• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Australian Rugby / RA

Wallaby Man

Trevor Allan (34)
NZ has hitched it's wagon to Australia by pushing SA out of Super Rugby. I think we are already seeing the effects of that with players not getting consistent quality competition to improve. And the same point I make about Australia, I will make about NZ - none of the top tier teams play domestic-only competitions. And the state of Super Rugby at the moment, it's really only a domestic comp for NZ.

Listening to Giteau on the GBRA podcast reinforced the thoughts that I have expressed on here. Players need to have competition for their spots. The depth of talent isn't here to do that right now. Having players being able to freely move between Super Rugby teams will help provide that.

Where would the Force or the Rebels be placed right now if they were in NPC? Genuine question - @Dan54 I know you watch a heap of NPC, do you have thoughts on how well these teams would go?
Burkey explained why this doesn’t wash on the same podcast. Gits can think that because he’s always going to attract top dollar where he has played. Times have changed and the potential quality reserve isn’t going to sit around and offer competition in 2023, hes going to head overseas to play regularly and earn starter money.

What’s going to happen to the 19yr old talent that’s playing 3rd choice. Not play for 5yrs and play club rugby? Meanwhile overseas talent has 100 games pro experience in this time. Then all of a sudden we have a 25yr old with with the experience of a 21yr old in Europe and spends the next 3/4yrs learning the finer details of the game that the training pitch can’t offer.

It’s just no feasible in 2023. We need more games in our players. Looking at the Welsh team that beat us, they aren’t more talented, not athletically better, they are just more refined pros from systems that keep offering them opportunities to learn at the highest level.

We have been found out in Super Rugby as professionalism increases overseas. We celebrate 100 Super games like it’s a lifetime achievement. 100 games, it’s not even mentioned in the NRL and overseas pros are racking up 200/300 club appearances. No wonder we are so bereft of ideas on the pitch and unable to adapt with tactics on the fly. NZ is fairly naive as well, they have managed to keep the wolves away by having a little bit more money, a slightly better pro system and the most gifted athletes in rugby. But rugby smarts missing a plenty across both countries
 

drewprint

Colin Windon (37)
This is where Super Rugby needs to desperately improve as a product again. For the sake of both nations, it needs to be a tightly run, independently run, successful product that can afford to get the best talent playing in the competition. As dire as things are in Australia, I think NZ is on the same path of talent drain as the proper money will continue to flow from overseas competitions. I totally agree that amongst other things it needs free player movement - this will create competitiveness, which will create a higher quality product, which will create financial growth through sponsorships and broadcasting rights, which will create more of those talented Australians (and New Zealanders) choosing rugby over league, and choosing local rugby over European/Japanese rugby. This just requires both unions getting the fuck out of each others way/their own way and entrusting this to an independent body, who’s priority isn’t cultivating the next AB/Wallaby, but to make Super Rugby the best domestic league in the world.
 

Viking

Mark Ella (57)
It genuinely annoys the hell outta me how little rugby the Aussies actually play. They play only 14 games every year. Contrast that to the premiership where teams play 18 games every calendar year excluding the premiership cup and the challenge cup. There are 26 games per season in the top 14 for fucks sake. The URC has 18 rounds too.

Marcus Smith is the same age as Noah Lolesio yet has 200 professional games under his belt. The lack of games also means that the Aussies are often gassed and not fit enough and don't have enough time to build cohesion.

I agree. Every team should play each other twice home and away. That would at least give 22 games a season in a 12-team comp. Excluding Finals.
 

Tomikin

Simon Poidevin (60)
I think there are some reasonable middle ground options. Another option would be to just have 2 very concentrated elite teams in Super Rugby, which feeds into the Wallabies (and Australia A, who should play at least a handful of games every season), and then focus on building a national club competition that goes for the full season and lives within its means beneath that. It'd likely start at a semi-pro level, but it could include the 3 current super rugby brands that don't continue in that competition, along with 5-9 others. Maybe in time it builds to the point where you don't even need Super Rugby, or Super Rugby just becomes some fairly short provincial rep competition.

Then you get cohesion at the elite level, plus a legitimate national competition with local rivalries, stronger grassroots connection etc. It'd really be a 2nd tier, because the 1st tier would be Super Rugby+Wallabies/Aus A.
So your idea is to kill 3 clubs... you really think fans of the clubs would stay around if they went semi pro.. and no none of those fans would move to the Tahs and Reds ..
 
  • Like
Reactions: dru

Beer on the hill

Ward Prentice (10)
dr-evil-austin-powers.gif
Why was I reported?
 

Bullrush

John Hipwell (52)
Burkey explained why this doesn’t wash on the same podcast. Gits can think that because he’s always going to attract top dollar where he has played. Times have changed and the potential quality reserve isn’t going to sit around and offer competition in 2023, hes going to head overseas to play regularly and earn starter money.

What’s going to happen to the 19yr old talent that’s playing 3rd choice. Not play for 5yrs and play club rugby? Meanwhile overseas talent has 100 games pro experience in this time. Then all of a sudden we have a 25yr old with with the experience of a 21yr old in Europe and spends the next 3/4yrs learning the finer details of the game that the training pitch can’t offer.

It’s just no feasible in 2023. We need more games in our players. Looking at the Welsh team that beat us, they aren’t more talented, not athletically better, they are just more refined pros from systems that keep offering them opportunities to learn at the highest level.

