Saffas going?
-
-
If SA do this and dissolve the TRC it could be a blessing.
The NZRU could move to a model similar to what Notre Dame/BYU use in college football. Set their own schedule from start to finish and use the box office draw of the ABs to leverage better deals for their away games.
At least to start we would probably have to deal with a very weak slate of home fixtures to make that work.
-
This post is deleted!
-
If this were to happen it'd hurt short term but we'd get over it. It'd mean an end to SANZAAR and Super Rugby involving SA teams due to the overlap, but that's not the end of the world.
We should sidle up to Japan and get a couple of combined Top League teams into Super Rugby, with the Top League running completely separately. This would replace SA's broadcasting revenue. As a sweetener to the Japan RU who'd previously not backed the Sunwolves, we release a quantity of NZ players to boost their sides and up everyones' revenue. Also takes the pressure off NZR's contracting monies, but we'd need to change eligibility rules so that these Kiwis were still available for the All Blacks. I think that model solves a number of problems.
The Rugby Championship becomes NZ, Australia, Argentina and Japan. JANZAR.
Meanwhile I'm not sure when SA think they'll be able to play NZ and Australia, unless they become an in-bound tour in place of a NH team, which in itself is a bit of a win as an occasional three test series vs SA would create huge interest. We could go there also, so lets say every two years we play them either home or away, or it could even be that two of three tests are played in one nation.
But for a start I'd flip SA the bird and not play them for a couple of years at all.
-
The expression "where there is smoke" springs to mind, but I am still giving no credence to this supposed 7 Nations plan.
It doesn't strike me that many of the NH teams are in favour (and I base this on zero actual fact, more gut feel).
Equally, I am not sure there is that much unhappiness with The Rugby Championship from SA Rugby. The travel factor has long ago been accepted.
SA Rugby's possible, and most likely probable issue will be about cash. They need LOTS more of it as the player drain attests to. Maybe they can get more from a 7-Nations deal, maybe not. (I don't think it will resolve the exodus issues anyway).
Plus the seasonal timing doesn't work well. SA based players will end up having a 12-month season. Too big a workload, not much more pay.... can't see that going down a treat.Nah - I think we'll be staying put.
The trick for SANZAAR is to find a format / way to massively increase revenues for all the participating Championship nations. Because it's not just SA that is feeling the Euro / Pound pinch. -
Maybe some kind of cycle where the teams only play each other once and the whole tournament and it's hosted by one country, so each country gets it on a 4 year cycle? Or maybe 2 countries can host it at a time with a 2 year cycle?
Opens up more leeway for tours, etc, plus can also still have extra Bledisloes.
-
@Billy-Webb Maybe we can play in both tournaments (7N & RC). There are 46 SA players in the English Premiership alone. Rassie can select the NH base players for the 7 N and the SH players for the RC.
Myself would love to see the old rugby tours. Pretty sure an All Black tour to SA will produce more money then the one off RC test.
We can return to CC rugby. We saw this weekend the best crowd in S15 when the Bulls played the Stormers. The PRO14 is another example. We saw the best support when the Cheetahs and Kings played each other.
The attendance at Ellis Park this weekend was shocking.
-
All the talk seems to be about more rugby when everything but money seems to point to less rugby being the better option.
-
@nzzp said in Saffas going?:
@canefan said in Saffas going?:
I'm not sure this move would make their rugby any better. How many players come back from the NH better?
Currently, most of them. Look at the standouts in the AUS and SA teams in teh RWC; a lot of them are coming out of the NH comps. They went away and got better. We have to do the same.
That said, SA always does this, and so far no joy. I'm not sure the 6/7N will compromise their travel for a few SA dollars. The big money is in England and France, and potentially Japan. SA is a medium earner in the scheme of things.
If they do go, it'll be curtains for us though. We just wno't compete with the big boys up north with the deep pockets if we can't get Japan up and running as a superpower.
Why would the 6N agree to include RSA, though? You rightly point out that most of the money comes from France and England, so it’s at best a marginal financial gain. But on the field, they’ve got a lot to lose, playing the 3x world champs every year. Plus there’s the travel factor. Plus there’s getting Scotland, Italy, Ireland and Wales to agree to it as they’re arguably the most at risk of this new team at least on the field
-
Reflecting on this, and remembering that SA want to join NH as it's where the money is, the key road blocks have to be
- Seasons.
Playing summer rugby in SA would be a massive shift. It would be direct competition with Cricket (for instance), and out of step with the entire rest of the schedule (schoolboy, Currie Cup, etc). So you either have no pool of players playing footy during the 6N, or you have to rejig your entire calendar. Northern/Southern hemisphere calendar struggles exist for a reason.
