Brumbies 2012: New coach, new players, new attitude
Roar Rookie
By pjbreck, 28 Jan 2012 pjbreck is a Roar Rookie
- Tagged:
- Brumbies, Eddie Jones, Fotu Auelua, Jack White, Laurie Fisher, Leon Power, Rugby Union, Super 15
128 Have your say
So here we are on the precipice ready to dive into Super Rugby Season 2012. I am ready to move on from the debacle that was the Brumbies last season and the bewildering meanderings of the Wallabies at Rugby World Cup 2011.
So I thought in order to banish my memories of the Brumbies last year, I will give my opinion on how they will fare this year.
I am sitting here at a Canberra institution, All Bar Nun, the scene of many a football occasion, and the Brumbies have run of the place after finals victories. Sadly, it is in its last week of operation, but in this place I can see similarities to the Brumbies.
It had some high times (interestingly around the time the Brumbies did) but now it has the look and feel of a place content with where it is. Not moving on, just existing, much the same as the Brumbies of recent times.
I don’t want to dwell on the last few years, I think enough has been said and it should be left in the past. I previously wrote an article with some suggestions on how the Brumbies can once again be a force in Super Rugby. There wasn’t much to it, simple stuff really:
1. Get a good coach on board.
2. Get fans to buy back in, by getting around town.
3. Get in some young talent.
4. Upgrade the coaching panel.
I am not sure if the Brumbies officialdom read the article, but it looks like they taken significant strides towards my suggestions: They got a good coach in Jake White. Point one tick!
The entire squad now plays in the local competition and I see more players around town. For example they cooked the free breakfast at Australia day, and I sat next to Jerry Yanuyanutawa at Lonsdale St Roasters for coffee this morning. Point 2 tick!
They recruited a number of young guys including Sam Carter, Cam Crawford, Ruaidhri Murphy and Siliva Siliva. Point 3 tick!
They got Laurie Fisher to return as forwards coach and Eddie Jones on consultancy. Point 4 tick!
Additionally the Brumbies have recruited some size in the backs and forwards. Leon Power and Fotu Auelua will add some starch and go forward. I am especially keen to see how Auelua goes, having watched some of his runs on Youtube from his time at Toulon, he looks damaging.
I am also keen to see how the new halves and inside backs get on this year. In my opinion Toomua and Lealiifano have not been able to show how good they are.
I still believe that Lealiifano is one of the most underrated players going around. I am not saying he is as good as Cooper or even Barnes but he is better than he is given credit for. It will take these two good players to lead the team forward.
The squad this year looks to have a lot of hunger that has been missing over the last few years. The Brumbies seem to have been accepting of losses, and comfortable because their positions were safe. This new bunch expect to win. A sucessful team needs that attitude.
Compare the Brumbies to the Australian Cricket team. For the last couple of years, the Australian XI look content in a draw, a far cry from a few years ago where anything but victory inside 3 days was seen as failure.
As I sit here watching the 4th test against India, I am looking at a team where once again victory is mandatory. The Brumbies should take note of this- the winning attitude is why the Brumbies have succeeded in both winning and growing a fan base in the past.
So to Super Rugby 2012: what do I expect from the Brumbies? This is a delicate question, as in the eyes of many fans nothing but another title will suffice, but I think a bit of reality has to come into this year.
The Brumbies are moving in the right direction. For me personally, all I want to see this year is the return of hunger in the team. That desire to win. I am not expecting the Brumbies to win every game, in fact if they lost them all this year but give 110 percent in every game, I will be more satisfied than I was last year.
With this squad I think that it will take two to three years before they are a constant force, but they will knock over a few teams this year.
So with my membership renewed, and a new spring in my step, a new look team with a new attitude, I can’t wait for season 2012 to kick off. And this year I plan to go to all the games, so I’ll see you at the game!
Go those Brumbies!
Super Rugby Tipping now open - join in to claim bragging rights against some of the best Rugby minds in Australia. Join here
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Time for a trans-Tasman rugby championship (119)
- This won’t be the Year of the Waratah (119)
- Who are the Super Rugby smokies for 2012? (106)
- What if the Kings were thrown into Super Rugby? (101)
- What will Super Rugby bring us in 2012? (95)
- Australian teams at Super disadvantage (85)
- USA Rugby’s 64,102 reasons to celebrate plus a few more. (84)
- McGahan leaving Munster to join Wallabies
- Where are the Brumbies at? (7)
- Reds to take no prisoners in rugby opener (6)
- Wallabies need to call on Ella and Campese’s expertise (49)
- Super Rugby 2012 preview: Reds (13)
- How 130 years of Waratahs, Reds rivalry kicked-off (11)
- Super Rugby expansion: Tokyo and LA? (61)
- McGahan leaving Munster to join Wallabies (0)
- Where are the Brumbies at? (7)
- Super Rugby 2012 preview: Reds (13)
- How 130 years of Waratahs, Reds rivalry kicked-off (11)
- Super Rugby expansion: Tokyo and LA? (61)
- Super Rugby New Zealand conference mega preview (16)
- Rugby Union needs a World Club Challenge (2)
- Explore:
- Brumbies, Eddie Jones, Fotu Auelua, Jack White, Laurie Fisher, Leon Power, Rugby Union, Super 15
January 28th 2012 @ 5:57am
kingplaymaker said | January 28th 2012 @ 5:57am | Report comment
The Brumbies in a sense have things hardest of the franchises. Look at the areas they cover: Waratahs 7.2 million, Rebels 5.5 million, Reds 4.5 million, Force 2.3 million, Brumbies 400,000.
