Where to for Super Rugby?

[dru]

Neither ARU nor the NSWRU provide any funding to SS anymore. You can stop flogging that horse, it's well and truly dead.

Happy to apologise QH - something happened last year?

Last NSWRU Annual Report is still 2015 which shows:
Premier Rugby in 2014: ($735,363) in 2015 ($703,051)

 

[half]

^^^^^^ that is right.
compete. make it prestigous so the all the alphabet schools imagine if our governing bodies got involved in the high school system and created a competition so all kids could ant to be involved. That will develop players for our game and spit out more quality at the top.
Have those boys at highschool who play league also wanting to play union.

.

George's "My guitar gently weeps" springs to mind when I look at how we essentially walked out of state schools when in the early to mid 60's Union was the NSW winter sport in state high schools.

My wife reminds me of this site all the time its the Bill Turner cup.

Over 800 schools with both boys and girls teams. Its taken them years to get it to this stage.

I suggest you open the link look at the final 32 schools both boys and girls and then look to the sponsors link.

We just don't give the same level of support in fact we want schools to develop rugby academies for us.

http://www.billturnersoccer.com.au

 

[ACT Crusader]

I know this is pipe dream sort of stuff, but getting the state based unions away from Super rugby might be the answer. They then could concentrate on NRC and other grassroot measures. The Super teams are then run by the ARU. I know it's like saying get rid of State Governments - never going to happen - but it could simplify things and remove some of the politics from rugby on this country.

 

[Dave Beat]

Dave, did I say you did? You proposed that money redirected from WA could do a lot of good in the Sydney grass roots. I responded by suggesting you could start by finding funds much, much closer.

I am by now completely on board with suggestions to get behind community rugby and I'm not convinced that Super rugby as it is being offered is any better than a club based national domestic comp might be.

But each time these discussions use Shute Shield junior rugby (where it exists) as a claimed appropriate space to direct funds, I just can get past the fact that it ignores Sydney Subbies juniors, NSW Country juniors, NSW community rugby generally.

And of course rugby development in ACT, Victoria and Western Australia.


So to follow your logic, and "not to have a dig at the SRU", but if NSWRU license funds from Waratahs Ltd, which presumably aren't required when an anti Super, anti-ARU stance is put froward, if those funds were redirected to WA, hell, couldn't they do something with that for grass roots development!

Dru this is what i said,

^^^^^^ that is right.
imagine if our governing bodies got involved in the high school system and created a competition so all kids could compete.
make it prestigous so the all the alphabet schools want to be involved. That will develop players for our game and spit out more quality at the top.
Have those boys at highschool who play league also wanting to play union.

this is in NO way a dig at the Force.
But if the money handed to the Force each year was spent on a school boy competition there would be change left over and we would have more players feeding into our Soup teams.​

Where did i even reference Sydney rugby. I mentioned school boy rugby.

I then went on to say - yeahhhhhh include WA schools as well.

I used a wholestic approach and referenced our governing bodies so i wasnt pointing fingers.

 

[Dave Beat]

