Super Rugby 2023
-
@Duluth said in Super Rugby 2023:
But SR & NPC are sacred cows. Both must continue to exist forever in front of smaller & smaller & older crowds.
it'll never happen because there will be losers. And those losers will kick off
But a 14-15 team comp playing all year would be fucking great.
But i can already hear it
The hard core NPC guys will whinge
The provinces who miss out will whinge
Moana Pacifica will whinge and cry racism when they get cut too.And there isn't a Board with the balls to tear it up and start again.
-
It'd take a crisis to force through a change. In late 1995 there was a bidding war and that lit a fire under NZRFU's arse.. covid was probably a missed opportunity
-
@Duluth said in Super Rugby 2023:
It'd take a crisis to force through a change. In late 1995 there was a bidding war and that lit a fire under NZRFU's arse.. covid was probably a missed opportunity
i've made the comment before about whether rugby is an international or a club game
I believe the NZRU view it as an international game, and the only role of the club game is to provide players to the ABs. In which case every single decision they make appears to be strategically on point. I reckon the ARU see it much the same way.
Expecting change when the current structure suits their strategic goals is folly.
-
@mariner4life you're right, but NZR focusing on international game whilst also holding the licences for super rugby is stupid
-
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby 2023:
only role of the club game is to provide players to the ABs.
The current structure isn't great for that either
Take a position like hooker where the AB's will have three in the squad. Expect at least one injury in a given year and the ABs need four hookers.
The competition has five regular starting hookers. That's not ideal. -
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Duluth said in Super Rugby 2023:
It'd take a crisis to force through a change. In late 1995 there was a bidding war and that lit a fire under NZRFU's arse.. covid was probably a missed opportunity
i've made the comment before about whether rugby is an international or a club game
I believe the NZRU view it as an international game, and the only role of the club game is to provide players to the ABs. In which case every single decision they make appears to be strategically on point. I reckon the ARU see it much the same way.
Expecting change when the current structure suits their strategic goals is folly.
Almost every rugby board in the world know that their money that money is made by international rugby. Hell in Aus the kids team have to (or did when I was there) pay money towrds their rugby board. So that RA can make enough money to administer game through test rugby. Have a look anywhere in world it's the case , and even in other sports all lower gade comps are really aimed at filling out higher grade teams. Have a look at the league comps in Aus, all the lower grades are just really in existence to fill out NRL teams, which is the pinnacle comp for league. AFL also has feeder clubs, it's not much different anywhere that I am aware. Even in places like France etc their teams that are completely seperate to their rugby board are now restricted on foriegn players for one reason, so teams produce more players that are eligible for France or Englnador wherever. Japan is same.
We kidding ourselves if we think any sport isn't trying to feed upper echelons of said sport.And it was always going to be case when game went pro.
-
@Dan54 the national organisations may have to focus on the international game for money...but looking at the UK, the domestic teams are independent of that, not controlled by the RU like NZR controls SR
-
This post is deleted!
-
@Dan54 100% missing the point
of course every sport has a top level. I am dumb but i'm not retarded
But every sport has a pretty significant distinction between which is the most importnat
Soccer, by far the biggest sport, is a club game, where aside from international tournaments for 6 weeks every two years, the International game is an unwelcome distraction
Basketball is a club game where the pinnacle is the NBA and quite frankly the international game is irrelevant.
Cricket is an international game where domestic cricket is watched by 8 people who probably wandered in to the ground by accident (incidentally T20 is probably the reverse)
League is a club game where internationals are an after-thought.Rugby is still trying to make both Internationals constantly relevant, while also trying to maintain the club game is as well. A season where a player will play as often for the ABs as the Chiefs has its priorities all over the shop.
-
@Dan54 said in Super Rugby 2023:
Once again encourages teams that aren't going to win comp to not show interest as lower they are more money they get?
Don't think this would happen.
But I believe they have got to try something. This is just one option. Give more money to a small number of teams (NZ conference would include MP - a lot - and Highlanders less) and see how it goes
-
@mariner4life never agreed with you more than right now...maybe you're not all bad
lets not forget the football world cup is still HUGE making FIFA billions....they just spend four years building hype so everyone is gagging for it rather than several small competitions or trophies that just results in people going...oh well, we'll just win the next one
-
@kiwi_expat said in Super Rugby 2023:
The Chiefs & Blues have just as many All Blacks in their squads, so why the emphasis on the Crusaders?
Because the Crusaders have a very understrength team this week (for them), I was discussing it with a Cantab, so it was an easy comparison to make.
-
Giving some franchises more money than others is just as stupid as a draft. Why would SR franchises with a good academy develop players if other franchises can just pick those players up in a draft or sign them on higher paid contracts because they have more money to offer? I'm with @Dan54 on that one. A draft could also lead to players leaving NZ, because they'd end up playing for a franchise they don't want to play for; some players are loyal to the bone. If more money for some franchises would end up in an influx of more foreign players, that would also totally send the wrong message to NZ players. More would leave the country and our depth would only shrink.
