"Get Rid Of 'Em": How Sanzaar Was Convinced To Bin the Sunwolves - Green and Gold Rugby
Humour

“Get Rid Of ‘Em”: How Sanzaar Was Convinced To Bin the Sunwolves

“Get Rid Of ‘Em”: How Sanzaar Was Convinced To Bin the Sunwolves

The Off-White Card can exclusively reveal that Sanzaar decided to cut the Sunwolves only after a passionate speech from Karl Pilkington.

English radio celebrity Pilkington produced a speech called ‘Do We Need ‘Em?’, which sources say was centred on asking the question about whether or not Super Rugby “needed” Sunwolves.

Pilkington, 42, is best known as being Ricky Gervais’ stooge when Gervais had his own radio show in London in the early 2000s. Pilkington’s idiot-cum-genius charm is apparently what attracted Sanzaar, as Sanzaar’s board, and entire philosophy, is based on making smart decisions that everyone else thinks is really dumb.

As revealed on Wednesday in the Tele, some immigrant group is causing spurious problems the Sunwolves have been canned by Sanzaar, with 2020 their last year in Super Rugby.

“Alright,” Pilkington was said to have begun his speech with.

“Erm, Sunwolves, do we need em? We already have snow wolves, and, uh, climate change is really massive right now innit. So ‘Sun’ wolves, do we really need them hotting up this earth?

“We already have enough useless animals on this planet. There’s plenty of ‘em already. Same with jellyfish, snails and cockroaches. It goes on and on.

“Ages ago, alright, there was some man in America or something who said we’ve invented everything. We should have kept it that way.

“It’s weird, innit.”

After his time addressing the Sanzaar board, Pilkington stayed around the tell some story about a “little monkey fella”, and thanked the supranational governing body for giving him enough money “to finally fix” his boiler.

  • Jason

    I just don’t understand how or why they didn’t cut the Sunwolves when they cut the Force and moved the two South African teams.

    • Huw Tindall

      $$$ mate! Always $. Follow the money and you’ll find the answer.

  • Cameron Rivett

    Cut the Saffers instead and bring the Force back. Maybe add another Argie or Fijian team while we’re at it. At least the Sunwolves are in a watchable timezone.

    • D. Braithwaite’s The Brumbies

      Do we honestly believe that Australia has the depth for five Super Rugby teams?

      • Cameron Rivett

        How does having fewer professional positions build depth and keep talent in Australia? If anything we need to review our coach selection process, not player depth.

        • D. Braithwaite’s The Brumbies

          If the talent of Argentina was spread over five teams almost every team would be annihilated every round and all that would happen is that teams would play in losing environments – that is what has happened to most of Australia’s players since we expanded to 5 teams, at best we had 1-2 decent teams per year in the period from 2011-17.

          We have to build depth, sure, but we also have to be realistic about the number of quality professional players we can produce, especially with the player drain to the northern hemisphere.

          There’s a reason that New Zealand have gone for 5 teams, and Ireland 4. Because you need to strike the right balance between being able to develop players (which you can’t do with only 1-2 teams) and having your talent spread too thin.

        • Cameron Rivett

          The situation is different in Australia. There are 20 NRL teams, which provides a hell of a lot more employment opportunity than 4 Super Rugby teams. We also have to compete with overseas big bucks as probably 200 clubs with varying degrees of professionalism in Europe and Japan hire Australians. If you’re an 18 year old with a talent for rugby, you’d be an idiot to go to Super Rugby unless you made private school connections because you have 5x the employment chance in League and 50x the employment chance overseas. Adding an extra team reduces this to 4x and 40x respectively. Yes, those 5 teams will be weaker than 4 teams with the worst players cut, but by that logic we should only have 1 team.

          It’s really just a guessing game though. What we have the depth for is relative to the other teams in the competition. We competed pretty well when we had 5 teams against South African teams, as well as Argentina’s team (which by your logic should be super strong because there’s only one). The trouble is that we only care about results against NZ teams, and they have the talent for probably 8 Super Rugby teams of the same strength as the rest of the competition. I definitely also think that the Argentines have the depth for a second team, they still have a lot of overseas talent and they could start to bring it home with a second team.

        • D. Braithwaite’s The Brumbies

          I think your first paragraph demonstrated exactly why we shouldn’t have 5 super rugby teams.

          It is not by chance that our results have improved since we reduced to four teams. We may have win super rugby twice with 5 teams, but it is also not a surprise that at an aggregate level our results declined when we went from 3 to 4 teams, and again from 4 to 5 teams. We don’t have the depth of players.

          Is that comment on Argentina serious? If it is then you’ve completely missed what I am saying.

  • IIPA

    The bigger question….how does Karl Pilkington get famous? About as funny as bowel cancer

    • D. Braithwaite’s The Brumbies

      Nah, I think he’s the funniest man alive. Don’t be an Scrooge.

  • Keith Butler

    Well that was about as funny as watching paint dry.

  • Nutta

    I’m really sorry to see them go because I believe that in an ever-increasingly crowded sporting marketplace the road to redemption is international relevance and the markets it opens up. However the idea/team must be sustainable in and of itself – and the Pingers in their current form simply weren’t. My old man used to say funny stuff. One of his more obtuse comments was “Boy, don’t be surprised when a sheep grows wool.” It’s a comment about how you will get what you set yourself up for. The Pingers didn’t have realistic chance because the best footballers available in Japan were jealously guarded and kept away by the Corpo-Clubs. As a result all that was left for the Pingers were those locals not good enough to be so-guarded by the Corpo-Clubs filled out by the also-rans from Super Franchises. So from a pure rugby perspective they were shanked from the start because they just weren’t winning. Better quality cattle on the field pulling consistent wins would have meant we weren’t having this discussion. Money is great, but it can’t paper over an unsustainable position for ever – just ask RA.

  • D. Braithwaite’s The Brumbies

    Quality KP banter.

Humour
@OffWhiteCard

Printing all the rugby news that isn't true, but you wish it was!

More in Humour

  • A love letter to Rugby

    It’s 5.45pm Friday night, in downtown Sapporo, and I’ve tried 4 bars already. All of the bars...

  • World Rugby urges TMOs to get back to core business.

    In a high level memo obtained by OWC, senior figures within World Rugby are pushing to clarify...

  • Nutta’s Navel Gazing – Centres

    Just gently reminding folk that this is not original work. This is a caboodle of connotation and...

  • Nutta’s Navel Gazing – Standoff

    Continuing the continuum of a Frontie now considering the Fairies; meandering among the inexplicable… This week we contemplate the guy called First Five, Five Eight, Fly Half, Outside Half or any one of a plethora of idiotic, nonsensical names that have little in-common with each other then conjoined to mean even less. What this...