Discussion in 'Rugby Discussion' started by Quick Hands, Mar 5, 2017.
The players contracted by the 5 teams currently playing?
Are there any other legitimate options?
Slim, a TT will be dictated by NZ and they will not start with a preference for 5 Aus franchises. Play just one season with five Aus teams and performance level will pretty much guarantee what follows. There is a chance it might start that way but will not last long. Destiny of a TT is 3 Aus teams. Best scenario, actually. And if NZ is smart then WA will be the first on that 3 team list.
From there think it through, but pain for Aus rugby is inevitable.
That sounds like conjecture whipped up by the anti-NZ mob...
Well, we will see, wont we? BTW not anti NZ, just pro Aus.
The Sydney Rays will do for me, Stars my next choice
3 Aussie teams in a 8 team TT is another legitimate option, and pragmatically the greater possibility given the financial state of Australian Rugby, and an option the Kiwis could very well push for to ensure Australian teams are competitive enough to provide a product that fans and broadcasters are going to be interested in.
The solution to making 5 Australian teams competitive is to partner with Argentina and the PI's to help fill those squads. Don't think of it as 5 Kiwi teams and 5 Australian teams, think of it as 5 Kiwi teams plus 5 Australian/Fijian/Tongan/Samoan/Argentinian teams that happen to be based in Australia.
It should be in NZ's interest for rugby to gain in popularity in Australia too - it is the only potentially large (ish) market near them. Just because rugby has struggled in Australia in recent years doesn't mean it can't thrive here, and over the longer term the Australian market really has much more potential for growth than the NZ rugby market. You don't exploit that by cutting teams.
If we go domestic the competition financially & quality wise will settle at a level that the game here can sustain, which will then hopefully be followed by growth, the pace of that growth will be determined by the quality of its overseers.
If we go TT with 5 teams you then need to compete with NZ on a weekly basis that means filling 5 teams rosters, There will always be a bunch of journeymen SA/ARG & Pacific players available, very easy to end up with Aussie versions of the Sunwolves, the issue is filling our teams with quality players, because you will be competing with English/French and growing markets in Japan & America,
That means $$$$, want a Springbok well ya gonna have to pay, which is fine. But the RA have just laid off what 80% of its staff, Sorry about your job, but meet our new Saffa ???
The other issue you face is NZ will always look after themselves, this for them is only about the All Blacks. Yes they want a strong Australia but only for there benefit. They've spent 20 years in Super rugby wanting whats best for Aussie rugby????
Problem with sanctioning imports is Australia loses depth in key positions. We’d be better off opening up foreign contracts to old stagers who’d bring some intellectual property to our young blokes. Our problems at positions like 10, 12 etc is that their aren’t enough opportunities to play professionally, whereas in league where those positions have transferable skills you get paid to play even in the lower lower tiers.
Great post. Agree completely. Have also heard 2 Japanese teams likely to join in 2022.
Have you seen the reds v Tahs teams? I’m not sure the current number of teams in SR are delivering depth.
SR has actually failed in so many of the metrics used as reasons why the status quo should remain. It hasn’t delivered on-field or off-field success. It’s been a steady decade long decline despite titles in 2011 and 2014.
My mail is that NZ really aren’t sold on TT. The public aren’t behind and the administration certainly has major reservations.
A lot of contributors on this thread are making a major assumption that a TT is even on offer.
NZR may be trying to curb its reliance on broadcasting deals by growing its sponsorship revenue, but I'd imagine that running purely with SRA will be too small for that strategy. I guess they could add another franchise or two -- maybe even three at the absolute most -- but that's going to strain the playing and financial resources, and seems a bit pointless when you can add in n number of ready-made Australian teams.
depending on what the organisations goal is, adding Australian teams might be pointless. we will need to wait until NZR is ready to reveal what its goals and preference is.
The cost of this concept is astronomical though, even when the broadcast rights were at an inflated value this concept would have been financially unviable, now that we’re likely to receive a fraction of what was last offered, there is simply not the money to recruit large numbers of super rugby standard foreigners.
Even with a TT competition next year, broadcast revenue will decline as it has with the AFL/NRL and the the average salary on offer to rugby union players will fall, Australian Rugby will struggle enough to retain home grown players let alone recruit super rugby standard foreigners.
Well then fuck it. Work with Forrest and move en mass across to GRR. I'm over waiting with bated breathe as to what NZ thinks or wants. Especially as it only ever is to suit them. Time we suited ourselves.
You don't think that Super Rugby involved compromises for all parties involved? Generally most parties walk away from a deal having made concessions to reach something mutually acceptable.
Let's consider the unlikely event that a domestic comp gets off the ground; not only will there be a huge drop in player talent as the majority of our decent rugby players move overseas (we may be able to keep our 'stars' for a short-time through a central funding model - which is essentially bankrolled by the Wallabies)
BUT it also means that our players get no exposure to playing the best rugby players (e.g. NZ teams) on a consistent basis, which doesn't seem like the best way for the Wallabies to be competitive moving forward.
I am so over this we must play NZ every single week to improve our rugby, what has the consistent basis of playing every week for the last 20 years against NZ achieved, how has that moved the game forward in Australia.
Talk of a domestic competition or GRR involvement doesn't mean we stop playing NZ, the Wallabies will play 2/3 Tests a year, and I would put money on a Champions league being arranged.
This is the kind of thing that can only ever happen if the competition is run as an end in itself and not just a feeder comp for the All Blacks and Wallabies.
I don't see it happening unless there is a serious shift in the way SR is run - perhaps through private equity or something along those lines.
I don't think this is true. I don't think the Jaguares players are very highly paid for example. They'll no longer have a high quality competition to play in that aligns with the Rugby Championship season, so perhaps there is an opportunity to partner with the UAR and have half of those guys or more in Australian squads. There's also a few guys in the Fiji Drua every year who are undoubtedly of Super Rugby standard that don't get professional opportunities (remember the Reds wanted to sign their fly half a couple of years ago before Cheika intervened to stop it). These players are not expensive. The fact you see some Super Rugby quality players signing for MLR teams is a sign that there's not an unlimited number of highly paid squad spots for non-Europeans in Europe, or non-Japanese in Japan.
There's also an attractiveness to living and playing in Australia for a couple of years that I think would appeal to plenty of players in Europe even if it means less money.
Separate names with a comma.