Where to for Super Rugby?

[The_Brown_Hornet]

As I said the Reds v Tahs thread in response to MST, I'm feeling increasingly confident that we can go it alone. I think what we do is align the club and Super seasons so we can have Super players playing first grade and obviously test players playing Super rugby (maybe even an occasional club game, it would be great PR). The Super season feeds into the test season. It leaves open the question of what to do with the NRC but unfortunately I think we're going to have to bin it due to cost.

If we can get SRAU + GRR working + club footy then feeding into the Wallabies then that's our product.

 

[Dan54]

"just" I think you could write a book on what was wrong with Super Rugby.

Ok so why didn't it send the other nations broke?

 

[Forcefield]

I can't speak for the financials, but in the current climate going alone looks like the best option. The ideal would be to have another team (or more) to increase the number of games most weekends (allowing for some byes).

 

[Dan54]

Dan

Is it more how you design a commercially successful competition and leaving all the status quo opened to be challenged and open to change or is it looking at how status quo teams and structures fit into a new proposed competition. I suggest the NZ proposal was more the latter and how it would best support the All Blacks development and Brand. To me it just lacked the vision of what we needed and did not have the sort of dialogue Twiggy and his team had with rugby or some of the left field thinking coming from Hamish and others (considering marquees / imports, making players who play for other teams in super rugby eligible for national selection etc). If NZRU seriously are interested in being part of what could be the best competition in the world they need to be prepared to put those things on the table.

Ps twiggy in his grr consulting team he used in designing GRR has some people with impressive sporting consultant and commercial experience and do wonder if he has has those persons involved in discussions on alternative sporting models alongside Hamish own network

I would suggest Macca's is no different, isn't he suggesting exactly same as NZR, but with 5 teams? But of course it not trendy to suggest that it easier to say it is to support AB development, and RA's isn't to develop Wallabies? I really don't know what you thinking sometimes. I can almost bet that Scott Johnson etc will be in consultation with RA, if not what the hell are RA doing paying big money for coaches? As I said I am almost amazed that super rugby isn't there to develop players for Wallabies, and I think some of you may not be in the real world. All I have heard from both camps is they want the best comp possible, and from there NZR are bad boys and RA are the ONLY ones with the true spirit of the comp!

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I would suggest Macca's is no different, isn't he suggesting exactly same as NZR, but with 5 teams? But of course it not trendy to suggest that it easier to say it is to support AB development, and RA's isn't to develop Wallabies? I really don't know what you thinking sometimes. I can almost bet that Scott Johnson etc will be in consultation with RA, if not what the hell are RA doing paying big money for coaches? As I said I am almost amazed that super rugby isn't there to develop players for Wallabies, and I think some of you may not be in the real world. All I have heard from both camps is they want the best comp possible, and from there NZR are bad boys and RA are the ONLY ones with the true spirit of the comp!

I think many are saying for too long the national unions (ok
Moreso RA until recently) have taken too much a short term top down view - wallabies important sure but decent regional footprint and pro product equally important if going to be relevant in crowded football market and indeed grow the game in the region to avoid threat of nrl expanding footprint long term in Asia pacific.

 

[Dan54]

Sorry mate I was watching rugby. I would ask why if you agree that all that RA uses super as a development of Wallabies which is obvious why do you only criticise NZR?
You do realise why RA etc do it? For all the big talk about grassroots, it is International rugby that pays the bills in almost every rugby playing country in the world. Mate if you have a good domestic comp and Wallabies are getting whipped in tests, you really think it going to strengthen rugby's ability to compete against other codes?

 

[hoggy]

Sorry mate I was watching rugby. I would ask why if you agree that all that RA uses super as a development of Wallabies which is obvious why do you only criticise NZR?
You do realise why RA etc do it? For all the big talk about grassroots, it is International rugby that pays the bills in almost every rugby playing country in the world. Mate if you have a good domestic comp and Wallabies are getting whipped in tests, you really think it going to strengthen rugby's ability to compete against other codes?

Well with Co-Vid hanging around it may pay to have a plan B, and yes a good domestic competition is far more important, in Australia's case than a slightly better Test win ratio, but I agree with one thing the RA lead the way in incompetence or maybe self interest is a better word.

 

[dru]

The difference is that NZRU unashamedly proposed a TT/Super comp that in it's entirety was built around proving the ABs. It was not proposed to have a TT that helped build the WBs. It was hardly an open partnership being offered.

But at any rate, if the competition is to be sustainable it needs to have integrated goals related to the competition itself.

It is increasingly clear that we can't do this with the NZR unless they start changing their intentions.

