Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

[shanky]

This talk of Australian rugby ‘dying’ is overcooked

The real grassroots is in rude health.

Yesterday, young men from (supposed rugby wastelands) Blacktown, Penrith and Wests played multiple junior grade matches.

In ‘heartlands’, the U-11s are fielding 4-5 teams

The sport isn’t dying at all - the professional tier is dying.

All this is operating on shoestring budget - so, ipso facto, it’s not all about money.

I would honestly, be happy to survive on local peanuts (and no stars) for a couple of years, while we re-group.

The fundamental fallacy is that we play this game for money.

[Tussock]

The problematic area will remain any conference system which rewards mediocrity.[/quote]

Hear hear

[Mr Mike]

This talk of Australian rugby ‘dying’ is overcooked

The real grassroots is in rude health.

Yesterday, young men from Blacktown, Penrith and Wests played multiple junior grade matches.

In ‘heartlands’, the U-11s are fielding 4-5 teams

The sport isn’t dying at all - the professional tier is dying.

Strong roots and diseased branches, just need to aggressively prune some of those. About 60% cut back sounds like a good ratio, should make for a much healthier plant.

[grievous]

This talk of Australian rugby ‘dying’ is overcooked

The real grassroots is in rude health.

Yesterday, young men from Blacktown, Penrith and Wests played multiple junior grade matches.

In ‘heartlands’, the U-11s are fielding 4-5 teams

The sport isn’t dying at all - the professional tier is dying.

Strong roots and diseased branches, just need to aggressively prune some of those. About 60% cut back sounds like a good ratio, should make for a much healthier plant.

No it just needs a spot in the Greenhouse with other similar plants where it can thrive. Kept away from introduced species.

[kiap]

Aus had no meaningful domestic competition. Super Rugby filled that gap for Aus, they started pushing for more teams rather than creating their own competition. Expanding Super Rugby and test windows compacted the window for CC, adding derbies to Super Rugby which Aus wanted making Super Rugby more of a domestic competition also made the CC a bit pointless.

There is some truth to what you say here, Ox (not all of it, just a few pieces).

However, I think you've got the "flavour" wrong.

Australian rugby doesn't fit the models of other countries. You'll get a misread trying to make that fit, especially when looking for answers from 25+ years ago.

After Super Rugby goes, the option is to revert to what was there before. For SA that's an 8 team CC could add Argentina and Nam to make it 10 sides, and maybe some foreign link up if that's possible.

Happy to see this for RSA and perhaps Arg and others.

In my opinion 6+2 would be stronger than 8+2, but that's up to SARU ...

[kiap]

NZ will have the NPC, or a smaller version of Super Rugby if Aus is interested (the fact NZ can walk away puts NZ in a stronger position).

NZR will have some versions of both NPC and a smaller Supe. I don't think semi-pro Mitre-10 (NPC) can be the preferred NZ model for replacing SR. But, again, that's up to them.

Their current SRA sides + an extra privately-funded side in Auckland is effectively 6 NZ teams ... and IMO their maximum (short of a significant extra injection of private capital, of course).

Aus seems a bit stuck. No meaningful domestic competition to fall back on.

A semi-pro league is not a true fallback option. Aus does have such competition, albeit not as good as NZ's ... But ... even if RA owned the Mitre-10, the likely move would be 1 team being promoted to join the existing professional franchises.

RA can likely run 4 teams. Western Force makes it 5 and a 6th team would be desirable. In terms of private funding, Australia is well-placed.

A smaller version of Super Rugby, either means less teams concentrating talent to be competitive with NZ (what NZ wants) permanently limiting Aus growth, or the same amount of Aus teams (what Aus wants) probably making Aus sides uncompetitive.

This is true. Making all Aus sides more competitive will need to be addressed. It will require introducing more foreign players.

The thing about the first half of 2021 (with an ongoing pandemic) is there's a fair likelihood of only domestic competitions being possible. All countries will need to look at that. RA can run such a comp in 2021 if needed.

If transcontinental Champions/Challenge Cups can be added on top late in the season, well and good.

[ox wagon]

NZR will have some versions of both NPC and a smaller Supe. I don't think Mitre-10 (NPC) can be the preferred NZ model for replacing SR. But, again, that's up to them.

Their current SRA sides + an extra privately-funded side in Auckland is effectively 6 NZ teams ... and IMO their maximum (short of a significant extra injection of private capital, of course).

I guess it's NZ that's interesting in all this. Their rugby admins have never got publicly embroiled in these fights before really. This time they're in the middle of it all.

The interesting part is the privately funded side pretending to be a PI team. Super Rugby expansion would've worked a bit better if NZ had been willing to add a side to their conference (there could've been 3 conferences with the same amount of teams in each). Instead odd things happened like a Japanese side only Aus really wanted, in an SA conference (Japan is on the other side of the world to SA). NZ's position always seemed to be defending the status quo. Adding a PI side into a SANZAAR competition would've presumably meant at least some input from a PI union, which isn't the case with a private team playing in NZ. It wouldn't be surprising if NZ interest in a new side vanishes if it's not located in NZ and presumably owned by NZ in some way. The proposed ownership model of the new side could indicate how NZ wants the comp itself to be owned.

