Chat Forum
It is currently Fri Jul 20, 2018 7:42 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 183 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2018 12:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 34300
Location: Queensland
Flockwitt wrote:
UncleFB wrote:
Andalu wrote:
Why not have all 5 sides play each other home and away, then the top 2 (for example) go into an international playoff?

Also not convinced the attrition rate would be reduced in a provincial setup.

I would hate that. I actually don't like watching NZ teams play each other, I prefer to see them playing other countries teams.

As other posters have noted Super rugby is where we pay our players to play in NZ, we'd be stuffed without it.

Yep this. From one competition we've got TV revenues from 5 markets. You're simply never going to get that income any other way. Think an NZ only comp will pay for any sort of league of competitive salaries and grass root development below the ABs? Forget it.


We get shit money from 5 markets though. We are severely under-selling our product. In Australia, the A League gets fewer TV viewers than Super Rugby but has a much more lucrative TV deal. Why? Because it generates more content. Lots of games, played at viewer friendly times every weekend. Super Rugby gets two prime time games a weekend in Australia, the rest are in the late afternoon (NZ games) or at 3am.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2018 12:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:34 am
Posts: 13966
guy smiley wrote:
CrazyIslander wrote:
guy smiley wrote:
CrazyIslander wrote:
Did you consider the fact no one else is putting in a bid for rugby broadcasting rights?


The rights deal isn't due for renewal until 2020 dude. There's plenty of time.

But no one is ever gonna put up $300m/5 yrs for rugby in Oz.


I'm not suggesting that... while I think the way the code is promoted by the rights holder here isn't ideal, compromised by it's conflicting interests across the sporting landscape, rugby down here needs to work together to generate the revenue. No way any of the three countries going alone works.... I'm sure you and I are pretty much agreed on that, aren't we?

I've got a rough idea of selling packages through lightweight internet based streaming services like ESPN who are moving into serious sports coverage... tv, internet and handheld device access to various packages bringing the game straight to the consumer in the format and combinations they want.
Formula 1 was sold last year after decades of ownership by Bernie Ecclestone. I'm not a fan of everything the new owners (American based) are doing with the sport but they are selling packages to their own product and controlling that access really well. It's a model that works. Rugby should be looking at doing the same.

That's pie in the sky stuff. Regardless how it is broadcasted, SANZAR would not want to do it themselves. Someone needs to bid for the rights then broadcast it how they see fit. It still comes down to no one is prepared to stump up the money Foxtel are willing to pay.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2018 11:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14905
Location: Leafy Surrey, UK
I can see them proposing the following soon...

each team plays the other teams 5 times.

2 home, 2 away and 1 neutral country venue.

The home and away games alternate each week, that way no one gets a jet-lag advantage.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2018 11:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20389
Zakar wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Bindi wrote:
Rugby is in terminal decline in Australia. Dumping the Force hasn’t improved anything.

Hard to say whether a modified Sup rugby is the answer, or pull out all together and select Wobs from local comp and overseas. Either way, I don’t expect the twats running the show to get it right.


Terminal decline is overly pesimistic. Look at club rugby finals around the country (even in the bush where I'm told rugby doesn't exist). The 110k people that went to the Australia NZ bled in 2000 haven't all died, but like most aussies, they back winners. We haven't been winning.


One of the benefits of a domestic competition is there there will always be a domestic winner.


I genuinely think that's one reason NRL and AFL do so well.


I agree. In Rugby Union in Australia basically the media coverage must fizzle out with no positivity. An elite domestic league always ends a season on high with hype about who will win? Super Rugby always freezes out at least one major Rugby Nation and it's not as exciting or has the interest in a final between other nations. It's no coincidence the two domestic Leagues in Europe are doing the best financially. Australian Netball went from strength to strength splitting the league, more money, more interest, more attendance more ratings. They didn't have anywhere near the levels of difference of Rugby.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2018 12:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20389
Ali's Choice wrote:

We get shit money from 5 markets though. We are severely under-selling our product. In Australia, the A League gets fewer TV viewers than Super Rugby but has a much more lucrative TV deal. Why? Because it generates more content. Lots of games, played at viewer friendly times every weekend. Super Rugby gets two prime time games a weekend in Australia, the rest are in the late afternoon (NZ games) or at 3am.