Now of course this means that any real loss in profile with the public is dangerous given how small the public is even at best.
On the other hand Canberra is a rugby town, and so with good promotion they should able to encompass and dominate the whole area.
I don’t think AAC or Giteau or Elsom are losses given their collectively dire form last year.
Whoever the new coach is, he would have brought more stability and so I think they will be instantly more effective as a team.
However, Jake White should be better than the average coach so all bodes well.
I think all the franchises are set to improve this year, with new coaches at those that underperform, and some good recruitment to improve deficiencies at others.
I think the Force will be one to reckon with more than expected too.
But the Brumbies do look good.
January 31st 2012 @ 3:06pm
pjbreck said | January 31st 2012 @ 3:06pm | Report comment
i agree, add Chisolm into that list and i think the cleaning out was not too bad.
January 28th 2012 @ 7:05am
Who Needs Melon said | January 28th 2012 @ 7:05am | Report comment
I admire your passion PJ.
The Brumbies desperately need a good win or two early. Maybe even in the pre season. If they do that, the team will bond, settle. If not, it could be another year without the self belief and much chopping and changing.
The Brumbies are so far from the team they once were though. In their heyday they were FULL of stars. With the departure of Giteau, Elsom and AAC, the annoying ghost of that era has finally ended. They are now a team rebuilding and I’m so glad they are no longer going to be ‘based around’ one or two stars. Hopefully White will get them playing for each other and as a team.
For this reason I agree with you on Toomua and L..fano. They aren’t ‘stars’ like Barnes, Beale, etc. and probably won’t ever be but they could be just right for this team at the moment.
As I mentioned in another article recently, I’m still p1ssed they didn’t also axe the administrator whose overseen the awful decline but that won’t stop me cheering on the Brumbies… As well as the other aussie teams.
January 28th 2012 @ 12:42pm
Bakkies said | January 28th 2012 @ 12:42pm | Report comment
The Brumbies did well by creating stars (particularly George Smith, Stirling Mortlock, Owen Finegan who couldn’t get contracts with the Tahs). Toomua just needs to get on the pitch in his best position. Rea made no sense by picking him at fullback in that daft three playmakers scheme. It isn’t league
January 28th 2012 @ 8:36am
Brendon said | January 28th 2012 @ 8:36am | Report comment
Brumbies have southern nsw too… Also in this age if player swapping, it’s not particularly hard to recruit from other states
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download The Roar’s iPhone App in the App Store here.
January 28th 2012 @ 12:56pm
Bakkies said | January 28th 2012 @ 12:56pm | Report comment
Which a lot of ignorant fools who write in to the Canberra Times don’t understand. They get upset because ACT was dropped from the Brumbies name without realising that Brumbies Rugby governs parts of NSW and the Brumbies pro team represents them too plus the ACT comps have teams from NSW that feed in to the Brumbies. Queanbeyan which is over the border produces players for the ACT (including Campo) and used to have the Raiders home ground
January 28th 2012 @ 8:44am
kingplaymaker said | January 28th 2012 @ 8:44am | Report comment
Brendon there’s not so much for Canberra to have in terms of population nearby nor is it exactly that near in journey time to anywhere.
Not that I’m against a Super franchise in Canberra at all by the way as some are.
January 28th 2012 @ 8:44pm
Bakkies said | January 28th 2012 @ 8:44pm | Report comment
Nonsense. Canberra is only 3 hours by car and a 1 hour flight from Melbourne. Victorians used to drive up to watch them play. Canberra is close to the south coast, Wagga Wagga, etc.
January 29th 2012 @ 12:21pm
Ian Whitchurch said | January 29th 2012 @ 12:21pm | Report comment
Bakkies,
Canberra is 3 hours by car from Sydney, not from Melbourne.
Melbourne is more like a 7 hour drive.
January 29th 2012 @ 1:13pm
Bakkies said | January 29th 2012 @ 1:13pm | Report comment
i know but you can jump on a plane and be in Melbourne in next to no time. Sydney is more relevant as that’s where a lot of the players come from.