I think NZ probably could run a 6 to 8 team competition, they're maxed out on growth but that wouldn't be the point of it. The fact is they could run domestic competition that's decent quality basically forever. The position outlined in the NZ reports isn't one that includes any sort of Aus growth. It's maximise what NZ has (6 sides) and complement that adding only the best of Aus (probably 2 or 3 sides).

There's no Aus growth component at all in any of the NZ reports. But from my reading down the years, the entire point of a TT competition for Aussies was fully accommodating more Aussie sides/matches. Instead the reality of TT comp could be another NZ side and less Aus sides. It seems unlikely Aus goes back to 5 sides and looks to expand into Asia (which is/was the Aus position), there doesn't seem much prospect of that even coming back onto the table again.

The danger of all this is. It's correct the money is in the RC, Super Rugby is not where the money is, but the point of Super Rugby was to produce strong national sides so that the RC can make the money. The point of Super Rugby wasn't to produce only a strong All Black side, if whatever comes after Super Rugby ends up badly weakening the national side of any of Aus/NZ/SA then it has failed and will damage the RC (it's hard to see how Argentina will not be hurt whatever happens, so there's already damage to the main asset). The national level reports NZ is conducting will not capture this.

[towny]

This talk of Australian rugby ‘dying’ is overcooked

The real grassroots is in rude health.

Yesterday, young men from Blacktown, Penrith and Wests played multiple junior grade matches.

In ‘heartlands’, the U-11s are fielding 4-5 teams

The sport isn’t dying at all - the professional tier is dying.

All this is operating on shoestring budget - so, ipso facto, it’s not all about money.

I would honestly, be happy to survive on local peanuts (and no stars) for a couple of years, while we re-group.

The fundamental fallacy is that we play this game for money.

I couldn’t agree more. Australia is pumping out quality juniors like we never have before. The game is great; except we have issues in the pro game: structural/legacy, from overseas competition draining talent (coincidentally never happened in the good old days, and a tv partner that likely doesn’t want to have to pay for 4 codes to slow their slide into oblivion. But this is all 1% of rugby. The other 99% if fantastic.

For the first time in (ever?) ages, we are holding on to our best young talent, and because the talent is better than its been in a long time (ever?), we are about to see the top 1% sort itself out.

[towny]

This talk of Australian rugby ‘dying’ is overcooked

The real grassroots is in rude health.

Yesterday, young men from Blacktown, Penrith and Wests played multiple junior grade matches.

In ‘heartlands’, the U-11s are fielding 4-5 teams

The sport isn’t dying at all - the professional tier is dying.

Strong roots and diseased branches, just need to aggressively prune some of those. About 60% cut back sounds like a good ratio, should make for a much healthier plant.

Worry about your own game. Junior participation plummeting and I the talent pipeline seems slightly above Italy. NZ’s bet the house on the success of one team, but you’re running out of cattle, which means the strategy is likely a bad one.

Just my 2 cents.

[towny]

NZR will have some versions of both NPC and a smaller Supe. I don't think Mitre-10 (NPC) can be the preferred NZ model for replacing SR. But, again, that's up to them.

Their current SRA sides + an extra privately-funded side in Auckland is effectively 6 NZ teams ... and IMO their maximum (short of a significant extra injection of private capital, of course).

I guess it's NZ that's interesting in all this. Their rugby admins have never got publicly embroiled in these fights before really. This time they're in the middle of it all.

The interesting part is the privately funded side pretending to be a PI team. Super Rugby expansion would've worked a bit better if NZ had been willing to add a side to their conference (there could've been 3 conferences with the same amount of teams in each). Instead odd things happened like a Japanese side only Aus really wanted, in an SA conference (Japan is on the other side of the world to SA). NZ's position always seemed to be defending the status quo. Adding a PI side into a SANZAAR competition would've presumably meant at least some input from a PI union, which isn't the case with a private team playing in NZ. It wouldn't be surprising if NZ interest in a new side vanishes if it's not located in NZ and presumably owned by NZ in some way. The proposed ownership model of the new side could indicate how NZ wants the comp itself to be owned.

I think NZ probably could run a 6 to 8 team competition, they're maxed out on growth but that wouldn't be the point of it. The fact is they could run domestic competition that's decent quality basically forever. The position outlined in the NZ reports isn't one that includes any sort of Aus growth. It's maximise what NZ has (6 sides) and complement that adding only the best of Aus (probably 2 or 3 sides).