We have been found out in Super Rugby as professionalism increases overseas. We celebrate 100 Super games like it’s a lifetime achievement. 100 games, it’s not even mentioned in the NRL and overseas pros are racking up 200/300 club appearances. No wonder we are so bereft of ideas on the pitch and unable to adapt with tactics on the fly. NZ is fairly naive as well, they have managed to keep the wolves away by having a little bit more money, a slightly better pro system and the most gifted athletes in rugby. But rugby smarts missing a plenty across both countries
Are you saying that if a player is 3rd choice for the Waratahs, they should be able to be 1st choice somewhere else in Australia?

This is already happening and all it seems to do is pull down the whole level of competition.

If you are 3rd choice here in Super Rugby, it should mean you are not good enough. If a club overseas wants to pay you big money to come and be their 1st choice then so be it. But playing for the Wallabies should mean something too and if a player doesn't want to stay and earn that privilege, let them go.

Again, another professional competition is needed under Super Rugby but keeping or creating more Super Rugby clubs so less talented or skilled players can stay and earn a living doesn't make sense to me.
 

Slim 293

Stirling Mortlock (74)
If you are 3rd choice here in Super Rugby, it should mean you are not good enough.

Really? Aside from the completely illogical nature of that statement...

Off the top of my head I can give you a few examples where that is simply not the case...

The Brumbies' four Wallaby hookers last year...

The Brumbies' four Wallaby locks...

The Rebels' three Wallaby tighthead props next year.
 
Last edited:

HogansHeros

Syd Malcolm (24)
I like the idea of a domestic comp. We need to improve rugby as a product to gain any traction among the public. Watching our Super Rugby teams get beaten by the kiwis all season is pretty rubbish. The Brums are the only competitive team yet still no one shows up to watch them. We need to get the bandwaggoners back on board. Some positive media.

Even if you only started with 8 clubs, sort out 3 more from the 5 we have. Have a professional 1st grade squad, a semi pro 2nd grade for development and a womens. They can play double or triple headers to create an event at the venues.

Let it be an open market, like the NRL, however try and attract as much overseas talent as possible to create a high quality competition. Im sure there would be plenty of Currie Cup players willing to come over if lured with residency to escape the loadshedding blackouts and opportunity for their families.

The domestic product needs to stand on its own two feet. If the Wallabies are successful ontop of that, then bonus.

Edit: also can we stop playing super rugby in big empty stadiums, there would be more atmosphere at a local park serving full strength beer where punters can yell from the fence.
 
Last edited:

Omar Comin'

Chilla Wilson (44)
So your idea is to kill 3 clubs... you really think fans of the clubs would stay around if they went semi pro.. and no none of those fans would move to the Tahs and Reds ..

Well you could even have the 5 current teams form the basis of the national competition, and create 2 new brands for the Super Rugby tournament. It'd be like in cricket where the Australian squad is largely separate from the big bash and other domestic competitions.

It's not my preference for the long term, but I do think for the next 4 years we probably need to focus on the Wallabies as the number 1 priority, simply because if they perform well in 2025 and 2027 it could quickly save the sport as a major code in this country. Longer term I think the primary focus should be on what sits beneath the Wallabies - rugby needs other competitions and events that attract general interest, regardless of how the Wallabies are doing. International rugby is only going to become more competitive, and it's not realistic that we could always be in the top 2 or 3 teams, even with better structures, player development etc.
 

Members Section

John Thornett (49)
whats with all the sydney elites obsession with "competing against the nz team" Super Rugby is not working & it looks like for both unions now, no one cares about it anymore expect the rusted on fans,

blow it all up start again,
 

Lorenzo

Colin Windon (37)
What part was reasonably coherent, it was just another rant. There was not a single thing offered in the article about how to turnaround Australian rugby.

We start winning, play attractive running rugby, sack Eddie Jones and then win the 27 World Cup. Wow I didn't realize how simple the whole thing was , we appoint one captain, we employ another coach, we pay out another coach, I mean why have they simply not done that for the last 20 years.

This article sums up the whole bloody approach of Australian rugby for the last two decades, just another fanciful Wishlist with promises to spend money on the Grassroots, but everything is focused on the Wallabies.

I can't read it but if he did say this, he is living in cuckoo land. Any reality in which we gave the capacity to consider what kind of 'style' we play alongside the goal of winning is long gone. We can't even win anymore. No one else in the test arena devotes any energy to how 'attractive' their play is and anyone that thinks we can do so and even think about keeping up with them needs to see a doctor.
 

wamberal99

Billy Sheehan (19)

And this article pretty much hits the bullseye
A pretty easy bullseye to hit. But the point they make about the kids who play rugby at private schools and end up in the NRL kind of misses the point. Kids like Kalyn Ponga were never going to play rugby (not in Australia, in his case), they were on scholarships paid for by the opposition.

The opposition has enough money to buy whomever they want.

2023 might go down as the year professional rugby died in Australia. I am deeply pessimistic.
 

Members Section

John Thornett (49)

And this article pretty much hits the bullseye

Do we think grass roots is as really bad or its a throw away line? I know that in vic registrations haven't been higher & it seams like Shute shield & Hospital cup is killing it. I mean now i'm invested in both from another state rather than just watching the final on the abc once a yr. they could always do with more funding.

To me our main problem for 20 yrs has been turning elite school talent into wallabies
 
Top