Good point. I think some posters are worried about the big safety net of Super Rugby. But Advertisers are not paying for 3am Games and 3/5 teams fans being unengaged domestically. What they want is all fans engaged all weekend and lots of media attention at the end of the season.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2018 1:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 11:18 pm
Posts: 218
Is there an argument for making SR more like the Heineken Cup? Four groups, four teams in each, on top of expanded domestic competitions? Can see it working for NZ and SA, might be more difficult for the Aussies.

Just an idea. Admittedly, it might be a shite one.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2018 5:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 26218
Biffer29 wrote:
Is there an argument for making SR more like the Heineken Cup?
Quote:
I think so.

Quote:
might be more difficult for the Aussies.

What's the thinking there?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2018 6:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 11:18 pm
Posts: 218
kiap wrote:
Biffer29 wrote:
Is there an argument for making SR more like the Heineken Cup?
Quote:
I think so.

Quote:
might be more difficult for the Aussies.

What's the thinking there?


Basically I thought that because their domestic competition isn’t as well established as the Currie Cup or Mitre10.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2018 6:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 26218
Biffer29 wrote:
Basically I thought that because their domestic competition isn’t as well established as the Currie Cup or Mitre10.

Ah, okay. I don't think that would pose a problem.

Obviously the Euro version has a mix of clubs/provinces. It can just as easily work with provincial franchises. There's only two teams different as of this year in the NRC as compared to those franchises.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2018 12:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 7:02 am
Posts: 2880
kiap wrote:
There's only two teams different as of this year in the NRC as compared to those franchises.



Will the NRC capture the rugby public's attention?



This is my radical suggestion. Let us forgot about trying to have a national footprint, we never have, and never will.


We need to accept reality, and play to, and within, our strengths, which is the triangular territory which encompasses Canberra, Sydney, and Brisbane, with a footprint into the adjacent country areas.


This is where we have always been relatively strong, and this is where any "national" competition should be based. And it should be composed of existing club teams. Teams that have histories, and traditions, long standing rivalries, and lots of supporters.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2018 12:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 37638
Location: in transit
wamberal99 wrote:
kiap wrote:
There's only two teams different as of this year in the NRC as compared to those franchises.



Will the NRC capture the rugby public's attention?



This is my radical suggestion. Let us forgot about trying to have a national footprint, we never have, and never will.


We need to accept reality, and play to, and within, our strengths, which is the triangular territory which encompasses Canberra, Sydney, and Brisbane, with a footprint into the adjacent country areas.


This is where we have always been relatively strong, and this is where any "national" competition should be based. And it should be composed of existing club teams. Teams that have histories, and traditions, long standing rivalries, and lots of supporters.



It's a shame that the Eastern States of Australia are so blind to the energy and numbers the game enjoys in WA. Locals, not just expats although the expats' support helps.

You had a national footprint. You didn't have the administration to capitalise on it. You still have the administration, though.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2018 12:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10723
Location: Growing Rugby Online. FACT.
Ali's Choice wrote:
Why do the three SANZAR countries persist with Super Rugby?

It doesn't make financial sense. It runs at a loss for all three countries. They would be much better off financially not being involved in this tournament. In these tough economic times, when cashed up NH clubs are luring more and more SH players North on hefty contracts, surely loss making projects such as Super Rugby are a luxury that we cannot afford?

I get that we need to prepare our players for test Rugby, and SR does this effectively. But surely the injury toll counter-balances any benefit that our players get from participating in this comp? The injury toll in the NZ conference in particular is immense, and I'm sure it is the same for Australia and SA. Throw in all the travel, and time away from wives, families and partners, and Super Rugby is arguably a massive burden for SH players.

Scrapping SR would allow the three SANZAR nations to concentrate on domestic competitions and International Rugby. The intra-conference games are the big drawcards as it stands anyway. Spectators have voted with their feet, they don't want to pay to see visiting teams from overseas in SR. The abysmal crowd in Johannesburg this year for the Crusaders vs Lions game, which was a replay of last year's final, shows just how little interest there is in the cross-conference games. Also wholly domestic comps would be much more responsive to the needs of players and spectators. There would be no 3am kick offs, no shit games against teams like the Sunwolves and I believe more domestic interest across all three countries.



