Chat Forum
It is currently Sun Aug 09, 2020 2:42 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1507 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 ... 38  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2020 12:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4097
Ali's Choice wrote:
WoodlandsRFC wrote:
Kahu wrote:
New Plymouth doesn't have a functioning stadium so that rules out that backwater

A provincial population a little over Southland with no other major population centres nearby that don't already have franchises etc. You'd have to go Tauranga with its rapidly growing population and... Napier or Nelson I suppose.


No love for Palmy?


Palmerston North might as well be an outer suburb of Wellington. The connectivity and location of Tauranga to Hamilton sees the chiefs enjoy decent support through BOP.

The only options left are the outliers. New Plymouth has Whanganui down the road who'd align themselves closer to Taranaki than Wellington. Yarrows stadium getting the earthquake upgrades required to reopen so that region frm Ruapehu through New Plymouth isn't a bad call.

Napier region be a worthwhile look for similar reasons and proximity to other isolated unions.

Nelson for sure. All three regions have a worthwhile base.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2020 1:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11418
Location: Tahstown
sonic_attack wrote:
Ali's Choice wrote:
WoodlandsRFC wrote:
Kahu wrote:
New Plymouth doesn't have a functioning stadium so that rules out that backwater

A provincial population a little over Southland with no other major population centres nearby that don't already have franchises etc. You'd have to go Tauranga with its rapidly growing population and... Napier or Nelson I suppose.


No love for Palmy?


Palmerston North might as well be an outer suburb of Wellington. The connectivity and location of Tauranga to Hamilton sees the chiefs enjoy decent support through BOP.

The only options left are the outliers. New Plymouth has Whanganui down the road who'd align themselves closer to Taranaki than Wellington. Yarrows stadium getting the earthquake upgrades required to reopen so that region frm Ruapehu through New Plymouth isn't a bad call.

Napier region be a worthwhile look for similar reasons and proximity to other isolated unions.

Nelson for sure. All three regions have a worthwhile base.

So what sort of crowds then?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2020 1:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4097
grievous wrote:
sonic_attack wrote:
Ali's Choice wrote:
WoodlandsRFC wrote:
Kahu wrote:
New Plymouth doesn't have a functioning stadium so that rules out that backwater

A provincial population a little over Southland with no other major population centres nearby that don't already have franchises etc. You'd have to go Tauranga with its rapidly growing population and... Napier or Nelson I suppose.


No love for Palmy?


Palmerston North might as well be an outer suburb of Wellington. The connectivity and location of Tauranga to Hamilton sees the chiefs enjoy decent support through BOP.

The only options left are the outliers. New Plymouth has Whanganui down the road who'd align themselves closer to Taranaki than Wellington. Yarrows stadium getting the earthquake upgrades required to reopen so that region frm Ruapehu through New Plymouth isn't a bad call.

Napier region be a worthwhile look for similar reasons and proximity to other isolated unions.

Nelson for sure. All three regions have a worthwhile base.

So what sort of crowds then?


Yarrows and McLean around 25k max, Trafalgar maybe 20K max. Somewhere between 8K-15K for quality first class rugby depending on weather you'd consider decent.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2020 3:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2786
sonic_attack wrote:
Yarrows and McLean around 25k max, Trafalgar maybe 20K max. Somewhere between 8K-15K for quality first class rugby depending on weather you'd consider decent.


They generally get decent weather in Nelson I believe...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2020 4:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4245
Mr Mike wrote:
Mr Mike wrote:
Ellafan wrote:
Mr Mike wrote:
It’s over 20 years since I read the decisions but aren’t you referring to Justice Burchett's first instance judgment which was overturned? The High Court refused to hear the ARL appeal so wasn’t the final outcome that the Commitment and Loyalty provisions were deemed void?


The Full Court watered it down a bit, and after that it was settled. The settlement favoured the ARL.