About an alternative comp, which has already been discussed to death in the past without much agreement:
NPC is the main reason why I watch rugby. If it was my province being cut from a new comp of 10 teams, I'd probably not watch that new comp. I like to watch 1st XV rugby, to see which players will progress to NPC. I watch Super Rugby, to watch my province's players at a higher level. It's the provincial connection that makes rugby more interesting, because basically I follow many players from the start to the end of their careers. If that provincial connection is lost, then rugby will just compete more with other things. I'd lose a lot of passion for the sport. I'd probably only watch 1st XV (as club rugby isn't streamed). If my province would be playing in the new comp, it would depend entirely on the format. -
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Dan54 the national organisations may have to focus on the international game for money...but looking at the UK, the domestic teams are independent of that, not controlled by the RU like NZR controls SR
Of course they do, but domestic teams are independant at pro level. But not sure your point even your post forgets that RA also controls super rugby , but even in England they have rules about international players that are brought in by RU, no comp can be totally independant of governing body . The games are controlled by Referees that are part of RU etc too.
Are you suggesting that NZR and RA should just wipe their hands and let super die? -
Just out of interest if I was a bigwig in NZR or RA I would like 2 super comps tried, 1 a league where all results count towards winner, none of this finals, and then follow it with a knockout cup with every team involved, would suit me to the ground a little similar to soccer in Pommy land, with the championship and the FA cup but not exactly the same .
-
@Winger said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Dan54 said in Super Rugby 2023:
Once again encourages teams that aren't going to win comp to not show interest as lower they are more money they get?
Don't think this would happen.
But I believe they have got to try something. This is just one option. Give more money to a small number of teams (NZ conference would include MP - a lot - and Highlanders less) and see how it goes
Mate it happened overseas, I believe there was talk in AFL when I first went to Aus that some teams didn't really want to win games at end of season, there was certainly a stink in NFL years back about same thing. I want every team to want to win every game they play and not get more money for losing.
-
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Dan54 100% missing the point
of course every sport has a top level. I am dumb but i'm not retarded
But every sport has a pretty significant distinction between which is the most importnat
Soccer, by far the biggest sport, is a club game, where aside from international tournaments for 6 weeks every two years, the International game is an unwelcome distraction
Basketball is a club game where the pinnacle is the NBA and quite frankly the international game is irrelevant.
Cricket is an international game where domestic cricket is watched by 8 people who probably wandered in to the ground by accident (incidentally T20 is probably the reverse)
League is a club game where internationals are an after-thought.Rugby is still trying to make both Internationals constantly relevant, while also trying to maintain the club game is as well. A season where a player will play as often for the ABs as the Chiefs has its priorities all over the shop.
Understand your points Mariner, so what is your answer , do you want less tests (and less money for grassroots etc) or scrap super ? Of course 10-12 tests is too many, but the game is pro and why that many are played, the bills have to be paid. As I said if ABs etc don't bring in money our kids etc will be paying a lot to play.
I enjoy super rugby, watch it all the time and go to games a fair amount of time, same as tests. So obviously I find it still a good comp, although improvements could be made. -
@Stargazer said in Super Rugby 2023:
About an alternative comp, which has already been discussed to death in the past without much agreement:
NPC is the main reason why I watch rugby. If it was my province being cut from a new comp of 10 teams, I'd probably not watch that new comp. I like to watch 1st XV rugby, to see which players will progress to NPC. I watch Super Rugby, to watch my province's players at a higher level. It's the provincial connection that makes rugby more interesting, because basically I follow many players from the start to the end of their careers. If that provincial connection is lost, then rugby will just compete more with other things. I'd lose a lot of passion for the sport. I'd probably only watch 1st XV (as club rugby isn't streamed). If my province would be playing in the new comp, it would depend entirely on the format.and there we go
-
@mariner4life Yes, and ...?
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2023:
@kiwi_expat said in Super Rugby 2023:
The Chiefs & Blues have just as many All Blacks in their squads, so why the emphasis on the Crusaders?
why does it matter? its the example that sparked @Nepia 's thought, it could have been one of the other teams but it obviously occurred to him watching that game
Well It's a pretty simplistic view in my opinion, I mean 10 years ago Highlanders brought in multiple All Blacks from other franchises before the 2013 season and finished 14th that year. After that dismal season Joseph Brown Dermody put a greater emphasis on developing players into All Blacks instead of signing them from other franchises - this yielded some of their most successful seasons in recent times (2014-2018) where Sopoaga, Naholo, Dixon, Squire, Coltman, Fekitoa, Evans, & Hemepo, were all developed into All Blacks.