Dude. You are/were one of the biggest supporters of Super Rugby for many years. Fcuk you are an idiot.

I have been saying scrap SR for years, but you would say stick with it.. its what we need blah blah.

Anyone could see what was gonna happen to SR rugby after the 2011 RWC with dwindling numbers, subpar oz and Saffa rugby teams, plus the dreary no frills rugby started by the Saders, brumbies and Bulls.

You are so full of shite.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2018 12:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2048
I'd always wondered just how much money there really is for Rugby in New Zealand. Not saying the NZRU doesn't do a terrific job, but I'd always wondered what what available outside the structure the Unions comply to.

Private ownership or lease of national unions? Wealthy individuals/Companies who'll use a Union as their toy/project in the same way France does - But within a framework that benefits everyone within New Zealand Rugby. We have a well established system already in place to feed pro teams through club rugby, an infrastructure that's probably a world leader in the way it's set up.

I wouldn't say an utter free-for-all, but private ownership/lease of top class unions within a set of guidelines set out by the NZRU to ensure there is continuity to the NZ Rugby system.

What does it cost to run a pro rugby team in this part of the world currently anyway? Any of the 5 NZ franchises for example, does anyone know? Or an NRL side for comparison?
Is it really that hard to find money for Rugby in New Zealand, if the structure was something different to what we currently run, and private ownership/lease of a union was the reality?

I could be well wrong but I always thought we underestimated ourselves a bit in regard to what's available to us. It wasn't too long ago the NZRU was offering a stake in the Highlanders but with HUGE restrictions, Taranaki were quite serious about tendering for a Super Rugby spot, and Hawkes Bay gave it thought for a short time.

Me personally, I don't have a problem with the "State Insurance Auckland" side, or "Gallagher Electric Fence" Waikato, or the "Eric Watson Wellington" titles.

Any country only needs one first class Rugby competition and season. It should be all done and dusted in 4 months so there's a good gap to keep interest up.
Anything will suffer burnout if it's played continuously - Rugby, Music, TV shows..
I think the benefit of exposure of a NZ pro rugby side is pretty obvious, the country is choked and littered with media exposure about Rugby.

Yeah, I do wonder if we're selling ourselves short. No, we'll probably never compete with the top value players, but we still manage to keep a good bunch of them, and we still manage to replace what we lose for the most part, but I think the same happens in Europe too. Players get offered more, or better conditions, or an alternative and they move. Sometimes it's probably not even about money.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2018 6:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14291
Location: XPAT CUNT
wamberal99 wrote:
kiap wrote:
There's only two teams different as of this year in the NRC as compared to those franchises.



Will the NRC capture the rugby public's attention?



This is my radical suggestion. Let us forgot about trying to have a national footprint, we never have, and never will.


We need to accept reality, and play to, and within, our strengths, which is the triangular territory which encompasses Canberra, Sydney, and Brisbane, with a footprint into the adjacent country areas.


This is where we have always been relatively strong, and this is where any "national" competition should be based. And it should be composed of existing club teams. Teams that have histories, and traditions, long standing rivalries, and lots of supporters.


That's BS, and unfair to people in Perth and Melbourne, amongst other areas. It also will hasten our demise.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2018 7:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5181
Location: STRAYA CUNT!!!
Zakar wrote:
wamberal99 wrote:
kiap wrote:
There's only two teams different as of this year in the NRC as compared to those franchises.



Will the NRC capture the rugby public's attention?



This is my radical suggestion. Let us forgot about trying to have a national footprint, we never have, and never will.


We need to accept reality, and play to, and within, our strengths, which is the triangular territory which encompasses Canberra, Sydney, and Brisbane, with a footprint into the adjacent country areas.


This is where we have always been relatively strong, and this is where any "national" competition should be based. And it should be composed of existing club teams. Teams that have histories, and traditions, long standing rivalries, and lots of supporters.


That's BS, and unfair to people in Perth and Melbourne, amongst other areas. It also will hasten our demise.


This is another example of a Wambers special. Either he's acting as RA's chief apologist or he's offering solutions that were barely relevant 25 years ago.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2018 7:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14291
Location: XPAT CUNT
Working Class Rugger wrote:
Zakar wrote:
wamberal99 wrote:
kiap wrote:
There's only two teams different as of this year in the NRC as compared to those franchises.



