A way forward for rugby in Australia
Roar Rookie 
Kurtley Beale starred as the Rebels conquered the Crusaders (AAP Image/Martin Philbey)
Related coverage
Well here we go. This is my first post to The Roar, and it’s about something dear to my heart: rugby union. How did we get to our current state?
We have billion dollar deals for the AFL and now the NRL, the A-League signing European superstars and rugby union looking like something out of an old western movie pub brawl.
To me, rugby union in Australia is at the crossroads. We can talk all we want about Quade Coopers tweets but is that really the problem?
The whole infrastructure of rugby is the problem. We are top heavy. There are five Super Rugby teams but below that we have Sydney club rugby and maybe a couple of teams from Brisbane.
I am a passionate Rebels supporter. I joined on the first day that membership was available.
Do I care that they play expansive rugby? No. Do I care that they have the best rugby players? No. Do I like them because they are the best? No.
I care because they are my team, I want to wear my Rebels polo shirt and walk around with my Rebels key-ring.
I want ownership and they are my team and I am along for the ride.
Every Monday morning I log onto The Roar for my weekly beat-up of rugby. We hear criticism of the game, the referees and the administration.
When you read the wash-up of NRL of AFL on a Monday, there is a lot of criticism but the coaches, players and referees are the targets – not the game.
Why do we criticise the game so much? I think it is because we haven’t got the same tribalism as the other codes. I think it is because we don’t feel ownership of our teams.
How are the Rebels and Force suppose to survive, and more importantly how will rugby grow in these states, to a level where an aspiring club player in Victoria can make the next step to the top division?
These franchises will never be able to create a pathway from local club rugby to Super Rugby.
To me Super Rugby is the problem, it is a made up comp to suit pay TV and create revenue for short sighted rugby administrators
It’s not about having the best rugby comp in the world. It’s about having a competition that supporters care about.
My solution? Scrap Super Rugby. Replace it with the Itm (NZ), Currie cup(SA) and an ARC comp played side by side from March to June.
Each comp should have 8-10 teams that suit individual countries.
There should then be a June Test window followed by a Heineken Cup/knockout style comp with all teams eligible to play July to Late September.
The Rugby Championship must be played alongside the knockout style competition.
What do you think Roarers? Is this the way forward for rugby in Australia?
Have you seen the new Wallabies jersey? Want one of your own? We're giving away a brand new 2013 Wallabies jersey to one lucky Roarer, click here to go in the running to win.
- Explore:
- ARU, Rugby Union, Super Rugby
September 26th 2012 @ 4:40am
kingplaymaker said | September 26th 2012 @ 4:40am | Report comment
This article is a welcome dose of sanity and maturity after the usual silly stuff in the first article today.
Super rugby as a format doesn’t offer enough teams for tribalism to develop. You have five regionals identities, and another large regional identity (southern Australia) is left out, while of the 8 biggest cities in Australia aside from Adelaide, the Gold Coast and Newcastle are left out. Then the huge rugby heartlands of Sydney and Brisbane are not split into different entities, while a mass of other smaller areas in the rugby heartlands are abandoned: Central Coast, Wollongong, Ilawara, Sunshine Coast, North Queensland.
That makes a total, if Sydney and Brisbane were divided in three and two respectively, of 16 different sites which could support rugby teams. In a national competition SUPPLEMENTING Super rugby there would be 8-10 teams, but in a national competition REPLACING Super rugby would that be enough? Maybe you could forcefully divide the current Super squads in three, allow each team 5 imports, and allow private ownership: with all 16 teams!
Now how can five possibly develop the full extent of tribalism possible if 11 locations are omitted? It can’t and so there is a very strong argument from the author that any format with not just one or two more teams, but many more teams is desirable.
September 26th 2012 @ 4:49am
Billy Bob said | September 26th 2012 @ 4:49am | Report comment
Hog, when you create a new structure the first question is ‘where is the money?’
You are accurate about the problem though. Rugby suffers from a lack of traditional tribalism, (although the Brumbies, Rebels and Reds seem to have plenty).
And the reason NRL and afl fans don’t criticize their code as much is because they are the cherries at the top of the Aussie tree. Their codes are well supported by fans and tv and are not fighting for survival.
