Where to for Super Rugby?

[qwerty51]

TT is dead (for next year). Not because NZRU and RA don't want it. I think COVID has forced the hand for next year given it needs to be locked in very shortly.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I like Hamish, Clarke I don't know and is only temporary anyway, so doesn't matter. but some things Grob has aid a right and no doubt some are wrong . I can't say I disagree with it all because she saying what I been saying in here, RA is playing some real publicity games in press, and once again fair enough that is their plan. But if the TT is dead as you say why is Hamish being quoted as saying he is prepared to give NZ a bigger cut of the TV deal? Noone will answer me on that.

They have stated it is their preference for TT and only reason is dead is because I don’t see NZRU agreeing to 5 oz teams. And again I don’t want them to agree to this if don’t have open borders policy. And yes don’t buy into this national sides won’t have influence rubbish as soccer seems to manage this club vs country issue and just utter bollocks imo that you don’t set the ground rules like test windows etc and get on with it as other pro sports and competitions around the world do.

 

[Dan54]

Why is the TT dead? i think it's clear that no one is going to respond to NZRUs request for EOIs. Which is fair enough because NZRU fucked that right up.

Doesn't mean there will ultimately be no TT comp.

The one thing everyone agrees on at the end of the day is that Australian and New Zealand rugby need each other in some capacity.

No I was responding to what I thought RN was saying that it was dead, I don't think it is, and still think it is how it will end up.

 

[KevinO]

I actually think the Tahs have shown a lot of improvement, maybe coaching, but they certainly look like they comping on nicely. I wonder if Reds may not be going overboard with the youth, and could do with a few more older heads?

Rob Penney is a good coach, with time I think he will turn the Tahs around. He was doing a good job with Munster before being forced out the door for Foley. Which in my opinion was a big mistake.

 

[Dan54]

They have stated it is their preference for TT and only reason is dead is because I don’t see NZRU agreeing to 5 oz teams. And again I don’t want them to agree to this if don’t have open borders policy. And yes don’t buy into this national sides won’t have influence rubbish as soccer seems to manage this club vs country issue and just utter bollocks imo that you don’t set the ground rules like test windows etc and get on with it as other pro sports and competitions around the world do.

I actually understand your point on why you not for TT but I not sure NZ won't agree to 5 teams. (I see your point of having Aus teams only playing Aus teams so you keep the interest of them winning , may just not agree with the point). But don't forget this all started when RA was a basket case who couldn't even table their end of year financials etc, but I tend to think they may have a decent board now who will be able to convince Aus can afford to have 5 teams. We will never agree on national teams side , as you say you compare soccer etc games that players seem to be able to jet in and play with very little team training, where rightly or wrongly seems rugby's team structures seem to need a lot more bedding in because of the complicated game it is. Or perhaps you think all these times that coaches from national unions go into super teams training sessions are wasted. Because in both NZ and Australia national skills coaches attend them quite often and have camps during season.

 

[Dan54]

'Others' being NZRU.

Otherwise, you are hardly going to award her the Pulitzer Prize for pointing out there may not be enough money...

No others including ex-wallaby coaches etc, I not sure NZR is worried about how much it will weaken the Wallabies ,just the comp!
Well if there is not enough money it ends there doesn't it? RA doesn't want to get in the shit even more, and don't really see Hamish doing that.

 

[Dan54]

He said this before he came out with his plan, he wants NZR involved but is happy to go it alone. We Australian fans want our 5 teams, if that's not acceptable, we will add a Japan team and a Pacific team and be on our way, with Super 8 at the end.

You hope, see I still reading the we will add Japan and PI team, not anyone saying they may join with Japan etc to come up with a comp. So is that an Aus comp that adds and deletes teams as required? And supposedly what everyone is accusing NZR of??

 

[Dan54]

TT is dead (for next year). Not because NZRU and RA don't want it. I think COVID has forced the hand for next year given it needs to be locked in very shortly.

I agree very probably is, but I still think if one can be put in place for Broadcasters etc they will build something into it. Although this Covid thing is really ballsing everything up, I think everyone has to carry on planning as though it not there with contingency.

 

[Derpus]

No others including ex-wallaby coaches etc, I not sure NZR is worried about how much it will weaken the Wallabies ,just the comp!
Well if there is not enough money it ends there doesn't it? RA doesn't want to get in the shit even more, and don't really see Hamish doing that.

Why not respond to my longer post about quality of squads? Provide some substance to the assertion that compressing teams will somehow help.

 

[Dan54]

Why not respond to my longer post about quality of squads? Provide some substance to the assertion that compressing teams will somehow help.

Sorry mate been doing stuff will have a look. I was just responding to your post that NZR were claiming a lesser number of team would strengthen the Wallabies.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Telegraph today saying due to covid nz and oz each doing own domestic comp next year 6 or 5 teams each with top 2 teams from each competition in finals series with plans for this to revert to TT in 2022

Personally I will wait for press release as must be a lot of let’s regurgitate rumours and make shit up for slow news day and/or need to find rugby story...

 

[Dan54]

Man it's such fucking bullshit.

Did the Rebels suddenly become amazing with two squads at their disposal and a better coach? no. They still fucking sucked.

You have the same quality of player - just 23 less spots.

What do we do when the Rebels join the Tahs and the Tahs still suck? Should we just have the Wallabies playing in the Super Rugby?

Point me to a single example, anywhere, where consolidating two squads results in dramatically improved performances?

It's just grumpy old men who miss the 'glory days' and refuse to accept that Australia's failings are systemic and can't easily be fixed by some superficial move like 'cutting a team'.

It's also a complete mystery how or why more or less teams results in a different quality of player. As opposed to, say, the quality of coaching at junior level?

