• 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
    wrote on last edited by Derpus
    #361

    Setting all of this aside - you still haven't really provided a compelling reason why we should accept cutting a team. Even assuming the 'competitiveness' argument is valid. That really only benefits NZ. Why would Australia compromise?

    The Force-Reds game last night was fantastic and they are both typically on the lower end of the scale. I just don't see any point in agreeing to cut someone.

    M SnowyS A sharkS 4 Replies Last reply
    0
  • M Offline
    M Offline
    Machpants
    replied to Derpus on last edited by
    #362

    @Derpus because being un-competitive is killing Ozzie rugby. Less and less people are watching because they are sick of the decreasing level of competitiveness. The place to develop your depth is the level down (NPC, Currie, whattever Oz next thinks of) NOT the super competitive international level. AR accepted that, when they got rid of the Force, international super rugby is not where to spread the rugby gospel, by seeing your team at the bottom of the table most of the time

    D 1 Reply Last reply
    3
  • D Offline
    D Offline
    Derpus
    replied to Machpants on last edited by
    #363

    @Machpants If we only play ourselves that issue evaporates instantly. If anything, that's a more compelling reason to go it alone.

    M 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • SnowyS Offline
    SnowyS Offline
    Snowy
    replied to nzzp on last edited by
    #364

    @nzzp said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    With three teams the pool is super shallow

    Which it is. That is why they should only have three teams until they build these "talent pathways" and create the depth. Just have three good teams that people want to watch as they are actually quite good?

    @Machpants Figures would back that up.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • M Offline
    M Offline
    Machpants
    replied to Derpus on last edited by
    #365

    @Derpus Yup. Except there is not enough money to keep your best players on the back of SRAu 4 EVAR comp. So all your best players will be overseas. Maybe that will work? Doesn't for the Islands, but could for Oz. I dunno. Big risk.

    D 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • D Offline
    D Offline
    Derpus
    replied to Machpants on last edited by
    #366

    @Machpants Just a big risk being subserviant to the All Blacks needs IMO, which is what agreeing to whatever NZRU want would mean.

    Going it alone really depends on whether they can obtain the requisite funding to start it up. I have NFI if that is actually viable but they are apparently figuring it out at the moment.

    M 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • M Offline
    M Offline
    Machpants
    replied to Derpus on last edited by
    #367

    @Derpus Well the Wallabies best period ever in rugby was during Super 12 with 3 teams. I think that is what Oz should be looking at, along with something (like NZ and SA have) underneath.

    1 Reply Last reply
    3
  • SnowyS Offline
    SnowyS Offline
    Snowy
    replied to Derpus on last edited by
    #368

    @Derpus said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    Why would Australia compromise?

    Because of standards and competition levels. The better the competition the higher the standards. You have to play against the best to be the best.

    That is why we want good Aussie teams to play against, not diluted teams that have journeymen fillers.

    D 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • D Offline
    D Offline
    Derpus
    replied to Snowy on last edited by
    #369

    @Snowy maybe. I personally don't think it would have the effect you think. I think the majority of the players from cut teams would just leave the country. As demonstrated with the Force, it would also damage the existing support for the game in the country greatly.

    The costs far outweigh the benefits IMO.

    SnowyS WingerW 2 Replies Last reply
    0
  • SnowyS Offline
    SnowyS Offline
    Snowy
    replied to Derpus on last edited by
    #370

    @Derpus Fair enough, but it weakens the product and your ability to pay the players to stay at home. Fewer players to pay as well.

    So that cost benefit analysis may not be so valid.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • M Offline
    M Offline
    Machpants
    wrote on last edited by
    #371

    This guy is singing from my hymn sheet. Probably a kiwi

    Super Rugby replacement should grow the game by being an elite competition, not by opening the doors to everyone

    Super Rugby replacement should grow the game by being an elite competition, not by opening the doors to everyone

    When Super 12 was launched, the initial spots for teams were handed out based on merit. SANZAAR has since made the mistake of trying to use the competition to promote rugby's growth. That shouldn't be the job of a premier competition, however.

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • WingerW Offline
    WingerW Offline
    Winger
    replied to Kiwiwomble on last edited by
    #372

    @Kiwiwomble said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    can we dumb a team that has won the comp previously?

    A different competition. This is a new start hopefully

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • WingerW Offline
    WingerW Offline
    Winger
    replied to nzzp on last edited by
    #373

    @nzzp said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    also, I think 4 Aus teams would be a good compromise.

    They can't support 4 teams. And maybe not afford 4 teams either. Just maybe the Aussies want NZ to push for 2 or 3 teams (with 3 the aim) because the affordability factor

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • D Offline
    D Offline
    Derpus
    wrote on last edited by
    #374

    Well, yeah. If you accept that we have to cut a team the Rebels are the only choice. Would still be a massive mistake IMO.

    WingerW 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • WingerW Offline
    WingerW Offline
    Winger
    replied to Derpus on last edited by
    #375

    @Derpus said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    As demonstrated with the Force

    It likely had more to do with the poor std of the Aust teams

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • A Offline
    A Offline
    akan004
    replied to Derpus on last edited by
    #376

    @Derpus In March Australia only had 4 teams and nobody complained about it. Now you Aussies are acting like it's the end of the world if you don't get your 5 teams.

    WingerW 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • WingerW Offline
    WingerW Offline
    Winger
    replied to Derpus on last edited by
    #377

    @Derpus said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    Well, yeah. If you accept that we have to cut a team the Rebels are the only choice. Would still be a massive mistake IMO.

    8 teams is the only sensible option for now. Aust are not in great financial shape and 1 extra team is a big cost.

    Maybe combine the Rebels with the Brumbies. But I want to want to watch Aussie teams play. As I did in the past with the Brumbies. At there best they were sometimes a joy to watch

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • WingerW Offline
    WingerW Offline
    Winger
    replied to akan004 on last edited by
    #378

    @akan004 said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    @Derpus In March Australia only had 4 teams and nobody complained about it. Now you Aussies are acting like it's the end of the world if you don't get your 5 teams.

    Its an ego thing re NZ. The wise decision is 3 team but as NZ have 5 teams its hard for the bigger fish to accept

    barbarianB 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • barbarianB Online
    barbarianB Online
    barbarian
    replied to Winger on last edited by barbarian
    #379

    @Winger Easy to talk about 3 Aussie teams on an internet forum, but in reality it's very tough to implement.

    That's another fanbase without a team, players and staff without a job, another major market where rugby leaves a sour taste in the mouth.

    I can understand the arguments from a rugby standpoint. But saying this is about ego is well wide of the mark IMO.

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • gt12G Offline
    gt12G Offline
    gt12
    wrote on last edited by
    #380

    It would be nice if NZ, OZ, Japan, and the Pacific islands got together and tried to make a ‘premium’ competition with a second tier below it, but with some system for teams to move from the top tier to second tier, and vice versa (maybe not in the initial years, but after a couple of iterations).

    Perhaps two tiers of 8 teams, such as the following:

    Super 8: NZ teams, 3 Oz teams
    Pacific 8: 2 Oz, 1 Pacific, 5 Japan

    M BonesB D 3 Replies Last reply
    0

'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.