Which doesn't change the fact that an attempt by one RU to interfere with the internal workings of another in the way you suggest, including trying to "peel off" teams with contracted ARU players, is a bad idea.
”Watered it down a bit”... Interesting interpretation.

Quote:
A. The Court orders:

1. That the appeals be allowed.

2. That the orders made and confirmed by the trial Judge on 11 March 1996 be set aside.
I’m sure after that kind of decision the ARL were furious, hurt, bewildered and probably felt as if they had been hit by a train.


SNIP - 5 quote limit

Curious, at the time of the judgement only the order I quote was actually issued. There were other orders that the court intended to issue but those were subject to further submissions, so I haven’t seen the final versions, but which ones do you think affected the only order issued at the time “watering down” the first judgment by allowing the appeal and overturning all all 60 orders previously made?


Those proposed orders are in the copy of the judgement I have in front of me.

https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/j ... 996fca0870

I don't expect you want me to write a summary of part III of the judgement, but the really short version (as to which see paras 22-25) is there were about 7 causes of action (at least) in the ARL cross claim, and the initial battle was fought over the TPA issue and the JV/fiduciary duty claim. The ARL lost those (and there might be a third one I have forgotten that was dismissed at that point). The Full Court, however, also stated that they needed to remit a number of claims for renewed hearing before the trial Judge. Importantly the Court said this -

Quote:
[at 22]We.... find that the clubs breached an implied obligation arising under the contract constituted by their admission to the 1995 national competition. Part III considers associated claims against News, SLPL and the Franchisees, based on allegations that they unlawfully induced the rebel clubs to breach their contractual duties.


The issue of the quantum of damages payable by the Super League parties for inducing those breaches was part of the remitter.

So, basically SL was not shut down & could kick off in 1997, but it was going cost them a lot of $$$. Hence my overall view that the Full Court watered it down a bit - including by fairly and squarely raising the prospect that damages would be considered a sufficient remedy, with the corollary that the ARL might lose control of the premier league in the medium-longer term.

At that point (late 96/early 97) Kerry Packer and Rupert Murdoch got sick of paying everyone's lawyers, sorted out the broadcast carve up, and the case was settled. As far as I am aware, those proposed further orders were not ultimately needed (or in any event were subsumed in the settlement).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 1:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6891
The Central Vikings didnt work as a two city team, so can you pick a favorite ginger step child?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 1:24 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 12676
WoodlandsRFC wrote:
Kahu wrote:
New Plymouth doesn't have a functioning stadium so that rules out that backwater

A provincial population a little over Southland with no other major population centres nearby that don't already have franchises etc. You'd have to go Tauranga with its rapidly growing population and... Napier or Nelson I suppose.

Tauranga has even less of a functioning stadium.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 3:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4768
Location: The other side of midnight
UncleFB wrote:
WoodlandsRFC wrote:
Kahu wrote:
New Plymouth doesn't have a functioning stadium so that rules out that backwater

A provincial population a little over Southland with no other major population centres nearby that don't already have franchises etc. You'd have to go Tauranga with its rapidly growing population and... Napier or Nelson I suppose.

Tauranga has even less of a functioning stadium.

If you build it, they will come


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 10:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 10:58 am
Posts: 2203
Location: Christchurch NZ
I'm not going to try and read through the previous 28 pages but if Australia do their own thing then SRA is unsustainable in my opinion. These derby clashes have been absolutely brutal, hence the number of injuries.

A 5 team competition is another reason why this won't work, perhaps its time to look at putting all our efforts into the NPC and having a shorter season?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 11:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 10:23 am
Posts: 836
JPNZ wrote:
I'm not going to try and read through the previous 28 pages but if Australia do their own thing then SRA is unsustainable in my opinion. These derby clashes have been absolutely brutal, hence the number of injuries.

A 5 team competition is another reason why this won't work, perhaps its time to look at putting all our efforts into the NPC and having a shorter season?