There's no Aus growth component at all in any of the NZ reports. But from my reading down the years, the entire point of a TT competition for Aussies was fully accommodating more Aussie sides/matches. Instead the reality of TT comp could be another NZ side and less Aus sides. It seems unlikely Aus goes back to 5 sides and looks to expand into Asia (which is/was the Aus position), there doesn't seem much prospect of that even coming back onto the table again.

The danger of all this is. It's correct the money is in the RC, Super Rugby is not where the money is, but the point of Super Rugby was to produce strong national sides so that the RC can make the money. The point of Super Rugby wasn't to produce only a strong All Black side, if whatever comes after Super Rugby ends up badly weakening the national side of any of Aus/NZ/SA then it has failed and will damage the RC (it's hard to see how Argentina will not be hurt whatever happens, so there's already damage to the main asset). The national level reports NZ is conducting will not capture this.

Good post. SR wasn’t set up to succeed. It was set up for the national teams to be strong - but Europe and Japan thwarted those plans. In the end we are stuck with a solution that was not fit for any purpose. What’s bizarre, in NZ wanting to double down on the failed strategy, with a solution that looks to slow down its collapse rather than build the game where it needs to be build from - the grass roots.

[kiap]

I guess it's NZ that's interesting in all this. Their rugby admins have never got publicly embroiled in these fights before really. This time they're in the middle of it all.

The NZR position may not be quite as strong as many think.

The interesting part is the privately funded side pretending to be a PI team. Super Rugby expansion would've worked a bit better if NZ had been willing to add a side to their conference (there could've been 3 conferences with the same amount of teams in each). Instead odd things happened like a Japanese side only Aus really wanted, in an SA conference (Japan is on the other side of the world to SA). NZ's position always seemed to be defending the status quo. Adding a PI side into a SANZAAR competition would've presumably meant at least some input from a PI union, which isn't the case with a private team playing in NZ.

The whole Kanaloa Hawaii Rugby biz is a bit sketchy at the moment. But happy to see Kanaloa + NZR taken at face value. Have this team playing SR Aotearoa in 7 months time. Let's see...

The PI unions are all separate enities. I'd suspect Kanaloa Hawaii's official links to PI unions (ex-USA) are minimal right now.

[kiap]

I think NZ probably could run a 6 to 8 team competition, they're maxed out on growth but that wouldn't be the point of it. The fact is they could run domestic competition that's decent quality basically forever.

In terms of player depth, yeah NZ could run 8 teams. But that brings 150+ extra mouths to feed on the payroll + associated costs. Does an increase in the number of NZ teams by 60% bring an extra 60% of income?

The answer is ... No. It is a small, saturated rugby market. They know that, we all know that. It's the reason they've called for entries from overseas.

The danger of all this is. It's correct the money is in the RC, Super Rugby is not where the money is, but the point of Super Rugby was to produce strong national sides so that the RC can make the money. The point of Super Rugby wasn't to produce only a strong All Black side, if whatever comes after Super Rugby ends up badly weakening the national side of any of Aus/NZ/SA then it's has failed and will damage the RC. (it's hard to see how Argentina will not be hurt whatever happens, so there's already damage to the main asset). The national level reports NZ is conducting will not capture this.

Yeah, I think it's true that Test matches still need to generate most of the cash. The pro rugby competition(s) still need to stand on their own IMO, and not be relegated to a series of trials.

[ox wagon]

The whole Kanaloa Hawaii Rugby biz is a bit sketchy at the moment. But happy to see Kanaloa + NZR taken at face value. Have this team playing SR Aotearoa in 7 months time. Let's see...

The PI unions are all separate enities. I'd suspect Kanaloa Hawaii's official links to PI unions (ex-USA) are minimal right now.

My take from all that is they want another team in NZ, owned by NZ in some way, with some hybrid financing model. The interesting aspect is, Super Rugby expansion would've been a bit better with 3 conferences of 6 each, but NZ never pushed for a 6th side that I can recall, and any non-NZ side added to a SANZAAR competition would need some union input from that nation, and who wants to deal with PI unions (no one).

In terms of player depth, yeah NZ could run 8 teams. But that brings 150+ extra mouths to feed on the payroll + associated costs. Does an increase in the number of NZ teams by 60% bring an extra 60% of income?

The answer is ... No. It is a small, saturated rugby market. They know that, we all know that. It's the reason they've called for entries from overseas.

The NZ model is focusing resources at the top and keeping their best players in NZ. If they accepted they're going to lose their top players they could change the model and focus resources further down the pyramid (the SA model). Everything indicates NZ will keep their model focusing resources at the top of the pyramid (hence trying to fund a 6th side with new money, not reallocating money they already have). On the current information NZ only wants foreign sides that fit that model (meaning the strongest Aus sides). It's not a real open request for any foreign sides, it's really just Tahs/Reds/Brumbies that they want.

Yeah, I think it's true that Test matches still generate most of the cash. The pro rugby competition(s) still need to stand on their own IMO, and not be relegated to a series of trials.