Rugby fans are disappointed by the lack of vision of the executive leadership and the apparent contempt the leadership have by keeping fans in the dark.
JON cancelled the ARC but has done diddly squat to replace it.
Inconceivably it seems, from the ARU’s inaction and silence, that the plan is to carry on with present structures(i.e. no 3rd tier).
The other problem with scrapping super rugby (apart from the financial) is that it has an international flavour that is unique to rugby, and a big selling point.
A Heineken cup style format as suggested by others may be a good development though because it would allow more Aussie teams play week to week before heading off to battle with the best of SA and nz.
September 26th 2012 @ 6:01am
garth said | September 26th 2012 @ 6:01am | Report comment
A heineken cup style format would be a step (or 2) backwards for NZ & SA. Super Rugby is a REPRESENTATIVE competition, NOT A CLUB tournament. Something Australians seem to have trouble coming to terms with. Keeping Super Rugby as is, but introducing a concurrent Australia-wide tournament played by regional teams could work. By regional, I do not mean states but smaller areas from within the states, such as a rep. side selected from Gold Coast clubs playing a rep. side from NSW Country or North Queensland for example. Select your Super Rugby/State teams from these sides.
In NZ, club sides player in provincial tournaments, the provincial sides are selected from these and play in the ITM/Heartland tournaments, Super Rugby franchises select from THESE players, with All Blacks then being selected from Super Rugby teams (+ a certain Sevens side).
I see no reason why Aussie rugby can’t be organised: CLUB < REGION < STATE < WALLABIES. Having SR teams playing the occassional game OUTSIDE their main base wouldn't hurt either, even if it's just a pre-season game.
September 26th 2012 @ 10:17am
sheek said | September 26th 2012 @ 10:17am | Report comment
Garth,
I’m sorry, but I believe you totally misunderstand the situation. Or you are being inflexible in your thinking. We crossed paths on this not so long ago.
Super Rugby can be whatever you want it to be, to best fit the structure you desire.
It actually began in 1996 as a provincial comp, which continued the theme from S10 (1993-95) & S6 (1986-92).
For the first few years, SA continued the theme before joining the regional concept evolved by NZ.
Look at the early years of S12 (1996-99). The SA teams are called Northern Transvaal, Transvaal, Natal, Western Province & Free State.
Australia has always had provinces, even though the Brumbies are trying to avoid their origin, which makes no sense to me, other than as a trite marketing exercise.
NZ went to regions so that ABs candidates from smaller unions wouldn’t be compromised without adequate tough rugby. SA followed suit a few years later in this regard.
Super Rugby isn’t going to disappear anytime soon, because its the major revenue driver.
However, there’s no reason why it can’t be altered to provide the best of all desires. By truncating the SR into a Heineken Cup style comp, & have the leading teems from each of NZ, SA, Aus & possibly Arg qualify (either S12 or S16), means you still have the SR but also give back prominence to the national comps.
Where there is a good idea somewhere else, it makes sense to adopt it. The Heineken Cup concept in the northern hemisphere, which brings the best domestic teams & players each year from England, France, Wales, Ireland, Scotland & Italy into one tournament is a terrific idea.
In the southern hemisphere this keeps both SR & domestic comps at 2nd tier level with a seamless connection of resources.
The 2007 model in Australia of separate SR & ARC teams is an unwieldy dilution of resources. Thus far too expensive. Have the same teams, the same playing rosters, the same coaches, the same playing strips, the same home grounds, the same sponsors, etc.
In Australia, we already the basis for two divisions:
ARC/ARC (div 1): Sydney rep, New South Wales, Queensland, Australian Capital Territory, Victoria, Western Australia.
ARS (div 2): NSW Country, Qld Country, ACT Country (Southern Inland NSW), South Australia, Northern Territory, Tasmania.
These 12 provinces already exist, without resorting to creating artificial clubs.
With some inventive thinking you can create Eastern Australia (based in Newcastle) & EA Country (NE NSW), North Qld Country (based in Townsville), WA Country & perhaps Vic Country.
All bar EA (which in any case is the old Northern NSW) already exist either as sporting regions or political regions.