Dave Beat,
Why is it the ARUs fault alone to be pushing into high schools? What does NSWRU contribute to high schools? Do they even fundraise and invest they're own time and resources into the schools or do they only do the bare minimum on what the ARU provides and uses that as an excuse not to do any more?
I know in Perth our Development Officers go to schools from Kununurra to Albany and out to Kalgoorlie. They cover and run programs over an area the size of NSW, QLD and VIC combined and have reached over 50 000 school kids over the last 6 months alone. And that is while receiving less money than NSW in funding. We raise our own funds to cover the shortfall.
As for the NRC, most of the detractors are missing some key points. Firstly it gives the best club players the chance to test themselves against super players. As super rugby is levels above club it is only logical to play against them to improve.
Secondly it gives our professional players somethong they need, more high level matches. Playing in Super Rugby then going back down a couple of tiers to club rugby just undoes the skill and instinct built up playing at Super level. Yes its good because x team wins a premiership with a stacked team but it also brings playets back to the lower intensity and skill levels at semi amateur levels. 1 step forward 2 steps back.
Thirdly, it has the potential to be another source of revenue for Australian rugby in the future. Contracted players from Super Rugby are covered by existing contracts so there is no extra cost there. The club players sign a per match contract. No real significant costs added there. Travel costs is the only significant cost which canbe absorbed into sponsorship and a small fraction of the tv money.
Fourthly, it develops the player bases in WA and Victoria. Whilst some pine for the glory days of the 90s, a simple but inevitable fact of life is that times have changed and we must change with them. Its like saying VHS was the best, lets go back to VHS. All the while our competitors have moved on to Bluray discs and streaming services. They have moved onto superior ways of doing things. The majority of detractors want us to go backwards to an out dated system.
Fifthly, The Shute Shield does not produce the level of talent it used to. The common argument is that Sydney produces some 80% or 90% of our Super players. This just proves the point that the Shute Shield is not developing players of a necessary standard as the same players that are produced in the Shute Shield are our current Super players. I mean the best of the Shute Shield still hasnt won the NRC, yet they are considered our best players by some.

To be a strong rugby nation you need depth, not just at the top level but in the development levels. Providing as many opportunities as possible to as many kids as possible is how we achieve that. We have seen players like Haylett-Petty, Godwin and Naivalu unearthed in the non traditional heartlands. We must continue to look for these diamonds in the rough regardless of which state they're in. There are more to come from these states, all of which will come through the pathways are consolidate the player pool. It will take some time, a couple more years, but it is happening. We can all remember when a WA or VIC under 20s side would get pummeled by NSW or Qld. The situation now is that instead of 2 competitive teams we now have 5. Instead of having 60 or 70 for the Aussie 20s to select from we now have 180 guys playing top level under 20s rugby. Expand that again with some Country sides and all of a sudden we have 250 guys pushing for selection and Super contracts and NRC contracts. Telling our best players they must choose between taking a huge gamble and moving state to maybe get a contract is silly. It just make the decision for those kids giving up on rugby and going to other sports a lot easier. Then rugby loses twice, less depth and a lower standard of athlete.

Starting with your last paragraph we agree on depth, and with that i think we are speking a simlar language. I'd like to keep all 5 soup teams, you also miss Ollieee Hoskins as well i wish he stayed in Aus rugby.

It isnt the ARU's fault alone, but we need a leader.

I was impressed with what Perth did in the NRC this year, it was a team effort to acheive that.

Yes i am a fan of the Shute Shield, maybe becuase it doesnt have the mess and politics that we see in pro rugby. I have no doubt if i lived in Perth I'd speak just as pationately about the club comp there.

A schoolboy comp may attract unearth, and retain more players. It maybe zone champs, state champs, National champs (find some others in between). It maybe like the sevend curcuit where there is bowl, plate, cup, sheild, so the lessor teams keep competing.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Actually Fiji's involvement is being jointly funded by the Fiji Government and World Rugby and Oz and its NRC get the benefit without contributing a cent.

Really disappointed that someone has actually seen to criticise something that is actually a major positive all round.

 

[Dave Beat]

Actually Fiji's involvement is being jointly funded by the Fiji Government and World Rugby and Oz and its NRC get the benefit without contributing a cent.

Really disappointed that someone has actually seen to criticise something that is actually a major positive all round.

Awesome news.
I have some good PI friends and i hope it is a huge success.
I havent researched much on how it will evolve.
Are you aware if all the games will be played in Aus, or do NRC clubs travel to Fiji as well.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Yes home Fiji games will be played in Fiji with Oz teams funded for this travel etc. A very sweet deal that WR (World Rugby) and Fiji Government has funded.

 

[Quick Hands]

Happy to apologise QH - something happened last year?

