Where to for Super Rugby?

[liquor box]

Speak for yourself.

I am still on the fence on this one, and can see merit in both options. Nothing against Force or Rebels fans and players, I certainly understand their arguments. But I also see a history of constant failure on the field, with no end in sight.

Will the broader rugby public really care if we chop a team? Sure the bulk of posters here are against it, but we're the hardest of the hardcore. I'm not sure there is a huge love for the expansion teams among the wider public, and while there may be a backlash I'm not sure it will be that strong (outside of those directly affected).
.

South Sydney fans were never going to have anything to do with newscorp or Rugby League again when they were dropped.

South Sydney had one of the highest numbers of membership when they came back.

Die hard supporters of the game get pissed off but will always love the game.

I would be happy with a 15 team comp with 4 Aussie teams and Japan as a conference, 5 in NZ and 5 for SA/ARG- 18 week regular season.

I am equally happy to keep all teams and find a solution.

 

[todd4]

I found the whole competition fromat far more interesting when it was the Super15, sure it wasn't ideal that teams had to travel to SA & NZ for away games but that was how it was, & so I used to record and watch most games including SA derbies because they were all relavent to the competition.
The inclusion of Japan & Argentina have made the comp far too unwieldy & complicated. The travel is horrendous, the comp is fragmented & a little confusing, I no longer record games other than Aussie teams because a lot of these games seem irrelevant to following my team. Is there any other sporting comp in the world where teams are expected to circle the globe to play? Apparently there is a pot of gold coming to us for admitting Japan, does this mean we would not have survived without them? I never record a Sunwolves game unless they are playing the Force as I just can't get interested in them (same for the Kings if I'm honest). Argentina are a more interesting team to watch but not sure if that balances out the ridiculous travel that is involved.
My ideal solution would be for the powers-that-be admit they made a huge mistake by adding the Kings, Japan & Argentina to the comp, turf them out & go back to Super15 as it was.

 

[TOCC]

Yep that's a very crucial point, the conference system means I care little for what is happening in other conferences, especially South Africa.

 

[barbarian]

And that should be enough in itself, B. How would you or any of the Tahs' supporters feel if it was NSW Rugby facing extinction? I know it has been very mind numbing just having the Brumbies under a cloud so I fully sympathise/empathise with the fans from the Rebels and Force as well.

Should it? There are plenty of reasons not to chop a side, but 'the local fans would really hate it' isn't the best one. Of course it would suck mightily, and I sympathise 100% with those affected fans. I'd hate it to happen to me, no doubt.
.

 

[RedsHappy]

Re the Force, as an aside, an aspect of their survival or not that IMO has been under-covered in these threads is the way in which their supporters - and business viability - were betrayed by very poor, yet very critical, decisions made by WARugby in picking R Graham and then, almost worse, M Foley as HCs.

These demonstrably poor HCs (Foley's lamentable HC wares were on clear display at the Tahs) presided over sustained periods of awful Force w-l %s, dull to very dull playing styles, odd selections and generally uninspiring team performances (perhaps bar a short period in 2014).

These sequential down and yet more down periods unsurprisingly saw declining home Force crowds, major sponsors departing and weakening TV viewership (that, btw, fed through further to declining crowds for Wallaby Tests in Perth).

Ultimately, this all led to an expensive $3m++ bail out of the Force by the ARU and fears amongst some in the ARU that, rightly to wrongly, reviving the Force to a position of commercial and financial viability will be a huge, high-risk task.

If the Force are cut today, the Graham-Foley HC sequence for the Force will be a major contributing factor. The Force fans deserved much better in their team's leadership and, yet again, over-promoted, poor quality, insular RugbyWA board members made calls that took their charges on a downwards spiral, perhaps to their death.

 

[chibimatty]

I think the conference system is causing a disconnect throughout the competition. I would love it if they could go back to the system of everybody playing each other once. The only team I would be "in favour" of cutting, if there really has to be a cut, would be the Kings. They were not admitted to the competition for either rugby or financial reasons. I actually support Japanese involvement, however, only on the basis that the team is fully supported by the JRFU and ALL Top-League companies/clubs; and that they play all their home games in Japan. We don't need another "Super League Paris St Germain" débâcle.