January 29th 2012 @ 12:25pm
TommyM said | January 29th 2012 @ 12:25pm | Report comment
LOL! Not sure what you’re driving to get from Melbourne to Canberra in 3 hours, but I want one!
http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en&q=melbourne&gs_upl=4100l5046l0l5180l9l6l0l3l3l3l516l2609l3-1.4.1l6l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.,cf.osb&biw=1536&bih=805&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=0x6ad642af0f11fd81:0x5045675218ce7e0,Melbourne+VIC&gl=au&ei=V58kT6iLL4-6iAebv5XtBA&sa=X&oi=geocode_result&ct=image&resnum=2&ved=0CEMQ8gEwAQ
January 29th 2012 @ 1:26pm
Bakkies said | January 29th 2012 @ 1:26pm | Report comment
Where did I mention that it takes 3 hours to drive to Melbourne, you absolute goose.
January 30th 2012 @ 3:47pm
Brett McKay said | January 30th 2012 @ 3:47pm | Report comment
um, Bakkies:
“Canberra is only 3 hours by car and a 1 hour flight from Melbourne.”
Sorry pal, but I want one of those cars too…
January 30th 2012 @ 6:49pm
Bakkies said | January 30th 2012 @ 6:49pm | Report comment
another who can’t read. 1 hour flight to Melbourne is basic comprehension. You are jumping to a conclusion that I meant it takes 3 hours to drive to Melbourne.
January 31st 2012 @ 1:24pm
Brett McKay said | January 31st 2012 @ 1:24pm | Report comment
Bakkies, when you talk about a 3 hour drive and 1 hour flight to Melbourne, and then of Victorians driving up to games in the next sentence, what other conclusion is there to be reached??
January 28th 2012 @ 9:40am
peterlala said | January 28th 2012 @ 9:40am | Report comment
pjb, the coaching staff is awesome…White, Fisher, Jones.
Can they transform the Brumbies? That question alone will make it worth watching them.
It’s great to have three coaching giants in Australia…White, Ewen McKenzie and Robbie Deans.
It will be interesting to see their approach and their effectiveness.
January 28th 2012 @ 9:53am
tc said | January 28th 2012 @ 9:53am | Report comment
Sorry but just to change the subject ,it is being reported that the Southern Kings are to enter the South African Super Rugby conference as of 2013.This bodes well for extra teams from Aus/NZ come 2015, maybe Taranaki (New Plymouth) and Adelaide.
January 28th 2012 @ 10:30am
Darwin Stubbie said | January 28th 2012 @ 10:30am | Report comment
Haven’t SA been told that to get the kings in 1 existing team drops out …. The deal is for a 15 team competition and it looks like the cheetahs will most likely go – the competition doesn’t run well now unbalancing the conferences will make it worse and both NZ and Aust have stated they don’t want more teams … So bye bye cheetahs
January 28th 2012 @ 10:46am
kingplaymaker said | January 28th 2012 @ 10:46am | Report comment
I don’t think it does mean one team drops out, and South Africa demanded a sixth. Australia and New Zealand both need 6 and indeed 7, 8 and more for that matter. So balance can be kept with each conference getting a new team.
January 28th 2012 @ 11:15am
Darwin Stubbie said | January 28th 2012 @ 11:15am | Report comment
Yes it does … And despite what you think NZ and Aust don’t need more teams and are on record saying so – 5 is more than enough for a country the size of NZ (and the same for Aust given the niche sport rugby is in this country) – quoting population figures from Wikipedia doesn’t tell the whole story … You need to understand NZ rugby to realise they’ve got it about right as it stands and in reality Aust have too many teams now
January 28th 2012 @ 11:22am
kingplaymaker said | January 28th 2012 @ 11:22am | Report comment
I don’t see any argument in what you say against more teams at all. No country can possibly develop all of their talent with only five teams. It’s impossible for a young lock to get into the Waratahs squad or a scrum-half into the Rebels at the moment, and in all three countries vast numbers of young players will never get the chance to play Super rugby, some of whom could be stars.
Frankly you could double the number of teams and have good crowds given the endless neglected markets with the five team system. Have a look at the comment I make below for why.
All the countries are shooting themselves in the foot with only five teams. Markets left undeveloped, players never getting a chance to play, the game not growing.
New Zealand has armies of players coming out of its ears but many never get the chance to play. not only that but the only unconquered territory, South Auckland, where league is strong, doesn’t have a team. A team there designed to take the players away from league would add to the huge union player pool even further.
It can’t add masses of teams overnight but it can slowly add them one by one, as it should across the board next year.