The answer could be a NPC/Mitre 10 cup played earlier in season, followed by a short sharp Super comp?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 11:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11418
Location: Tahstown
Dan54. wrote:
JPNZ wrote:
I'm not going to try and read through the previous 28 pages but if Australia do their own thing then SRA is unsustainable in my opinion. These derby clashes have been absolutely brutal, hence the number of injuries.

A 5 team competition is another reason why this won't work, perhaps its time to look at putting all our efforts into the NPC and having a shorter season?


The answer could be a NPC/Mitre 10 cup played earlier in season, followed by a short sharp Super comp?

With who? No guarantee Oz comp would align in schedule.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 29, 2020 1:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3913
Location: STRAYA CUNT!!!
Dan54. wrote:
JPNZ wrote:
I'm not going to try and read through the previous 28 pages but if Australia do their own thing then SRA is unsustainable in my opinion. These derby clashes have been absolutely brutal, hence the number of injuries.

A 5 team competition is another reason why this won't work, perhaps its time to look at putting all our efforts into the NPC and having a shorter season?


The answer could be a NPC/Mitre 10 cup played earlier in season, followed by a short sharp Super comp?


Don't know if it has been discussed here but that very structure has come up on G&GR several times in the past.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 29, 2020 1:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 10:23 am
Posts: 836
grievous wrote:
Dan54. wrote:
JPNZ wrote:
I'm not going to try and read through the previous 28 pages but if Australia do their own thing then SRA is unsustainable in my opinion. These derby clashes have been absolutely brutal, hence the number of injuries.

A 5 team competition is another reason why this won't work, perhaps its time to look at putting all our efforts into the NPC and having a shorter season?


The answer could be a NPC/Mitre 10 cup played earlier in season, followed by a short sharp Super comp?

With who? No guarantee Oz comp would align in schedule.

Mate I am dropping this in if Aus don't want to play. I just throwing it out there Mitre 10- Super Aotearoa, ( or maybe something with Aus or Islands) then a North/South leading into test season? Geez don't ask me too many questions, I thought we were just chucking out ideas, not having anything a firm co,p. I just wonder if that is something that could be worked on?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 29, 2020 3:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 18535
@Dan

Yes. Arguably, if nations are 'going it alone' then NZ (especially) should revert to NPC

More teams, more rounds, better local involvement.
The franchises are a little artificial anyway and only exist to create an additional tier with which to play overseas franchises

For Oz (in this scenario), there's no comparable natural 'lower tier' so we either have a national club comp or NRC/Supe hybrid


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 29, 2020 4:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19578
The spat is wholly about whether a TT becomes the main regular season for pro rugby.

But 'going it alone' in that context doesn't mean all matches against overseas franchises vanish into the ether.

The money carrot is too big for that to happen. NZ and Aus also want to play a few Japan sides and maybe even teams from England and France et al.

The Mitre-10 doesn't fit that bill. Nor does it align with NZR's focus on concentrating All Black talent.

Don't want to make a rash adjustment to the number of players on the payroll in these straitened times IMO. Could be short lived.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 29, 2020 2:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5762
The format I wanted before expansion, was 3 conferences each playing all their matches in one go at the start deciding the conference winner in each. If each conference has 6 sides, each team plays 10 matches, 1 bye round, and the top two play a final (12 rounds in total). Then the top 2 or 3 from each conference progress to a new log (all start without points) and play each other once with a final to decide Super Rugby.

Part of the reason this never happened was because NZ didn't want to add team/s to their conference, there was likely other objections too (not enough matches between conferences would surely be in there). To try and get around the conference sizes issue (that existed then, now it turns out NZ maybe want a 6th side of some description), SARU suggested that conferences with more teams start earlier but that was rejected. Then we got Homer Simpson's car design.

Still seems like the best solution to me. Not sure what SARU's desired outcome is now, a lot has changed since then.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 29, 2020 3:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 11:18 pm
Posts: 1821
grievous wrote:
Dan54. wrote:
JPNZ wrote:
I'm not going to try and read through the previous 28 pages but if Australia do their own thing then SRA is unsustainable in my opinion. These derby clashes have been absolutely brutal, hence the number of injuries.