Last NSWRU Annual Report is still 2015 which shows:
Premier Rugby in 2014: ($735,363) in 2015 ($703,051)

They've been cut adrift and seem to be revelling in their new found independence. Intrust as the major sponsor and an FTA deal for the season.

EDIT:
The SRU is in the third year of a five-year deal with Club Rugby TV, which requires it to spend $250,000 on advertising with Channel Seven in exchange for the live broadcast of one game per round on 7Two. Last year the Australian Rugby Union came up with the money at the last minute, but in his first few months as SRU president Begg was left with little time to secure support and sponsorship after the ARU and NSW Rugby Union signalled they were not prepared to fund the deal.
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/u...newcastle-act-club-rugby-20170323-gv4uhr.html

 

[Quick Hands]

Yes home Fiji games will be played in Fiji with Oz teams funded for this travel etc. A very sweet deal that WR (World Rugby) and Fiji Government has funded.

Ditching super rugby altogether and running a season long NRC in its place with Fiji, Samoa and Tonga would be a far better long term option for Australian rugby IMO.

Super rugby is just death by a thousand cuts.

 

[NTT]

Starting with your last paragraph we agree on depth, and with that i think we are speking a simlar language. I'd like to keep all 5 soup teams, you also miss Ollieee Hoskins as well i wish he stayed in Aus rugby.

It isnt the ARU's fault alone, but we need a leader.

I was impressed with what Perth did in the NRC this year, it was a team effort to acheive that.

Yes i am a fan of the Shute Shield, maybe becuase it doesnt have the mess and politics that we see in pro rugby. I have no doubt if i lived in Perth I'd speak just as pationately about the club comp there.

A schoolboy comp may attract unearth, and retain more players. It maybe zone champs, state champs, National champs (find some others in between). It maybe like the sevend curcuit where there is bowl, plate, cup, sheild, so the lessor teams keep competing.

Nothing loaded in my question mate, im just curious how the funding is made up and distributed in NSW schools rugby. Is it 75% ARU 25% NSWRU? That sort of thing. I dont wanna start the state v state bs im just curious on how its done over there, last time i was in Sydney was circa 1995 or 96.
I agree fully with strong schools and strong clubs competitions.

The second half was a bit of a rant i admit

 

[Quick Hands]

Nothing loaded in my question mate, im just curious how the funding is made up and distributed in NSW schools rugby. Is it 75% ARU 25% NSWRU? That sort of thing. I dont wanna start the state v state bs im just curious on how its done over there, last time i was in Sydney was circa 1995 or 96.
I agree fully with strong schools and strong clubs competitions.

The second half was a bit of a rant i admit

I'm not sure either the ARU or the NSWRU fund schools rugby in this state. I've certainly never heard of it. They might provide some in-kind support here and there, but nothing of any significance.

 

[chibimatty]

Ditching super rugby altogether and running a season long NRC in its place with Fiji, Samoa and Tonga would be a far better long term option for Australian rugby IMO.

Was there something like that proposed a while back after the Force were admitted? The "Super 8s." Fiji, Tonga, Samoa, Japan and the (then) four Aussie Super 14 teams. I think they went to the IRB for funding for the South Pacific teams, but it was vetoed (by New Zealand?) on the grounds that the IRB shouldn't be funding an Australian "domestic" competition?

 

[Quick Hands]

Was there something like that proposed a while back after the Force were admitted? The "Super 8s." Fiji, Tonga, Samoa, Japan and the (then) four Aussie Super 14 teams. I think they went to the IRB for funding for the South Pacific teams, but it was vetoed (by New Zealand?) on the grounds that the IRB shouldn't be funding an Australian "domestic" competition?

Not sure. But it would as it would allow NZ and SA to play more games against each other, it should suit the demands of NZRU perfectly.

