I've thought for a while some sort of Twiggyball is the way to go....... As a starting point I'd like to see the five Oz sides + two Pacific teams (we should grab our Pacifika pals before the Kiwis do) + ONE Asian franchise. I'd recommend Hong Kong as it's in a friendly time zone and is a good weekend away for supporters. I'd also suggest Fiji and the other Pacifika team play most of their games in Sydney (Parramatta or St Marys Stadium?) or Brisbane.

Reading an old copy of The Australian this arvo (yes, things are that grim) which has a thoughtful article by Wayne Swan about the cost of air travel and how he reckons it could be the death knell of any future Super Rugby. The article's headed "Flight costs could sound death knell for Super Rugby", from the Oz of 8/4. In addition to the anticipated cost of flying when planes get back into the air Swan points out we could be behind the eight ball without a broadcast deal. Whether the in-situ deals both the Saffers and Kiwis had in place pre-COVID-19 hold is another matter, but ATM we don't have one.

Taking all that into account the way forward for professional rugby in Australia would seem to be some sort of internal comp with the five Oz sides as starters. What I'd like to see is a well-thought out and viable alternative put up by brains trust here on G&GR.

 

[Joe King]

Reading an old copy of The Australian this arvo (yes, things are that grim) which has a thoughtful article by Wayne Swan about the cost of air travel and how he reckons it could be the death knell of any future Super Rugby. The article's headed "Flight costs could sound death knell for Super Rugby", from the Oz of 8/4. In addition to the anticipated cost of flying when planes get back into the air Swan points out we could be behind the eight ball without a broadcast deal. Whether the in-situ deals both the Saffers and Kiwis had in place pre-COVID-19 hold is another matter, but ATM we don't have one.

Taking all that into account the way forward for professional rugby in Australia would seem to be some sort of internal comp with the five Oz sides as starters. What I'd like to see is a well-thought out and viable alternative put up by brains trust here on G&GR.

At the very least, we need to thoroughly explore this idea as a viable option because we don't know what's going to happen next year and beyond, as you suggest.

 

[Joe King]

If as has been suggested, NZ just play a double round robin over 10 weeks with a first past the post winner, then perhaps we should do the same. If the boarders open up, we could simply have a single game with our winner verse theirs in a kind of Super Bowl concept.

With the boarders opening up being uncertain, it's a simple way to make use of it if they do open, without being dependent upon it if they don't become operational in time.

I'd also be interested to see what the fan engagement is like in both countries (and possibly SA) with only the domestic component. It could give us a good insight into the best model going forward.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Reading an old copy of The Australian this arvo (yes, things are that grim) which has a thoughtful article by Wayne Swan about the cost of air travel and how he reckons it could be the death knell of any future Super Rugby. The article's headed "Flight costs could sound death knell for Super Rugby", from the Oz of 8/4. In addition to the anticipated cost of flying when planes get back into the air Swan points out we could be behind the eight ball without a broadcast deal. Whether the in-situ deals both the Saffers and Kiwis had in place pre-COVID-19 hold is another matter, but ATM we don't have one.

Taking all that into account the way forward for professional rugby in Australia would seem to be some sort of internal comp with the five Oz sides as starters. What I'd like to see is a well-thought out and viable alternative put up by brains trust here on G&GR.

There would be significant structural changes in regards to how things are run for a domestic league to be viable. I agree using the Super Rugby/Force squads as a backbone is the most logical choice.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

If as has been suggested, NZ just play a double round robin over 10 weeks with a first past the post winner, then perhaps we should do the same. If the boarders open up, we could simply have a single game with our winner verse theirs in a kind of Super Bowl concept.

With the boarders opening up being uncertain, it's a simple way to make use of it if they do open, without being dependent upon it if they don't become operational in time.

I'd also be interested to see what the fan engagement is like in both countries (and possibly SA) with only the domestic component. It could give us a good insight into the best model going forward.

I think that's the direction Super Rugby should take post Covid-19.

 

[BDA]

Haven't really been following the thread but wanted to come on and give my two cents.

In 2018 I was at a charity breakfast where Raelene Castle was giving a speech. In question time, i asked her whether RA still thought Super Rugby was the way forward. I said that, in my view, Super Rugby was failing to capture the attention of fans for a number of reason, but in particular because we only had an Australian Championship team every maybe 5 years, whereas every year the NRL and AFL have local sides winning the grand final, creating lifelong fans and generating additional interest and revenue in those areas. Raelene said that they did still believe Super Rugby was the best way forward.