A 5 team competition is another reason why this won't work, perhaps its time to look at putting all our efforts into the NPC and having a shorter season?


The answer could be a NPC/Mitre 10 cup played earlier in season, followed by a short sharp Super comp?

With who? No guarantee Oz comp would align in schedule.


If there was money in it, the Aussies would take part. They're f**king skint. And they'll become more so if they're relying on a domestic competition. They'll take what they're given by NZ/SA/Japan/whoever.

Whether it's NPC/M10 or SRA, it's the way to go for NZ Rugby in my opinion. Get that played before the mid year internationals then get some kind of competition which is your equivalent to the Heineken Cup for Aug-Oct, then finish the year with tours to the NH.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 29, 2020 11:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11418
Location: Tahstown
Biffer29 wrote:
grievous wrote:
Dan54. wrote:
JPNZ wrote:
I'm not going to try and read through the previous 28 pages but if Australia do their own thing then SRA is unsustainable in my opinion. These derby clashes have been absolutely brutal, hence the number of injuries.

A 5 team competition is another reason why this won't work, perhaps its time to look at putting all our efforts into the NPC and having a shorter season?


The answer could be a NPC/Mitre 10 cup played earlier in season, followed by a short sharp Super comp?

With who? No guarantee Oz comp would align in schedule.


If there was money in it, the Aussies would take part. They're f**king skint. And they'll become more so if they're relying on a domestic competition. They'll take what they're given by NZ/SA/Japan/whoever.

Whether it's NPC/M10 or SRA, it's the way to go for NZ Rugby in my opinion. Get that played before the mid year internationals then get some kind of competition which is your equivalent to the Heineken Cup for Aug-Oct, then finish the year with tours to the NH.

Looking forward to this new Kiwi comp flushed with ca$h.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 30, 2020 11:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4245
Yeah, nah, fuck'n.

I'm willing to bet you the usual amount that the McKinsey report's advice on fiscal sustainability included assumptions that the NZR s/comp - which would, they assumed (hypothetically) include 2 or 3 Australian teams - included in its number crunching the assumption that the comp would be able to sell to the 25million strong AU TV market, and more particularly the rugby market*. It probably includes some equally fragile assumptions that the NZR could control the revenue in a way that suited using it to retain fringe All Blacks in NZ.

[* quite possibly, they included the WF in this, on the basis it was worth rejecting the brumbies to get Twiggy to help pay for their comp.]

Whether or not this is true would be revealed... if NZR tabled the McKinsey plan.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 8:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2019 10:32 am
Posts: 526
Matt Carroll wants RA to call NZ's bluff. I have to agree. Its commercial suicide for NZL to continue down their current path. But will they be too proud to change their stance? I guess we will find out. But for the people who claim NZL is the best run administration in the sport I can assure you they are no where near, infact they seem to be on par with Australia, but had a bit of luck with AIG sponsoring them, and riding the back of the All Blacls success. This next decade will be a true and proper test for the NZ administration. Is it any wonder Tew did a John O'Neil and got out when he did, insuring his tenure was succeasful when a blind man could have run NZR during those years.


Quote:
'Call their bluff': AOC boss backs Australia in Super Rugby stand-off

Georgina Robinson
By Georgina Robinson
July 30, 2020 — 6.24pm


Former Rugby Australia executive Matt Carroll has rubbished New Zealand's Super Rugby plans and urged Australia to call the Kiwis' bluff as negotiations continued this week.

Carroll, who now runs the Australian Olympic Committee and was lined up to replace Raelene Castle before the RA board baulked at the idea two months ago, said New Zealand did not have the population to mount a commercially strong replacement to Super Rugby.