 

[Spaldo]

A friend of mine picked up on the way the RUPA survey suggested that Australia should either go it alone or pursue a Trans-Tasman comp and wrote to them directly to ask whether a domestic competition would really be financially viable. Apparently RUPA told him that they think a domestic competition would be more commercially viable in the long term.

I guess, if we could somehow up-skill and make our teams more competitive, then a Trans-Tasman comp could be quite exciting and mutually beneficial after the current broadcast deal ends in 2020.

But one of the problems with a Trans-Tasman comp, if we fail to up-skill fast enough, is that constantly being beaten by NZ teams does not help gain media attention and build a larger fan base in Australia, etc.

This is one reason why going it alone (at least for a spell) could be more attractive (assuming it really is financially viable). The benefits that come with teams winning would stay within Oz and help build rugby here. The ARU could put Australian rugby first in a way that is directly obvious to fans.

So just trying to think outside the box for 2020 onwards, I reckon something like this could be a bit exciting:


March-May: A revamped NRC* with all the test players available

May-June: State of Origin involving a real NSW Waratahs, Queensland Reds, and a ‘Best of the Rest’ representative team.

June: Offer the winner of State of Origin to play the winner of Super Rugby or any other such champion from whatever competition that exists at that time.

July: Inbound Tests

August-October: the Rugby Championship

November: End of Year Tour


*The revamped NRC could include the following teams:

ACT Brumbies
Western Force
Melbourne Rebels
+
2-3 teams created by the NSWRU
2 teams created by the QRU


I haven’t suggested what a ‘third tier’ could look like during July-October, but I reckon a set-up like this would suit fans in Oz, with all the pathways being kept alive. It also provides a mixed-bag of goodies for the broadcasters.

The ‘Best of the Rest’ team in State of Origin would work because it’s not a regular team playing week in and week out without a home. It would be a select representative team made up of the best players outside of NSW and Qld (there are other such equivalent teams that work in other sports).

The end result would be: Australia would have a national domestic comp with the best players available. It would have a great State of Origin concept. And the winning State of Origin team would have the potential opportunity to play the best team from another top level competition each year.

The other SANZAAR countries could establish a similar set-up if they wanted to, or continue with a form of Super Rugby. But whatever happens, Australia would be attempting to do what’s best for Australia, and take charge of its own future.

^^^^^^ THIS

THIS x1000

More Aussie games. 8 teams - 4 games/wk, in a time zone we can watch, an Aussie team to win every week and at the end. Would get more passion in the final than, e.g Sharks vs Brumbies 2004. Can anyone name a Sharks player from then? I can still name most of the Raiders and about half of Balmain from the epic 1989 final, and I hate league. A bit of a SOO flavor after the regular season.

More opportunities for players - instead of being sheltered in extended squads - but also coaches and refs. Better exposure for sponsors. Do you think Gallagher (sponsors of the Chiefs) get good value when they play in SA?

Start small, 8 teams, and grow it like the A-League. Cities are lining up to be the next A-League team. Canberra's enclosed stadium will only be built if they get a team. Why? Because soccer is popular. Wasn't always that way, look at what happened to the NSL. People don't care that the Soccerroos aren't as good as Germany or Brazil, that we don't have a hope in hell of winning the next world cup. People don't care that we aren't the top test team in cricket - we have been no 3 for a while. BBL is going great.

So the question is - do we pander to SANZAAR by:
- Giving up on the West, and all the promise that their exellent development programs show? Hand it on a platter to League?
- Do we cull the Rebels, and cut off the second largest market in Australia?
- Do we shaft the most successful professional-era provincial team in Australia?
All to chase some future pay-day from asian TV by supporting the Sunwolves, or to make do on a promise from the RWC 2007 to better support Argentina?

We should go it alone. Commit to the breakdown. Confidence is key.