My top-down scenario is as follows:
Tier 1: Wallabies, ABs, Boks, Pumas.
Tier 2: Both SR & NPC, Currie Cup, ARC/APC, Cameonato Zona.
(eg, Auckland, Canterbury, Western Province, Northern Transvaal, NSW, Victoria, Buenos Aires, Tucuman)
Tier 3: Premier club rugby in each major provincial capital.
Tier 4: Suburban & Regional (Country) rugby throughout each major & minor province.
Tier 5: Schools & Junior rugby.
September 26th 2012 @ 10:42am
Wilbur said | September 26th 2012 @ 10:42am | Report comment
Re: The Brumbies, Australian Capital Territory & Southern New South Wales Brumbies doesn’t really roll off the tongue. We know who the Brumbies are and who they play for….Go Brumbies!!!
September 26th 2012 @ 11:48am
sheek said | September 26th 2012 @ 11:48am | Report comment
Wilbur,
You’re not paying attention.
ACT Brumbies & ACT Country Rams or Brumby Runners, or Drovers, or Stockmen, take your pick.
Southern NSW, now called the mind-numbingly Southern Inland, have thrown their lot in with ACT.
You don’t throw away all that history, tradition, tribalism purely for cheap marketing. Brumbies represents the whole of ACT.
Rugby fans from far & wide will follow the Brumbies, irrespective of where they come from. Dropping the ACT deceives no-one. The provincial name is still very important.
Geez……….
September 26th 2012 @ 11:55am
kingplaymaker said | September 26th 2012 @ 11:55am | Report comment
sheek is that photo you? You look extremely young!
September 26th 2012 @ 12:13pm
sheek said | September 26th 2012 @ 12:13pm | Report comment
KPM,
A smile can take years off a person’s age……….!
September 26th 2012 @ 7:34pm
Bakkies said | September 26th 2012 @ 7:34pm | Report comment
The Brumbies always represented more than just the ACT. Yass, Goulburn, Queanbeyan and I think even the snowy mountains were in the Brumbies catchment before they took on southern inland. So you suggest they should isolate the fans that live in those areas by calling them the ACT?
September 27th 2012 @ 11:48am
Mike said | September 27th 2012 @ 11:48am | Report comment
Sheek, you left out Sydney University. That’s 13 provinces
October 4th 2012 @ 5:22pm
Barry said | October 4th 2012 @ 5:22pm | Report comment
Well said that man.
September 26th 2012 @ 5:03am
Johnno said | September 26th 2012 @ 5:03am | Report comment
To me these problems have been building and bubbling for 25 years 1987-2012, and now exploded, like any failed system eg communism, or if a family budget builds up to much debt buy buying sports cars it can’t afford or buying a bigger house it can’t afford or spends to much money on plasma tv’s and holidays, it catches up with you.
And now 25 years it has caught up with wallabies.
1987- rugby world cup comes alive. rugby still amaturer sport, but should of been the start of taking it to the masses. Rugby elitist image in OZ unlike other coutnries eg NZ, Wales: has been terrible for sport as has limited it;s market share, by not going out to public schools enough.
1991- wallaby’s win the world cup, some big ticket tape parades in sydney and tv headlines. The ARU should of cashed in on that and the 92 bledisloe series and promoted rugby more into public schools. But nothing, a wanna be a wallaby campaign but that didn’t last.
1996 rugby turns pro should of really got into public schools then what a chance, and still nothing.
Now fast forwad 2012 :
4 footy codes, plus 3 other core sports basketball, netball, cricket.
All other sports try to get market share and promote all areas not just private schools. Soccer had it’s revloution in 2005 which JON was a part of with frank lowy. And embraced the mainstream , rugby still has not done that in 2012, and is losing vital markert share.
Basketball, and cricket and NRL, had it’s business re-models. Let’s hope this governance review achieves anything for aussy rugby.
