• 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.

Where to for Super Rugby?

Rugbynutter39

Steve Williams (59)
yeah the complete lack of money and carrying significant debt are the elephant in the room… RA are fucked financially
Hence why I think (read hope) RA are just ploughing on with TT where once have PE investment they will make investments where critical one nrc mark 3. My concern is that is couple of years away and a couple of years too long to wait. But without doubt lack of financial horsepower and covid means RA playing a conservative waiting and survival game - hence accepting a TT competition that really does not resolve the issues.
 

Adam84

Tony Shaw (54)
Tony Lewis highlights the imbalance in resources and reasons why Super Rugby wont be competitive, a revenue sharing agreement would be a small start.

‘NZ Super teams wouldn’t financially survive in our system’​


Western Force chief executive Tony Lewis knows the Super Rugby landscape on both sides of the ditch better than anyone. On Friday, he gave the Herald some real insights into why Australia might struggle against the Kiwis. For Lewis, it’s not the playing talent, it’s the coaching pathways, and second it’s the funding. Lewis said the Force get the same amount from RA as other Australian teams - “not quite $4.5 million”.

The Kiwis teams’ baseline budget is bigger than that, plus they get a coach and assistant coach, while further player payment incentives are available through the NPC - all paid for by NZ Rugby. “I look with envy over in New Zealand, and where they’re basically I think it’s about 130 per cent salary cap,” Lewis said. “So I think the perfect model is...the national body should cover all salaries, plus a soft cap of head coach, assistant coach, doctor. I think if the New Zealand teams had to work on our model, they wouldn’t financially survive.”

 

half

John Solomon (38)
^^^^^^^

There is a hard head school of thinking thats says the more you spend if you spend wisely the better you will be. Its actually hard to argue with as evidence world over says that's right and when some team breaks that mold then they become famous almost because they won with less money.

Money does always guarantee success but as the old saying goes, 'Money won't buy happiness". But it does take away a lot of the misery.

Which illustrates how important maybe even critical that those running RA determine new ways to increase revenue.

The Nine / Stan / Fairfax / Radio Network, media deal should be used to increase revenue from less traditional sources.
 

Dan54

Michael Lynagh (62)
Tony Lewis highlights the imbalance in resources and reasons why Super Rugby wont be competitive, a revenue sharing agreement would be a small start.



I don't understand the revenue sharing agreement you speak of, I have never seen a breakdown to say NZ teams get more than Aus teams anyway except one report from a reporter that never broke down how it was done, just went crook because he reckoned NZR got more from their tv deal the RA did for theirs, but no explanantion how it was so as Aus has bigger population. Would be very interested to see your figures anyway, but would expect that evryone is getting a share of whatever Super earns anyway. I know there is som
 

Adam84

Tony Shaw (54)
McLennan credits NZR Chair Stuart Mitchell for keeping the Trans-Tasman relationship alive form NZR side of the tasman, this speaks loudly about the relationship and opinion of NZR Chairman Mark Robinson though...

“If it wasn’t for Stuart Mitchell we would have cut them adrift and done Super AU only,” McLennan told foxsports.com.au.
“He’s a good guy, someone you can trust and he wants to do the right thing.
“We might still wind our relationship back with them over time if the relationship doesn’t settle at all levels. We’ll give it two years and re-evaluate.”

 

Dan54

Michael Lynagh (62)
McLennan credits NZR Chair Stuart Mitchell for keeping the Trans-Tasman relationship alive form NZR side of the tasman, this speaks loudly about the relationship and opinion of NZR Chairman Mark Robinson though..
Well his relationship with Mark Robinson as chair of NZR would be poor, as he is CEO and not chair, so him and Leapfrog I imagine would deal with each other and the Chair would deal with the chair?
 

Bullrush

John Thornett (49)
I wonder if the Boks are feeling any effects of not playing SR and Rugby Championship for 1-2yrs.

If SAANZAR created a Lions type team, who would beat them in the NH?
 

Dan54

Michael Lynagh (62)
If nz press is correct mark Robinson may soon be following Impey out the door. Personally think that may be a good thing
I haven't seen that in press here RN, not saying someone hasn't written something, I see something on Foxsport, but just a whisper mate, they are Aus not NZ press. ;) You do know Impey wasn't shown door or anything, has said a long time ago he was finishing up. But still it makes fora good story huh?
 