I know the travel is bad for us (the Force,) Argentina and South Africa under the 1-match round-robin system, but rather than trying to make the travel/playoff-finals easier, maybe the compromise is to make the travel just as hard for those who have it "easier," by forcing a "tour schedule" on these teams that are equivalent to what the Jags/Wolves/Force/Saffers have to go through? At least then maybe, it can even out the playing field and placate the South Africans somewhat?

 

[The torpedo]

Re the Force, as an aside, an aspect of their survival or not that IMO has been under-covered in these threads is the way in which their supporters - and business viability - were betrayed by very poor, yet very critical, decisions made by WARugby in picking R Graham and then, almost worse, M Foley as HCs.

These demonstrably poor HCs (Foley's lamentable HC wares were on clear display at the Tahs) presided over sustained periods of awful Force w-l %s, dull to very dull playing styles, odd selections and generally uninspiring team performances (perhaps bar a short period in 2014).

These sequential down and yet more down periods unsurprisingly saw declining home Force crowds, major sponsors departing and weakening TV viewership (that, btw, fed through further to declining crowds for Wallaby Tests in Perth).

Ultimately, this all led to an expensive $3m++ bail out of the Force by the ARU and fears amongst some in the ARU that, rightly to wrongly, reviving the Force to a position of commercial and financial viability will be a huge, high-risk task.

If the Force are cut today, the Graham-Foley HC sequence for the Force will be a major contributing factor. The Force fans deserved much better in their team's leadership and, yet again, over-promoted, poor quality, insular RugbyWA board members made calls that took their charges on a downwards spiral, perhaps to their death.

shitty HCs, bailout from the ARU, state RU exces with their heads up their arses?

Are you talking about the Reds or Force RH?

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I think the conference system is causing a disconnect throughout the competition. I would love it if they could go back to the system of everybody playing each other once. The only team I would be "in favour" of cutting, if there really has to be a cut, would be the Kings. They were not admitted to the competition for either rugby or financial reasons. I actually support Japanese involvement, however, only on the basis that the team is fully supported by the JRFU and ALL Top-League companies/clubs; and that they play all their home games in Japan. We don't need another "Super League Paris St Germain" débâcle.

I know the travel is bad for us (the Force,) Argentina and South Africa under the 1-match round-robin system, but rather than trying to make the travel/playoff-finals easier, maybe the compromise is to make the travel just as hard for those who have it "easier," by forcing a "tour schedule" on these teams that are equivalent to what the Jags/Wolves/Force/Saffers have to go through? At least then maybe, it can even out the playing field and placate the South Africans somewhat?

I actually don't mind the conference system. If done correctly it actually reduced travel and ticks a number of boxes in terms of satisfying local audience. But SANZAAR have managed to make a complete meal of it.

The iteration employed in the 15 team format should have never been altered. Could still have added the three new teams without going down the clusterfuck that we have now by just keeping that basic structure and the double derby rounds it featured.

If SANZAAR come out and say they plan to go back to the previous three conference syste, adding the Sunwolves to ours and Jaguares to NZ while keeping the current 6 SA franchises I'd be happy. I'd be even happier if the declare that the competition will be played in two phases. A 10 round in conference phase and a 5 round international phase where teams are divided into three pools determined by their in conference rankings. Top 2 from each pool in this phase progress to the finals. I think that would be a fairly compelling competition.

 

[Sir Arthur Higgins]

Can we not split into then3x 6 team conferences with home and away series.
Those 10 games then determine the rankings for a Heineken cup style tournament - 2x4 teams and 2x5 team pools (not ideal). Then pool play with top two teams progressing to championship tournament and bottom 2/3 progressing to a challenge cup style tournament.
Anything is better than what we currently have. I just don't care about most of the games at the moment. Quality of the comp is dulilutednand too man meaningless games for the average fan.

 

[Sir Arthur Higgins]

I actually don't mind the conference system. If done correctly it actually reduced travel and ticks a number of boxes in terms of satisfying local audience. But SANZAAR have managed to make a complete meal of it.

The iteration employed in the 15 team format should have never been altered. Could still have added the three new teams without going down the clusterfuck that we have now by just keeping that basic structure and the double derby rounds it featured.

