Where to for Super Rugby?

[Joe King]

I like the potential broadcast offerings. I think we're on the right track. I really hope NZR don't take us up on the offer of a trans-tasman. Maybe in the future, but for now we need to persist with an Australian-centric model to engage Australia. I think the Super 8 concept over four weeks will suffice in relations to the best v the best. Makes it 'super' again.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

We

I like the potential broadcast offerings. I think we're on the right track. I really hope NZR don't take us up on the offer of a trans-tasman. Maybe in the future, but for now we need to persist with an Australian-centric model to engage Australia. I think the Super 8 concept over four weeks will suffice in relations to the best v the best. Makes it 'super' again.

I was only ever in favour of TT with 5 oz teams if had open border policy which latter seems even more unlikely then indeed getting 5 teams. I completely agree we need a model that focuses on oz interests and engagement which just can’t see getting with the kiwis.

Happy to play NZ in super 8 but otherwise not really that interested in being in a competition with them and indeed NZRU behaviour of directly approaching our teams outside of RA has really made fans like me really less fussed or bothered about the prospect of being in a TT competition with them. Irony is that strategy really backfired for NZRU as made it easier for RA to pursue a domestic competition with much greater fan support for this by what was behaviour I don’t think one is ever going to forget in oz rugby circles.

 

[The Honey Badger]

Super 8, should be the very best second tier rugby comp on the planet. 6 Nations and TRC the only thing to better it.

For that to happen we need 2 representative selected teams from each country, For NZ its simple 1 X South Island 1 X North Island. For Aus it should be the SOU Tahs and Reds (with a number of invitational spots for non NSW & QLD but Wallaby eligible players). Not sure how SA and Jap/PI divide into 2 - but they need to. Basically these are test level players, the best of the best.

Now let see the eyeballs and the ratings from that

 

[kiap]

It is proposed I believe, as a 4 week competition.

Was reported as 5 weeks by Pandaram:

The jewel in the crown is the Super Eight proposal that would mirror European football’s Champions League, pitting the best southern hemisphere teams against each other in a five-week tournament.​

If a trans-Tasman Super Rugby deal is struck, the Super Eight would start at the finals stage of that tournament. If Australia and New Zealand play domestic tournaments, the Super Eight would start immediately afterwards.​

(Paywalled)​

If I was to hazard a guess, either :

• 2 standard pools, 4 teams in each = 3 games + SF + Final (or perhaps no SF if a travel break is required); or
• 2 cross-over pools, 4 teams in each = 4 games + Final.

The second option would perhaps allow a fairly shared first stage of 2 home + 2 away games per team -- but is unorthodox and therefore unlikely from Rugby Australia.

Then again, having a slighty unfair draw could improve the competition (it works for the 6N).

Anyway, early days.

 

[Dan54]

We

I was only ever in favour of TT with 5 oz teams if had open border policy which latter seems even more unlikely then indeed getting 5 teams. I completely agree we need a model that focuses on oz interests and engagement which just can’t see getting with the kiwis.

Happy to play NZ in super 8 but otherwise not really that interested in being in a competition with them and indeed NZRU behaviour of directly approaching our teams outside of RA has really made fans like me really less fussed or bothered about the prospect of being in a TT competition with them. Irony is that strategy really backfired for NZRU as made it easier for RA to pursue a domestic competition with much greater fan support for this by what was behaviour I don’t think one is ever going to forget in oz rugby circles.

I honestly pretty sweet with whatever happens , one thing I would dislike is open border policy, because it would mean one country dictating to another who they have to pick for their test teams (which I think is ironic as some are shitty with NZR sending EOIs ). I guessing with RA going to Optus they will be wanting a TT comp to get decent money, and I do think without it could very well set Wallabies back, but I can also see why people want it. I also think a pretty reasonable number of Kiwis would be more than happy to have a NZ super comp , especially if a PI team or 2 was in it, but think a lot depends on what broadcaster's want. Clarke has said someone told someone that Sky wanted transtasman, and I guessing Fox would want same, if it true.

 

[BDA]

Honestly I think New Zealand will feel they are left with no option but to go it alone now. They've nailed their colours to the mast. Conceding to RA's demands at this stage would be seen as kowtowing, something I doubt the higher-ups, or the New Zealand public, would be willing to stomach.

 

[Bandar]

I honestly pretty sweet with whatever happens , one thing I would dislike is open border policy, because it would mean one country dictating to another who they have to pick for their test teams (which I think is ironic as some are shitty with NZR sending EOIs ). I guessing with RA going to Optus they will be wanting a TT comp to get decent money, and I do think without it could very well set Wallabies back, but I can also see why people want it. I also think a pretty reasonable number of Kiwis would be more than happy to have a NZ super comp , especially if a PI team or 2 was in it, but think a lot depends on what broadcaster's want. Clarke has said someone told someone that Sky wanted transtasman, and I guessing Fox would want same, if it true.

I don’t see how anyone can take an open border policy to mean that someone else other than the All Black selectors will pick their team. Only that instead of 5 teams to look at they have players potentially from 10 teams.

 

[barbarian]

They are certainly in a bind. If they stick to their guns and refuse to accommodate five Aussie teams, they also risk the wrath of the NZ public for failing to get the TT comp off the ground because of their own hard-headedness.

