Where to for Super Rugby?

[spikhaza]

The players have to be sourced from somewhere and it would have a flow-on effect because the blues look to replace by recruiting from elsewhere right. Imo even a few key players getting drained down can make teams quite uncompetitive

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I was under the impression that the MP (Moana Pasifika) board was to be completely self run once they were running properly in a few years.
And the other thing I suspect is happening with Hamish and Leapfrog being in NZ, will be setting up an idependant board to run Super or whatever the new comp will be called (and I don't think it will be super).
All in all I feeling positive that although there will be still work to do, that we are going to end up with a good comp that includes MP (Moana Pasifika) and Drua, and I really wonder why a few seem so sure it will come crashing down. Well there a few who have got very little positive to say about it anyway.

Many of us just don’t trust nzru after last years fiasco given they have been ones behind the design and formation to date. Super rugby in its last incarnation almost destroyed oz rugby and history was we wanted to dump SA in early 2000’s but nz wanted them kept in super rugby. So yep little gun shy on a new TT rugby competition with nzru the pupteer as being our salvation.

Will wait to see all the details and how plays out but hope does work out and moreso for oz rugby interests.

Ps. A great outcome would be at end of next year a successful competition run by an independent body and trust rebuilt with nzru and all friends again.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I was under the impression that the MP (Moana Pasifika) board was to be completely self run once they were running properly in a few years.
And the other thing I suspect is happening with Hamish and Leapfrog being in NZ, will be setting up an idependant board to run Super or whatever the new comp will be called (and I don't think it will be super).
All in all I feeling positive that although there will be still work to do, that we are going to end up with a good comp that includes MP (Moana Pasifika) and Drua, and I really wonder why a few seem so sure it will come crashing down. Well there a few who have got very little positive to say about it anyway.

I really believe this needs to happen. Let the damn thing be run as a commercial venture with the ability to determine its own structure and direction free from the overbearing influences of the national Unions. I also genuinely believe that this would be the catalyst toward a greater degree of outside investment in the game as opposed to people sitting on the sidelines.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I really believe this needs to happen. Let the damn thing be run as a commercial venture with the ability to determine its own structure and direction free from the overbearing influences of the national Unions.

This would be in best interests of creating a successful competition and growing the footprint and game across the Asia Pacific, but would nzru and RA believe this is their best interests is the question.

More then ever before I think there is a strong message that rugby fans are tired of pro leagues being interfered and meddled
with to support national team agendas of national bodies. Hopefully they may be listening as some messaging appears to suggest but not prepared to bet the house this is what will happen.

 

[dru]

This would be in best interests of creating a successful competition and growing the footprint and game across the Asia Pacific, but would nzru and RA believe this is their best interests is the question.

More then ever before I think there is a strong message that rugby fans are tired of pro leagues being interfered and meddled
with to support national team agendas of national bodies. Hopefully they may be listening as some messaging appears to suggest but not prepared to bet the house this is what will happen.

With Drua and especially Moana Pasifika this is actually going to increase.

 

[Dan54]

This would be in best interests of creating a successful competition and growing the footprint and game across the Asia Pacific, but would nzru and RA believe this is their best interests is the question.

More then ever before I think there is a strong message that rugby fans are tired of pro leagues being interfered and meddled
with to support national team agendas of national bodies. Hopefully they may be listening as some messaging appears to suggest but not prepared to bet the house this is what will happen.

I agree so much with it being run by a seperate board, and as I said Robinson said that beginning of last year. Only thing we have to realise that a board set up to run the comp is not going to have as part of it's agenda to grow the footprint of the game. It will I guess have some kind of represnetation from NZR and RA, but that just guessing as to imagine a board running a comp in complete isolation isn't going to ever happen as they will have to work in with test schedules etc.

 

[Dan54]

Many of us just don’t trust nzru after last years fiasco given they have been ones behind the design and formation to date. Super rugby in its last incarnation almost destroyed oz rugby and history was we wanted to dump SA in early 2000’s but nz wanted them kept in super rugby.