I do believe that Super Rugby in its current form needs to be scrapped. I think that some kind of shortened champions league style tournament (involving the top sides from AUS, SA, NZ and ARG) should still be on the calendar, but I think that primary focus should be either a straight domestic comp, or a trans-tasman.

There was a time when I didn't miss a Super Rugby game all season. TBH, in recent years I couldn't give a fuck about what is going on in SA or ARG and I certainly had no interest in staying up to watch the games at 2am. I think most casual / new fans would find it very hard to follow / invest in the comp in its current format.

I do think there is still genuine interest among both NZ and AUS fans in a trans tasman comp. I'd structure it with two 2 pools of 6 (Australia would include the Western Force and maybe one other team either from the NRC or the Sun Wolves) every team plays each other once. The top two teams of each pool play off for NZ Champions / AUS Champions respectively, then those two teams meet to crown a Trans-Tasman champion. I think fans could get behind it. That gives you 13 weeks of rugby.

You could then take the top 4 overall teams from the Trans-Tasman comp (which might work out to be 3 NZ teams and 1 Aus team) top 2 teams from SA, and two top teams from ARG, Japan or Europe and do knock out comp over 3 to 4 weeks.

 

[Quick Hands]

Is that Wamberal in the black hat and dressing gown?

 

[Quick Hands]

Reading an old copy of The Australian this arvo (yes, things are that grim) which has a thoughtful article by Wayne Swan about the cost of air travel and how he reckons it could be the death knell of any future Super Rugby. The article's headed "Flight costs could sound death knell for Super Rugby", from the Oz of 8/4. In addition to the anticipated cost of flying when planes get back into the air Swan points out we could be behind the eight ball without a broadcast deal. Whether the in-situ deals both the Saffers and Kiwis had in place pre-COVID-19 hold is another matter, but ATM we don't have one.

Taking all that into account the way forward for professional rugby in Australia would seem to be some sort of internal comp with the five Oz sides as starters. What I'd like to see is a well-thought out and viable alternative put up by brains trust here on G&GR.

We don't really know what's viable unless we know what the broadcasters will pay for anything.

In terms of a general concept, the NRC teams provide a fairly good starting point. I think it's essential that there's a team playing out of western Sydney, so based on an 8 team set-up it could look something like:

Sydney
Western Sydney
Brisbane
Qld Country
Canberra
Perth
Melbourne
Fiji

If it was possible, teams from Tonga and Samoa could also play bringing the total to 10 teams.

I'd have the Fiji team playing out of Townsville (noting the strong Fijian community there)
https://www.townsvillefijians.com/

A Tongan team should play out of Campbelltown based on the significant Tongan community there.

Samoa would also need to play out of Australia.

Noting that once it's a professional competition, anyone from any background can be signed - just as Australians play for the NZ Warriors in the NRL.

The NRC as it stands doesn't work because it's tacked on to the end of the season and starts just when NRL and AFL semi finals start so it's completely starved of any possibility of mainstream media coverage.

By he way, none of these teams should be run by the state RUs. It's another failure in the NRC IMO.

There's actually a good case for getting rid of state RUs altogether. Regions and organisations should affiliate directly with RA. 19th century colonial boundaries have no place in running a 21st century sport. More a topic for the RA thread, but it has some relevance here.
Possibly leave the NSWRU and QRU one function - to select state teams if an interstate competition ever becomes feasible.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I like the nrc but I am in a small minority so hence struggle to accept nrc is right thing to morph into our pro domestic comp
- I actually don’t know what the answer is anymore and wonder that losing so many fans to our game over the years we have lost the opportunity to inject back interest unless we had something like world League of Nations concept with private equity money to invest back in reenergising oz rugby (with more clever sods then past RA mobs who wasted away the war chest from early 00’s

 

[Brumby Runner]

Haven't really been following the thread but wanted to come on and give my two cents.

In 2018 I was at a charity breakfast where Raelene Castle was giving a speech. In question time, i asked her whether RA still thought Super Rugby was the way forward. I said that, in my view, Super Rugby was failing to capture the attention of fans for a number of reason, but in particular because we only had an Australian Championship team every maybe 5 years, whereas every year the NRL and AFL have local sides winning the grand final, creating lifelong fans and generating additional interest and revenue in those areas. Raelene said that they did still believe Super Rugby was the best way forward.

