Planet Rugby Forum

towny wrote:

Mr Mike wrote:

towny wrote:NZR CEO has given an update to the stalled planning for their future competition structure. https://youtu.be/VCyo_6kFbwk

“They dudn't hev to cut us off. Make out like it nivver heppened and thet we were nothing. And we don't even need theer love, but they treat us like a stranger and thet feels so rough. No, they didn't hev to stoop so low. Hev theer frinds collict theer ricords and thin change theer number. I guess thet we don't need thet though. Now we’re just somebody thet they use to know.”

But you have reversed the lines there. In the song it is the Aussie saying that. Then the Kiwi comes in with this

Now and then I think of all the times you screwed me over
But had me believing it was always something that I'd done
But I don't wanna live that way
Reading into every word you say
You said that you could let it go
And I wouldn't catch you hung up on somebody that you used to know

Works very well.

You’re the ones chasing Australia, who’s moved on? Please understand who you are in the ‘crazy ex gf’ analogy.

grievous wrote:

Ali's Choice wrote:As an aside, I am glad that none of the posters on this thread are representing either NZR or RA in the ongoing negotiations.

Yeah last thing you want is for your union to grow the game and produce something fans and advertisers want

CrazyIslander wrote:

Dan54. wrote:

CrazyIslander wrote:

we will also be working with Rugby Australia to seek expressions of interest from their current Super clubs and other interested parties to join the competition," said New Zealand Rugby chief executive Mark Robinson.

As I said, NZR saw that both parties needed a TT comp and instead of talking it over with RA they sneakily put together a TT structure first in order to get all they wanted and hope RA would panic and beg to be included.

It could be, I tend to think NZR and RA have been talking all the time, and RA are making sure NZR cop the shit when they drop Rebels or whoever from comp, they can't afford 4 teams, they need Twiggy to pay for Force and then they have only 3 teams to pay for. Or maybe they weren't actually almost bankrupt at beginning of year and they have got more money than they been letting on, one of reasons McLennan want PI team in Sydney , can say look we still got 5 teams based in Oz. Don't get me wrong NZR will be trying to get what they want, would be piss poor if they didn't.

Why should NZR care that RA can't afford 5 teams. That's RA's responsibility. What NZR wants is an access to the Aust market but keep the greater part of revenue. They can't do that without Aust teams in the comp. That's why they tried to talk directly to the Aust SR teams.

Dan54. wrote:

grievous wrote:

Ali's Choice wrote:As an aside, I am glad that none of the posters on this thread are representing either NZR or RA in the ongoing negotiations.

Yeah last thing you want is for your union to grow the game and produce something fans and advertisers want

AC is right, not sure if too many on here even know what the fans want, let alone the advertisers , I don't think I have read one post on here (including my own 0 where I have thought, geez he or she has got all the facts and would be great at the table.

Dan54. wrote:

CrazyIslander wrote:

Dan54. wrote:

CrazyIslander wrote:

we will also be working with Rugby Australia to seek expressions of interest from their current Super clubs and other interested parties to join the competition," said New Zealand Rugby chief executive Mark Robinson.

As I said, NZR saw that both parties needed a TT comp and instead of talking it over with RA they sneakily put together a TT structure first in order to get all they wanted and hope RA would panic and beg to be included.

It could be, I tend to think NZR and RA have been talking all the time, and RA are making sure NZR cop the shit when they drop Rebels or whoever from comp, they can't afford 4 teams, they need Twiggy to pay for Force and then they have only 3 teams to pay for. Or maybe they weren't actually almost bankrupt at beginning of year and they have got more money than they been letting on, one of reasons McLennan want PI team in Sydney , can say look we still got 5 teams based in Oz. Don't get me wrong NZR will be trying to get what they want, would be piss poor if they didn't.

Why should NZR care that RA can't afford 5 teams. That's RA's responsibility. What NZR wants is an access to the Aust market but keep the greater part of revenue. They can't do that without Aust teams in the comp. That's why they tried to talk directly to the Aust SR teams.

Because if RA can't afford 5 teams, you get the shit show you got when they pulled the Force, any comp set up has to know that all teams are financially viable I would of though anyone would know that!

Dan54. wrote:

grievous wrote:

Ali's Choice wrote:As an aside, I am glad that none of the posters on this thread are representing either NZR or RA in the ongoing negotiations.

Yeah last thing you want is for your union to grow the game and produce something fans and advertisers want

AC is right, not sure if too many on here even know what the fans want, let alone the advertisers , I don't think I have read one post on here (including my own 0 where I have thought, geez he or she has got all the facts and would be great at the table.

Dan54. wrote:

CrazyIslander wrote:

Dan54. wrote:

CrazyIslander wrote:

we will also be working with Rugby Australia to seek expressions of interest from their current Super clubs and other interested parties to join the competition," said New Zealand Rugby chief executive Mark Robinson.

