• Categories
Collapse

The Silver Fern

'Super Rugby' 2021

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Sports Talk
1.9k Posts 81 Posters 133.9k Views
'Super Rugby' 2021
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • D Offline
    D Offline
    Derpus
    replied to Tim on last edited by Derpus
    #221

    @Tim Viewing figures for NZ derbies in Aus, as far as i am aware, are never better than local games. They are still quite strong due to a high expat population though (i think on the weekend the Aus games, including kayo streams, got about 100k vs 50k each for the NZ derbies).

    And i never said an alternative was a sure thing. But why continue to limp along like a wounded dog when we have some other options that could be explored that, in the long term, could be far more beneficial for the health of the game here?

    TimT 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • TimT Away
    TimT Away
    Tim
    replied to Derpus on last edited by
    #222

    @Derpus said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    Viewing figures for NZ derbies in Aus, as far as i am aware, are never better than local games

    The viewing figures get posted on Green and Gold forum some times, and NZ derbies frequently out rate Australian games.

    we have some other options that could be explored that, in the long term, could be far more beneficial for the health of the game here?

    What are these options? The likely consequence of going it alone is that rugby becomes a semi-professional sport in Australia, like the NRC.

    D 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • D Offline
    D Offline
    Derpus
    replied to Tim on last edited by Derpus
    #223

    @Tim see my original post.

    Also - i don't think im losing the plot. Most of my points were calmly presented and rational.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • barbarianB Offline
    barbarianB Offline
    barbarian
    replied to Tim on last edited by
    #224

    @Tim said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    The top viewing figures in Australia are often for NZ derby games. We saw what happened when Australia had five teams - the rugby was dire. Who would pay to watch eight or even ten Australian teams? How many watch the NRC? Even with four teams, Australia has only one good team (Brumbies), one team of strivers who seldom win (Reds), and two teams of low quality.

    I'm in favour of a TT comp, but saying the top viewing figures here are 'often for NZ derby games' is just untrue. They rate OK but in my memory I can never recall them topping the charts.

    And when Australia had five teams at times some teams played poorly, but in that time the Waratahs and Reds also won the comp. And Brumbies made the final on a number of occasions.

    This year all of our sides were competitive. The Rebels beat the Highlanders in NZ, while the Brumbies were genuine competition contenders.

    I get the points that you are trying to make but I think the whole 'Australian rugby teams are terrible' narrative over-eggs things just a little.

    1 Reply Last reply
    5
  • KiwiwombleK Offline
    KiwiwombleK Offline
    Kiwiwomble
    replied to Derpus on last edited by Kiwiwomble
    #225

    @Derpus said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    I forgot my final point, being that no succesful comp in the world is perfectly balanced. To the contrary - the most valuable and succesful leagues are all pretty one sided with only a small percentage of the competing teams a realistic chance of winning the title. EPl, NFL, NRL, AFl, Bundesliga, NBL - they all have plenty of whipping boys.

    i mean...thats not completely true, bth the NRL and AFL have had 7 different permiers in the last decade and the NFL have had nine....hardly a monopolies

    BonesB 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • BonesB Online
    BonesB Online
    Bones
    replied to Kiwiwomble on last edited by
    #226

    @Kiwiwomble said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    @Derpus said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    I forgot my final point, being that no succesful comp in the world is perfectly balanced. To the contrary - the most valuable and succesful leagues are all pretty one sided with only a small percentage of the competing teams a realistic chance of winning the title. EPl, NFL, NRL, AFl, Bundesliga, NBL - they all have plenty of whipping boys.

    i mean...thats not completely true, bth the NRL and AFL have had 7 different permiers in the last decade and the NFL have had nine....hardly a monopolies

    I don't think he said monopolies did he? My reading of it makes perfect sense. There's always whipping boys, doesn't necessarily mean it's the same team every year.