​

 

[Forcefield]

I think there needs to be an international component. We can't rely on domestic only. I don't see why we don't try to create something like the European Cup/European . Cup: Top 4 NRC Aussie teams, 7 NZ Mitre 10 Premiership teams + however many others to made the ideal number (1? Winner of the Pacific Nations Cup?). Trophy: Bottom 4 NRC Aussie teams, 7 Mitre 10 Championship teams + however many others to made the ideal number.

This makes 14 NZ teams (2.8 times their current number) and 8 Aussie teams (1.6 times our number). This weakens the NZ teams who are simply too strong. It uses existing structures. I personally think that the NRC has taught us that lack of talent doesn't make for a poor spectacle- what makes a poor spectacle is one team horrendously out-classed by their opposition.

 

[Ulrich]

More opportunities for players - instead of being sheltered in extended squads - but also coaches and refs. Better exposure for sponsors. Do you think Gallagher (sponsors of the Chiefs) get good value when they play in SA?

Not to detract from your post or this thread, but I'd have you know, being in the security industry myself since 2011 that Gallagher is a very well known brand and SA has close to the biggest if not the biggest security industry in the world, certainly the largest for private security.

The unfortunate part is that Gallagher is considered an expensive product and in SA we like our coffee like we like our women.

Cheap.

A joke for grins there. Anyway.

 

[TOCC]

Sponsorship and marketing is a fatal flaw of the competition, most of the brands appeal to their domestic market only. There are a few scenarios of crossover where brands are involved in more then one country, but it's not the norm.

Even with the new digital sponsorship which gets superimposed on the field, there is an opportunity there to target the market by swapping in different sponsors. But it doesn't happen, Vodaphone Australia has their own marketing budget, they aren't particularly interested in advertising in South Africa, where Vodacom operates as a seperate entity and under a different ownership structure.

 

[zer0]

This makes 14 NZ teams (2.8 times their current number) and 8 Aussie teams (1.6 times our number). This weakens the NZ teams who are simply too strong. It uses existing structures. I personally think that the NRC has taught us that lack of talent doesn't make for a poor spectacle- what makes a poor spectacle is one team horrendously out-classed by their opposition.

The NZRU is unlikely to abandon the franchises because they A) work very well in the current NZ rugby pyramid; and B) avoid the troubles that come with provincial rugby.

 

[RedsHappy]

From Wayne Smith below in The Australian this morning (extract only).....as I've had cause to say before here, you could not make this ludicrous saga up if you tried. The negligence, arrogance and manifest incompetence of the entire process as it affects virtually every aspect of southern hemisphere rugby is breathtaking both in its extent and probable impact:


".............Meanwhile, the ARU has been taken by surprise by indications out of South Africa that the SARU general assembly meeting on Thursday does not have any debate about Super Rugby on its official agenda. According to a SARU spokesman, it will be SANZAAR that makes the decision on how many teams contest Super Rugby next season and once that is decided, South Africa will adjust accordingly.

Indeed, the spokesman categorically stated no vote would be taken on whether South Africa approves of SANZAAR’s plan to cut two sides or which franchises will be cut, if any.

But that flies in the face of everything that the ARU and SANZAAR had expected. The ARU had a board meeting arranged for yesterday but cancelled it because it was considered pointless to make any decision before it was known whether South Africa was prepared to cut two teams. If it was, then Australia almost certainly would cut one of its own. If not, then the five Australian teams would continue in a presumably slightly tweaked Super Rugby competition next season.

The ARU has rescheduled its board meeting for Monday morning, just ahead of the annual general meeting, which would have been a timely occasion to announce any planned changes. But where the entire process stands now that South Africa has declared there will be no ballots on Thursday is anyone’s guess.

SANZAAR, too, is believed to be tearing its hair out at the frustrating delay being caused by South Africa. Its expectation was that firm decisions on what would form the building blocks of SA rugby would be made on Thursday.

But Australia is also dragging the chain. An ARU spokesman confirmed that the broadcasters had come back to them with an indication of how they would react to key questions — presumably how they would view a reduction in teams and whether they would demand any compensation."