I think we need a little reality check here mate, ok Super in it's old format almost destroyed Aus rugby you say. Super started as a very very successful format,and rugby grew a hell of a lot in Aus, was a boon for the game. So who was it who actually stuffed it? Let's see RA needed more teams, and then SA said well so do we. The expansion is basically what was the beginning of it going to pack, you know the expansion that resulted in the Force and REbels becoming identities. Now remind me again how NZR stuffed Super rugby?
As Leapfrog RA's own CEO said , super was designed to be a good top end comp, not a vehicle for domestic teams, and despite numerous warnings about weakening teams and comps RA and SARU insisted that they had the depth etc to add these teams! The actual downfall of super rugby was in a quite big part bought about by the Rebels and Force being formed. All the calls for NZ players etc being available for Aus teams was never mentioned until Australia decided they needed more teams than they had quality players to fill those teams. Let's face it early days of Super there was never a hint of having the Aus teams going through a year without beating one NZ team was there?
So basically be a bit slower at pointing finger at who ruined the comp! Hamish was right in saying RA would not shrink it's way to greatness, but weren't slow in forcing super rugby to expanding it way to mediocrity!

 

[Adam84]

After last years fiasco I don’t trust NZRU at all and will continue to question their motives and intent. Better get used to it.

 

[dru]

After last years fiasco I don’t trust NZRU at all and will continue to question their motives and intent. Better get used to it.

You are hardly on your own. +1.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

With Drua and especially Moana Pasifika this is actually going to increase.

The Drua is supposedly going to be run independent of the FRU. But either way, a independent administration can still be established. Give each participant a single vote. Plus RA and NZR to vote on competition structure and direction.

 

[dru]

The Drua is supposedly going to be run independent of the FRU. But either way, a independent administration can still be established. Give each participant a single vote. Plus RA and NZR to vote on competition structure and direction.

Works for me. Though I suspect that neither NZR nor RA will be entirely satisfied without a larger say. Nor for instance, QRU and NSWRU who would have their control dampened. You are also not going to change domestic policy for things like AB selection only from NZ teams. Any move to better balance what is likely to be an underwhelming MP (Moana Pasifika) will see AB qualified players diverted to MP (Moana Pasifika). What happens in time regarding the supposed support to Tonga and Samoa rugby will be interesting, with WR (World Rugby) watching their investment closely for satisfactory results.

I'd love to hear Waratahs management thoughts on Fiji in Sydney. [Blues thoughts on MP (Moana Pasifika) in Aukland.] I'd be amazed if they are enthusiastic and I don't think the politics are going to be as smooth-running as people seem to suggest. Independent administration helps, but does not eradicate the matter. You can't even get smooth relations between Shute Shield and RA for goodness sake. An expectation for greater commercial support to top up from presumed loss of fan catchment is likely. Both in Aukland and Sydney.

This said - 6 domestic teams in both Nations is a huge improvement on 5. Bringing the two sets together For a larger TT format is a huge improvement. I'm not convinced that we will get a domestic comp followed by the TT, which I think is best. It is comforting to hear similar thoughts from some commentators and even Marino. But I don't think a domestic format is being supported widely.

I'm still enthusiastic for the new comp, however it pulls together and however bumpy the process proves. Beggars can't be choosers, as they say.

 

[Dan54]

After last years fiasco I don’t trust NZRU at all and will continue to question their motives and intent. Better get used to it.

Fair enough too mate, same as after last year I don't trust Hamish to tell truth. But I sure neither Hamish or NZR are too concerned what we think! I suspect that both parties will carry on doing what they think is right, and they are no doubt working together right now to do it, and not once looking at this bored to see what us couple of dozen think.
I only put that post up about who I think stuffed up Super rugby, as there seems to be a short memory ot two here.
And thought it wrth noting your own CEO seems to agree.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Fair enough too mate, same as after last year I don't trust Hamish to tell truth. But I sure neither Hamish or NZR are too concerned what we think! I suspect that both parties will carry on doing what they think is right, and they are no doubt working together right now to do it, and not once looking at this bored to see what us couple of dozen think.
I only put that post up about who I think stuffed up Super rugby, as there seems to be a short memory ot two here.
And thought it wrth noting your own CEO seems to agree.