If SANZAAR come out and say they plan to go back to the previous three conference syste, adding the Sunwolves to ours and Jaguares to NZ while keeping the current 6 SA franchises I'd be happy. I'd be even happier if the declare that the competition will be played in two phases. A 10 round in conference phase and a 5 round international phase where teams are divided into three pools determined by their in conference rankings. Top 2 from each pool in this phase progress to the finals. I think that would be a fairly compelling competition.

Ha. Same. That makes sense to me

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Can we not split into then3x 6 team conferences with home and away series.
Those 10 games then determine the rankings for a Heineken cup style tournament - 2x4 teams and 2x5 team pools (not ideal). Then pool play with top two teams progressing to championship tournament and bottom 2/3 progressing to a challenge cup style tournament.
Anything is better than what we currently have. I just don't care about most of the games at the moment. Quality of the comp is dulilutednand too man meaningless games for the average fan.

I think I could live with that.

 

[Mortal Wombat]

There are plenty of reasons not to chop a side, but 'the local fans would really hate it' isn't the best one.

I feel like this would be true, if all local fans (and media) were created equally.

Unfortunately, that is not the world we live in. People in WA already have a chip on their shoulder, where they think everyone who lives east of Esperance is in league against them.

The strength of the local development program and the timezone are 2 good, positive reasons to keep the Force, but the biggest reason to keep them, in my opinion, is that removing the Rebels would do the least amount of damage to a game that is already bleeding.

We can get rid the Rebels, and still hold test matches in Melbourne. People would show up, and the Melbourne media aren't invested enough to make a lot of trouble.

Killing the Force would effectively kill the game in Perth. Forget rugby for a second, a huge part of the WA identity is wrapped up in an us and them mentality against the rest of the country, or the eastern states, as they are referred to. Many people are not aware that WA voted to leave the Federation in a referendum in the 1930! Their parochialism makes the Queensland siege mentality look positively tongue in cheek.

If the Force go, it plays into that pre-existing sore spot, and the WA media will run with it, because it will sell like hot chips to all those West Australians who presently don't have strong feelings about rugby, but who will take it as a conspiracy and an insult by the hated eastern states against them, shitting on WA yet again.

All the Force need are some wins, and the game will grow there. How many years of success have the Storm had in Melbourne, and the people (and media) in Victoria still give zero fucks?

 

[Twoilms]

^^^
Won't be long until they Secede. Civil war is just around the corner.

Though also, fuck Melbourne and their stupid, uncoordinated singlet wearing basketball rugby.

 

[Quick Hands]

Of course they hard QH, and by the way it not me who says 2 derbies is not preferable but the players, who seem to think that playing other NZ teams once is enough. I wish I could remember wheer the quotes are, but I know Dane Coles in an interview earlier in year said that the local derbies were played with the intensity of test matches generally, he didn't say local derbies in SA or Aus were any different, as he hasn't played in them, but was in a general discussion of Super rugby he said the feeling was once against each local team was enough!

The silly thing about the current structure is that it actually reduced SA v NZ games - I think it's the Sharks who go through the whole of the season without playing an NZ team. It also reduced the derby matches for the Aussie teams. So, the current structure would seem to please no one, which sort of makes a lot of us wonder why anyone agreed to it.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

What Mortal Wombat is saying is actually pretty true. Our relationship with the East is a particular sore spot for most West Aussies right now and this wouldn't help. The problem we have of course is that we don't have enough votes for anybody over there to give a shit about it, which only fuels the siege mentality even further.

 

[Twoilms]

The silly thing about the current structure is that it actually reduced SA v NZ games - I think it's the Sharks who go through the whole of the season without playing an NZ team. It also reduced the derby matches for the Aussie teams. So, the current structure would seem to please no one, which sort of makes a lot of us wonder why anyone agreed to it.

I was told it was because it guaranteed (more or less) a couple of home SA finals.

 

[Scooter]

The fans we need are the ones who have already left, in droves. The current levels of support are not viable. So, if we lose a few, but gain a lot, who cares? The vast majority of the current support base will bitch, scream, complain, post vitriolic rants here, and then settle down and enjoy the game.

I am not sure how cutting a team is going to lead to gaining a lot of fans. Other than the players being spread over less teams which in theory should increase the quality of the remaining 4 teams. Of course there is also likely to be more players head to Europe and Japan.