Will the NRC capture the rugby public's attention?



This is my radical suggestion. Let us forgot about trying to have a national footprint, we never have, and never will.


We need to accept reality, and play to, and within, our strengths, which is the triangular territory which encompasses Canberra, Sydney, and Brisbane, with a footprint into the adjacent country areas.


This is where we have always been relatively strong, and this is where any "national" competition should be based. And it should be composed of existing club teams. Teams that have histories, and traditions, long standing rivalries, and lots of supporters.


That's BS, and unfair to people in Perth and Melbourne, amongst other areas. It also will hasten our demise.


This is another example of a Wambers special. Either he's acting as RA's chief apologist or he's offering solutions that were barely relevant 25 years ago.


What's his gig? Sydney Uni?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2018 8:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5181
Location: STRAYA CUNT!!!
Zakar wrote:
Working Class Rugger wrote:
Zakar wrote:
wamberal99 wrote:
kiap wrote:
There's only two teams different as of this year in the NRC as compared to those franchises.



Will the NRC capture the rugby public's attention?



This is my radical suggestion. Let us forgot about trying to have a national footprint, we never have, and never will.


We need to accept reality, and play to, and within, our strengths, which is the triangular territory which encompasses Canberra, Sydney, and Brisbane, with a footprint into the adjacent country areas.


This is where we have always been relatively strong, and this is where any "national" competition should be based. And it should be composed of existing club teams. Teams that have histories, and traditions, long standing rivalries, and lots of supporters.


That's BS, and unfair to people in Perth and Melbourne, amongst other areas. It also will hasten our demise.


This is another example of a Wambers special. Either he's acting as RA's chief apologist or he's offering solutions that were barely relevant 25 years ago.


What's his gig? Sydney Uni?


He's an Eastwood fan.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2018 8:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 7:02 am
Posts: 2880
Believe what you like chaps. Reality can be tough to face up to. Sorry to have to do it to you.



Yes, I am an Eastwood supporter, have been now for close to 70 years, pretty much from the first Saturday of their first season in the Shute Shield.



Not sure how many more seasons I will see, but I know that our days of pretending to be a major sport with a national footprint in Australia will never, ever come to fruition.


I will keep saying what I believe to be true. You all keep your little heads in the sand, waiting, and hoping, for some kind of miracle. It won't happen.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2018 10:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 34300
Location: Queensland
I was a strong supporter of the proposed Trans Tasman comp. But I'm not sure that this woulkd be as attractive to sponsors and viewers, in both the NZ and Australian markets, as two separate domestic comps. Australian viewers will potentially tire of seeing NZ teams dominate, especially in the short to medium term. Australia needs domestic success at 2nd tier level, year in and year out.

Moreover with a Trans Tasman model both countries will be impacted by the time zones differences. Broadcasters demand content at viewer friendly times. A game played at 8pm in Brisbane during summer would broadcast live into NZ at 11pm. Similarly games played at 7.30pm Friday night in NZ are live at 4.30pm in Brisbane and 2.30pm in Perth, when white collar Rugby fans are still at work. That's not good enough in today's highly competitive sports broadcasting world.

I believe that both NZ and Australia would be better off directing funding and energy into two strong domestic comps. Remember they don't need to earn as much as SANZAAR currently gets for Super Rugby, even a third of that paltry amount will leave each nation ahead financially. A short Champions Cup style comp with the top SA domestic teams could be held late in the year that would draw in further revenue.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2018 1:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 37638
Location: in transit
wamberal99 wrote:
Believe what you like chaps. Reality can be tough to face up to. Sorry to have to do it to you.



Yes, I am an Eastwood supporter, have been now for close to 70 years, pretty much from the first Saturday of their first season in the Shute Shield.



Not sure how many more seasons I will see, but I know that our days of pretending to be a major sport with a national footprint in Australia will never, ever come to fruition.


I will keep saying what I believe to be true. You all keep your little heads in the sand, waiting, and hoping, for some kind of miracle. It won't happen.