1a. Seaons continued
You're now asking NH teams to go from what they had in Scotland at the weekend, to summer temperatures (high20's, low 30's possibly) in a week. Really not sure that's going to be feasible.- Travel
Similar timezone, but I think the 12H flight to Cape Town would be a real deal breaker. The longest trip at the moment would be Scotland-Italy; about 3 hours. Replace that with two or three flights depending on start/finish and it's a real headache.
The other factor in that is the fans. The reason the 6N is the best comp in the world (not the best rugby, but the best comp) are the fans, and the travelling fans in particular. Basically you kill that for one team completely.
- Buyin from Scotland, Wales (and maybe Italy)
Will they really sign up to playing a top team every year, and possibly getting humiliated? Not sure I see it, with marginal financial gain. Will SA really bring that much to the table?
This (http://archive.livewire.ie/international-rugby-union-revenues-reach/) from 2015 suggests not:
So overall, I'd be really really surprised if this happened. It's kind of like a developer offering to build a waterfront stadium - based on a lot of pie in the sky, hypotheticals.
- Seasons.
-
@nzzp said in Saffas going?:
key road blocks
Questions on those:
a) If the "Springboks" play out of London, seeking Saffa exile crowds and with many Euro based players in the squad, would that affect roadblocks 1 and 2?
b) What role does CVC play in deciding the 6N future - does their partial buy out impact buy-in choices of others for roadblock 3?
-
@Kiap said in Saffas going?:
@nzzp said in Saffas going?:
key road blocks
Questions on those:
a) If the "Springboks" play out of London, seeking Saffa exile crowds and with many Euro based players in the squad, would that affect roadblocks 1 and 2?
b) What role does CVC play in deciding the 6N future - does their partial buy out impact buy-in choices of others for roadblock 3?
Do you think the SA rugby public will be happy with having their national team effectively playing away for an entire competition?
-
@canefan said in Saffas going?:
@Kiap said in Saffas going?:
@nzzp said in Saffas going?:
key road blocks
Questions on those:
a) If the "Springboks" play out of London, seeking Saffa exile crowds and with many Euro based players in the squad, would that affect roadblocks 1 and 2?
b) What role does CVC play in deciding the 6N future - does their partial buy out impact buy-in choices of others for roadblock 3?
Do you think the SA rugby public will be happy with having their national team effectively playing away for an entire competition?
and if they do play away, where is the player pool? Do you select out of the NH competition as none of your players are active?
-
@canefan said in Saffas going?:
Do you think the SA rugby public will be happy with having their national team effectively playing away for an entire competition?
Depends. So, what do they lose and what do they gain?
For instance:
-
Will the SA rugby public's much-loved home test matches in January/February/March be taken away?
-
Will the SA rugby public's favourite Euro-based Boks have to move to Europe ... from Europe?
-
Are there fewer Test matches for the SA rugby public to watch - or more?
-
Is there less money filtered back to SA rugby and their public - or more?
etc.
-
-
@junior said in Saffas going?:
@nzzp said in Saffas going?:
@canefan said in Saffas going?:
Plus there’s getting Scotland, Italy, Ireland and Wales to agree to it as they’re arguably the most at risk of this new team at least on the field
Oh really
-
Seems to be a no-goer if the NH players get their way.
RPA warns of a mass player revolt over Seven Nations plot
The chief executive of the Rugby Players Association, which looks after England’s leading players, has warned against expanding the Six Nations.
-
@Catogrande said in Saffas going?:
All the talk seems to be about more rugby when everything but money seems to point to less rugby being the better option.
Absolutely. Scarcity builds interest/demand.
I cannot be fucked with Super rugby right now. The comp is way too long and we're in the middle of our cricket season. I'll only start to get interested later in the comp when games start to mean a bit more. They've really fucked the whole format which is why crowd numbers are so poor.
Injuries are also a massive plague on the game now, with top players regularly out of action or missing as they need a rest, bringing the value of each match into disrepute as you rarely get the best possible sides playing each other anymore.
Sorry bit of a tangent from the thread topic but the world game needs a rethink as the balance is all wrong at the moment.
-
@No-Quarter said in Saffas going?:
@Catogrande said in Saffas going?:
All the talk seems to be about more rugby when everything but money seems to point to less rugby being the better option.
Absolutely. Scarcity builds interest/demand.
32 team NFL. 16 games regular season. 1 month of playoffs. That's it son, you're done for the year. Do you think people watch every minute of every game? You goddamn betcha.
Rugby. 16 game regular season for 16 teams + playoffs. Then 6-9 AB tests. Then a 12 game NPC comp + playoffs. Then another 3-4 AB games, plus a meaningless barbarian style game if you're interested.
Way too much Rugby, and it gets overloaded. The Super comp is devalued, it's now just a feeder to internationals. Starting in January is way too early (and yet I got hooked on Week 2 games. FML).
Edit: and just to kind of make the point, apparently Super is now 15 teams. FFS.
-
Quality over quantity. Time to go back to Super 12.
