'Super Rugby' 2021
-
@antipodean said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@nzzp said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@antipodean said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@nzzp said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
There is just no way to compete financially. Rugby is 3rd (well, probably 4th overall if you consdier cricket), so why aren't we helping them grow their game and the market?
New Zealand has been, for over thirty years.
so do you think we should stop?
I'm of the opinion that missionary work is great as long as it isn't to your own detriment.
Also, as an aside, did you see how many Australians used to pop over for the Bledisloe's here in NZ? It was amazing- so many supporters wandering around spending foreign currency.
So all it requires is Australia to win again and the economy can have a small shot in the arm.
nah, this was pre-covid ... even when losing, good contingents of fans came over for the weekends. It's no surprise that the Bled got scheduled in Auckland for about 8 years in a row
-
@antipodean said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@nzzp said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@antipodean said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@nzzp said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
There is just no way to compete financially. Rugby is 3rd (well, probably 4th overall if you consdier cricket), so why aren't we helping them grow their game and the market?
New Zealand has been, for over thirty years.
so do you think we should stop?
I'm of the opinion that missionary work is great as long as it isn't to your own detriment.
I don't see too much of a downside frankly. We dilute the comp quality short term, but give players a physical break. Provide a benchmark for Aus teams, and access a market we need - the only major market near our timezone in our season.
-
@nzzp said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
Maybe we should be collaborating with Australia to send players, coaches and administrators over and still be eligible for the ABs? I mean, rugby growth there has to be good for us.
@nzzp said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
I don't see too much of a downside frankly. We dilute the comp quality short term, but give players a physical break. Provide a benchmark for Aus teams, and access a market we need - the only major market near our timezone in our season.
I keep coming back to the point we've done this before. And yet here we all are. Sending players over is a short term fix and no AB is going to jeopardise their representative career being coached by and playing with journeymen.
The reaction over here to foreign coaches (particularly New Zealand ones) faces a barrage of criticism by a stablemate of the broadcaster and apparently the CEO of their RWC bid.
The reality is there's no market if they aren't competitive.
There's no upside to this. NZR has to recognise that it's a case of playing five Australian teams, there will be some dross and stipulate finals appearances are merit based.
-
@antipodean said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
NZR has to recognise that it's a case of playing five Australian teams, there will be some dross and stipulate finals appearances are merit based.
I agree with this. It's the way it's going to be I fear.
Optimistically though, how the hell do you collaborate with an organisation that isn't interested to lift quality and participation? I mean, rugby here is suffering from a dropoff in player numbers too. Get people playing, build interest, build a market and reap the rewards.
-
@mariner4life said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
Your solution has a danger of over-valuing our worth, and losing big in the process. Australia are in the same boat. Barb may be happy to watch his domestic comp, but if the rest of the world isn't, then it dies. Both countries just do not have enough fans. Economics are a bitch.
It doesn't die, it just becomes the A-League - a product for the local tragics, filled with has-beens and youngsters trialling for an overseas contract.
Ultimately the issue facing both NZ and Australia is that overseas $$$ kills our player base. Australia is still producing world class players, but sadly about half of those players ply their trade in Japan or Europe. Get a few of them back and all of a sudden the Rebels and Force start to look competitive.
So both of us are caught in a bit of a catch 22. We need to chase dollars to keep our best players on-shore (and even entice some home), but that means accepting a less-than-ideal competition that may suit sponsors and TV execs more than fans.
-
@barbarian said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@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.
Just to clarify this - in order to avoid having to ditch one of your second rate Australian teams, you will set up a comp with two third rate teams from the Pacific and Asia, one team propped up by a billionaire for the time being, and one team in a state where no one gives even half a shit about rugby. :face_with_stuck-out_tongue:
-
@Machpants said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
As predicted, by everyone but NZR it seems, AR have come out and said it’s 5 teams or 0, your choice NZ. NZR have totally fucked this by making it all public. Dicks
5 Australian and 5 NZ teams for 2021 is fine.
BUT
Removal of conference system. No guaranteed finals spots for Oz teams.
A promise to support a Pacific and an Asian franchise by 2023
Franchises to have common, basic standard for player welfare.
-
@Nepia said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@barbarian said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@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.
Just to clarify this - in order to avoid having to ditch one of your second rate Australian teams, you will set up a comp with two third rate teams from the Pacific and Asia, one team propped up by a billionaire for the time being, and one team in a state where no one gives even half a shit about rugby. :face_with_stuck-out_tongue:
Yes. But because we're second rate, the standard of comp will be much more even with the third rate teams
-
@sparky said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@Machpants said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
As predicted, by everyone but NZR it seems, AR have come out and said it’s 5 teams or 0, your choice NZ. NZR have totally fucked this by making it all public. Dicks
5 Australian and 5 NZ teams for 2021 is fine.
BUT
Removal of conference system. No guaranteed finals spots for Oz teams.
A promise to support a Pacific and an Asian franchise by 2023
Franchises to have common, basic standard for player welfare.
Yeah I can live with that. No guaranteed finals is non negotiable for me.