'I'd be calling their bluff': Australian Olympic Committee chief executive Matt Carroll on the future of Super Rugby.
'I'd be calling their bluff': Australian Olympic Committee chief executive Matt Carroll on the future of Super Rugby. CREDIT:KATE GERAGHTY

He said a full trans-Tasman competition was the way to go but urged Australia to hold firm on the terms of engagement.

RA has indicated it will not participate in NZR's 'expression of interest' process and wants to negotiate on an equal footing.

Advertisement

"I'd be saying (to New Zealand), 'sure guys, can we cut the crap and get on with life?'," Carroll told podcast The Playmaker's Playbook.

"Professional competitions are not just about who's winning on the field each week, it's also about the reach into markets. Sponsors want to know they have a market.

I'd be calling their bluff, well and truly.

Former Australian rugby executive Matt Carroll
"I can't for the life of me believe that the New Zealand sponsors would be content with 4.5 million people in New Zealand. It would be like running a national competition in Sydney, and we know how hard a time even the NRL has sustaining the number of clubs it has in Sydney. So imagine trying to sustain 10 clubs in New Zealand with 4.5 million people.

"Okay, it's the number one sport in the country, but it's not the only one. There's a bit of rugby league in Auckland and a bit of football throughout the country as well ... and netball, so they haven't quite got it all to themselves. I'd be calling their bluff, well and truly."

Advertisement

Debate has quietened on both sides of the Tasman this week after weeks of combative back and forth between the nations.

The uncertainty triggered by COVID19 has taken its toll in Argentina, where UAR president Marcelo Rodriquez revealed he had been forced to let all of the country's top players go.

Rodriguez said the cancellation of the 2020 edition of Super Rugby and the subsequent loss of TV, sponsorship and ticket revenue, meant there was no way to keep their best players in Argentina.

"We had to be straight with the players so they know the situation, with the uncertainty and the huge impact in the southern hemisphere," he said.

Advertisement

Jaguares coach Gonzalo Quesada has already left to take over at Stade Francais and eight senior players, including the last two captains, Agustin Creevy and Jeronimo de la Fuente, have joined European clubs.

South Africa is still hoping to stage a domestic competition at the end of the year.

Carroll also confirmed he would not be applying for the vacant chief executive role at RA.

The game's former deputy chief and 2003 Rugby World Cup general manager was lined up on the ticket of former director Peter Wiggs after Castle's departure in April, but board members baulked when Wiggs demanded John O'Neill be given a director's role.

"I offered to come in as managing director but I'm not going through a (formal recruitment) process. The people who would be interviewing me for the process know far, far less about sport and the game than I do."

Advertisement

with Reuters


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 8:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:34 am
Posts: 18788
The NZR have just played themselves into a corner here. The Saffas are pissed off and now RA actually have some power over them. Like I said if NZR go for a 8+ team plus comp of their own then it's effectively just the Mitre 10 Cup. I don't think anyone will be paying extra for that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 8:21 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Posts: 17413
Location: Perth
Ellafan wrote:
Yeah, nah, fuck'n.

I'm willing to bet you the usual amount that the McKinsey report's advice on fiscal sustainability included assumptions that the NZR s/comp - which would, they assumed (hypothetically) include 2 or 3 Australian teams - included in its number crunching the assumption that the comp would be able to sell to the 25million strong AU TV market, and more particularly the rugby market*. It probably includes some equally fragile assumptions that the NZR could control the revenue in a way that suited using it to retain fringe All Blacks in NZ.

[* quite possibly, they included the WF in this, on the basis it was worth rejecting the brumbies to get Twiggy to help pay for their comp.]

Whether or not this is true would be revealed... if NZR tabled the McKinsey plan.


McDisney.....

That’s the company that charges a fortune to give your own opinion back to you. Smart people and outstanding marketing, but in my experience, their advice is about as reliable as a Townsville taxi driver’s.