If the RC goes under then it's game over for all of us. The value comes from a double round between 3 of the world's best (often the 3 best), Argentina added additional games against another strong side on a good day. That's why post-RWC talk of adding Japan/Fiji/USA and who knows who else to the RC was very dumb.

[kiap]

This is the way RA is going:

• Expression of no interest: Australia to rebuff New Zealand competition invitation
  
  By Georgina Robinson
  July 24, 2020 — 12.01am
  
  Australia will rebuff New Zealand Rugby's Super Rugby proposal and look to negotiate on an equal footing after sounding out Argentina and Japan on their interest in alternative models.
  
  yada yada yada: show

  Rugby Australia boss Rob Clarke has been exchanging emails with his NZR counterpart Mark Robinson but RA is expected to ignore a request to submit expressions of interest in the Kiwis' eight-team competition.
  
  "The expression of interest I'm not interested in and if they send it over I won't open it," RA chairman Hamish McLennan said. "If [chairman Brent Impey] and Mark [Robinson] want to chat with Clarkie and myself, I think next week's the week to do it."
  
  The news will come as a blow to NZR which has been buffeted by some rare bad press for their stance on the future of Super Rugby.
  English pundits weighed in after the release of the Aratipu review, accusing New Zealand of "arrogance" over their fait accompli approach to their Australian neighbours.
  
  But the killer blow was landed by South African Rugby boss Jurie Roux, who reminded New Zealand of the binding nature of the SANZAAR agreement then said: "If anybody kicked anyone out of Super Rugby, it was New Zealand kicking themselves out."
  
  The line would have stung, not least because of the 'special relationship' status bestowed by both unions on each other over the years. While Australian rugby fans like to think of the Bledisloe Cup rivalry as an enduring one, the reality is the All Blacks consider the Springboks their 'equals' on the rugby field. Roux's public admonishment was a significant moment.
  
  yada yada yada: show

  Now their hope to have a competition agreed and signed off by the end of August looks at long odds of happening, unless they can find another two teams to fill the vacant spots.
  
  Incumbent Wallabies captain Michael Hooper weighed into the debate during an interview with Fox Sports that aired on Thursday night.
  
  "I've been surprised by some of New Zealand's comments," Hooper said. "I think it's a business at the end of the day. I think we need each other to some extent but I don't know what that is. There are other options as well. I want to play rugby, I'm a rugby person. I'm not in the board room."
  
  My preferred competition is trans-Tasman and I received a call last night from London from powerful backers wanting to invest...
  RA chairman Hamish McLennan
  Australia, meanwhile, have been working hard on their plan B, an eight-team competition featuring all five Australian professional outfits, a Fijian Drua team, an Argentinian side and the second coming of the Sunwolves. McLennan spoke to UAR president Agustin Pichot on Thursday about Australia becoming a second home for Jaguares players left high and dry after the cancellation of Super Rugby. He described Pichot's reaction as "appreciative".
  
  RA's position remains that a 10-team trans-Tasman competition is the ideal model in what is likely to be a COVID-19 restricted international landscape next year. Pasifika and Japanese sides could be added in 2022.
  
  "My preferred competition is trans-Tasman five and five and I even received a call last night from London from powerful backers wanting to invest in the competition," McLennan said.
  
  Silverlake, Providence and Tattarang - the private equity arm of Andrew Forrest's empire - are believed to be the three major players keeping a close eye on proceedings. RA would look to use a similar model to CVC's investment in the UK's Premiership Rugby, whereby the investment firm buys a stake in the commercial rights to a competition.
  
  yada yada yada: show

  Meanwhile, the SANZAAR partners received good news from Europe overnight with World Rugby confirming a six-week Test window for the end of the year. The move will give national unions unrestricted access to their overseas-based Test stars between October 24 and December 5, allowing the Rugby Championship to go ahead in the so-called 'hub' formation in New Zealand.
  
  "In the north, this window will accommodate the postponed men's and women's Six Nations matches at the end of October, a rest weekend on 7 November and a programme of international matches involving the Six Nations and invited teams hosted in Europe from 14 November through to 5 December," the governing body said in a statement.
  
  "With COVID-19 restrictions continuing to impact international travel and borders across southern hemisphere unions, on an exceptional basis The Rugby Championship 2020 will be hosted in full in a single country over a reduced six-week period between 7 November and 12 December. Special measures will be implemented to deal with any government-required quarantine period prior to the start of the competition."
  https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-unio ... 55ev4.html

[mdaclarke]

This is the way RA is going:

• Expression of no interest: Australia to rebuff New Zealand competition invitation
  
  By Georgina Robinson
  July 24, 2020 — 12.01am
  
  Australia will rebuff New Zealand Rugby's Super Rugby proposal and look to negotiate on an equal footing after sounding out Argentina and Japan on their interest in alternative models.
  
  yada yada yada: show

  Rugby Australia boss Rob Clarke has been exchanging emails with his NZR counterpart Mark Robinson but RA is expected to ignore a request to submit expressions of interest in the Kiwis' eight-team competition.
  