January 28th 2012 @ 11:37am
Darwin Stubbie said | January 28th 2012 @ 11:37am | Report comment
I wish that 1 day you actually turn your attention to a topic you know something about …. If there. Is so much undeveloped talent in Aust rugby there wouldn’t be a need for the multiple foreigners populating their sides …. NZ has the NPC as their development pathway anyone showing promise in that gets drafted … To suggest Manwatu or BoP could could support SR teams just displays your total lack of knowledge of the NZ rugby landscape – if there was so much undeveloped talent in Akld the blues would be pushing for titles every year and Nth Harbour and Counties would at least show some level of dominance in the NPC …. But neither scenario is true
What you’re advocating is for a bloated competition full of mediocre teams just for development purposes …. If you actually knew the sports landscape in Aust you’d know that punters here are spoilt for choice …. I watched the first 15 mins of the Rebels first game last season and knew within that time they were rubbish – so flicked the button over to the A league finals … Every weekend you are up against a high class AFL match or a game from the NRL …. More Rebels type teams enmass will mean more rubbish rugby – theres a reason why there was very few Friday SR live in Aust last year – because they know the cant compete with the big 2 at present …. Pumping more rubbish into the system isn’t the way to change that
January 28th 2012 @ 11:52am
kingplaymaker said | January 28th 2012 @ 11:52am | Report comment
The Blues have endless talent, it’s coaching and perhaps something in the nature of the team that make them lose.
A second tier is not the same kind of development pathway as Super rugby as it is not the same level nor offers the same highly paid contracts.
With a South Auckland team, a whole mass of contracts could be offered to young players who now choose league.
When new teams are created in new areas, the game spreads to the schools, investment is made in the local clubs, and playing numbers increase. Not only that, but excess players from other regions can get playing slots that they wouldn’t do otherwise. Richard Kingi and Nick Phipps are both at the Rebels but only one can play scrum-half, with another team Kingi would be able to start. The Reds have endless good centres who could play in a new team, the Waratahs endless good locks.
So the teams would be good from the start, and in the case of Australia could be strengthened temporarily with league recruits.
Australia loses masses of players each year to league because it can’t offer enough contracts with its five teams, i.e. Jamal Idriss, Cooper Cronk, Jarod Saffy, Jared Waerea-Hargeaves, Jordan Rapana, probably whole teams of them.
With more Super teams it would be able to get these young players, as New Zealand would be able to get young players who now go to league. South Aucklland is the last area in New Zealand where there are new players to be got and another Super team would do that.
In time the game grows in a new location, new players are produced, while others who can’t get a shot develop, and those that go to league young no longer do.
So the new teams would not be mediocre and would get stronger and stronger with time.
The Rebels didn’t even try to recruit properly but nonetheless were midtable until the terrible decision to drop Cipriani.
Plus there would be far more revenue from a larger market and a larger TV deal accordingly. This money could then be reinvested in the game.
January 28th 2012 @ 12:10pm
Darwin Stubbie said | January 28th 2012 @ 12:10pm | Report comment
Whatever – you ignore the facts and make up things to fit a flawed argument – love the comment re rugby in NZ schools needing and getting a boost from a new Sth Akld SR side … That comment alone speaks volumes
January 28th 2012 @ 12:13pm
kingplaymaker said | January 28th 2012 @ 12:13pm | Report comment
I suppose I didn’t expect any seriously argued reasons in reply and there was no disappointment in that regard.
By the way I didn’t mention schools in connection with South Auckland if you bother to even read what I wrote.
January 28th 2012 @ 12:35pm
Darwin Stubby said | January 28th 2012 @ 12:35pm | Report comment
You made reference to extra SR teams giving a boost and support to schools and clubs – where is the evidence of this having occurred to date
Re players – if kingi wanted to move for game time – haven’t the tags signed an SA halfback … Just one example … But to blindly state there a mountain of players not getting a go is crazy talk – your incessant ideal of raiding and weakening league ignores the strength of the game and the report new TV deal which will make them even stronger
If there are so many players in Auckland missing – who are they name some names that can’t get a go …
There is zero substance to what you say – SR has far too many poor games now flooding it with more wont magically produce new viewers or extra revenue
Where are your facts that Manawatu could support a SR side – or BoP or GC – which is already overloaded with poorly supported national teams in other codes … You provide nothing back up this claims of yours
January 28th 2012 @ 1:08pm
kingplaymaker said | January 28th 2012 @ 1:08pm | Report comment
In terms of schools I was referring more to teams in new areas in Australia, areas where rugby is not yet played in schools. In Perth the Force have spread the game to many new schools. Each Rebels player has to patronise a school, as well as a company and charity. Players don’t always hop from place to place and if there are enough places nearby they can fit in without difficulty. Beau Robinson had to leave Australia due to lack of places.
The addition of a large new market in Melbourne was a crucial factor in the size of the new TV deal.
Players who don’t get a chance are by their nature obscure: it takes sustained exposure to elite rugby for some players to develop.
Any large area in New Zealand should be able to support a rugby team in terms of crowds.
In Australia, either a huge new market (Perth, Adelaide), or a smaller market but which is a RUGBY HEARTLAND like Gold Coast.
