Simply answering Igs question, if it actually meant more bums on seats by having game 2 hours earlier. Thought it was polite, I don't care what what time it was on, I thought convo was finished, but if someone asks a question, it polite to reply. I was dead wrong about why RA had their games early, as I thought it was to attract crowds, bit I have been corrected.
I’d like to contrast that with my experience on the ground. Our local rugby club, after not having enough players to field a senior side on 2024, fought back and not only fielded a 2025 team, but also won its grade. At a junior level our club is surviving on merged sides - one merger spanning around 60kms separation. Today i received an email from my kids school inviting kids to sign up for a six week league program. Imagine if RA ran a similar program in established rugby areas to help support the game post-Rebels. I get we don’t have a pro side any more in. Victoria, but the speed at which RA vacated the ground is shocking.
Has an explanation for this been given anywhere? I have seen speculation that because it was a WC year the expenses were higher and next year is going back to pre WC expenses but not sure how true that is. Also being reported that pathways and mens 7s are facing cuts as well.
Yep I a fan of Waugh (and the RA board in general seem to be good), and even as a kiwi I pleased they not wasting the money they made from Lions etc. Just not sure perhaps it a good look to trumpet the profits from the Lions game and then cut funding to women's game. I can understand cutting perhaps 7s funding etc (I think NZR could do same) but worry, although I not a huge fan of the Women's game I do think it's important growth area. Seems it being handed over to NRL almost.
Like everything Doran writes, there's a lot of half truths. Looking at the women's high performance manager, perhaps the resignation is due to Jamie finding something else as Peter Horne is overseeing both the Wallabies and Wallaroos so Jamie has no role available that he thinks he is fit for.
I'd be incredibly surprised if it was paid in crypto, I don't think either party would want that. This is far from SwyftX's first foray into sports sponsorship, and I can't see any of their other partners agreeing to be paid in crypto.
www.rugby.com.au
I think the NZers they talk about might be Warriors, think I read something about that.I'd be incredibly surprised if it was paid in crypto, I don't think either party would want that. This is far from SwyftX's first foray into sports sponsorship, and I can't see any of their other partners agreeing to be paid in crypto.
Swyftx signs on as naming partner of Super Rugby Pacific, Super Rugby Women's in Australia
Leading cryptocurrency exchange Swyftx has been unveiled as the official naming partner of Super Rugby Pacific and Super Rugby Women's in Australia until the end of 2027.
The most interesting thing about this deal is that they have also signed a partnership with the NZ super sides. This looks like a pretty positive development for the comp going forward - more willingness to work together on whole of comp deals should hopefully unlock bigger and better sponsorship opportunities going forward.
It's not an inheriting bad decision so long as you tie it to the currency you want to be paid in. Given the volatile nature of crypto if it tanks you still want it be the same amount had they paid cash.
Ok hadn't read that, but good.
Once again , wasn't that something stupid when there was talk of a crossover game a few years back? As Sir A says it was craziest of crazy ideas that were thrown about.