  "The expression of interest I'm not interested in and if they send it over I won't open it," RA chairman Hamish McLennan said. "If [chairman Brent Impey] and Mark [Robinson] want to chat with Clarkie and myself, I think next week's the week to do it."
  
  The news will come as a blow to NZR which has been buffeted by some rare bad press for their stance on the future of Super Rugby.
  English pundits weighed in after the release of the Aratipu review, accusing New Zealand of "arrogance" over their fait accompli approach to their Australian neighbours.
  
  But the killer blow was landed by South African Rugby boss Jurie Roux, who reminded New Zealand of the binding nature of the SANZAAR agreement then said: "If anybody kicked anyone out of Super Rugby, it was New Zealand kicking themselves out."
  
  The line would have stung, not least because of the 'special relationship' status bestowed by both unions on each other over the years. While Australian rugby fans like to think of the Bledisloe Cup rivalry as an enduring one, the reality is the All Blacks consider the Springboks their 'equals' on the rugby field. Roux's public admonishment was a significant moment.
  
  yada yada yada: show

  Now their hope to have a competition agreed and signed off by the end of August looks at long odds of happening, unless they can find another two teams to fill the vacant spots.
  
  Incumbent Wallabies captain Michael Hooper weighed into the debate during an interview with Fox Sports that aired on Thursday night.
  
  "I've been surprised by some of New Zealand's comments," Hooper said. "I think it's a business at the end of the day. I think we need each other to some extent but I don't know what that is. There are other options as well. I want to play rugby, I'm a rugby person. I'm not in the board room."
  
  My preferred competition is trans-Tasman and I received a call last night from London from powerful backers wanting to invest...
  RA chairman Hamish McLennan
  Australia, meanwhile, have been working hard on their plan B, an eight-team competition featuring all five Australian professional outfits, a Fijian Drua team, an Argentinian side and the second coming of the Sunwolves. McLennan spoke to UAR president Agustin Pichot on Thursday about Australia becoming a second home for Jaguares players left high and dry after the cancellation of Super Rugby. He described Pichot's reaction as "appreciative".
  
  RA's position remains that a 10-team trans-Tasman competition is the ideal model in what is likely to be a COVID-19 restricted international landscape next year. Pasifika and Japanese sides could be added in 2022.
  
  "My preferred competition is trans-Tasman five and five and I even received a call last night from London from powerful backers wanting to invest in the competition," McLennan said.
  
  Silverlake, Providence and Tattarang - the private equity arm of Andrew Forrest's empire - are believed to be the three major players keeping a close eye on proceedings. RA would look to use a similar model to CVC's investment in the UK's Premiership Rugby, whereby the investment firm buys a stake in the commercial rights to a competition.
  
  yada yada yada: show

  Meanwhile, the SANZAAR partners received good news from Europe overnight with World Rugby confirming a six-week Test window for the end of the year. The move will give national unions unrestricted access to their overseas-based Test stars between October 24 and December 5, allowing the Rugby Championship to go ahead in the so-called 'hub' formation in New Zealand.
  
  "In the north, this window will accommodate the postponed men's and women's Six Nations matches at the end of October, a rest weekend on 7 November and a programme of international matches involving the Six Nations and invited teams hosted in Europe from 14 November through to 5 December," the governing body said in a statement.
  
  "With COVID-19 restrictions continuing to impact international travel and borders across southern hemisphere unions, on an exceptional basis The Rugby Championship 2020 will be hosted in full in a single country over a reduced six-week period between 7 November and 12 December. Special measures will be implemented to deal with any government-required quarantine period prior to the start of the competition."
  https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-unio ... 55ev4.html

They will be asking the Saffers next.

[kiwigreg369]

Good to see Aus saying no to bullying off the field.

[shanky]

It seems to me that NZ’s version of a proper review of their rugby issue revolves around asking their husband “does my bum look big in this?”

[Thomas]

It seems to me that NZ’s version of a proper review of their rugby issue revolves around asking their husband “does my bum look big in this?”

It'd be hilarious is this blows up in the NZRU's face.

"What do you mean no one wants to play with us? But..but...Hawaii?"

[RandomNavigat0r]

It seems to me that NZ’s version of a proper review of their rugby issue revolves around asking their husband “does my bum look big in this?”

It'd be hilarious is this blows up in the NZRU's face.

"What do you mean no one wants to play with us? But..but...Hawaii?"

Hawaii

[towny]

We are laughing!

[Ali's Choice]

Been reading a bit about these farcical negotiations online. I'm still confident that a mutually beneficial arrangement will be reached for NZ and Aus, and that a TT comp will happen, but gee whiz neither union is covering themselves in glory. It's like they have taken negotiation lessons from Donald Trump.