New Zealand, Australia and South Africa have more good elite players than say England and France, but yet have only 5 teams, while the latter two have 12 and 14 respectively. Obviously the quality is diluted in the latter thus, but 8 teams with some more even spread of quality, instead of for example all the good players being in the Bulls and none in the Lions, would produce 8 good teams.
January 28th 2012 @ 8:48pm
Rugbug said | January 28th 2012 @ 8:48pm | Report comment
KPM please stop you really are starting to sound extremely silly.
New Zealand and South Africa have the Currie Cup to develop players.
SR is not the place to develop players and Australia needs to get this idea out of its head that SR is a surrogate domestic competition.
The current development pathways to SR and International rugby work well for NZ hence 10 of 17 Super rugby titles have gone to NZ and every single NZ franchise has featured in a Final at some point in SR since its inception in 1996 the same can not be said for Australian teams.
I personally do not think Australia warranted a 4th team let alone a 5th team and believe Australia would be shooting itself in the foot if there was any expansion of the Australian conference in the next 5 years.
Who would fill the roster more foreigners and mediocre club players at best?
The reality is SR has lost alot of its appeal with pity finalists and a completely unfair system where not everyone plays each other.
Some would arguably say the Australian conference is very weak and the Reds and Waratahs were given an easy ride to the finals. Yes the Reds won in the end but their table standing could arguably be put down to a few things. Firstly a very weak and diluted Australian conference, secondly all the top teams they faced at home (not their fault of course) a extremely dubious decision by Dickinson in pool play against the Crusaders to hand the Reds victory. The Christchurch earthquake where the match against the Hurricanes was declared a draw and not all points were up for grabs. Had the Crusaders rightfully won the pool match at Suncorp and the Earthquake had not occurred it would have seen the Cantabs finish on top of the heap assuming the had beaten the Canes. Not to mention the 100 thousand plus km they travelled and no solid home base yet they still made the final in my opinion is remarkable and much more of an acheivement than the Reds winning their maiden title. This year will be very interesting indeed as the Reds do not have such a favourable draw playing the stronger foreign teams away.
Sorry I digressed
Reality is KPM Australia can not afford to add teams it simply does not have the depth to do so. It is not the responsibility of SANZAR to create a psuedo domestic competion for Australia either. New Zealand on the otherhand whilst it may have the player depth, I think would be pressed to find the financial resources to back another Franchise then again Taranaki did have a very wealthy billionaire ex pat willing to back their bid which the NZRU refused to back simply to appease the ARU and get the Rebels in the door.
January 29th 2012 @ 12:57am
kingplaymaker said | January 29th 2012 @ 12:57am | Report comment
Rugbug as I only just saw your post I won’t reply to it at length because you probably won’t see the reply.
In brief, there are many spectator and playing markets that are not in existence in SANZAR countries because of an absence of teams: for example Adelaide and South Auckland.
A new team would be formed on the Rebels model, using few local Australian or rather non-league players, but then rugby would GROW in the region and players would appear from there and then over time it would produce its own players.
I would say the SA conference is the weakest, but mainly because they allow the Bulls to hog all the good players when just a handful would significantly strengthen the Lions.
January 30th 2012 @ 2:09pm
Suzy Poison said | January 30th 2012 @ 2:09pm | Report comment
“I would say the SA conference is the weakest, but mainly because they allow the Bulls to hog all the good players when just a handful would significantly strengthen the Lions.”
Sorry mate, from a Saffa perspective, I tend to disagree.
If you look at last year’s results, Australian teams occupied three out of four of the bottom positions on the log, at the end of the season. No matter how you determine the various strengths of the five Australian teams versus the five Kiwi and South African teams, it’s clear the Kiwis dominate, followed by South Africa, and then Australia. You can add up tries scored, tries against, points for, points against, or simply log position, and it always tells the same story, Australia is simply the weakest conference. Which is no shame or surprise, as 2011 was the introduction year for the Rebels, and like, other teams, before them, they will need a couple of years to get some traction. The Cheetahs and Lions have long struggled, but it was only last year that the Cheetahs started delivering some results and ended ahead of the Force, Brumbies and the Rebels.
Secondly it’s a bit of a myth, that the Bulls dominate South African rugby. Once upon a time they did, but that dynasty ended a year or two ago. The Sharks won the Currie Cup in 2010, the Lions won last year, in 2011. Last year, the Bulls did not in fact make the six team finals of the Super 15. Even at a National level, there are as many Sharks (five) in the Bok team, as Bulls players, and only one less Stormer player.
Thirdly, as the Lions won this year’s Currie Cup, (knocked out the Bulls in the semis) they may be a few more Lions in the Bok team, we will just have to wait and see how they go in Super 15. The Lions are still a bottom of table team, but it would not surprise me, if they end up ahead of the Brumbies?