As I said, NZR saw that both parties needed a TT comp and instead of talking it over with RA they sneakily put together a TT structure first in order to get all they wanted and hope RA would panic and beg to be included.

It could be, I tend to think NZR and RA have been talking all the time, and RA are making sure NZR cop the shit when they drop Rebels or whoever from comp, they can't afford 4 teams, they need Twiggy to pay for Force and then they have only 3 teams to pay for. Or maybe they weren't actually almost bankrupt at beginning of year and they have got more money than they been letting on, one of reasons McLennan want PI team in Sydney , can say look we still got 5 teams based in Oz. Don't get me wrong NZR will be trying to get what they want, would be piss poor if they didn't.

Why should NZR care that RA can't afford 5 teams. That's RA's responsibility. What NZR wants is an access to the Aust market but keep the greater part of revenue. They can't do that without Aust teams in the comp. That's why they tried to talk directly to the Aust SR teams.

Because if RA can't afford 5 teams, you get the shit show you got when they pulled the Force, any comp set up has to know that all teams are financially viable I would of though anyone would know that!

Dan54. wrote:one of reasons McLennan want PI team in Sydney , can say look we still got 5 teams based in Oz.

Ali's Choice wrote:Just imagine for a moment that you're at the negotiating table. Representing NZR is Muttonbirds, and representing RA is grievous.

grievous wrote:

Ali's Choice wrote:Just imagine for a moment that you're at the negotiating table. Representing NZR is Muttonbirds, and representing RA is grievous.

And youre down the road at the NRL

Ali's Choice wrote:

grievous wrote:

Ali's Choice wrote:Just imagine for a moment that you're at the negotiating table. Representing NZR is Muttonbirds, and representing RA is grievous.

And youre down the road at the NRL

grievous wrote: Cutting the Force didn't save RA financially, it was more how that administration was running the game.
Shirely you can see with how the Force are competing currently that RA cannot afford to NOT in include them.

Dan54. wrote:

grievous wrote:

Ali's Choice wrote:As an aside, I am glad that none of the posters on this thread are representing either NZR or RA in the ongoing negotiations.

Yeah last thing you want is for your union to grow the game and produce something fans and advertisers want

AC is right, not sure if too many on here even know what the fans want, let alone the advertisers , I don't think I have read one post on here (including my own 0 where I have thought, geez he or she has got all the facts and would be great at the table.

grievous wrote:

Dan54. wrote:

grievous wrote:

Ali's Choice wrote:As an aside, I am glad that none of the posters on this thread are representing either NZR or RA in the ongoing negotiations.

Yeah last thing you want is for your union to grow the game and produce something fans and advertisers want

AC is right, not sure if too many on here even know what the fans want, let alone the advertisers , I don't think I have read one post on here (including my own 0 where I have thought, geez he or she has got all the facts and would be great at the table.

No they do.
The former super format was unique but odd to anyone other than rugby fans. Its dead now and needed to be it was failing.
Fans want what every sport wants, a competition to watch, attend and follow with the best quality on offer. The commercial stuff is run in boardrooms.
Its quite simple. We have been hearing it for years from fans.

Murdoch wrote:

grievous wrote: Cutting the Force didn't save RA financially, it was more how that administration was running the game.
Shirely you can see with how the Force are competing currently that RA cannot afford to NOT in include them.

The Force are able to compete because the standard as a whole is very poor. It's barely above club standard.

Australian teams if they were to be competitive in a TT competition would need to consolidate their talent. Just like they did post-2017.

tubbyj wrote:That is not what NZR is saying at all. They want 3 Australian teams in the competition. Its what the ARU is threatening and fans asserting with a swagger but so far it is all talk and bluster which is getting a bit tiresome.

Working Class Rugger wrote:

tubbyj wrote:That is not what NZR is saying at all. They want 3 Australian teams in the competition. Its what the ARU is threatening and fans asserting with a swagger but so far it is all talk and bluster which is getting a bit tiresome.

We get that. But what they don't understand is the Australian Rugby landscape that makes that very difficult as it currently stands. Forget 2017 when we cut the Force. We are talking about now. The present. Our teams are controlled by our respective member Unions in their entirety.Unlike in NZ where NZR either owns significant stakes in their sides and in regards to the Blues the franchise entirely. It's not a simple as telling the VRU that the Rebels are gone and expect that is that. There a fundamental lack of understanding of how the system works here.