[shanky]

Rugby Australia boss Rob Clarke has been exchanging emails with his NZR counterpart Mark Robinson but RA is expected to ignore a request to submit expressions of interest in the Kiwis' eight-team competition.


"The expression of interest I'm not interested in and if they send it over I won't open it," RA chairman Hamish McLennan said. "If [chairman Brent Impey] and Mark [Robinson] want to chat with Clarkie and myself, I think next week's the week to do it.

[kiap]

Thought I'd give it the Two Smileys™ (© guy smiley 2008)

[grievous]

This is the way RA is going:

• Expression of no interest: Australia to rebuff New Zealand competition invitation
  
  By Georgina Robinson
  July 24, 2020 — 12.01am
  
  Australia will rebuff New Zealand Rugby's Super Rugby proposal and look to negotiate on an equal footing after sounding out Argentina and Japan on their interest in alternative models.
  
  yada yada yada: show

  Rugby Australia boss Rob Clarke has been exchanging emails with his NZR counterpart Mark Robinson but RA is expected to ignore a request to submit expressions of interest in the Kiwis' eight-team competition.
  
  "The expression of interest I'm not interested in and if they send it over I won't open it," RA chairman Hamish McLennan said. "If [chairman Brent Impey] and Mark [Robinson] want to chat with Clarkie and myself, I think next week's the week to do it."
  
  The news will come as a blow to NZR which has been buffeted by some rare bad press for their stance on the future of Super Rugby.
  English pundits weighed in after the release of the Aratipu review, accusing New Zealand of "arrogance" over their fait accompli approach to their Australian neighbours.
  
  But the killer blow was landed by South African Rugby boss Jurie Roux, who reminded New Zealand of the binding nature of the SANZAAR agreement then said: "If anybody kicked anyone out of Super Rugby, it was New Zealand kicking themselves out."
  
  The line would have stung, not least because of the 'special relationship' status bestowed by both unions on each other over the years. While Australian rugby fans like to think of the Bledisloe Cup rivalry as an enduring one, the reality is the All Blacks consider the Springboks their 'equals' on the rugby field. Roux's public admonishment was a significant moment.
  
  yada yada yada: show

  Now their hope to have a competition agreed and signed off by the end of August looks at long odds of happening, unless they can find another two teams to fill the vacant spots.
  
  Incumbent Wallabies captain Michael Hooper weighed into the debate during an interview with Fox Sports that aired on Thursday night.
  
  "I've been surprised by some of New Zealand's comments," Hooper said. "I think it's a business at the end of the day. I think we need each other to some extent but I don't know what that is. There are other options as well. I want to play rugby, I'm a rugby person. I'm not in the board room."
  
  My preferred competition is trans-Tasman and I received a call last night from London from powerful backers wanting to invest...
  RA chairman Hamish McLennan
  Australia, meanwhile, have been working hard on their plan B, an eight-team competition featuring all five Australian professional outfits, a Fijian Drua team, an Argentinian side and the second coming of the Sunwolves. McLennan spoke to UAR president Agustin Pichot on Thursday about Australia becoming a second home for Jaguares players left high and dry after the cancellation of Super Rugby. He described Pichot's reaction as "appreciative".
  
  RA's position remains that a 10-team trans-Tasman competition is the ideal model in what is likely to be a COVID-19 restricted international landscape next year. Pasifika and Japanese sides could be added in 2022.
  
  "My preferred competition is trans-Tasman five and five and I even received a call last night from London from powerful backers wanting to invest in the competition," McLennan said.
  
  Silverlake, Providence and Tattarang - the private equity arm of Andrew Forrest's empire - are believed to be the three major players keeping a close eye on proceedings. RA would look to use a similar model to CVC's investment in the UK's Premiership Rugby, whereby the investment firm buys a stake in the commercial rights to a competition.
  
  yada yada yada: show

  Meanwhile, the SANZAAR partners received good news from Europe overnight with World Rugby confirming a six-week Test window for the end of the year. The move will give national unions unrestricted access to their overseas-based Test stars between October 24 and December 5, allowing the Rugby Championship to go ahead in the so-called 'hub' formation in New Zealand.
  
  "In the north, this window will accommodate the postponed men's and women's Six Nations matches at the end of October, a rest weekend on 7 November and a programme of international matches involving the Six Nations and invited teams hosted in Europe from 14 November through to 5 December," the governing body said in a statement.
  
  "With COVID-19 restrictions continuing to impact international travel and borders across southern hemisphere unions, on an exceptional basis The Rugby Championship 2020 will be hosted in full in a single country over a reduced six-week period between 7 November and 12 December. Special measures will be implemented to deal with any government-required quarantine period prior to the start of the competition."
  https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-unio ... 55ev4.html

Putting a timeline on this finally is good, moves along the issue.

