'Super Rugby' 2021
-
@mariner4life oh, misunderstood
-
@barbarian said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@Crucial said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
Call their bluff I reckon.
They have neither the player quality or money to set up an attractive product themselves that would threaten what we want to set up.
Just to clarify this - in order to avoid having five second rate Australian teams, you will set up a comp with five third rate teams from Asia, the PIs and the Americas?
god that would suuuuck
the worst of both worlds
-
We know from history that a league without sufficient depth results in terrible teams getting flogged. No one watches those games, so they're a net loss.
New Zealand doesn't have the economics to support a competition of any considerable length of time but what it does bring to the table is quality.
Australia brings more economic opportunity, but less quality. There's no way accepting the ham-fisted ultimatum by NZR is politically viable for RA. The economic opportunity is tied directly to the competitiveness of the Australian franchises.
It's a terrible catch-22.
-
@mariner4life said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@Kiwiwomble said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@mariner4life you think it will damage NZ? will it be much worse than previous comps?
I mean if both teams go it alone. Australia need our quality, (sorry Aussies, it's arrogant but it's true);
I'm not sure we do. I agree NZ sides are generally better (though not by as much as some here seem to think), but nobody I know has had any issues with the quality of rugby in SuperAU. Sure there's been a few stinkers, but you will get that in any competition.
There's a world where we have 5 Aussie teams, the Fiji Drua (already involved in NRC), and one more team from Asia (Sunwolves?) and it's a pretty tidy little comp. Yeah it may not be world beating and I still prefer TT but I think it probably ends up a more solid commercial proposition than what NZ could muster. Not by a huge amount, but a little bit.
-
@barbarian yeah righto, have fun with it.
-
@mariner4life said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
this is going to damage both Unions pretty badly.
Yep. A "few" good Aussie teams would be good. However, how the fuck is having weak teams in a competition "growing the game" in any way?
It comes down to the very heart of rugby to me - contest. Contest for the ball is the very premise of the game. Rucks, mauls, scrums, lineouts - all about winning the ball. Don't we all hate uncontested scrums? That is what extra Aussie teams add to me. Not worth watching.
Until Australia can prove that they have enough good players to compete with 5 teams ...which they have yet to do, they would ruin what has been a fantastic SRA.
How much would they actually bring financially for NZR?
-
-
We had this debate about five pages ago, but man you'd think no Aussie team had won a game in years. Or even been close. I know you guys think the rugby sun shines out your arsehole, but really you aren't quite as good as you think you are.
And you need to realise that winning isn't the main concern of RA in designing this comp. It's getting a viable commercial product that ensures local fans get good content in their home city.
-
If the answer is a competitive NRC level team and the Force, the question is shit.
-
-
@barbarian said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
It's getting a viable commercial product that ensures local fans get good content in their home city.
Loads of fans want to go a see a substandard team go and lose in their home town, aye?
-
-
Super 10 still sounds a hell of a lot better than Super 18 was.
You don't have the issue of big travel - you'd have say 7-8 competitive teams every year competing for say 4 semi final spots.
You don't have the issue of conferences and lopsided schedules.
The Kiwis would watch the kiwi derbies - the Aussies would watch the aussie derbies. The good trans Ta$man games would get watched. Ok the bad games wouldn't get many viewers but how is that much different to Super 12 was?
Sounds good.
-
@Kirwan said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
Whatever, let them have five but our red line is no guaranteed finals spots. Be careful what you wish for with no finals in Aussie at the pointy end of the comp.
Aust can't even support 4 sides (financially or player quality). If they want 5 they should do it alone (it would be better for them rather than their teams being thrashed ever other week by NZ sides). NZ would be best just to step away until they come to their senses (likely after about 1 or 2 years when they are close to bankrupt)
I would sooner watch 5 NZ sides as the main competition (but NZ need to set a financial structure up so its impossible for 1 team to win year after year) than playing 2nd rate Aussie sides. NZ should stick with the 5 sides plus a PI side. 6 sides but NZ must ensure the PI can compete
And maybe look at some sort of pool knockout competition as well. This may include SA, Aust NZ PI Japan and maybe some Celtic league sides as well
-
@barbarian said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
Why not? They have had pretty solid support, albeit with poor results. Regularly have big crowds at Bledisloes, tests etc.
-
@barbarian said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
Why not? They have had pretty solid support, albeit with poor results. Regularly have big crowds at Bledisloes, tests etc.
don't they average less than 10k through the gate?
Those tests are always packed with people from other states travelling because a weekend in Melbourne is awesome for the rugby. That and Melbournians will actually front for an international event.
FWIW i am happy to keep the 5 if you really want, but you cannot pretend the comp is going to be better for it.
You are effectively hanging your hat on one side a year being a shot. Australian supporters are not going to stand for that (they haven't in the past, why would they now?)
