Pasifika SR team
-
I just dont get it. The Pasifika franchise.
What is it for? I've heard explanations like to stop the player drain. But what does that mean? They absolutely do NOT want to stop the player drain from the Pacific, that is how they get ahead in the world.
The Pacific should want a player drain but to leagues where there players still can play for their country of origin.
The other half of that coin is the Pacific union's need to be professional enough that pro players want to give up their time of play for them. And, that the unions can pay them decent appearance fees.
Adding the North Auckland Knighiwhas, and increasing the overseas cap on PI players , or removing it, would achieve that. North Auckland would be sustainable, under your own governance, tapping into a rich area, and a total population base about 4 x as big as the Auckland pacific diaspora.
Still need to include the PI nations in a tournament they have a share of profits, if you want to tick off the decent international appearance fees issue.
So going back to the purpose if the team. It is not to attract back top Pacific players from Europe. That is not the purpose. That is just part of the process of making sure they aren't an abomination in their first few years. The purpose of the team is to stop/reduce Fakatava and Fekitoa type players going into the All Black system, or Speight type players into Aus system , and I guess to poach NZ pacific diaspora players.
Will Fakatava play for Tonga if there is a Pasifika franchise rather than Highlanders? He can play SR for Pasifika but then will still spend August to October playing for Tonga for almost free for 3 weeks and then semi pro for Hawkes Bay for 8 weeks. No, he'll want to enter the NZ central contracting system, or, he'll want to move to Europe and get paid a proper wage for 30 weeks rather than 12 weeks in NZ . Exactly like the players we're hearing Pasifika will attract back.
In summary. Problem not solved.
It is trying to half-solve an unsolvable problem.
-
-
@Duluth It's hard to know where to start with that dismal piece of shit writing. But I'll take umbrage with this bit right at the end:
1 – George Bower (Crusaders and Fiji): Stuff has been told Fiji tried very hard to get him for last year's RWC, but ran into a brick wall at the top of NZ Rugby. Let's right that wrong.
Where's the wrong in a New Zealander choosing not to play for Fiji? NZR can't stop him if he's eligible.
-
what in the actual fuck????
How Stuff have the unmitigated gall to post that article, overlaid with a banner begging me to pay them is beyond me
a mythical team could be awesome if they were bankrolled to the tune of about $50m a year for player salaries so they could buy every high profile brown player in the world?? get the fuck out.
"how the Chiefs could win the World Cup if they bought every awesome player you can think of"
-
I’m impressed you got to the bottom of it. The idea that the world’s highest paid player will return to Super rugby is pure fantasy. When they wonder why this team isn’t getting off the ground, maybe they should look at the type of ‘support’ they are getting in the media.
-
@gt12 said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
I’m impressed you got to the bottom of it. The idea that the world’s highest paid player will return to Super rugby is pure fantasy. When they wonder why this team isn’t getting off the ground, maybe they should look at the type of ‘support’ they are getting in the media.
it's the same support the Pacific Islands always get in the media.
Big on emotion, lots of half-truths, a huge amount of wishful thinking, some deliberate omission of pertinent facts, all wrapped up with a heart-felt finger-pointing conclusion that someone isn't doing enough.
you name the issue, the article is always pretty much the same.
-
this is a really bad time for NZR, another forum im on its pretty much accepted NZR single handily killed super rugby as we knew it, ignoring all the COVID stuff, was too early to make any decisions on next year, apparently its just as likely the old format with SA and Arg would have gone ahead as anything
all rubbish of course but people seem to be lapping it up and the bully boy articles coming out of aus and how the dismaissal of a PI team is being reported just seem to support NZ f'd everything up
-
-
i've always thought a PI team needs to be at least predominately based in the PI's and so we need to look at the issues with starting one there, good enough stadium/lighting training facilities? then then is there an acceptance it might take some time to become competitive
and if we think NZ could provide the base for a sixth team thats a separate issue, separate team, i think trying to do both means we'll truly achieve neither
-
I don't mind a pacific franshise team if we are going down the Trans- Ta$man comp path. But it needs to be PI (Suva) based. I have my doubts about its viability, though. All decisions should be based on financial and operational realities. Not emotional and often false crap.
I have real problems with a pacific franshise being based in NZ (Auckland), my post which is at top of the split thread outlines why I think it achieves none of the supposed aims. But that just means I think it is pointless. But it is worse than pointless because it is also just plain wrong.
for these reasons.
1. Team model consistency
The most likely league format is going to be 5 NZ geographic based teams and 5 Australian geographic based teams + maybe 1 Pacific based team. If they add Pasifika, it logically should be a PI geographic based team.But, to make the league 10 geographic and 1 ethnic is just weird.
That's from a league authenticity POV.
2. Societal
From a societal / nation-building POV. I hate everything about NZ having 6 professional teams where 5 are geographic and 1 is raced based.
I hate the message it is sending to Pasifika New Zealanders. That you're not expected to be New Zealanders or even Aucklanders.
I have no problem with 1st generation migrants still supporting their home based team in a joint comp, just like several hundred thousand NZers in Australia probably already do.3. Financial
A South Auckland based Pasifika team is operating in the same 'NZ rugby economy'. The same economy we are told can't support more than 5 teams. So either, get it the fuck out of here, or make a 6th team out of a more viable option like North Auckland. That may actually last. -
As a comparison to adding Jaguares.
Jaguares were added to SR and Argentina were added to SANZAAR at the same time.
If we had added Jaguares but not added the Pumas it would have meant Jaguares would only attract the calibre of players below test level. The calibre of players they wanted to attract would have remained in Europe.
Adding the Pumas to TRC but not adding Jaguares to SR might have worked. . But not the other way around. (Only might have worked, depending on player availability from clubs and burnout)
Adding Pasifika to SR without adding PI national unions to an international comp that pays good coin, will only attract the calibre of players not good enough (or still too young) for the NZ system or European clubs.
So 1 team in the comp will be structurally perma-weak compared to the others.
Its a bad idea.
Where as adding Fiji to TRC, FRU getting a share of pooled TV revenues to pay match fees - but leaving the European clubs or Aus/NZ franchises to pay their wages for the other 44 weeks of the year .... could work.
-
-
i think rugby in the SH just isn't conducive to these kinds of teams....i doubt the Highlanders would actually be sustainable in such an expensive comp as super rugby if they had to stand alone...but because they're all just effective part of NZR they get by
a proper PI team kind of has to stand alone, as their unions arent rich enough to help...so a suva based team just has really had road to travel
-
-
@Bovidae still less that SA and Arg though
-
@Kiwiwomble That ship has sailed in the current economic climate. Having only domestic travel saves all 5 NZ teams (NZR), and this proposed PI team, a lot of money.
-
to each their own, i think id rather stick to five teams, or the NPC than force another one into NZ
-
Pacific rugby franchise threatens legal action over Super Rugby snub
The Pacific rugby franchise Kanaloa Pasifika is threatening to take legal action against New Zealand Rugby if its not included in a revamped Super Rugby competition.
Gee, is this an organisation you'd want to go into a partnership with?
-
@Rapido said in Pasifika SR team:
Pacific rugby franchise threatens legal action over Super Rugby snub
The Pacific rugby franchise Kanaloa Pasifika is threatening to take legal action against New Zealand Rugby if its not included in a revamped Super Rugby competition.
Gee, is this an organisation you'd want to go into a partnership with?
Problem when you’re dealing with US enitities.... their answer to disappointment is SUE! Happening in other places in the US as we write!
-