    NepiaN KiwiwombleK 2 Replies Last reply
    0
  • NepiaN Online
    NepiaN Online
    Nepia
    replied to Bones on last edited by
    #227

    @Bones said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    @Kiwiwomble said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    @Derpus said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    I forgot my final point, being that no succesful comp in the world is perfectly balanced. To the contrary - the most valuable and succesful leagues are all pretty one sided with only a small percentage of the competing teams a realistic chance of winning the title. EPl, NFL, NRL, AFl, Bundesliga, NBL - they all have plenty of whipping boys.

    i mean...thats not completely true, bth the NRL and AFL have had 7 different permiers in the last decade and the NFL have had nine....hardly a monopolies

    I don't think he said monopolies did he? My reading of it makes perfect sense. There's always whipping boys, doesn't necessarily mean it's the same team every year.

    Then what was the point of him even posting that? Because every comp in every year will have its share of whipping boys. It's a non point.

    BonesB 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • KiwiwombleK Offline
    KiwiwombleK Offline
    Kiwiwomble
    replied to Bones on last edited by Kiwiwomble
    #228

    @Bones i took it to mean that in general all these only have a small percent that ever have a chance where i think a of of successful leagues rotate more regularly

    maybe @derpus cold clarify

    The EPL is different too because it has over 100 years of support, generations of familys following one club through thick and thin...we're talking about a new comp with manufactured teams...harder to get people invested

    I assume your the same @derpus from TRF?

    BonesB D 2 Replies Last reply
    0
  • BonesB Online
    BonesB Online
    Bones
    replied to Nepia on last edited by
    #229

    @Nepia said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    @Bones said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    @Kiwiwomble said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    @Derpus said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    I forgot my final point, being that no succesful comp in the world is perfectly balanced. To the contrary - the most valuable and succesful leagues are all pretty one sided with only a small percentage of the competing teams a realistic chance of winning the title. EPl, NFL, NRL, AFl, Bundesliga, NBL - they all have plenty of whipping boys.

    i mean...thats not completely true, bth the NRL and AFL have had 7 different permiers in the last decade and the NFL have had nine....hardly a monopolies

    I don't think he said monopolies did he? My reading of it makes perfect sense. There's always whipping boys, doesn't necessarily mean it's the same team every year.

    Then what was the point of him even posting that? Because every comp in every year will have its share of whipping boys. It's a non point.

    I think I'm the best person to ask that, good on you.

    NepiaN 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • BonesB Online
    BonesB Online
    Bones
    replied to Kiwiwomble on last edited by
    #230

    @Kiwiwomble imagine the moaning on forums 100 years ago about how shit Millwall were though.

    KiwiwombleK 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • KiwiwombleK Offline
    KiwiwombleK Offline
    Kiwiwomble
    replied to Bones on last edited by
    #231

    @Bones football isn't good comparison anyway, with promotion and relegation teams have a lot more to play for, so even if your not wining you celebrate surviving the drop and even if you drop you'll probably have a season winning more in the league below

    I support Wimbledon, i know about going through the leagues! 😉

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • D Offline
    D Offline
    Derpus
    replied to Kiwiwomble on last edited by Derpus
    #232

    @Kiwiwomble Ya.

    I guess my point is basically just that you don't need every team in the comp to be capable of winning it for it to be a succesful comp. We will usually have at least one team capable of competing for the title and that should be enough.

    KiwiwombleK antipodeanA 2 Replies Last reply
    0
  • KiwiwombleK Offline
    KiwiwombleK Offline
    Kiwiwomble
    replied to Derpus on last edited by
    #233

    @Derpus that might be true with more established comps where you have rock solid support...rugby doesnt have that

    @jabby here 😉

    D 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • D Offline
    D Offline
    Derpus
    replied to Kiwiwomble on last edited by
    #234

    @Kiwiwomble I don't know about the NZ teams but the Tahs and Reds at least are 100 years old? and you have to start building somewhere, dont you.