It boggles the mind they'd walk away from the TT comp solely because they are worried the Force and Rebels will be easybeats. What a weird way to torpedo a competition that presents as the best option for all parties.

 

[Dan54]

Honestly I think New Zealand will feel they are left with no option to go it alone now. They've nailed their colours to the mast. Conceding to RA's demands at this stage would be seen as kowtowing, something I doubt the higher-ups, or the New Zealand public, would be willing to stomach.

I not sure why. NZR have always said they were in discussion with RA, and it has only been in Australia that there is supposedly demand for less teams. I reckon they still real open to 5 teams if Aus can afford them. Think RA has made it clear noone has to kowtow by saying they happy for NZ to get bigger cut of TV money. Don't think anyone from either union is going to care what a few internet forum members think, I believe both lots will agree to what they decide is best for them.

 

[Dan54]

I don’t see how anyone can take an open border policy to mean that someone else other than the All Black selectors will pick their team. Only that instead of 5 teams to look at they have players potentially from 10 teams.

Disagree Bandar, NZ cannot tell who Australia has to make available for Wallabies either. Open border policy means jus that , you have to agree to select players from whichever country they play in, and noone can tell another country where they have to pick from.

 

[fatprop]

They are certainly in a bind. If they stick to their guns and refuse to accommodate five Aussie teams, they also risk the wrath of the NZ public for failing to get the TT comp off the ground because of their own hard-headedness.

It boggles the mind they'd walk away from the TT comp solely because they are worried the Force and Rebels will be easybeats. What a weird way to torpedo a competition that presents as the best option for all parties.

The suggestion today of a pool system for excess Kiwi players is interesting, we want competitive teams and to reduce talent hoarding

I would go further, it would be good to see the TT use the the current Kiwi super system for all teams, that is, each team only gets to have say 25 protected players, the rest of the players dropped in a pool where any side can pick them up as a "protected player" or go into a draft for the outer squad of any team

 

[qwerty51]

I'm almost positive RA has just been copying ideas from GAGR in the past 6 months.

 

[dru]

I'm almost positive RA has just been copying ideas from GAGR in the past 6 months.

I have no problem with this.

 

[Brumbieman]

I've gotta say, I am loving how the kiwis unintentionally pulled a Pearl Harbour - pissed off a disunited but much larger country and got them all to collectively say 'you know what, fuck those guys!'.

No one in Australia could have united rugby here as effectively as they've done

 

[Number 7]

It boggles the mind they'd walk away from the TT comp solely because they are worried the Force and Rebels will be easybeats. What a weird way to torpedo a competition that presents as the best option for all parties.

I watched the NZ Rugby show last night and it seems they are obsessed with looking backwards. Jeff Wilson spoke to a somewhat redundant graphic that showed how unsuccessful Australian teams have been and made that the centrepiece of the discussion with Kafer.

Why not look forward and propose solutions that keep both Australia and NZ satisfied ie: 10 competitive teams? It seems that's how Clarke and McLellan are looking to progress the discussion which is potentially far more appealing to all stakeholders (NZ, AU, media and public).

 

[barbarian]

Both countries have different goalposts here. In New Zealand it's all about competitiveness, and having a tournament where any team can win on any given day. They want less rugby, but better quality rugby.

In Australia it's about having a broad geographic footprint that maximises revenue and the opportunity for our fans to support the game, even if that means having a few cellar-dwellers. We are happy with some slightly mediocre rugby if it keeps the broad rugby population happy.

We all know the on-field product will be better if we cut a team, but the on-field product isn't everything to us. But to the Kiwis it is. They don't fully understand the pain of cutting a team.

 

[Dan54]

I watched the NZ Rugby show last night and it seems they are obsessed with looking backwards. Jeff Wilson spoke to a somewhat redundant graphic that showed how unsuccessful Australian teams have been and made that the centrepiece of the discussion with Kafer.

Why not look forward and propose solutions that keep both Australia and NZ satisfied ie: 10 competitive teams? It seems that's how Clarke and McLellan are looking to progress the discussion which is potentially far more appealing to all stakeholders (NZ, AU, media and public).

The discussion with Kafe where he said no 5 Australian teams shouldn't be in a TT comp? He actually goes with RN that Australia needs to play in a lesser comp with more teams. I mean as for looking backwards, doesn't everyone? Isn't that the whole point of this thread, everyone has looked backwards and said that comp doesn't suit us anymore? And I would add, 10 competitive teams is all NZ wanted originally..

 

[Dan54]

We all know the on-field product will be better if we cut a team, but the on-field product isn't everything to us. But to the Kiwis it is. They don't fully understand the pain of cutting a team.

True that Barb, they didn't insist on expanding and having more teams than they could afford, so didn't need to cut any

 

[hifflepiff]

For purely selfish reasons, I'd honestly prefer two separate comps to TT.

Mostly because I just don't care that much about NZ teams or their players, and wouldn't be that interested in seeing Aussie sides play them on a regular basis.

I wish NZ the best of luck and hope they can get a good local competition off the ground, but I'd rather only play them once or twice in a post season champions cup style format. Would also keep playing NZ teams more special, which would increase interest from Aussie audiences.

 

[Adam84]

True that Barb, they didn't insist on expanding and having more teams than they could afford, so didn't need to cut any

Let’s see how sustainable a 5 team kiwi tournament is then..