No there is no memory problems but different views on interpretation and cause. But smart enough not to try and debate that with you Dan54 as will only bore everyone else with the 10 pages of this debate.

 

[Dan54]

No there is no memory problems but different views on interpretation and cause. But smart enough not to try and debate that with you Dan54 as will only bore everyone else with the 10 pages of this debate.

Ok, that's one way of saying yep you right Dan, see I dealing in facts. But anyway you right we need to move forward, and hope the lessons have been learnt in some way. I remember when Super was a bloody great comp, and when it wasn't so good.
I do have to say, Leapfrog's remarks give me hope that there won't be a repeat.

 

[Quick Hands]

Works for me. Though I suspect that neither NZR nor RA will be entirely satisfied without a larger say. Nor for instance, QRU and NSWRU who would have their control dampened. You are also not going to change domestic policy for things like AB selection only from NZ teams. Any move to better balance what is likely to be an underwhelming MP (Moana Pasifika) will see AB qualified players diverted to MP (Moana Pasifika). What happens in time regarding the supposed support to Tonga and Samoa rugby will be interesting, with WR (World Rugby) watching their investment closely for satisfactory results.

I'd love to hear Waratahs management thoughts on Fiji in Sydney. [Blues thoughts on MP (Moana Pasifika) in Aukland.] I'd be amazed if they are enthusiastic and I don't think the politics are going to be as smooth-running as people seem to suggest. Independent administration helps, but does not eradicate the matter. You can't even get smooth relations between Shute Shield and RA for goodness sake. An expectation for greater commercial support to top up from presumed loss of fan catchment is likely. Both in Aukland and Sydney.

Governing bodies shouldn't be involved in running pro-sports teams in pro-leagues. Teams need to be run on a club or private franchise model and need to be commercially viable without the need to be constantly propped-up and/or bailed out by the national body.

Rugby needs to adopt a Darwinian natural selection model where the best organisations are allowed to prosper and the shambolic outfits such as the NSWRU/Waratahs are allowed to go out of business.

The sooner we get away from the capitalise your profits and socialise your losses model, which simply breeds mediocrity on and off the field, the better.

 

[Quick Hands]

I watched the NSW (Sydney) channel 9 news sport segment last night, it covered, NRL, AFL, Cricket, Formula 1, A-League, EPL & NBL. Nothing on the Rebels-Brumbies match that finished a couple of hours earlier or nothing on the Waratahs-Force match from the night before.

Stan & 9 are doing a great job on the telecast but it would be nice if they let people know it's on.

Rugby has unfortunately become an invisible sport to the sporting public of Sydney. The mainstream media shows little interest, presumably because the think that their readers/listeners/viewers aren't interested - or so few of them are interested that they don't count.

For example in the Friday edition of the Daily Telegraph yesterday there wasn't one story on rugby in over 20 pages of sporting coverage. Today there were two mentions of rugby and neither mentioned any on-field action. One was a story in which Michael Cheika gave his views on whether TJ Perenara would make in the NRL - this was about 15 pages from the back. The other story was 22 pages from the back and was a short couple of paragraphs noting that RA's latest jersey sponsor had pulled out at the 11th hour. I can't recall the last time I saw a report in a news bulletin on commercial TV on a rugby game.

People simply aren't buying what rugby is selling, but unfortunately rugby seems to want to keep selling the same product and hope that former supporters and uncommitted sports fans will somehow start buying.

 

[Quick Hands]

Sure, nor did I suggest otherwise. The attack dog was not the clubs per se (or not all of the clubs) but the SRU. Certainly the SRU leadership.

One fundamental toxic schism in Aus rugby remains SRU-NSWRU. And the RA role within that mess.

For what it's worth, my NRC team was the Stars and I can think of few places more enjoyable to watch rugby than Leichardt. But unfortunately, RA concern over a single club being competitive at NRC was proven correct. The connection with Uni and Balmain was largely one of convenience and they were never competitive at NRC level. Balmain is a fantastic sub club and a good fun day out. But Uni have had more strength if they had found SRU club partners.