January 28th 2012 @ 10:02am
kingplaymaker said | January 28th 2012 @ 10:02am | Report comment
tc why wait until 2015? One of Adelaide, Western Sydney and Gold Coast would be delighted to enter now, as would one of South Auckland, North Harbour, and Bay of Plenty (Taranaki only has a population of 94,000, while the first two are around half a million and Bay of Plenty almost 300,000).
I can’t understand why Australia and New Zealand don’t take wonderful opportunities when presented.
January 28th 2012 @ 10:38am
Markus said | January 28th 2012 @ 10:38am | Report comment
Getting way too far ahead there. Australia is not ready to accommodate another team in 2013. They probably won’t be ready in 2015 either. The Rebels haven’t even had to release all their marquee players yet.
I’d much prefer to see the next few years getting the Force and Rebels off the bottom of the table, and the Brumbies pushing for the finals again each year, than to see another Aus team consistently challenging for the wooden spoon.
January 28th 2012 @ 1:26pm
kingplaymaker said | January 28th 2012 @ 1:26pm | Report comment
They are ready for the arguments given at great length above. The Rebels model using a mixture of local and imported talent and league converts worked fine until they dropped Cipriani, and to be honest they hardly bothered recruiting properly last year anyway.
A team would easily be possible in 2013.
January 29th 2012 @ 1:28pm
Bakkies said | January 29th 2012 @ 1:28pm | Report comment
The reality of the Rebels inclusion will bite when they have to release the foreign players.
January 30th 2012 @ 1:50am
kingplaymaker said | January 30th 2012 @ 1:50am | Report comment
There’s no reason they should have to, why?
January 30th 2012 @ 11:44am
Bakkies said | January 30th 2012 @ 11:44am | Report comment
Because they have to be equal of the other Australian teams who are only allowed 1 + 1 (1 capped foreigner and 1 that isn’t capped who wishes to qualify for the Wallabies on residence). The other 4 teams can’t have 10 foreign players and there is an agreement down the line for the Rebels to do so.
January 28th 2012 @ 12:46pm
Bakkies said | January 28th 2012 @ 12:46pm | Report comment
Neither national union can afford it and forget western Sydney and the Gold Coast both are sporting graveyards
January 28th 2012 @ 1:22pm
kingplaymaker said | January 28th 2012 @ 1:22pm | Report comment
How is either a sporting graveyard? Sydney has a population of 4.5 million, NSW 7.2 million and much of rugby in Australia in there, so why wouldn’t it be able to contain a second team? The NRL has 8 teams in Sydney so why couldn’t rugby have two?
In any case why would the founding of an AFL team there suddenly destroy decades of union and mean that no one would watch a rugby team but they would all watch AFL instead?
And the Gold Coast may have an NRL and AFL team but it also a rugby heartland and NOT an AFL heartland and so the moment a rugby team appeared it would grab the attention and few would care about the AFL side. The Moreton area is almost 1 million so it is perfectly large enough and Queensland with 4.5 million, only has one team.
In terms of affording it, both teams would produce perfectly big crowds, the season is longer now so there is more revenue, and there is now a salary cap, so of course they could afford it.
January 28th 2012 @ 10:52am
Markus said | January 28th 2012 @ 10:52am | Report comment
Very much looking forward to this season. People question the lack of Wallaby caps in the squad, but this was deliberate recruiting by White to pick young potential Wallabies over former washed-up ones (I will be quite okay with never seeing Valentine play for an Aus Super Rugby Team ever again).
So they have managed to sign a lot of the stars Aus U20s team, including holding onto Michael Hooper. I strongly recommend people check out some highlights of him captaining them Aus at the junior championship last year. There is no question as to why he was U20s world player of the year.
I’m not sure I share your belief in Lealifano though. He is a fantastic attacking runner, no doubt. But his defense is abysmal, and his unforced errors (drop balls, intercepts thrown) not much better. Hopefully he can get through a whole season uninjured to build some consistency.
Speaking of consistency, Toomua is the guy I am very optimistic about.
This guy smoked both Beale and Cooper at schoolboy level (beat their NSW A and QLD A teams leading QLD B as a 16yr old), and has huge raps on him from his brief time playing for Western Province in the Currie Cup – WP fans were seriously peeved that they didn’t work harder to sign him up to the Stormers. It’s only injury that has prevented more time in the Wallaby squad, too.
Because he isn’t a utility player he has never received the chances guys like Lealifano have had to get regular game time, which looks like it will finally change this season.
January 28th 2012 @ 2:32pm
Sally said | January 28th 2012 @ 2:32pm | Report comment
Hooper was Australian U20s player of the year, NOT world U20s player of the year.
Hooper didn’t even make the shortlist for that prestigious award.