Ali's Choice wrote:There has been lots of talk about what NZR want and what RA want, and then the follow up trolling by parochial posters. But the reality is that both NZR and RA will opt for whatever option raises the most money. I have no doubt now that both organisations are negotiating with various broadcasters, and ultimately the most financially attractive option will be the competition we have. If NZR and RA can earn more going solo, they'll go solo. If they can earn more from a combined TT competition, that is what we will have. If anyone thinks that these organisations are going to come up with their own competition structures without consulting with broadcasters, then they are idiots. Broadcasters will be consulted every step of the way and the end result will be a comp that earns these two unions the most money.

Ali's Choice wrote:

Working Class Rugger wrote:

tubbyj wrote:That is not what NZR is saying at all. They want 3 Australian teams in the competition. Its what the ARU is threatening and fans asserting with a swagger but so far it is all talk and bluster which is getting a bit tiresome.

We get that. But what they don't understand is the Australian Rugby landscape that makes that very difficult as it currently stands. Forget 2017 when we cut the Force. We are talking about now. The present. Our teams are controlled by our respective member Unions in their entirety.Unlike in NZ where NZR either owns significant stakes in their sides and in regards to the Blues the franchise entirely. It's not a simple as telling the VRU that the Rebels are gone and expect that is that. There a fundamental lack of understanding of how the system works here.

Yup, NZR cannot expect RA to cull two teams. It's either they accept all 5 teams or they move on.

sonic_attack wrote:The force are an outlier and probably shouldn't even go into the hat to be drawn from.

They have moneybags that will create an entire international competition so his team can play. If he wanted to he could click his fingers tomorrow and buy the players required to win a trophy in the first season and hold it for 20 years.

It would be one of the other 4 to whittle it down to 3 plus the force. I don't think the force have too much to worry about moving forward whatever happens.

Working Class Rugger wrote:

sonic_attack wrote:The force are an outlier and probably shouldn't even go into the hat to be drawn from.

They have moneybags that will create an entire international competition so his team can play. If he wanted to he could click his fingers tomorrow and buy the players required to win a trophy in the first season and hold it for 20 years.

It would be one of the other 4 to whittle it down to 3 plus the force. I don't think the force have too much to worry about moving forward whatever happens.

It's not that simple. There's a whole degree of complexity you re missing in regards to player production, market size etc. that you and every other NZ either do not understand or are completely overlooking here. If we went with a player production and market potential as the deciding factors then the Brumbies, the team NZ wants most would fall into the potentially to be cut realm. Looking at the starting 15 tonight. Breaking down the pack. There are 5 from NSW, two from Melbourne and one from Queensland. In the backs its 1 from Canberra, two from NZ, two from Queensland and two from NSW.

Try justifying cutting the Force or Melbourne who both have produced more players in recent times than Canberra has.

Ellafan wrote:

Working Class Rugger wrote:

sonic_attack wrote:The force are an outlier and probably shouldn't even go into the hat to be drawn from.

They have moneybags that will create an entire international competition so his team can play. If he wanted to he could click his fingers tomorrow and buy the players required to win a trophy in the first season and hold it for 20 years.

It would be one of the other 4 to whittle it down to 3 plus the force. I don't think the force have too much to worry about moving forward whatever happens.

It's not that simple. There's a whole degree of complexity you re missing in regards to player production, market size etc. that you and every other NZ either do not understand or are completely overlooking here. If we went with a player production and market potential as the deciding factors then the Brumbies, the team NZ wants most would fall into the potentially to be cut realm. Looking at the starting 15 tonight. Breaking down the pack. There are 5 from NSW, two from Melbourne and one from Queensland. In the backs its 1 from Canberra, two from NZ, two from Queensland and two from NSW.

Try justifying cutting the Force or Melbourne who both have produced more players in recent times than Canberra has.

I am finding it difficult to name 5 actual Canberra players in the championship teams of 20 years ago.

Gregan, Larkham, Roff, Walker* and possibly Caputo.

* Young in NSW has been made part of the 'southern' RU based on Canberra, so technically he is a local.

Were there any others?

Working Class Rugger wrote:

Ellafan wrote:

Working Class Rugger wrote:

sonic_attack wrote:The force are an outlier and probably shouldn't even go into the hat to be drawn from.

They have moneybags that will create an entire international competition so his team can play. If he wanted to he could click his fingers tomorrow and buy the players required to win a trophy in the first season and hold it for 20 years.

It would be one of the other 4 to whittle it down to 3 plus the force. I don't think the force have too much to worry about moving forward whatever happens.

It's not that simple. There's a whole degree of complexity you re missing in regards to player production, market size etc. that you and every other NZ either do not understand or are completely overlooking here. If we went with a player production and market potential as the deciding factors then the Brumbies, the team NZ wants most would fall into the potentially to be cut realm. Looking at the starting 15 tonight. Breaking down the pack. There are 5 from NSW, two from Melbourne and one from Queensland. In the backs its 1 from Canberra, two from NZ, two from Queensland and two from NSW.