We hear often on this issue of SRU, where clubs deny that the SRU leadership speaks for them. Unfortunately the SRU leadership do in fact represent the Clubs in the SRU. The clubs, or certain clubs may feel this representation runs across their interests, but the rugby world will react to the leadership of the SRU for what it is.

Much truth in what you say and the part which I have highlighted in bold is the critical point.

Unless the NSWRU and SRU can find a way to each give some ground for the common good then the game at a pro level in Sydney will continue to whither.

In a world where brand recognition and fan involvement at an emotional level with sports teams has never been more important, the stubborn refusal of NSWRU and RA to find any space for recognisable brands with passionate followers is not helpful. The childish demands of some clubs is also a contributing factor.

As an aside I note the recent mobilisation of fans in English soccer in defence of their clubs against the mooted super league. (There's that word super again). We've seen in here in rugby league where Wests supporters (in the early 80s) and Souths supporters (in the late 90s) rallied in numbers to save their team.

On a smaller scale, Sydney club rugby supporters would rally to stop their local team from folding - because they really care.

Not really a wimper at the demise of the Sydney Rays, Sydney Fleet, Sydney Stars etc.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Rugby has unfortunately become an invisible sport to the sporting public of Sydney. The mainstream media shows little interest, presumably because the think that their readers/listeners/viewers aren't interested - or so few of them are interested that they don't count.

For example in the Friday edition of the Daily Telegraph yesterday there wasn't one story on rugby in over 20 pages of sporting coverage. Today there were two mentions of rugby and neither mentioned any on-field action. One was a story in which Michael Cheika gave his views on whether TJ Perenara would make in the NRL - this was about 15 pages from the back. The other story was 22 pages from the back and was a short couple of paragraphs noting that RA's latest jersey sponsor had pulled out at the 11th hour. I can't recall the last time I saw a report in a news bulletin on commercial TV on a rugby game.

People simply aren't buying what rugby is selling, but unfortunately rugby seems to want to keep selling the same product and hope that former supporters and uncommitted sports fans will somehow start buying.

How is Super Rugby Au the same thing Rugby has been selling? It's actually something entirely different. A massively entertaining and compelling competitive structure that we have direct control over. Something we've not had at the professional level at any time since the game went pro.

I think what may be needed is for RA to start to produce their own highlights for News slots and provide them with the only thing needed is for a reporter to dub over them. We cannot rely on them just doing it as for far too long we've been locked away out of sight and out of mind.

 

[D-Box]

How is Super Rugby Au the same thing Rugby has been selling? It's actually something entirely different. A massively entertaining and compelling competitive structure that we have direct control over. Something we've not had at the professional level at any time since the game went pro.

I think what may be needed is for RA to start to produce their own highlights for News slots and provide them with the only thing needed is for a reporter to dub over them. We cannot rely on them just doing it as for far too long we've been locked away out of sight and out of mind.

That may be the plan as RA filling back up the media team. See one from the Front Pages of this site and also one from RugbyWA

 

[Brumby Runner]

Rugby has unfortunately become an invisible sport to the sporting public of Sydney. The mainstream media shows little interest, presumably because the think that their readers/listeners/viewers aren't interested - or so few of them are interested that they don't count.

For example in the Friday edition of the Daily Telegraph yesterday there wasn't one story on rugby in over 20 pages of sporting coverage. Today there were two mentions of rugby and neither mentioned any on-field action. One was a story in which Michael Cheika gave his views on whether TJ Perenara would make in the NRL - this was about 15 pages from the back. The other story was 22 pages from the back and was a short couple of paragraphs noting that RA's latest jersey sponsor had pulled out at the 11th hour. I can't recall the last time I saw a report in a news bulletin on commercial TV on a rugby game.

People simply aren't buying what rugby is selling, but unfortunately rugby seems to want to keep selling the same product and hope that former supporters and uncommitted sports fans will somehow start buying.

Absolute shame QH. The Canberra Times has been running half a page to a full page of stories almost every day since the start of SRAu this year, covering all match reports and featuring stories on individual players, often not even Brumbies players. Has been top coverage imo.