Management Consulting firms generally exist so that management has justification for whatever plan they wanted. “Oh, McDisney said that? Well then, I guess we should do it.” Their role is centred around letting the individuals within their clients’ organisation skirt accountability. Sort of like the old saying, “No one ever got fired for buying IBM”.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 8:30 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Posts: 17413
Location: Perth
CrazyIslander wrote:
The NZR have just played themselves into a corner here. The Saffas are pissed off and now RA actually have some power over them. Like I said if NZR go for a 8+ team plus comp of their own then it's effectively just the Mitre 10 Cup. I don't think anyone will be paying extra for that.


The stated priority was keeping the ABs strong, and that involved limiting the players to the 5 SR teams. By going to 8 or more invalidates the report and the justification behind it. The whole reasoning as to why Oz can’t have 5 teams is because it waters down the quality of the teams.

They’ve played themselves into a tiny corner. You have to wonder as to the the thinking of the person that leaked that report - did they want a proper TT comp or did they want this whole thing to blow up so NZR could return to a focus on the NPC?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 9:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:34 am
Posts: 18788
towny wrote:
CrazyIslander wrote:
The NZR have just played themselves into a corner here. The Saffas are pissed off and now RA actually have some power over them. Like I said if NZR go for a 8+ team plus comp of their own then it's effectively just the Mitre 10 Cup. I don't think anyone will be paying extra for that.


The stated priority was keeping the ABs strong, and that involved limiting the players to the 5 SR teams. By going to 8 or more invalidates the report and the justification behind it. The whole reasoning as to why Oz can’t have 5 teams is because it waters down the quality of the teams.

They’ve played themselves into a tiny corner. You have to wonder as to the the thinking of the person that leaked that report - did they want a proper TT comp or did they want this whole thing to blow up so NZR could return to a focus on the NPC?

I think that REPORT proposing TT was intentionally leaked by NZR to make it sound like the idea wasn't theirs and so RA know. That way it wouldn't seem like they're proposing it to RA. Instead, they went to work as if on a mission from God and secretly hoping RA were watching and had taken the divine message to heart too.

So in that time, NZR and Hansen etc were sending signals across the ditch on how the TT would work. By the time they had the meeting NZR were acting as if RA was also a disciple of the same God who wrote the report, only the lesser disciple. The meeting pretty much went like this, NZR "God told me to do it this way, sign here." RA replied "Fvck off."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 9:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 10:23 am
Posts: 836
I got a question that may need answering. NZR are being rubbished for seemingly coming up with a comp and not talking Aus, and saying that Aus were welcome to join whether it 3 or 5 teams. A lot of our Australian brothers on here are saying it disgusting NZ can't just say they getting a comp going and then invite THEM to join.
Next we read Australia have come up with a comp and seem to be inviting a team from Fiji and maybe the Sunwolves and have said to Argentina they can send some of their boys over to play. Haven't read where they have had meetings with anyone else, just come up with an idea all by themselves. Does not anyone see any irony in this?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 9:50 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Posts: 17413
Location: Perth
I think you’re misunderstanding RA’s position. They’ve politely said “No thanks”, and are making plans for themselves with the knowledge that NZ has decided to go their own way. Are you angry that they’ve haven’t made public counter-offers to NZR? Seems that you’re angry that we didn’t respond to NZ arrogance with sufficient reverence. It’s not RA’s fault if NZR’s amazing plan backfired. Focus your anger where it’s deserved.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 10:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2786
Inviting you to join their competition is arrogance?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 10:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11418
Location: Tahstown
Dan54. wrote:
I got a question that may need answering. NZR are being rubbished for seemingly coming up with a comp and not talking Aus, and saying that Aus were welcome to join whether it 3 or 5 teams. A lot of our Australian brothers on here are saying it disgusting NZ can't just say they getting a comp going and then invite THEM to join.
Next we read Australia have come up with a comp and seem to be inviting a team from Fiji and maybe the Sunwolves and have said to Argentina they can send some of their boys over to play. Haven't read where they have had meetings with anyone else, just come up with an idea all by themselves. Does not anyone see any irony in this?