In the mean time the strongest indication as to what this "tasted" like in Australia, EOIs were called for. None has been received.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Sorry mate I was watching rugby. I would ask why if you agree that all that RA uses super as a development of Wallabies which is obvious why do you only criticise NZR?
You do realise why RA etc do it? For all the big talk about grassroots, it is International rugby that pays the bills in almost every rugby playing country in the world. Mate if you have a good domestic comp and Wallabies are getting whipped in tests, you really think it going to strengthen rugby's ability to compete against other codes?

Dan your not making sense to me as the whole point good national teams and strong pro comps are not mutually exclusive but there is many variables that go into this which we ain’t going to cover all here. Messaging from Hamish is decisions will have to be made soon (trans tasman or domestic comp) to pursue broadcast deal so despite us keyboard warriors expressing our angst it means diddly squat at this point as NZRU and RA will do what they will do and we just have to put our faith in what they come up with.

 

[Rebel man]

In the new broadcast deal they talk about state of origin. If they are going to have Qld v NSW why don’t they also try and build a Vic v WA. It would help build on the rugby rivalry growing between the states would give Super Rugby players an opportunity to represent their state obviously at the moment both WA and Vic can’t field a 23 of professional players so it would give players in club land the opportunity to represent their state and test themselves against the best.

 

[The Honey Badger]

Don't mind that idea either

 

[Rebel man]

Don't mind that idea either

If we are losing the NRC it will provide a pathway. Also it Victoria aren’t well liked in any code west of our borders so I don’t think you would find it hard to get the Western Australians to buy into the concept

 

[Rebels3]

There is already an inbuilt sporting hatred between the two states with the AFL that would feed into some rivalry. Sorry ACT you’re the Switzerland of states/territories hard to build bitterness between you and other area

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Don't mind that idea either

No better to start with state of origin between nsw and qld, lower risk commercial option to start with. Evaluate its success and room to expand to vic, wa and act for next broadcast deal in 2025

 

[KOB1987]

In the new broadcast deal they talk about state of origin. If they are going to have Qld v NSW why don’t they also try and build a Vic v WA. It would help build on the rugby rivalry growing between the states would give Super Rugby players an opportunity to represent their state obviously at the moment both WA and Vic can’t field a 23 of professional players so it would give players in club land the opportunity to represent their state and test themselves against the best.

I get where you are coming from, and they can’t discard the other states completely. I think in the first instance though the solution is to incorporate their best players into the main game, rather than try to concoct some sort of lower level game which the general public aren’t going to be interested in.

 

[rugboy]

So the State of Union concept will be based on State of birth according to SMH reports. That will make selections a little harder. A number have changed states for school or moved from NZ, PI or other states for junior footy and beyond. Will they be able to come with two highly talented teams from 1-23 for both States? Origin in league works because it is essentially the best of the best, for many it is a higher pinnacle than playing for Australia.

 

[Rebels3]

So the State of Union concept will be based on State of birth according to SMH reports. That will make selections a little harder. A number have changed states for school or moved from NZ, PI or other states for junior footy and beyond.

Surely they would copy the NRL criteria. It’s gotta mean something to those playing. Been a QLDer and knowing what we are like, I don’t think anyone that did schooling in another state or playing club rugby in another state would identify themselves as anything but a QLDer

 

[swingpass]

re SOO, i believe that it will be a three cornered contest, NSW, QLD, Rest (ACT, VIC, WA), i am sure a player who was born in Vic say but went to secondary school in Qld for example will be allowed to choose which state they want to represent. For the OS born one would assume it will be the state at which they went to school or first played club rugby in.

 

[rugboy]

Surely they would copy the NRL criteria. It’s gotta mean something to those playing. Been a QLDer and knowing what we are like, I don’t think anyone that did schooling in another state or playing club rugby in another state would identify themselves as anything but a QLDer

NRL is not based on state of birth. It lends more to schooling and where you played junior football. Any number of instances where players have represented the other state they were actually born in due to schooling and junior footy allegiances.

 

[Dan54]

I would rather hear a lot more about any ideas that were actually come up with, I suspect a little pressure at this stage, and good on him, but I will wait to see more. If you read the proposal it seems that it either a TT or domestic with a super 8 (sounds quite good) but has anyone spoken to other nations about a super 8? Probably the one thing if this is true what has been proposed it pretty clear that RA got interest in PI rugby as seems it not mentioned.
One thing I do like what he said is if true also,“As I said right at the beginning, we need to make decisions in the best interest of rugby in Australia
Gee it sounds better when we don't think NZ is making suggestions in the best interest of NZ rugby doesn't it?

That is why I will wait to hear more.