NPC - news, injuries etc
-
You're right about the promotional thing.
Provincial contracts do contain a clause where the player can be used for "promotion purposes" by the province, and it is a certain number of hours.
The full cost of an All Black's provincial contract is reimbursed by NZR if the All Black does not appear for the province. if the All Black does appear for the province then NZR reimburses on a pro-rata basis, I think.
-
@Wurzel said in Mitre 10 Cup - news, injuries etc:
I'm also unsure if the Reads are going to live in the Counties region. Surely with the amount of time spent with the Crusaders they'll remain living Christchurch.
Is Read's wife originally from Counties? BBBR moved back to HB because his wife wanted to live back there - could be the same with the Reads?
If I was Read, I'd probably try and squeeze in a game for Counties at some stage - i.e. if I went to another province before playing for the senior team, I'd personally want to play at least one game for the Magpies.
-
Trent Renata has signed a two-year contract with the Wellington Lions.
https://www.wrfu.co.nz/single/item/trent-renata-joins-wellington-lions-on-two-year-deal/
-
He has not been named in any of Wainuiomata's starting lineups in the twelve matches played this season. However as a fully contracted Super Rugby player perhaps he is too valuable to risk? He has been fully contracted with the Lions from his last year at Scots College and been part of the Hurricanes for a lot of that time as well so the investment in him from both Wellington RFU and the Hurricanes must be astronomical when weighed against the extremely scant return to date. Tiaan Falcon does not have a hope in hell of furthering his Hurricanes career if the standard modus operandi employed by the owners of the Hurricanes continues on.
-
@Higgins said in Mitre 10 Cup - news, injuries etc:
He has not been named in any of Wainuiomata's starting lineups in the twelve matches played this season. However as a fully contracted Super Rugby player perhaps he is too valuable to risk? He has been fully contracted with the Lions from his last year at Scots College and been part of the Hurricanes for a lot of that time as well so the investment in him from both Wellington RFU and the Hurricanes must be astronomical when weighed against the extremely scant return to date. Tiaan Falcon does not have a hope in hell of furthering his Hurricanes career if the standard modus operandi employed by the owners of the Hurricanes continues on.
Not sure about that. I think he's still injured. This is an interesting article about long-term injured players at the Canes that suggests he's still injured:
-
Geldenhuys released from Mako$ contract
-
Jarrad Hoeata is back in New Zealand and has signed with North Harbour for the 2017 Mitre Cup season.
North Harbour Rugby Union
The North Harbour Rugby Union was formed in 1985 and during this time has developed a reputation for playing colourful and entertaining rugby through all grades
-
A claim from the Southland Times that another change to the NPC format might be a possibility. Short of a full round robin, this would be the best format which gives every team a chance of winning the Mitre 10 Cup.
- **I'm hearing there has been a proposal put to the provinces which would see the premiership and championship divisions scrapped and replaced by a southern pool and a northern pool.
This is how I understand it would work.
The format would remain pretty much the same in regard to teams playing each of the other six teams in their pool, as well as four cross-over games against teams in other pools.
But the top teams from each pool would then advance to the same playoffs, rather than the top or bottom division.
Clear as mud?
I guess the geographical split might see Southland join Otago, Canterbury, Ta$man, Wellington, Manawatu, and Taranaki in one pool.
The competition will remain the same for 2017 but could change be on its way?**
-
Sounds terrible. A geographical split results in some kind of conference system like we have in Super Rugby. It could mean that - for example - the North division is much stronger than the South division, but the top 4 teams of both divisions would still progress to the play-offs, regardless of the fact that maybe the numbers 5 and 6 of the North division are much stronger than the numbers 3 and 4 of the South division. Yuck!
-
Not immediately a fan of the geographical split.
Does remind me of the old days of Secon Div North and Second Div South though
If they need a split then base it on finishing position from previous years.
If the issue is who plays who in the x overs then, again, base it on finishing positions from the previous year.
-
I'm a fan and have always thought it was better than the Premiership/Championship nonsense.
I'd have Hawke's Bay, not Taranaki in the South Zone.
As for cross over games, base it on seedings from the previous season so that a province plays the teams from the other Zone that have the same seeding, the seeding above and the seeding below.
So if you are seeded 4th in the South Zone you play the 4th, 3rd and 5th in the North Zone.
What if you are seeded 1st or 7th? Well if you are 7th then you'd play the 6th, 7th and 1st from the other Zone. Sure there will be a mismatch with 7th playing 1st but if 7th gets to host the big guns seeded 1st then that is great for gates. And isn't too dissimilar to what some Unions are already doing in their selected cross over games where they elect for a better gate as opposed to better chances on the paddock.
-
Is this some sort of Wellington sponsored plan to save their second-division-stuck asses?
I think the Premiership-Championship concept has worked bloody well. It's not ideal having the unbalanced cross-over games, but the geographic split model doesn't address that. All it seems to do is remove the interest of promotion-relegation to an "everyone has a chance" model, but with more mismatches.
Not a fan - seems like pointless meddling of which rugby has done too much in recent times.
-
@Chris-B. yeah I think the current format seems to work pretty well despite its flaws, although as I have said before, dropping 1 crossover match would remove the need for that 3 games in 8 days BS, although I hear players quite like that.
Short of 2 clear divisions, which we know they are unlikely to go back to, I think they should stick with the status quo.
-
@taniwharugby I wouldn't want to go back to the two clear divisions model, either. That really did promote a rich-get-richer model.
-
I would welcome change (but before you pile in, i am well aware i am in the minority on this one).
I find the cross-over games in a 2 division competition an utterly stupid compromise made by the NZRU when relegating a bunch of teams. It always results in at least one side make the finals for Div 2 with a losing record. I never understood playing teams from a different competition for points in your competition.
I know the general consensus is to make every game as relevant as any other, so why not go to a 2 conference system? I don't think NZ is big enough to need a geographical split (especially when you have to go half way up the North Island to split the teams). Just divvie it up some other way (finishing positions the prior year, or hell, even a lottery).
Top 2 at the end of round robin, next 4 play semis, then winners through to the prelims, then the GF. Great system.
-
@mariner4life the daft thing is, a similar thing happens in super rugby, except they are just different conferences, not divisions....without discussing the merits of the finals format there haha
Current format not perfect by any stretch, but is probably the best they can do to try to retain some semblance of fairness and as chris b says above, avoiding promoting the rich getting richer.
I know my POV is skewed because my team is usually in the bottom few teams, that is in some part due to their ability in the years since the changes to operate within their means, unlike others that spent shitloads to be better....
-
This year is a bit different for Super Rugby, with the Aussies falling off a cliff, but in general, the right teams have made the finals.
I just think, if you are going to have the 2 divisions play each other, why not all play for the same trophy? Lets face it, Canterbury are playing in the final anyway, everyone else can play for the chance to play against them. One year you might get a weaker pool, but the next you might get all the big sides.