I do believe that Super Rugby in its current form needs to be scrapped. I think that some kind of shortened champions league style tournament (involving the top sides from AUS, SA, NZ and ARG) should still be on the calendar, but I think that primary focus should be either a straight domestic comp, or a trans-tasman.

There was a time when I didn't miss a Super Rugby game all season. TBH, in recent years I couldn't give a fuck about what is going on in SA or ARG and I certainly had no interest in staying up to watch the games at 2am. I think most casual / new fans would find it very hard to follow / invest in the comp in its current format.

I do think there is still genuine interest among both NZ and AUS fans in a trans tasman comp. I'd structure it with two 2 pools of 6 (Australia would include the Western Force and maybe one other team either from the NRC or the Sun Wolves) every team plays each other once. The top two teams of each pool play off for NZ Champions / AUS Champions respectively, then those two teams meet to crown a Trans-Tasman champion. I think fans could get behind it. That gives you 13 weeks of rugby.

You could then take the top 4 overall teams from the Trans-Tasman comp (which might work out to be 3 NZ teams and 1 Aus team) top 2 teams from SA, and two top teams from ARG, Japan or Europe and do knock out comp over 3 to 4 weeks.

BDA I really think the absence of a 'national champion' every year does take away from our current rugby environment. My only concern with your proposals is that the two pools in the TT comp would play each other once with the top two in NZ and Aus respectively playing for the national championship. If it is a round robin comp, I don't see the need for pools. Instead, I'd go for the two pools to play home and away within their own pool to establish a champion by playing the top two finishers in a final. Then go to the inter-competition matches to crown a Tasman Champion (or whatever it might be called).

 

[Dctarget]

Can we get Rennie v Foster on Rugby '08 playing Wallabies v All Blacks with a chosen 23 based on current form. Please, I'll watch anything.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

We don't really know what's viable unless we know what the broadcasters will pay for anything.

In terms of a general concept, the NRC teams provide a fairly good starting point. I think it's essential that there's a team playing out of western Sydney, so based on an 8 team set-up it could look something like:

Sydney
Western Sydney
Brisbane
Qld Country
Canberra
Perth
Melbourne
Fiji

If it was possible, teams from Tonga and Samoa could also play bringing the total to 10 teams.

I'd have the Fiji team playing out of Townsville (noting the strong Fijian community there)
https://www.townsvillefijians.com/

A Tongan team should play out of Campbelltown based on the significant Tongan community there.

Samoa would also need to play out of Australia.

Noting that once it's a professional competition, anyone from any background can be signed - just as Australians play for the NZ Warriors in the NRL.

The NRC as it stands doesn't work because it's tacked on to the end of the season and starts just when NRL and AFL semi finals start so it's completely starved of any possibility of mainstream media coverage.

By he way, none of these teams should be run by the state RUs. It's another failure in the NRC IMO.

There's actually a good case for getting rid of state RUs altogether. Regions and organisations should affiliate directly with RA. 19th century colonial boundaries have no place in running a 21st century sport. More a topic for the RA thread, but it has some relevance here.
Possibly leave the NSWRU and QRU one function - to select state teams if an interstate competition ever becomes feasible.

I think ownership should be open to anyone who can meet set criteria. With the league being operated in a similar manner to that of Major League Rugby. Whereby the league administers the competition with players contracted directly to the league but via a set club. The goal of any TV deal should be to cover the salary cap and coaching expenses. There should be an initial licencing fee and annual cash calls designed provide the league with the necessary operational funds. For example. Say $1m for the initial licence fee and $500k every year or something along those lines. The exception could be Fiji. Though I would also suggest that perhaps a combined PI club might be a better initial option.

The individual clubs would draw revenue via sponsorship and game day operations. Placing emphasis on promotion and fan engagement as a means of bolstering income.

 

[Joe King]

We don't really know what's viable unless we know what the broadcasters will pay for anything.

In terms of a general concept, the NRC teams provide a fairly good starting point. I think it's essential that there's a team playing out of western Sydney, so based on an 8 team set-up it could look something like:

Sydney
Western Sydney
Brisbane
Qld Country
Canberra
Perth
Melbourne
Fiji

If it was possible, teams from Tonga and Samoa could also play bringing the total to 10 teams.