When I lived in Sydney I was fresh out of NZ and not aware of the various state based rivalries and petty parochialism. I rented a room in Manly for 2 1/2 years and the landlady became a good friend, along with the rest of her family. I remember her father giving her a birthday gift one year.... a gold pendant in the shape of the outline of Australia with a diamond set in Sydney's location (he was well off, yes)... I was struck by the piece at the time but it wasn't until years later that I came to understand that that is how NSW sees itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2018 6:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 38
I work in Saudi. I have Fridays and Saturdays off. Super Rugby fills in a nice part of the weekend. NZ matches in the morning, Aussie games through lunch, and the South African clashes late afternoon. It works for me.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2018 6:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 3:15 pm
Posts: 34210
Location: Planet Rock
I wonder how many people who like me loved watching super rugby totally lost interest in it once it went into conferences and have never gone back to it. If Shields hadn't signed for Wasps I wouldn't have watched one minutes worth this season.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2018 7:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20389
Anonymous. wrote:
I wonder how many people who like me loved watching super rugby totally lost interest in it once it went into conferences and have never gone back to it. If Shields hadn't signed for Wasps I wouldn't have watched one minutes worth this season.


That's the case here. And I was someone who thought conferences were the way forward. But it just makes things convoluted and off-putting in practice. Games just seem random and meaningless (even if they aren't).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2018 7:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21157
Location: Centre of the Universe
eldanielfire wrote:
Anonymous. wrote:
I wonder how many people who like me loved watching super rugby totally lost interest in it once it went into conferences and have never gone back to it. If Shields hadn't signed for Wasps I wouldn't have watched one minutes worth this season.


That's the case here. And I was someone who thought conferences were the way forward. But it just makes things convoluted and off-putting in practice. Games just seem random and meaningless (even if they aren't).


+2 I liked the variety of Super 12 back in the day, and imagined conference play saved on travel / money, so understood why... but for much the same reason I don't like watching sevens, seeing the same teams face off with each other over and over doesn't interest me.

I'd also rather see fewer teams and games - one match against each opponent, semis and final. But as with some saying there are too many (meaningless) tests these days, there's no chance they'll reduce unless there's a mass player revolt / bankruptcy. They won't throw away the money made.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2018 7:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 26218
Nieghorn wrote:
They won't throw away the money made.

What money?

This is a little out of date (RA don't publish much anymore, understandably) but if you read the numbers it can still form a picture.

Image

Soup is a loss-leader (and these days barely that).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2018 10:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 11:18 pm
Posts: 218
kiap wrote:
Nieghorn wrote:
They won't throw away the money made.

What money?

This is a little out of date (RA don't publish much anymore, understandably) but if you read the numbers it can still form a picture.

Image

Soup is a loss-leader (and these days barely that).


Given that, it’s worth considering binning Soup rugby. Stick 20 mil a year into domestic rugby and enter those teams into a SH Cup similar to the euro one. Big question is what broadcast rights you’d get for a domestic comp. there’s about 12million income from super rugby broadcasting that you’d need to either cut the expenditure of or replace at least partially. The Cup would replace some of it but not all (fewer games but maybe better product?).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2018 10:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 11:18 pm
Posts: 218
Teams in Mitre10 Cup Premier not relegated (6), Teams in Currie Cup Premier not relegated, top 6 from Aus NPC, extra team for the country that won last year plus one team from a qualifying tourney of PAC Island teams / Japan / RGs maybe. Then format is exactly the same as Europe (which is already a proven successful format).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2018 11:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6622
Biffer29 wrote:
kiap wrote:
Nieghorn wrote:
They won't throw away the money made.

What money?

This is a little out of date (RA don't publish much anymore, understandably) but if you read the numbers it can still form a picture.

Image

Soup is a loss-leader (and these days barely that).


Given that, it’s worth considering binning Soup rugby. Stick 20 mil a year into domestic rugby and enter those teams into a SH Cup similar to the euro one. Big question is what broadcast rights you’d get for a domestic comp. there’s about 12million income from super rugby broadcasting that you’d need to either cut the expenditure of or replace at least partially. The Cup would replace some of it but not all (fewer games but maybe better product?).


How on earth is/was RA paying Pulver $750k plus $1.5m bonus on revenue of around 100m. The governance there is criminal.
KG


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 12:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14651
Anonymous. wrote:
I wonder how many people who like me loved watching super rugby totally lost interest in it once it went into conferences and have never gone back to it. If Shields hadn't signed for Wasps I wouldn't have watched one minutes worth this season.