January 28th 2012 @ 4:48pm
Markus said | January 28th 2012 @ 4:48pm | Report comment
Cheers for picking that up (I’m usually fairly good with double checking before hitting submit).
Hooper was of course the Australian U20 player of the year.
January 29th 2012 @ 12:30pm
TommyM said | January 29th 2012 @ 12:30pm | Report comment
Agree. Hooper is sensational. He’ll be backing up Bam Bam in no time.
January 29th 2012 @ 1:14pm
Bakkies said | January 29th 2012 @ 1:14pm | Report comment
Getting past Liam Gill might be a problem though.
January 31st 2012 @ 10:26pm
pjbreck said | January 31st 2012 @ 10:26pm | Report comment
Yeah i agreee, i have always had raps on Toomua. Now that there is no one demanding to be picked at 10, he should get more game time. Hooper also looks good too. Remember he debuted at 18 for an injured George Smith, and now with experience from U20 world cup, could be up for a big year.
I just hope that they give some of the guys a chance to grow into positions too. All the chopping and changing really disrupts the playing continuity and confidence.
February 1st 2012 @ 2:02pm
Dr Bob said | February 1st 2012 @ 2:02pm | Report comment
Hi PJ, one thing you haven’t mentioned is a new committee so put a cross or three crosses there. Hooper needs to be another 10 cms taller.
Unlike you I have not renewed my membeship and will watch the games on TV.
The Brumbies may be a team going forward but until they rid themselves iof the bachwards looki committee they will go nowhere.
January 28th 2012 @ 10:52am
tc said | January 28th 2012 @ 10:52am | Report comment
Darwin Stubbie
The deal was 15 teams for two years then to 16 , so the way i understand it is that if Aus/NZ fight it legally they would not have a leg to stand on.
KPM
Lets just wait and see who enters in NZ ,but in all seriousness could Adelaide support a team.
January 28th 2012 @ 11:08am
Darwin Stubbie said | January 28th 2012 @ 11:08am | Report comment
http://www.superxv.com/news/super15_rugby_news.asp?id=33561
This article details you’ve got it wrong …. And there has been plenty of comments out of the NZRFU and ARU about not expanding their conferences and also making it clear that if SA want the kings in they need to come up with a workable solution that doesn’t disrupt the whole of SR – and uneven conferences does that – so they have been informed that the only way the kings get in is to drop one of their existing teams
January 28th 2012 @ 12:48pm
Bakkies said | January 28th 2012 @ 12:48pm | Report comment
SA don’t want more Sanzar expansion that would create more fixture weekends that is caused by more national expansion. NZ have got an unsustainable NPC and their privatisation of the Super Rugby teams has been a disaster.
January 28th 2012 @ 1:24pm
kingplaymaker said | January 28th 2012 @ 1:24pm | Report comment
It wouldn’t necessarily create more fixture weekends as not every team needs to play every team.
January 28th 2012 @ 8:53pm
Bakkies said | January 28th 2012 @ 8:53pm | Report comment
They still have to play more derbies in their conference and tour
January 28th 2012 @ 5:24pm
Krash said | January 28th 2012 @ 5:24pm | Report comment
But how competitive would that Adelaide team be? They make take close to a decade to build into a reasonable force…
January 29th 2012 @ 12:51am
kingplaymaker said | January 29th 2012 @ 12:51am | Report comment
Look at the Rebels model but imagine they had bothered to recruit more and better league converts, such as Israel Folau instead of Jarrod Saffy, and more and better European forwards. That would be the model and it would be competitive.
January 30th 2012 @ 2:43pm
TembaVJ said | January 30th 2012 @ 2:43pm | Report comment
KPM I thought Saffy was one of the standout players in the Rebels last year.
January 31st 2012 @ 1:48am
kingplaymaker said | January 31st 2012 @ 1:48am | Report comment
Exactly, and he was far from the best NRL player.
January 28th 2012 @ 11:17am
kingplaymaker said | January 28th 2012 @ 11:17am | Report comment
tc South Africa threatened to leave the competition if they didn’t get their sixth team, and Aus/NZ accepted it, even if they could perhaps have opposed it.
However, it’s much more in their interests to accept a sixth team but demand one each for themselves.
There’s no reason to wait until 2015 anyway. If SA can get a sixth team next year, then obviously it must be possible with the current conract. Besides no broadcaster would object to more markets.
Australia has endless possibilities for new teams. South Australia has 1.7 million and no NRL to compete with and could easily support a team, Western Sydney is a vast area in the biggest rugby state, Moreton is almost 1 million and so the Gold Coast, a rugby town, could take one, as indeed could Newcastle, probably other areas such as the Central Coast, the Sunshine Coast, a third Sydney team.
In terms of crowds there at least 14 sites that could support a Super team.