I'd have the Fiji team playing out of Townsville (noting the strong Fijian community there)
https://www.townsvillefijians.com/

A Tongan team should play out of Campbelltown based on the significant Tongan community there.

Samoa would also need to play out of Australia.

Noting that once it's a professional competition, anyone from any background can be signed - just as Australians play for the NZ Warriors in the NRL.

The NRC as it stands doesn't work because it's tacked on to the end of the season and starts just when NRL and AFL semi finals start so it's completely starved of any possibility of mainstream media coverage.

By he way, none of these teams should be run by the state RUs. It's another failure in the NRC IMO.

There's actually a good case for getting rid of state RUs altogether. Regions and organisations should affiliate directly with RA. 19th century colonial boundaries have no place in running a 21st century sport. More a topic for the RA thread, but it has some relevance here.
Possibly leave the NSWRU and QRU one function - to select state teams if an interstate competition ever becomes feasible.

I'd have a team based in Western Sydney, but I've started to wonder about the merits of calling it 'Western' Sydney, rather than simply having a second team called Sydney (something else). Simlar to what the BBL does with two teams in Sydney and two in Melbourne. 'Western' Sydney might mean something to the locals, but 'Sydney' gains traction with every other opposition team. Anyway, just musing.

Otherwise, there's also the option of playing a Fijian team out of Western Sydney since that's the biggest Fijian community outside of Fiji itself. This way you could also include NSW Country (if you plan to have Qld Country involved).

My other question is, would you look to use the current Super Rugby team names in some of those locations to leverage those existing brand names?

 

[Quick Hands]

I'd have a team based in Western Sydney, but I've started to wonder about the merits of calling it 'Western' Sydney, rather than simply having a second team called Sydney (something else). Simlar to what the BBL does with two teams in Sydney and two in Melbourne. 'Western' Sydney might mean something to the locals, but 'Sydney' gains traction with every other opposition team. Anyway, just musing.

I don't have a firm view either way, as long as there's a team representing the western Sydney region.

.

Otherwise, there's also the option of playing a Fijian team out of Western Sydney since that's the biggest Fijian community outside of Fiji itself. This way you could also include NSW Country (if you plan to have Qld Country involved).

All of the islands have a bigger presence in Western Sydney than anywhere else in the country. Townsville being close to Melanesia and having a reasonably large Fijian population makes that a good choice for me. But again, it's something to be examined. It does give rugby a boost in Nth Qld though having them in Townsville.

There's a much bigger Tongan population in Sydney, so that figured in my thinking as well.

I wasn't sure about Qld, whether two Brisbane teams was better or a country team. Possibly the name Qld Country could change, if for example the team was based on the Darling Downs maybe that would be better than the generic country label. I'd certainly steer well away from the Gold Coast - it's a sporting graveyard that the AFL can't even overcome.

My other question is, would you look to use the current Super Rugby team names in some of those locations to leverage those existing brand names?

Personally I'd get as far away from Super Rugby names as possible, but I'd leave it to the people in Perth, Melbourne and Canberra as to what they want to call themselves, but I'd have Perth, Melbourne and Canberra in the name if it was my choice. Rugby needs the tribalism to make it work.

 

[Quick Hands]

I like the nrc but I am in a small minority so hence struggle to accept nrc is right thing to morph into our pro domestic comp
- I actually don’t know what the answer is anymore and wonder that losing so many fans to our game over the years we have lost the opportunity to inject back interest unless we had something like world League of Nations concept with private equity money to invest back in reenergising oz rugby (with more clever sods then past RA mobs who wasted away the war chest from early 00’s

Unfortunately I think that rugby in Australia isn't big enough to support a super rugby type competition and an NRC, maybe we never were but definitely not now.

To me this means Wallabies as the pro rugby and national flagship, followed by a domestic pro or semi-pro league with an enhanced capital city club competitions (plural) as the next level down tasked with moving players from juniors to the pro league.

Don't worry about being in the minority either, I've been in the minority for quite a while around here. It's quite liberating actually.

 

[hoggy]

https://www.rugby.com.au/news/2020/04/27/new-zealand-super-rugby-review

Yep, nothing like a good old review.