TBF, you guys aren't really target market, Super rugby has to make its money in the SH.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 1:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15069
Location: Auckland, NZ, Earth
Super Rugby is ok, the idea is good. It's just the structure that is shit. The conference system is confusing and useless, and a lot of people have lost interest in it.

Also the Sunwolves are a total disaster (who saw that coming?) and just add extra costs and travel requirements.

Should be Super 14 again. Ditch the sunwolves, have 4 saffa and aus sides, 5 kiwi sides, and one argie side.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 1:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15069
Location: Auckland, NZ, Earth
Ali's Choice wrote:
I was a strong supporter of the proposed Trans Tasman comp. But I'm not sure that this woulkd be as attractive to sponsors and viewers, in both the NZ and Australian markets, as two separate domestic comps. Australian viewers will potentially tire of seeing NZ teams dominate, especially in the short to medium term. Australia needs domestic success at 2nd tier level, year in and year out.

Moreover with a Trans Tasman model both countries will be impacted by the time zones differences. Broadcasters demand content at viewer friendly times. A game played at 8pm in Brisbane during summer would broadcast live into NZ at 11pm. Similarly games played at 7.30pm Friday night in NZ are live at 4.30pm in Brisbane and 2.30pm in Perth, when white collar Rugby fans are still at work. That's not good enough in today's highly competitive sports broadcasting world.

I believe that both NZ and Australia would be better off directing funding and energy into two strong domestic comps. Remember they don't need to earn as much as SANZAAR currently gets for Super Rugby, even a third of that paltry amount will leave each nation ahead financially. A short Champions Cup style comp with the top SA domestic teams could be held late in the year that would draw in further revenue.


Re: Trans Tasman comp

I don't think NZ teams would dominate if they have the NPC teams rather than the franchises. So say Auckland, Canterbury, Otago, Waikato, Wellington, Taranaki, Hawkes Bay. The teams can change yearly depending on the results of the ITM Cup. (like it did with super 10)

Would breathe some extra life into the ITM Cup and we can see the glory days of Auckland v Queensland again.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 1:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 7:02 am
Posts: 2880
From an Australian perspective, it would be nice to think that New Zealand is willing to embrace a Trans-Tasman competition which might keep the professional game alive here. Would they?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 1:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 26218
wamberal99 wrote:
From an Australian perspective, it would be nice to think that New Zealand is willing to embrace a Trans-Tasman competition which might keep the professional game alive here. Would they?

Australian rugby is full of jobsworths with a cargo cult mentality.

A Trans-Tasman comp is not "the magic pill" to solve the problem. Australia has to up its game first on the domestic front.

But Trans-Tasman matches on the top of that? Of course.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 2:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 7:02 am
Posts: 2880
kiap wrote:
wamberal99 wrote:
From an Australian perspective, it would be nice to think that New Zealand is willing to embrace a Trans-Tasman competition which might keep the professional game alive here. Would they?

Australian rugby is full of jobsworths with a cargo cult mentality.

A Trans-Tasman comp is not "the magic pill" to solve the problem. Australia has to up its game first on the domestic front.

But Trans-Tasman matches on the top of that? Of course.



Who said anything about "magic pills?" Certainly not me. But if you believe that we can bootstrap the game here without any sort of cooperation, goodwill, call it what you like, you are the biggest cargo cultist of them all.


Do you really believe that the NRC is the way of the future? Good grief. Some future.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 2:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 26218
wamberal99 wrote:
But if you believe that we can bootstrap the game here without any sort of cooperation, goodwill, call it what you like, you are the biggest cargo cultist of them all.

No no, old son.

You're the one wanting NZ to fly in, Prince Philip style, and do the job the useless local branch can't do.

Image

All the while being Apologist-in-Chief for the ARU's failure after failure.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 3:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 34300
Location: Queensland
wamberal99 wrote:
From an Australian perspective, it would be nice to think that New Zealand is willing to embrace a Trans-Tasman competition which might keep the professional game alive here. Would they?