Try justifying cutting the Force or Melbourne who both have produced more players in recent times than Canberra has.

I am finding it difficult to name 5 actual Canberra players in the championship teams of 20 years ago.

Gregan, Larkham, Roff, Walker* and possibly Caputo.

* Young in NSW has been made part of the 'southern' RU based on Canberra, so technically he is a local.

Were there any others?

Walker is from the Shoalhaven in NSW. Joe Roff moved to Canberra as a teenager and attended Marist College from The Armidale School. The other three might be the only born and/or raised (Gregan moved their at the age of two) Canberrans.

Ellafan wrote:

Ali's Choice wrote:There has been lots of talk about what NZR want and what RA want, and then the follow up trolling by parochial posters. But the reality is that both NZR and RA will opt for whatever option raises the most money. I have no doubt now that both organisations are negotiating with various broadcasters, and ultimately the most financially attractive option will be the competition we have. If NZR and RA can earn more going solo, they'll go solo. If they can earn more from a combined TT competition, that is what we will have. If anyone thinks that these organisations are going to come up with their own competition structures without consulting with broadcasters, then they are idiots. Broadcasters will be consulted every step of the way and the end result will be a comp that earns these two unions the most money.

And I'd say there is a 99.94% probability that the McKinsey bods quietly talked to the broadcasters in Aus., and were told that they needed Aussie teams in their comp to tap fully into the much larger market here, before their report was delivered. If it wasn't for that $ lure, the NZR wouldn't be wanting to include any 'poor quaility' Aus. teams at all. So you may well be right to say "ultimately the most financially attractive option will be the competition we have", but it won't be NZR's preferred unilateral control option.

New Zealand Rugby (NZR) is confident it will get buy-in from Australia to join its new-look franchise competition in 2021 but says it will be highly selective over which teams will be invited to take part.

Trans-Tasman negotiations next week will determine whether Rugby Australia (RA) enters expressions of interest for its teams to join the competition or breaks ties and forms its own model.

NZR chief executive Mark Robinson said the bar will be set high for teams interested in joining what he believes will be the strongest professional league in the world.

Robinson has not directly addressed what problems would be caused if there was no Australian involvement in NZR's proposed setup.

"We'll work through that more as we go," he said. "Certainly there's aspects of Super Rugby Aotearoa (that) have shown that it's a particularly popular domestic league.

Ellafan wrote:I think it is important, on the 2nd August, to remind ourselves of the dictat issued by that insolent fellow Robinson on 17 July 2020 - that is 3 days post the 14 July declaration, but more than 2 weeks ago.

New Zealand Rugby (NZR) is confident it will get buy-in from Australia to join its new-look franchise competition in 2021 but says it will be highly selective over which teams will be invited to take part.

Trans-Tasman negotiations next week will determine whether Rugby Australia (RA) enters expressions of interest for its teams to join the competition or breaks ties and forms its own model.

NZR chief executive Mark Robinson said the bar will be set high for teams interested in joining what he believes will be the strongest professional league in the world.

Robinson has not directly addressed what problems would be caused if there was no Australian involvement in NZR's proposed setup.

"We'll work through that more as we go," he said. "Certainly there's aspects of Super Rugby Aotearoa (that) have shown that it's a particularly popular domestic league.

"Next week" ended on 24 July.

koroke hangareka wrote:You aren't sticking it to Robinson though, are you? He most likely doesn't read the Planet Rugby forum. You're just waving your arms around.

kiwigreg369 wrote:

koroke hangareka wrote:You aren't sticking it to Robinson though, are you? He most likely doesn't read the Planet Rugby forum. You're just waving your arms around.

Don’t forget Ellafan is on the side of the righteous.

...World Rugby chairman Sir Bill Beaumont has publicly supported New Zealand’s plan to create an eight to 10 team competition including the five Kiwi Super Rugby franchises and a “leaner” Australian contingent...

Beaumont also revealed World Rugby was open to funding a Pacific Islands team in the proposed trans-Tasman competition...

Ellafan wrote:Speaking of which, Bill Beaumont can fuck off too.

...World Rugby chairman Sir Bill Beaumont has publicly supported New Zealand’s plan to create an eight to 10 team competition including the five Kiwi Super Rugby franchises and a “leaner” Australian contingent...

Beaumont also revealed World Rugby was open to funding a Pacific Islands team in the proposed trans-Tasman competition...

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/ ... y-standoff

Ellafan wrote:Speaking of which, Bill Beaumont can fuck off too.

Spoiler: show

[quote]...World Rugby chairman Sir Bill Beaumont has publicly supported New Zealand’s plan to create an eight to 10 team competition including the five Kiwi Super Rugby franchises and a “leaner” Australian contingent...

Beaumont also revealed World Rugby was open to funding a Pacific Islands team in the proposed trans-Tasman competition...