The issues with the ARU are more fundamental and significant and will not be solved simply by cutting one Super Rugby team.

 

[GaffaCHinO]

Re the Force, as an aside, an aspect of their survival or not that IMO has been under-covered in these threads is the way in which their supporters - and business viability - were betrayed by very poor, yet very critical, decisions made by WARugby in picking R Graham and then, almost worse, M Foley as HCs.

These demonstrably poor HCs (Foley's lamentable HC wares were on clear display at the Tahs) presided over sustained periods of awful Force w-l %s, dull to very dull playing styles, odd selections and generally uninspiring team performances (perhaps bar a short period in 2014).

These sequential down and yet more down periods unsurprisingly saw declining home Force crowds, major sponsors departing and weakening TV viewership (that, btw, fed through further to declining crowds for Wallaby Tests in Perth).

Ultimately, this all led to an expensive $3m++ bail out of the Force by the ARU and fears amongst some in the ARU that, rightly to wrongly, reviving the Force to a position of commercial and financial viability will be a huge, high-risk task.

If the Force are cut today, the Graham-Foley HC sequence for the Force will be a major contributing factor. The Force fans deserved much better in their team's leadership and, yet again, over-promoted, poor quality, insular RugbyWA board members made calls that took their charges on a downwards spiral, perhaps to their death.

Whilst I completely agree with the head coach issues the force were also up against it from other sources.

Richard Graham was forced (pun not intended) upon rugby wa by the ARU as he was seen as the man In waiting after being involved with the wobs. They never wanted him but had no real choice in the matter.

Foley was a huge mistake however the force had been chasing Cheika for months an at one point he agreed to come West and had a contract infront of him to then have the tahs swoop in and score him. The force panicked and signed Foley which was a disaster with in weeks of Foley getting the gig the ceo moved on and they were stuck with him. Then after one ok season where we finished 9th they prematurely signed him again whiched was followed by our worst season ever.

Many mistakes have been make and if a team is cut today it will be another mistake in a long line which will have more disastrous effects on rugby is Australia.

 

[Jon]

Re the Force, as an aside, an aspect of their survival or not that IMO has been under-covered in these threads is the way in which their supporters - and business viability - were betrayed by very poor, yet very critical, decisions made by WARugby in picking R Graham and then, almost worse, M Foley as HCs.

These demonstrably poor HCs (Foley's lamentable HC wares were on clear display at the Tahs) presided over sustained periods of awful Force w-l %s, dull to very dull playing styles, odd selections and generally uninspiring team performances (perhaps bar a short period in 2014).

These sequential down and yet more down periods unsurprisingly saw declining home Force crowds, major sponsors departing and weakening TV viewership (that, btw, fed through further to declining crowds for Wallaby Tests in Perth).

Ultimately, this all led to an expensive $3m++ bail out of the Force by the ARU and fears amongst some in the ARU that, rightly to wrongly, reviving the Force to a position of commercial and financial viability will be a huge, high-risk task.

If the Force are cut today, the Graham-Foley HC sequence for the Force will be a major contributing factor. The Force fans deserved much better in their team's leadership and, yet again, over-promoted, poor quality, insular RugbyWA board members made calls that took their charges on a downwards spiral, perhaps to their death.

we - as fans are absolutely the victim of a succession of stupid decisions by the board.

However as to the bailout - this was the first additional financial support the force had received from the ARU. hell the state government loaned us money before the ARU gave us a handout - for which we had to sell our IP, something none of the other franchises have been required to do when they have needed to be saved financially.

also the steps that the organisation has taken in order to get the books right have been monumental. starting even before they sold the IP back to the ARU.

- selling the sponsorship rights to multiple companies was a first for Australian sport
- we have now secured a naming rights sponsor for 3 years (provided we're still around) based on the losses in the last financial year this alone would have put the force back in the black.
- on top of that there is the own the force campaign going to continually secure the finances.

the force have revived themselves into financial viability. to suggest otherwise is absolutely incorrect.

 

[Quick Hands]

I was told it was because it guaranteed (more or less) a couple of home SA finals.

It did achieve that, but at the expense of many other things.

EDIT: And it may be the single demand which has brought the whole thing down.