Dan54

Michael Lynagh (62)
Tony Lewis highlights the imbalance in resources and reasons why Super Rugby wont be competitive, a revenue sharing agreement would be a small start.



He is right though, NZR has been well run and looks after all levels of game , Rugby Australia???
 

Joe King

Bob Loudon (25)
He is right though, NZR has been well run and looks after all levels of game , Rugby Australia???
Probably applies more to old ARU than current RA.

Believe me, whenever the administrators of rugby in Australia do something wrong, Aussie fans are the first to call them out. That takes priority over protecting our collective reputation.

Of course, that way of doing things has its advantages and disadvantages.
 

Rugbynutter39

Steve Williams (59)
I haven't seen that in press here RN, not saying someone hasn't written something, I see something on Foxsport, but just a whisper mate, they are Aus not NZ press. ;) You do know Impey wasn't shown door or anything, has said a long time ago he was finishing up. But still it makes fora good story huh?

Seems our chairman not disappointed Impey finished up. Personally Dan unless major mindset and governance shift in this TT I reckon in 2 years we will be doing our own domestic competition. I suspect the 2 year timeframe coincides with private equity being landed and governance reform. So a case of if the Leopard (nzru) changes it’s spots we continue on with TT - orherwise go our own way. Regardless of that agree we need our nrc. Two years is enough time to trial whether TT and partnership with nzru can work…
 

Dan54

Michael Lynagh (62)
Seems our chairman not disappointed Impey finished up. Personally Dan unless major mindset and governance shift in this TT I reckon in 2 years we will be doing our own domestic competition. I suspect the 2 year timeframe coincides with private equity being landed and governance reform. So a case of if the Leopard (nzru) changes it’s spots we continue on with TT - orherwise go our own way. Regardless of that agree we need our nrc. Two years is enough time to trial whether TT and partnership with nzru can work…
Personally mate, I think it's just another Hamish playing to the crowd, but good on him, it's what he does, and it works for him. It worked last year and probably keep everyone happy while exactly the same thing carries on. I have been saying it for the last couple of years, but despite the overwhelming evidence that what I said (no changes etc) being fairly true, some for a strange reason think it will be different.
But also as I said I haven't seen the NZ press where Robinson is on the skids that you reported. Don't really care if he is or not just seems only place I read it is in a Aussie internet forum.
I will add I read very strongly that it was all going to be Super Au next year, on this forum, actually this very thread!
 

Rugbynutter39

Steve Williams (59)
Personally mate, I think it's just another Hamish playing to the crowd, but good on him, it's what he does, and it works for him. It worked last year and probably keep everyone happy while exactly the same thing carries on. I have been saying it for the last couple of years, but despite the overwhelming evidence that what I said (no changes etc) being fairly true, some for a strange reason think it will be different.
But also as I said I haven't seen the NZ press where Robinson is on the skids that you reported. Don't really care if he is or not just seems only place I read it is in a Aussie internet forum.
I will add I read very strongly that it was all going to be Super Au next year, on this forum, actually this very thread!
Mate we know both sides of the ditches media play up to their own audiences. Nz press and media is just as bad as oz media and press. Latter we can surely agree on. The media and press only fuel the relationship challenges.
 

hoggy

Cyril Towers (30)
Seems our chairman not disappointed Impey finished up. Personally Dan unless major mindset and governance shift in this TT I reckon in 2 years we will be doing our own domestic competition. I suspect the 2 year timeframe coincides with private equity being landed and governance reform. So a case of if the Leopard (nzru) changes it’s spots we continue on with TT - orherwise go our own way. Regardless of that agree we need our nrc. Two years is enough time to trial whether TT and partnership with nzru can work…
Sorry Rugbynutter, this is where i disagree with you the RA are broke, in 20 years they have shown no real genuine desire to push a domestic option and to be fair neither has the fan base really pushed it. The two year sign up is probably all they could get with co-vid concerns. There has been no real push for a domestic comp or even a hint that it is brewing in the background. PE will be busy paying of the current bills. does it matter if TT works or not, what options will you have at the end of 2023.

With the SA wins the RA have got there sugar hit they desperately needed, it will be all in on a 2023 world cup, followed by the Lions in 25 and 27 world cup, a domestic competition is simply not on the radar. I would be happy to be proved wrong.
 
Top