[Wilderbeast]

The dick waving is infuriating. I haven’t followed closely but it seems like NZRU have been pricks. Is that the consensus?

[kiap]

^A tad arrogant, you might say...

"The expression of interest I'm not interested in and if they send it over I won't open it," RA chairman Hamish McLennan said.

For me there are still some reservations about McLennan ... because reasons. Still, there is also a reason he was known as the 'Hammer' in business. The bloke is not Clyne - who was a cunt but soft; a pussy. Old mate Mark Robertson might have skipped some homework in that regard.

[Wilderbeast]

Seems RA have flopped theirs out for a bit of a way too. Just fell like I don’t have the patience for this bullshit.

[Thomas]

The dick waving is infuriating. I haven’t followed closely but it seems like NZRU have been pricks. Is that the consensus?

As Kiap says probably more arrogant than complete dicks.

In saying that, they've rattled a cage hard enough to make Australian rugby fans get behind their monumentally incompetent governing body in this fight. So well done NZRU.

[grievous]

^A tad arrogant, you might say...

"The expression of interest I'm not interested in and if they send it over I won't open it," RA chairman Hamish McLennan said.

For me there are still some reservations about McLennan ... because reasons. Still, there is also a reason he was known as the 'Hammer' in business. The bloke is not Clyne - who was a cunt but soft; a pussy. Old mate Mark Robertson might have skipped some homework in that regard.

He needs to communicate unlike the last previous management teams that enforced stone silence because they were hiding so much.
He also doesnt need to do the O'Neil brash talk that Newscvnt want as a headline.
Its not needed and Kiwis will go precious overdrive.
Controlled statements, regularly and actions speaking louder than words. Lot to learn from his predecessors about how not to lead RA.

[UncleFB]

^A tad arrogant, you might say...

"The expression of interest I'm not interested in and if they send it over I won't open it," RA chairman Hamish McLennan said.

For me there are still some reservations about McLennan ... because reasons. Still, there is also a reason he was known as the 'Hammer' in business. The bloke is not Clyne - who was a cunt but soft; a pussy. Old mate Mark Robertson might have skipped some homework in that regard.

He needs to communicate unlike the last previous management teams that enforced stone silence because they were hiding so much.
He also doesnt need to do the O'Neil brash talk that Newscvnt want as a headline.
Its not needed and Kiwis will go precious overdrive.
Controlled statements, regularly and actions speaking louder than words. Lot to learn from his predecessors about how not to lead RA.

Dude, you lot have claimed the title and then some in this thread and the other similar threads. To regain the title we'll need to form an unholy alliance of posters including dark, muttonbird, billW, the anti vax guy, all of Sens multis etc. I don't think we can hold that coalition together the way you Aussies have.

Also, of course he needs to do that brash headline, that's what your Newscvnt overlords want.

[Auckman]

I don't know what all the hoohah is about. Mark Robinson says here on Breakdown the other night (Tuesday 21 July) that the relationship with Australia is "critical" and he "absolutely" sees Australia as important to the future of both countries rugby.

He doesn't seem to see any issues at all. He is wanting to learn more about potential participants needs and everything appears to be still in negotiation; what he calls a 'consultation period'.

I can't see 2021 going ahead without Australian participation.

[Ali's Choice]

I don't know what all the hoohah is about. Mark Robinson says here on Breakdown the other night (Tuesday 21 July) that the relationship with Australia is "critical" and he "absolutely" sees Australia as important to the future of both countries rugby.

He doesn't seem to see any issues at all and everything is still in negotiation.

Yeah, the hoohah is mostly stemming from internet trolls, media pundits trying to create a crisis and a few outspoken individuals such as Steve Hansen who have nothing to do with either RA or NZR. Sadly, it created the perfect opportunity for posters like grevious to unleash their anti-NZ sentiment and that has really been evident in this thread.

[Ellafan]

Mark Robinson says... the relationship with Australia is "critical" and he "absolutely" sees Australia as important to the future of both countries rugby.

Did he say: "therefore as we understand RA's position that it is not feasible for them to cut 1 or 2 of their 5 current teams, as we demanded 2 weeks ago, we have withdrawn that ultimatum, and decided to accept a 5 x 5 trans-Tasman competition for 2021"?

I can't see 2021 going ahead without Australian participation.

I can. Mclennan & Clarke are not sitting on 5 teams just for the fun of it.

[Ali's Choice]

Question, how come RA was perfectly fine with four SR teams up until a few week ago, but now NZR is being "arrogant" and "unreasonable" to even suggest four teams into the future?

[RandomNavigat0r]

I don't know what all the hoohah is about. Mark Robinson says here on Breakdown the other night (Tuesday 21 July) that the relationship with Australia is "critical" and he "absolutely" sees Australia as important to the future of both countries rugby.

He doesn't seem to see any issues at all and everything is still in negotiation.