Cmon anyone would expect a devolvement of super rugby would be a TT comp with two teams in the picture. Two historic and multiple WC winners.
Why wouldn't a partnership deal be worked out? An equal one that suits both commercial needs.
Clearly NZR got together, recalled the underarm, laminations, Phar Lap and Peter Dutton and said lets do it for the brows and fvck these guys and put together a shitty deal for us. We said, nah bro not this time but good luck (youre gonna play the Kangaroos in mungo rules like we dont exist????) we are going to get this national comp going you keep criticising us about. We need to , yknow survive.

Now its like, Ozzie cvnts, didn't take their awesome 1.5 teams offer, enemy for life, times space continuum no comebacks.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 10:46 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Posts: 17413
Location: Perth
koroke hangareka wrote:
Inviting you to join their competition is arrogance?


Trashing Oz rugby and inviting someone that thought they were a partner to a NZ run comp - absolutely. Arrogant people don’t seem to have awareness of their arrogance - make of that what you will.

Regardless, I think we are now in a position to do what’s best for our respective games and I don’t think the bad blood will last long. It’s probably all for the best.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 11:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11418
Location: Tahstown
towny wrote:
koroke hangareka wrote:
Inviting you to join their competition is arrogance?


Trashing Oz rugby and inviting someone that thought they were a partner to a NZ run comp - absolutely. Arrogant people don’t seem to have awareness of their arrogance - make of that what you will.

Regardless, I think we are now in a position to do what’s best for our respective games and I don’t think the bad blood will last long. It’s probably all for the best.

:lol: Their recent and hardly retired coach recalled the "number" we did on them to get the 2003 WC. In other words we followed the IRB rules.
Good luck with that wish.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 11:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 10:23 am
Posts: 836
towny wrote:
koroke hangareka wrote:
Inviting you to join their competition is arrogance?


Trashing Oz rugby and inviting someone that thought they were a partner to a NZ run comp - absolutely. Arrogant people don’t seem to have awareness of their arrogance - make of that what you will.



As per this interviewfrom 10 days ago, Mark Robinson himself has said:

"We're going to take a little bit more time as part of this consultation process with all of the potential different participants in this competition to work through and understand what their requirements might be. We've got some broad ideas, but to be fair to teams we want to work with, we'd like to give them some input and insight into those ideas before we move too much further".
I am not sure what else they can say, there was no proposals from RA, but where have they evr said it was their comp, or thrashed Aus rugby?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 11:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 10:23 am
Posts: 836
towny wrote:
I think you’re misunderstanding RA’s position. They’ve politely said “No thanks”, and are making plans for themselves with the knowledge that NZ has decided to go their own way. Are you angry that they’ve haven’t made public counter-offers to NZR? Seems that you’re angry that we didn’t respond to NZ arrogance with sufficient reverence. It’s not RA’s fault if NZR’s amazing plan backfired. Focus your anger where it’s deserved.

No I wondering if you were upset because they proposed a comp and invited only 1 team from Japan and Fiji without any discussion with said unions.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 11:30 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 10:23 am
Posts: 836
grievous wrote:
towny wrote:
koroke hangareka wrote:
Inviting you to join their competition is arrogance?


Trashing Oz rugby and inviting someone that thought they were a partner to a NZ run comp - absolutely. Arrogant people don’t seem to have awareness of their arrogance - make of that what you will.

Regardless, I think we are now in a position to do what’s best for our respective games and I don’t think the bad blood will last long. It’s probably all for the best.

:lol: Their recent and hardly retired coach recalled the "number" we did on them to get the 2003 WC. In other words we followed the IRB rules.
Good luck with that wish.


Yep and Aussie's former coach suggested Aus were much better to have only 3 teams, and I took no more notice of him than I did of hansen or O'Neil etc, they are former.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 11:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11418
Location: Tahstown
Dan54. wrote:
grievous wrote:
towny wrote:
koroke hangareka wrote:
Inviting you to join their competition is arrogance?