    KiwiwombleK 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • NepiaN Online
    NepiaN Online
    Nepia
    replied to Bones on last edited by
    #235

    @Bones said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    @Nepia said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    @Bones said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    @Kiwiwomble said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    @Derpus said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    I forgot my final point, being that no succesful comp in the world is perfectly balanced. To the contrary - the most valuable and succesful leagues are all pretty one sided with only a small percentage of the competing teams a realistic chance of winning the title. EPl, NFL, NRL, AFl, Bundesliga, NBL - they all have plenty of whipping boys.

    i mean...thats not completely true, bth the NRL and AFL have had 7 different permiers in the last decade and the NFL have had nine....hardly a monopolies

    I don't think he said monopolies did he? My reading of it makes perfect sense. There's always whipping boys, doesn't necessarily mean it's the same team every year.

    Then what was the point of him even posting that? Because every comp in every year will have its share of whipping boys. It's a non point.

    I think I'm the best person to ask that, good on you.

    Well, you rode in with your shield up and lance out so you got the question directed at you.

    BonesB 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • KiwiwombleK Offline
    KiwiwombleK Offline
    Kiwiwomble
    replied to Derpus on last edited by
    #236

    @Derpus i honestly think thats why people are suggesting 2-3 aussie teams...those have the best support

    even with that history its still not the same as essentially the same comp for over 100 years, super rugby can only claim 25 years and thats subjective with the number of changes

    D 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • D Offline
    D Offline
    Derpus
    replied to Kiwiwomble on last edited by
    #237

    @Kiwiwomble Yeah but then you are limiting your audience and any potential growth. It was tremendously damaging to the game in Australia to cut the Force. They were the fastest growing area of rugby in terms of viewership and grassroots and boast the only billionaire benefactor around in the Southern Hemisphere. Sure they hadnt achieved anything particularly amazing yet but, as you say, these things take decades not years.

    KiwiwombleK 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • barbarianB Offline
    barbarianB Offline
    barbarian
    wrote on last edited by
    #238

    OK so maybe we introduce a rule that says teams that haven't made the finals for eight or nine years shouldn't be allowed in the competition.

    We then can say goodbye to the Rebels and Force. Oh, and the Blues as well.

    1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • KiwiwombleK Offline
    KiwiwombleK Offline
    Kiwiwomble
    replied to Derpus on last edited by
    #239

    @Derpus said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    @Kiwiwomble Yeah but then you are limiting your audience and any potential growth. It was tremendously damaging to the game in Australia to cut the Force. They were the fastest growing area of rugby in terms of viewership and grassroots and boast the only billionaire benefactor around in the Southern Hemisphere. Sure they hadnt achieved anything particularly amazing yet but, as you say, these things take decades not years.

    i agree re the force, im in Melbourne and couldn't believe the rebels got the nod....rugbys non existent here

    KiwiMurphK 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • KiwiMurphK Online
    KiwiMurphK Online
    KiwiMurph
    replied to Kiwiwomble on last edited by
    #240

    @Kiwiwomble said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    @Derpus said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    @Kiwiwomble Yeah but then you are limiting your audience and any potential growth. It was tremendously damaging to the game in Australia to cut the Force. They were the fastest growing area of rugby in terms of viewership and grassroots and boast the only billionaire benefactor around in the Southern Hemisphere. Sure they hadnt achieved anything particularly amazing yet but, as you say, these things take decades not years.

    i agree re the force, im in Melbourne and couldn't believe the rebels got the nod....rugbys non existent here

    It was all related to legally how easy it was to cut ties with either franchise. That's why Rebels were chosen cos there were clauses that RA could enact that could allow them to cut ties with the Force whereas Rebels were legally on much stronger ground.

    1 Reply Last reply
    1

'Super Rugby' 2021
Sports Talk
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.
  • First post
    Last post
0
  • Categories
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.