I think most people know that you are a stronger team if most of your players are in less teams, let's face it Wallabies were very strong when Aus has 3 teams, they had great players, but had a shit load that trained and played together, it always helps. There used to be a saying in NZ that while Auckland was strong the ABs were strong, that is not true they were pretty strong when Crusaders were strong too, because a big percentage of your players are training and playing together. With a game as complicated as rugby it very hard to weld together too many different styles. It not about quality of player only, but I will add that less teams meaning more players trying for a spot in each team raises the level of players in every squad.

 

[Derpus]

I think most people know that you are a stronger team if most of your players are in less teams, let's face it Wallabies were very strong when Aus has 3 teams, they had great players, but had a shit load that trained and played together, it always helps. There used to be a saying in NZ that while Auckland was strong the ABs were strong, that is not true they were pretty strong when Crusaders were strong too, because a big percentage of your players are training and playing together. With a game as complicated as rugby it very hard to weld together too many different styles. It not about quality of player only, but I will add that less teams meaning more players trying for a spot in each team raises the level of players in every squad.

You could just as easily say that the Wallabies were strong when 50% of our players wern't playing in Europe and France (which seems more likely to me).

Adding To'omua and Harrison to the same squad doesn't = Beauden Barrett.

 

[Pass it to Dunning!]

I think most people know that you are a stronger team if most of your players are in less teams, let's face it Wallabies were very strong when Aus has 3 teams, they had great players, but had a shit load that trained and played together, it always helps. There used to be a saying in NZ that while Auckland was strong the ABs were strong, that is not true they were pretty strong when Crusaders were strong too, because a big percentage of your players are training and playing together. With a game as complicated as rugby it very hard to weld together too many different styles. It not about quality of player only, but I will add that less teams meaning more players trying for a spot in each team raises the level of players in every squad.

I don't really buy this logic. I mean, the Wallabies were also very strong before Super 12 rugby, when all the great players were spread among the Shute Shield and the Hospital Cup, with some playing in the country and even one or two in Canberra.

 

[Dan54]

You could just as easily say that the Wallabies were strong when 50% of our players wern't playing in Europe and France (which seems more likely to me).

Adding To'omua and Harrison to the say squad doesn't = Beauden Barrett.

Yep you can say anything I guess, mate I just saying what seems to stack up, NZ has a probably a shitload more players in NH .

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I actually understand your point on why you not for TT but I not sure NZ won't agree to 5 teams. (I see your point of having Aus teams only playing Aus teams so you keep the interest of them winning , may just not agree with the point). But don't forget this all started when RA was a basket case who couldn't even table their end of year financials etc, but I tend to think they may have a decent board now who will be able to convince Aus can afford to have 5 teams. We will never agree on national teams side , as you say you compare soccer etc games that players seem to be able to jet in and play with very little team training, where rightly or wrongly seems rugby's team structures seem to need a lot more bedding in because of the complicated game it is. Or perhaps you think all these times that coaches from national unions go into super teams training sessions are wasted. Because in both NZ and Australia national skills coaches attend them quite often and have camps during season.

Dan I will explain the issue on open borders on where I see it - soccer and other sports like league has been professional for longer and has more power in terms of those who administer their professional competitions versus national bodies who administer national teams cf union which has been professional for shorter period of time and hence the national bodies have more power (reflecting back to amateur days they were the only power) and reluctant to give it up out of self interest. This is a case of union needing to come up to speed with more mature pro sports who have been professional for longer but held back by national bodies looking after their own self interest and span of control because it makes It easier for them and I call total BS this is in the best interest of the game as you otherwise telling me other more mature and bigger pro sports have got it wrong...

Eventually this change will happen (more free flow of players) but this is a case of national bodies trying to hold onto their power base from amateur days as long as they can.

 

[Derpus]

Yep you can say anything I guess, mate I just saying what seems to stack up, NZ has a probably a shitload more players in NH .

But the remaining players are of a higher quality. How will reducing teams improve the quality of our players? You keep saying the same thing in different ways without answering the question.

 

[Dan54]

Dan I will explain the issue on open borders on where I see it - soccer and other sports like league has been professional for longer and has more power in terms of those who administer their professional competitions versus national sides cf union which has less professional for less time and hence the national bodies have more power and reluctant to give it out of self interest. This is a car of union needing to come up to speed with more mature pro sports who have been professional for longer but held back by national bodies looking after their own self interest and span of control because it makes It easier for them and I call total BS this is in the best interest of the game as you otherwise telling me other more mature and bigger pro sports have got it wrong.

Fair enough mate but I would argue that these sports like league have no international comp to talk of, soccer excepted, which is a game you can apparently play well as a team with a week or 2 together. Mate not all rugby has the rules, most 2nd tier team allow their players to play anywhere, so it not just a rugby thing completely. I think one of the reasons these other sports can't do it anyway as the sport was professional before it was international so it was too late. There seems to be a pretty strong thought from better rugby brains than your or mine this is the better model!

 

[Dan54]

I don't really buy this logic. I mean, the Wallabies were also very strong before Super 12 rugby, when all the great players were spread among the Shute Shield and the Hospital Cup, with some playing in the country and even one or two in Canberra.

Aussie rugby was strong because they had players playing rep stuff in 2 states, basically generally whichever team was on top, that was where coach came from and most of players, so you played that team's plan and just brought in the best of the rest to strengthen the team. Well that is what players like Andrew Slack, Mark Ella etc have said when I have heard them speak.

 

[Dan54]

But the remaining players are of a higher quality. How will reducing teams improve the quality of our players? You keep saying the same thing in different ways without answering the question.

Ok mate apologies I not sure what your question is!