Quick Hands
David Wilson (68)
Even though the ARU denied this was the case?
Where to for Super Rugby?
- Thread starter Quick Hands
- Start date
- Status
Even though the ARU denied this was the case?
Quick Hands
David Wilson (68)
Hold the presses on that one IS, they haven't announced their "strategy" yet.
Quick Hands
David Wilson (68)
Agree TOCC. We've now reached French Revolution point, where the ruling class are contructing a new palace for themselves as the game disintegrates around them. We need our own Robespierre to clean this lot out forever.
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
Can we affiliate with the NZRU?
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
They agreed to it 5 weeks ago without knowing which team they were going to cut?
That is borderline insane.
Then, apparently, they have got no closer to making up their "mind" about that in the ensuing 5 weeks: FFS.
No wonder my NAB shares never went up in value while Clyne was at the "helm".
charlesalan
Sydney Middleton (9)
Surely at this important meeting the Rebels owner would be in attendance to cast his vote, but according to Wayne, he is lolling around the NZ wineries
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...s/news-story/6ecb8d8abebe818065a1e3f4733582cd
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...s/news-story/6ecb8d8abebe818065a1e3f4733582cd
Twoilms
Trevor Allan (34)
Many people seem to be suggesting that the NZRU have somehow bullied no-nuts Pulver into doing what they want. What i don't understand is how?
It doesn't make sense, they have a veto right. A veto system more or less guarantees that no single party can be ganged up on because they can just veto until the cows come home. Case study - Russia in the UN Security Council.
I thought, well it's probably the broadcasters (i.e. the money) pushing for a cut. But no, i'm reading that Fox stated they wanted 5 Australian teams to remain, particularly the Force due to (relatively) good TV ratings.
So from a relatively strong position, with leverage in the Veto right and backing from the broadcasters, we have sold out 20% of Australia super players, destroyed Rugby Union in whichever state the ARU decides for the foreseeable future and gained absolutely nothing in return.
How the fuck does that even happen? Someone should be contacting ASIC or the ACCC (he says knowing full well both organisations are equally as incompetent as the ARU).
It doesn't make sense, they have a veto right. A veto system more or less guarantees that no single party can be ganged up on because they can just veto until the cows come home. Case study - Russia in the UN Security Council.
I thought, well it's probably the broadcasters (i.e. the money) pushing for a cut. But no, i'm reading that Fox stated they wanted 5 Australian teams to remain, particularly the Force due to (relatively) good TV ratings.
So from a relatively strong position, with leverage in the Veto right and backing from the broadcasters, we have sold out 20% of Australia super players, destroyed Rugby Union in whichever state the ARU decides for the foreseeable future and gained absolutely nothing in return.
How the fuck does that even happen? Someone should be contacting ASIC or the ACCC (he says knowing full well both organisations are equally as incompetent as the ARU).
The Snout
Ward Prentice (10)
For heaven's sake, we need to get out in 2020.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11835387
"Tew told the Radio Sport Breakfast that New Zealand's top players believe there are too many local derbies under the new 15-team format, one of a number of reasons why the format might be re-jigged again after 2020."
"Tew said: "Japan are on notice that they've got to perform at a higher level as time goes on. "
Sorry, but if NZ think they have a right to put other member nations "on notice" , coupled with they seem to want the total opposite with less local derbies, frankly, our time together is at an end.
ARU has 3 years to come up with a viable Australia only competition to replace Super Rugby. Involve any Pacific Islands if you want.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11835387
"Tew told the Radio Sport Breakfast that New Zealand's top players believe there are too many local derbies under the new 15-team format, one of a number of reasons why the format might be re-jigged again after 2020."
"Tew said: "Japan are on notice that they've got to perform at a higher level as time goes on. "
Sorry, but if NZ think they have a right to put other member nations "on notice" , coupled with they seem to want the total opposite with less local derbies, frankly, our time together is at an end.
ARU has 3 years to come up with a viable Australia only competition to replace Super Rugby. Involve any Pacific Islands if you want.