Trashing Oz rugby and inviting someone that thought they were a partner to a NZ run comp - absolutely. Arrogant people don’t seem to have awareness of their arrogance - make of that what you will.

Regardless, I think we are now in a position to do what’s best for our respective games and I don’t think the bad blood will last long. It’s probably all for the best.

:lol: Their recent and hardly retired coach recalled the "number" we did on them to get the 2003 WC. In other words we followed the IRB rules.
Good luck with that wish.


Yep and Aussie's former coach suggested Aus were much better to have only 3 teams, and I took no more notice of him than I did of hansen or O'Neil etc, they are former.

No one listens to Eddie, he wants to coach league


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 12:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2786
towny wrote:
koroke hangareka wrote:
Inviting you to join their competition is arrogance?


Trashing Oz rugby and inviting someone that thought they were a partner to a NZ run comp - absolutely. Arrogant people don’t seem to have awareness of their arrogance - make of that what you will.

Regardless, I think we are now in a position to do what’s best for our respective games and I don’t think the bad blood will last long. It’s probably all for the best.


I don't think it was NZR that trashed Oz rugby.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 12:12 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Posts: 17413
Location: Perth
Dan54. wrote:
towny wrote:
I think you’re misunderstanding RA’s position. They’ve politely said “No thanks”, and are making plans for themselves with the knowledge that NZ has decided to go their own way. Are you angry that they’ve haven’t made public counter-offers to NZR? Seems that you’re angry that we didn’t respond to NZ arrogance with sufficient reverence. It’s not RA’s fault if NZR’s amazing plan backfired. Focus your anger where it’s deserved.

No I wondering if you were upset because they proposed a comp and invited only 1 team from Japan and Fiji without any discussion with said unions.


How do you know there was no discussion? Also, Sunwolves were in the comp the last few years and the Drua were in the NRC, so RA asked all of the teams.

Is this really all you’ve got? NZR acted like arseholes - don’t try to mitigate this with make believe bullsh*t.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 12:14 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Posts: 17413
Location: Perth
Dan54. wrote:
grievous wrote:
towny wrote:
koroke hangareka wrote:
Inviting you to join their competition is arrogance?


Trashing Oz rugby and inviting someone that thought they were a partner to a NZ run comp - absolutely. Arrogant people don’t seem to have awareness of their arrogance - make of that what you will.

Regardless, I think we are now in a position to do what’s best for our respective games and I don’t think the bad blood will last long. It’s probably all for the best.

:lol: Their recent and hardly retired coach recalled the "number" we did on them to get the 2003 WC. In other words we followed the IRB rules.
Good luck with that wish.


Yep and Aussie's former coach suggested Aus were much better to have only 3 teams, and I took no more notice of him than I did of hansen or O'Neil etc, they are former.


His whole view is based on what’s best for the national team in the short term. He’s wrong.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 12:20 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Posts: 17413
Location: Perth
Kiwis sounding like the ex gf whose plan to get back with you is to tell you that she wasn’t being a bitch and you should appreciate her more. Sure, she’s controlling, painful and awful company, but she’s doing this all for you. Why can’t you understand that.

Meanwhile Oz rugby is at the pub trying to meet some other birds, but getting the shits with the constant text messages. Hope NZ is okay when they see our cock getting sucked by some new mob, but I suspect they are going to go full Bunny-boiler.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 12:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 18535
I’m no psychologist...

But if I was, I’d be getting a full box of HB pencils out the cupboard right now.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 12:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:34 am
Posts: 18788
koroke hangareka wrote:
Inviting you to join their competition is arrogance?

Look at it this way. They knew we needed a TT comp, so rather than working together they got in first and arrange everything they wanted and made RA apply to join. :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1507 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 ... 38  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Beaver_Shark, Lemoentjie, Nieghorn, towny, UncleFB and 52 guests


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