I think many NZ fans would embrace such a comp. I have advocated for such a competition over many years on this forum. But my concern is that such a comp might potentially be dominated by NZ teams, which would turn-off Australian broadcasters and viewers. Australian Rugby needs some success stories and I'm not sure a combined comp would provide such stories. Equally, there would still be some timezine issues that would impact on the value of the tournament. I would certainly prefer a Trans Tasman comp over the current model, but I think three strong independent domestic comps would be preferable. The four current Australian teams plus the Western Force and the Sunwolves. That's six competitive teams. Australia already has a relationship with Fiji through the NRC, so perhaps a 2nd team based in Sydney could be included plus Fiji. That would be four games at prime time in Australia (twice what there currently are) and a guaranteed Australian winner at the end. You can't tell me that such a comp wouldn't generate at least a third of what SANZAR currently get for SR.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 9:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14291
Location: XPAT CUNT
Ali's Choice wrote:
wamberal99 wrote:
From an Australian perspective, it would be nice to think that New Zealand is willing to embrace a Trans-Tasman competition which might keep the professional game alive here. Would they?


I think many NZ fans would embrace such a comp. I have advocated for such a competition over many years on this forum. But my concern is that such a comp might potentially be dominated by NZ teams, which would turn-off Australian broadcasters and viewers. Australian Rugby needs some success stories and I'm not sure a combined comp would provide such stories. Equally, there would still be some timezine issues that would impact on the value of the tournament. I would certainly prefer a Trans Tasman comp over the current model, but I think three strong independent domestic comps would be preferable. The four current Australian teams plus the Western Force and the Sunwolves. That's six competitive teams. Australia already has a relationship with Fiji through the NRC, so perhaps a 2nd team based in Sydney could be included plus Fiji. That would be four games at prime time in Australia (twice what there currently are) and a guaranteed Australian winner at the end. You can't tell me that such a comp wouldn't generate at least a third of what SANZAR currently get for SR.


I think any trans tasman comp would need to go hand in hand with watering down the NZ conference in some way, maybe an extra team or two. I'm not sure there is an appetite for that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 10:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14339
Location: Tahstown
Australian sports fans want tribalism, not a match they have to rush home from work or stay up into the wee hours to watch..oh and they want to actually be able to attend not go weeks without seeing any rugby. A state based comp fans can identify with.
A trans tasman comp would be a way to finish the season after local finals but nz don't show any appetite for this so we need to get busy working out how we do it on our own.
I can't believe some still think the Shute shield will take over as the premier national comp, it never came close to be and never will. Honest but poor clubs with poor facilities. Lets just go back to park rugby if thats are only hope.
Anyway that idiot Marinos was recently quoted that the new pro comp in the US will save the day with possible expansion options...the fool has learnt nothing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 11:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 37638
Location: in transit
grievous wrote:
Australian sports fans want tribalism, not a match they have to rush home from work or stay up into the wee hours to watch..oh and they want to actually be able to attend not go weeks without seeing any rugby. A state based comp fans can identify with.
A trans tasman comp would be a way to finish the season after local finals but nz don't show any appetite for this so we need to get busy working out how we do it on our own.
I can't believe some still think the Shute shield will take over as the premier national comp, it never came close to be and never will. Honest but poor clubs with poor facilities. Lets just go back to park rugby if thats are only hope.
Anyway that idiot Marinos was recently quoted that the new pro comp in the US will save the day with possible expansion options...the fool has learnt nothing.


I'm of the opinion that the format of Super rugby has been its undoing, but all three original partners still need to work together for their own good, and while the Sunwolves have left us all hating the word 'expansion' we need to look at a vastly modified format that includes the Americas to flourish.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 29, 2018 11:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 7:53 pm
Posts: 220
I think it needs reform so every teams plays every other team.

Keeping the current teams we can either
1. get rid of the conference each team plays every other team once = 14 games
2. keep conference and have the Pro 14 system (play every team in conference home and away, play teams outside conference once) = 18 games

Given that we currently play 16 games either system is only 2 games more or less than the current system.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 183 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BokJock, Boxcar Ira, danny_fitz, fatcat, Flockwitt, Google Adsense [Bot], HighKingLeinster, Jensrsa, johnstrac, Kanbei, Lazy Couch potato, Madness, Margin_Walker, Murdoch, Nolanator, Oxbow, Peteray, Plato'sCave, Podge, Rinkals, SamShark, TokenSarriesFan, YOYO and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group