'Super Rugby' 2021
-
lets also not overlook, in this crying of poverty, that even if the supposed deal for a 16 year old is a 3rd of what's being reported, it's a million dollar deal for a 16 year old.
- years. old.
That's criminal financial mismanagement, and i would leave as well if i was told to take a pay cut and then read that in the paper.
-
@mariner4life said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
All my mates up here who were Reds fans turned it off because they were sick of sucking.
I well recall going to Reds games when they were dreadful and there'd be ~6,000 at Suncorp for a game against a NZ side. Half of them supporting the visitors.
-
@Derpus said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@mariner4life well i definitely dont have any answers to that. But i think it's pretty obvious you havent suffered from a talent flight to the same extent.
You might want to look at the 2015 RWC squad. Then there's all the fringe SR players who go OS either for more money or better prospects. The idea that player flight only affects Australia, or it's some outlier is mistaken.
-
@mariner4life Yeah - it seems pretty dumb to me
-
@antipodean I didn't say it wasn't happening. I said it affects us far worse. Which i stand by.
-
@mariner4life said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
lets also not overlook, in this crying of poverty, that even if the supposed deal for a 16 year old is a 3rd of what's being reported, it's a million dollar deal for a 16 year old.
- years. old.
That's criminal financial mismanagement, and i would leave as well if i was told to take a pay cut and then read that in the paper.
What else would you expect from the same organisation that gave Wendy and Tuqiri massive contracts? Spending millions on backs rather than investing in forwards...
-
@Derpus said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@antipodean I didn't say it wasn't happening. I said it affects us far worse. Which i stand by.
if it affects you more its only because you dont have the depth to replace those leaving, the actual numbers of players leaving would be comparable at least, and so concentrating on player retention rather than development is only going to get Aus in the same situation you've been in before, aging player that havent been overtaken looking for a retirement deal
-
@Derpus said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@antipodean I didn't say it wasn't happening. I said it affects us far worse. Which i stand by.
At the risk of citing Mark Keohane in 2017:
The South African professional system does not invest in the player as the game’s asset, which is why close to 300 South Africans play professional rugby outside of South Africa and 15 of those players represented other countries at the 2015 World Cup.New Zealand has 600 professional players off-shore and 38 played for other countries in the 2015 World Cup.
-
@antipodean It was around 60, the most by a factor of 3, NZ born players in other teams at RWC19. IIRC
Nope I remember incorrectly!
Obviously England right up there, when it is the same country at 3 others at the RWC.
I just like posting this bit of fact
-
@antipodean Ya but as a percentage of available professional players it's not even close. You pretty much exclusively produce Rugby players as winter athletes. We already only produce a fraction of what NZ (or SA) do.
-
@Derpus said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@antipodean Ya but as a percentage of available professional players it's not even close. You pretty much exclusively produce Rugby players as winter athletes. We already only produce a fraction of what NZ (or SA) do.
Are you aware how many NRL players are from NZ?
-
@Derpus said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@antipodean I didn't say it wasn't happening. I said it affects us far worse. Which i stand by.
Because you cant re-supply 4 or 5 teams with the replacement talent of equal promise.
NZ loses more players, but judge they can still support 5 teams despite the churn. Hence we dont have a second Auckland team.
-
@antipodean Okay - so you are so prodigous at producing talent you also supply the NRL. What's your point? you still far and away eclipse us in terms of available talent. You have players ready and able to step into the vacuum when you lose say a mid tier SR level player.
We don't. That simple. Every player we lose means a drop in quality.
-
@Derpus said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@antipodean Ya but as a percentage of available professional players it's not even close. You pretty much exclusively produce Rugby players as winter athletes. We already only produce a fraction of what NZ (or SA) do.
Hence why Aus cant sustain more than 3 Franchises. And ... we're back at the start .......
-
@Machpants said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@antipodean It was around 60, the most by a factor of 3, NZ born players in other teams at RWC19. IIRC
Nope I remember incorrectly!
Obviously England right up there, when it is the same country at 3 others at the RWC.
I just like posting this bit of fact
Fuck looks like Stuff was wrong, surpise, and I was right!
53 NZ born, next was Eng 18 - also Oz 11 SA 10
-
@Derpus said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@Derpus But cutting a team will just remove more talent. It won't magically compress it. This getting circular, anyway. Ive said what i think will happen if you cut a team. A repeat of the Force cutting. I.e. nothing but damage.
But you have already cut a team in 2017. Had Covid not happened there wouldn't even be an argument for 5 teams. It would have been the 5 NZ teams and the existing 4 Aussie teams from SR.
Everything from your perspective is about what is best for Aussie rugby only. Why should NZ Rugby fans have to compromise and watch a lower standard of play by having 5 Aussie teams? This is what caused SR to fail, fans stopped watching due to one sided games once the expansion teams came in.
-
@Derpus said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@antipodean Okay - so you are so prodigous at producing talent you also supply the NRL. What's your point? you still far and away eclipse us in terms of available talent. You have players ready and able to step into the vacuum when you lose say a mid tier SR level player.
We don't. That simple. Every player we lose means a drop in quality.
So we're in agreement that the talent pathways are the major difference. Australia really needs to address that, because adding a team at SR level is too late. There wasn't the quality of players to fulfil the additional squad. And this is why the number of Australian teams in a SR TT competition is in discussion. Historically speaking it would mean at least two Oz teams at the bottom of the ladder joined by whatever NZ franchise sucked at the time. And likely one good team (probs Brumbies) joining the other semifinalists.
Given the suggested comp of Sunwolves Mk II and a sixth NZ team (Pacifika), it's preferable to have five Australian teams until we can invite literally anyone else who can be at least mid-table. And brings heaps of cash. If
Argentinathe Jaguares could play SR, why not the Brave Blossoms?Which means the Force are still going to be arseholed out of the competition. If RA is prepared to do that again, sure...