-
@barbarian said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
Yes. But because we're second rate, the standard of comp will be much more even with the third rate teams
Haha. So a shit comp overall, like the last few years. You will get what you want I suspect.
-
@Snowy said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@barbarian said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
Yes. But because we're second rate, the standard of comp will be much more even with the third rate teams
Haha. So a shit comp overall, like the last few years. You will get what you want I suspect.
Jeez you're a fun bloke to have on the thread.
I was being slightly tongue-in-cheek, but I actually think Super AU is a good example of what might work here. It is probably a notch below SuperNZ, but every side has been competitive and there are two fanbases pretty happy at the end of the weekend.
Coming in I was skeptical it would work, but the quality of the comp has turned me around.
Throw a few more teams in for a bit of variety, and you have seven competitive teams in a competition that may not be 'world leading' but provides enough for local fans to get behind. And you Kiwis can watch if you want, or just choose to watch something else with a smug superiority. Whatever suits.
-
@Yeetyaah said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@Kiwiwomble more than happy to watch all of the NZ sides thrash the Aussie sides again if that's what they want. The best part is how all of the NZ rugby fans will be laughing when it's 4 kiwi sides making the top 4 because Aussie wanted 5 teams.
Seem to remember the Brumbies knocking off the Chiefs and the Rebels beating the Highlanders pre Covid. Also the Reds came within a bees dick of beating the Crusaders. We’ll never know how the rest of the season would have played out. I don’t think the difference is as great as what you think it is.
-
@sparky said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@Machpants said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
As predicted, by everyone but NZR it seems, AR have come out and said it’s 5 teams or 0, your choice NZ. NZR have totally fucked this by making it all public. Dicks
5 Australian and 5 NZ teams for 2021 is fine.
BUT
Removal of conference system. No guaranteed finals spots for Oz teams.
A promise to support a Pacific and an Asian franchise by 2023
Franchises to have common, basic standard for player welfare.
automatic promotion/relegation
-
@barbarian said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
Jeez you're a fun bloke to have on the thread.
Right back at ya. Play the ball - I could add something to that...
I just want a decent competition and I don't believe it has been with the conferences and guaranteed finals spots.
Solutions? Probably not more weak teams.
-
@yourmatenate said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
Seem to remember the Brumbies knocking off the Chiefs and the Rebels beating the Highlanders pre Covid. Also the Reds came within a bees dick of beating the Crusaders. We’ll never know how the rest of the season would have played out. I don’t think the difference is as great as what you think it is.
We all know that OZ can put out some good teams and all of them can have a good day. History would suggest that the player depth isn't there for 5, or even 4. Injuries in a long season hurt too.
-
@yourmatenate I hope you're right, i think most people would love a pretty even comp
-
Maybe to help bolster the standard we could introduce a rule that All Blacks can be selected from this comp. That way players could be based in NZ, Australia or eventually Japan.
Would be a way to develop youth players for NZ and plug the depth gap in Aussie. Also a way for players to make money in Japan and not be lost of the All Blacks.
Would have to stop poaching of young talent, but might be a solution?
Tear it apart below
-
@akan004 said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
i dont mind the idea except the travel needed for such a short comp, if we're talking everyone plays each other once it means travelling to SA for one game
-
@nzzp said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@Crucial said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
What rivers of gold that would be more than if we “owned” the comp?
Broadcasting rights, by way of comparison, where they have 5 times our population and 20% higher GDP per person.
There is just no way to compete financially. Rugby is 3rd (well, probably 4th overall if you consdier cricket), so why aren't we helping them grow their game and the market?
ARU TV Rights have gone from
-
worth around A$25m per year (2011 to 2015)
-
A$57m per year (2015-2019)
-
A$35m per year was offered in 2019 for renewal (rejected)
-
A$20m is what deal is now, after letting negotiations run , falling out with Fox, and covid happened.
NZRU signed in 2019 a NZ$500m (NZ$100m per year deal) in 2019.
Let me put this in table format:
So, next year. In theory.
NZRU will be getting a $20m per year USD pay rise.
ARU will be getting a $28m per year USD pay cut.We should add 5 more teams , from an ARU pot of 14.4m USD?
or add 3 more NZ teams (or 4 or 5 more) from an increased NZRU pot of $20m USD (total 66m USD) ? In an era of deflating rugby wages?I'm not trying to rub it in. I want ARU to do well, and perfect storm has hit them at same as their own incompetence. If run well and free of competing agendas, they are obviously worth more than that. But adding 5 Australian teams is not adding 5 well funded teams.
For a dose of realism - the NZRU and Sky's deal may get re-negotiated down if a new reality of decreased advertising revenue etc.
I have my biases. I want an NZ professional domestic comp.
I want to tap into the Australian and Japanese market by having an Asian-Pacific Champions League playoffs. As there is $ potential in those markets.
What we do know, is there is apparently no current desire by Australians to see 80% of their teams beaten each week they come up against an out-of-country opponent. Let them have a domestic comp. Wish it well, as we need to tap into their market for the champions league. Asia-Pacific Super Rugby.
-