Yeah, the hoohah is mostly stemming from internet trolls, media pundits trying to create a crisis and a few outspoken individuals such as Steve Hansen who have nothing to do with either RA or NZR. Sadly, it created the perfect opportunity for posters like grevious to unleash their anti-NZ sentiment and that has really been evident in this thread.

What is Fosters relationship with NZR?

[RandomNavigat0r]

Question, how come RA was perfectly fine with four SR teams up until a few week ago, but now NZR is being "arrogant" and "unreasonable" to even suggest four teams into the future?

RA were never comfortable with 4 teams. It tore RA apart, alienated all their fans, caused their fan base to walk away from the sport, it basically destroyed rugby in this country and resulted in the RA board, Clyne, And Pulver losing their jobs. NZR may have been comfortable with Australia having 4 teams but Australia wasn't, this was fairly obvious to anyone except those not living in Australia.

[Working Class Rugger]

I don't know what all the hoohah is about. Mark Robinson says here on Breakdown the other night (Tuesday 21 July) that the relationship with Australia is "critical" and he "absolutely" sees Australia as important to the future of both countries rugby.

He doesn't seem to see any issues at all. He is wanting to learn more about potential participants needs and everything appears to be still in negotiation; what he calls a 'consultation period'.

I can't see 2021 going ahead without Australian participation.

Then it's not going ahead without there being 5 Australian teams. It'll likely be a very short tenure for both men if they look to cut numbers to the 3 or 4 NZ have suggested. Because outside of a small minority of voices the overwhelming majority of the Australian fan base want all five teams. What most people find galling is that NZR thought they could just come out and say this is the deal now make it work and excepted not to see the reaction they have.

The issue of competitiveness does exist. Though, the gulf isn't as wide as it was and is closing. But there are ways to address that with our 5 teams intact.

Now the whole Pasifika side has come into play. Which as a concept I support. In fact. I believe there should be a combined Samoan/Tongan squad and a separate Fijian squad playing in a 12 team TT/Pacific competition. But I'm not too sure about the group proposing this at present. Especially after a Hawaiian Govt. rep came out this week and called bullshit on every claim they've made so far in regards to the MLR bid.

My ideal format would be a 12 team format with a combined Samoan/Tongan team based in Auckland but taking games to each respective nations and a Fijian side based out of Fiji itself. Playing a full 22 rounds home and way season against 5 NZ and 5 Australian teams. NZ can have their squad be wholly domestic sourced if they wish. We can look to import 5 or so international players to help bolster our squads and provide a competitive landscape.

And I genuinely think that if NZR came out with such an offer RA would immediately accept that.

[grievous]

^A tad arrogant, you might say...

"The expression of interest I'm not interested in and if they send it over I won't open it," RA chairman Hamish McLennan said.

For me there are still some reservations about McLennan ... because reasons. Still, there is also a reason he was known as the 'Hammer' in business. The bloke is not Clyne - who was a cunt but soft; a pussy. Old mate Mark Robertson might have skipped some homework in that regard.

He needs to communicate unlike the last previous management teams that enforced stone silence because they were hiding so much.
He also doesnt need to do the O'Neil brash talk that Newscvnt want as a headline.
Its not needed and Kiwis will go precious overdrive.
Controlled statements, regularly and actions speaking louder than words. Lot to learn from his predecessors about how not to lead RA.

Dude, you lot have claimed the title and then some in this thread and the other similar threads. To regain the title we'll need to form an unholy alliance of posters including dark, muttonbird, billW, the anti vax guy, all of Sens multis etc. I don't think we can hold that coalition together the way you Aussies have.

Also, of course he needs to do that brash headline, that's what your Newscvnt overlords want.

So bitter

[Ali's Choice]

I don't know what all the hoohah is about. Mark Robinson says here on Breakdown the other night (Tuesday 21 July) that the relationship with Australia is "critical" and he "absolutely" sees Australia as important to the future of both countries rugby.

He doesn't seem to see any issues at all and everything is still in negotiation.

Yeah, the hoohah is mostly stemming from internet trolls, media pundits trying to create a crisis and a few outspoken individuals such as Steve Hansen who have nothing to do with either RA or NZR. Sadly, it created the perfect opportunity for posters like grevious to unleash their anti-NZ sentiment and that has really been evident in this thread.

What is Fosters relationship with NZR?

Why don't you post a link to the mean things Ian Foster said about RA so we can discuss his comments in depth? Keeping in mind Ian Foster is just a coach, and plays no role in overseeing NZR or negotiating a new TT competition. His comments are no more representative of NZR than Kurtley Beale sending dick pics to Di Patston was representative of RA.

[kiwinoz]

RA are obviously in a strong position. Every Aussie SR player who took a pay cut will be looking forward to a pay rise after Joseph Suaalii comes on board. He was offered $1.7m for 3 years at the Bunnies so RA must be paying more and all for a winger. Imagine how much money they will be throwing at grassroots rugby.