New Zealand is way under capacity for teams too. Otago supports the Highlanders with 200,000, while with 1.5 million Auckland has only one team. There is certainly a market in South Auckland, North Harbour, dividing the city into units of half a million each. The Bay of Plenty also has nearly 300,000, Manawatu 222,000, Northland near 200,000.
Super rugby has so few teams that large numbers of spectator markets are left undeveloped.
In 2013 there should be not just the Kings, but Adelaide or Western Sydney, and South Auckland.
January 28th 2012 @ 11:43am
Darwin Stubbie said | January 28th 2012 @ 11:43am | Report comment
They didn’t get a 6th team and they didn’t leave
January 28th 2012 @ 7:04pm
simon said | January 28th 2012 @ 7:04pm | Report comment
Financially, I can’t see how the NZ market could sustain more franchises – even though they have the depth of players. Although, I think they could possibly squeeze one more in at some point, but that would be it, and as long as it didn’t make the season any longer. People also need to realise that having 5 regional franchises in NZ is actually more unifying and attracts more crowds than having 8 traditional provincial teams would. Once you start including provincial teams, you need to include them all to get the fans.
The NPC is in a happy place at the moment – still at the right time of the year, with a few mid-week games – need to leave it for a bit. It doesn’t need the Allblacks in it, just the Super players and plenty of up and coming players.
The AUS market could take a couple more teams if they were to build on the existing teams, but can’t do it because they don’t have the depth to compete against the fewer NZ teams.
I think SA will get their 6th soon enough and the AUS and NZ conferences will expand by including a team each out of ARG, JAP or another NZ team. They won’t close the conferences at that point, instead each team will play only 6 inter-conference games instead of 8.
January 29th 2012 @ 12:50am
kingplaymaker said | January 29th 2012 @ 12:50am | Report comment
simon a simple answer would be the following: Otago 200,000, BOP 300,000, Auckland one team for 1.5 million. So BOP has a market for one, and Auckland for at least two more.
The aim in Australia would be to set up teams with players from abroad and league so that they would be competitive until the game had grown in its new locations and produced its own players.
January 29th 2012 @ 4:21pm
simon said | January 29th 2012 @ 4:21pm | Report comment
I understand where you are coming from kingplaymaker, but surely the size of the population doesn’t determine how many will follow a rugby team. Are there enough fans for the Blues to think another team would get a good following in Auckland? I’m just not sure there are. And I’m not sure that the Blues would appreciate another team taking what support they do get.
January 30th 2012 @ 1:52am
kingplaymaker said | January 30th 2012 @ 1:52am | Report comment
simon in a large city fans can either identify with the city as a whole or areas within it, and often the support for the latter is much stronger. If Auckland were divided in three there would be much more local support and probably as many fans for each of the three as for one. Look at the case of the NRL in Sydney and Brisbane.
January 31st 2012 @ 7:15pm
simon said | January 31st 2012 @ 7:15pm | Report comment
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/sport/south-africa-pushes-southern-kings-bis-into-super-rugby/story-e6frg7o6-1226256681284
January 29th 2012 @ 6:12pm
Samvandamn said | January 29th 2012 @ 6:12pm | Report comment
Actually the Otago/Southland region has a catchment of 350,000.
I dont know why you persist with this idea of extra teams Kingplaymaker.
It is such a terrible idea.
NZ do have the best depth with one team usually struggling for depth (Used to be the Highlanders but now it is the Canes)
You could argue that Australia have 3 and SA have two.
The ultimate outcome would be a weaker competition and Super Rugby would not be known as the premier regional rugby competition in the world.
It would also make the NPC and Currie Cup almost pointless.
January 30th 2012 @ 1:53am
kingplaymaker said | January 30th 2012 @ 1:53am | Report comment
That’s because the players aren’t distributed fairly: see the Bulls/Lions for an example. It wouldn’t make the other competitions pointless at all. What’s more extra strength without weakening teams could come from foreign imports and league converts as in the Rebels.
January 30th 2012 @ 8:15pm
Samvandamn said | January 30th 2012 @ 8:15pm | Report comment
Oh I agree with spreading the talent across the current franchises but adding teams would spread the talent Too thin and would considerably weaken the quality of Rugby that is displayed in Super Rugby which (even though they wont admit it) is the envy of the Northern Hemisphere fans.
On the other side of things watching the weaker teams get up and beat the big teams is a thrill in its own and brings top coaches out of the woodwork.
Coaches such as Jamie Joseph of the Highlanders who took a team of relative no names to the brink of the playoffs beating teams such as the international laden Crusaders and Bulls away.
Your answer to all of this would be to add extra teams who would either end up punching bags or take talent from other teams decreasing the spectacle that is Super Rugby.
Give it up mate.
January 31st 2012 @ 1:49am
kingplaymaker said | January 31st 2012 @ 1:49am | Report comment
‘What’s more extra strength without weakening teams could come from foreign imports and league converts as in the Rebels.’ You forgot to read that part.