Strewthcobber
Mark Ella (57)
Each of the Super Rugby teams requires funding of approx $5.5m - $8m a year.
The broadcaster agreements will not be changed under the new arrangement. Revenue stays the same
So what the ARU gains is an additional $5m+ or so each year.
As others have said, that means a strengthening of the remaining four teams due to a concentration of talent, but also because the player payments will stay the same - so the remaining players will be paid more, hopefully meaning a better standard of player can be retained.
Given the well publicised financial issues the ARU have created for themselves, they obviously see this as worth it. I don't. But there is at least something gained there - enough for the executive, the board and the other members of the ARU to agree to it.
I just don't get how relegation works though.
What do the Force (for the sake of the argument) do next year to earn promotion back in?
Twoilms
Trevor Allan (34)
Wonder how much money would be gained if we cut their salaries.
Rebels3
Jim Lenehan (48)
2020 could be bloodier than it is now. Let's hope we have considerable runs on the board between now and then to leverage a better competition.
KOB1987
Rod McCall (65)
Having read the article by Wayne Smith, I think this will play out in the least painful way and that is that Cox will sell his licence to the Force and the Rebels will go. The 'own the force' campaign will continue.
The Brumbies won't officially merge with the Rebels, however their province will be extended to include Victoria. That's purely academic though, just like they get fuck all of their players from the Riverina now they'll also get fuck all of them from Melbourne. They may play say 2 of their 8 home games in Melbourne which is by no means a disaster. But they may not too.
As long as Melbourne still has the Rising and there are plans to continue or even expand the NRC the VRU should be able to continue with their elite development centre or whatever it's called.
The Brumbies won't officially merge with the Rebels, however their province will be extended to include Victoria. That's purely academic though, just like they get fuck all of their players from the Riverina now they'll also get fuck all of them from Melbourne. They may play say 2 of their 8 home games in Melbourne which is by no means a disaster. But they may not too.
As long as Melbourne still has the Rising and there are plans to continue or even expand the NRC the VRU should be able to continue with their elite development centre or whatever it's called.
They know who is going, they just don't know how to spin such bad news, whatever they do it will be bad press.
5.05pm on the Thursday before Good Friday sounds like the kind of timing
lou75
Ron Walden (29)
Had a little look at the ARU constitution for voting, it seems that the nominees are put to the members for approval on a two thirds vote, so they need 10 votes for approval -
8 member unions
2 NSW & QLD
5 Super Rugby
1 RUPA
Can the little states and territories form an alliance of voting? WA, SA, NT, VIC, TAS + 2 Super rugby + RUPA = 8 votes can hold them accountable and reject nominees and possibly changes
http://myrugby.rugby.com.au/myrugby/images/docs/Gov/Details.pdf
8 member unions
2 NSW & QLD
5 Super Rugby
1 RUPA
Can the little states and territories form an alliance of voting? WA, SA, NT, VIC, TAS + 2 Super rugby + RUPA = 8 votes can hold them accountable and reject nominees and possibly changes
http://myrugby.rugby.com.au/myrugby/images/docs/Gov/Details.pdf
Tex
Greg Davis (50)
What's the ARU email convention? first name.surname@aru.org.au? @rugby.org.au?
I'd love for the exec to hear first-hand from fans...
I'd love for the exec to hear first-hand from fans...
Strewthcobber
Mark Ella (57)
They may be strategically incompetent, but the board isn't stupid. I imagine the smaller unions will see a relatively small, but significant and vital for them increase in funding contingent on this proposal making it through the AGM
You don't do this type of stuff without the board being aware, they might not like the outcome, but they would have seen the figures and watched enough games over the last few years to see something had to change
It wasn't working, it isn't profitable and we weren't winning, the only reason we even get semi finalists is because of the comp structure, not merit
Dismal Pillock
Simon Poidevin (60)
oh shit **BREAKING NEWS**:
http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/co...eded-with-daily-news.13356/page-7#post-921394
http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/co...eded-with-daily-news.13356/page-7#post-921394
- Status