Global rugby is booming that is the good news. But aussy population 22 million big code wars, lets hope rugby union tries to get more market share. When i watch soccer on tv, or afl, or nrl, I see people from all backgrounds, and classes and dress sense, and different cars cheap to expansive when i go to matches. When i go to rugby games i see predomoinalty a sydney north shore type crowd. And that is hardly the majority in Australia. I have friends in North QLD townvilee , cairns way and they say they hardly ever see a wallaby jumper and it never rugby gets any media attention up there, and same in west sydney i have some mates out there and no one is aware of the wallabies in west sydney. SO brand awrness of rugby union and the wallabies, is terrible in parts of Australia.
-So how did we get to this stage. 25 years 1987-2012: Keeping rugby as elitist sport, like soccer used to be not mainstream in australia in the old NSL days. It has since reformed rugby has not. When you make something elitist it is not welcoming.
Bad adminsistration, the brand awareness of the wallabies is terrible in most parts of Australia. The ARU marketing department have a lot to awnser for. And JON he came from an elitist background went to a private school, and a very rugby driven school. So JON has been around rugby people a lot i don’t know if JON realises rugby is not big market share wise around rest of footy codes form the ivory towers of the ARU which is located at st leanord’s on sydney’s north shore which is one of the few rugby heartlands in OZ.
-So brand awrness, channel 9 type stuff ups on tv, and marketing of wallabies terrible, i never see any billboards of wallabies. A few free to air games on super rugby for those unlucky not to have fox would help. I have fox so am fine but many aussies don’t yet.
-so rugby has to really get into big heartland populations of OZ, west sydney,adelaide, gold coast, newcastle,melborune more.
-And getting rid of the ARC was a mistake. Yes it cost a bit but only coz of something to do with melbourne or some other cost thing that could of been fixed. And JON should of if he had the energy and hunger not give up, tries to pitch to tv networks and big business to fund the ARC. DIdn’t see any initiative there. And now the big tv deals of AFL and NRL $1 billion each, plus the big money in french and japan rugby, aussy rugby out of the core 7 sports in OZ i think is running dead last and will slip further behind if no review is done. RUPA want a review to .
-And out of all the sports rugby seems the most stubborn and backward, and most stubborn not to have a review. Dark times for aussy rugby and i fear the ones running aussy rugby as they know they will be booted out by the review are just trying to fight to keep power. It should not have to be a revloution if one has the best interests of the sport in Australia at heart , it should be an open and transparent exercise. We the public have not seen the review been made public of the world cup, unlike the argus cricket review.
More cloakc and dagger stuff , hiding it from the rugby public fans, who are slowy dwindling in numbers. The tahs and i live in east sydney have no brand awarness compared to the swans and the roosters. There is a joke almost now, if any tah fans exist anymore. Sad state of affairs.
And the awfully small shut shield grand final crowd , should show rugby is in a sad state of affairs. Alan jones, john connolly all critical of rugby. When you look at the AFL and NRL fianls crowds, and the bad tv ratings for the pumas test on the gold coat, and channel 9 not showing it live and the shut shield grand final, all bad nmes for aussy rugby.
Also not showing school boy rugby on tv unlike in NZ and south africa, is not good for sport. rugby league shows tv schoolboy rugby league. It rates high in NZ school boy rugby and in south africa.
Also no imports , protectionism by ARU . SHould allow 5-10 imports per team. Fans do not pay to watch locals , they pay to watch there team win. I as a rugby fan will not pay to watch barrack barnes or daniel halangaheu. I will pay to watch SBW, Ma nonu, johnny wilkinson, brian o’driscolll. .
ALl other sports in OZ embrace imports , as does french rugby, and Japan rugby.
If sachin tendulkar wanted to play in the big bash would cricket in australia say no, your import we want to give a local who has less talant than you , an opportunity . If sachin played T20 in oZ, or chris gaily who has, how has that hamred cricket. it has not it brings in tv ratings and exposure for sport and money $$$. NRL has lot so imports and lots of kiwis, that has helped Australia league stay competitive and , helped kiwis get better.
Australian soccer embraces imports to. Italain soccer star great for soccer in OZ. World series cricket embraced imports eg viv richards. English soccer manchester united, chelsea, and spain barcelona ,relalmadrid lots of imports , taking spots of locals.
Ausyy rugby is pretty protectionism and that has harmed the quality of super rugby. Ask yourself if sachin tendulkar played T20 big bash and that means taking a spot of a local , is that harming cricket in OZ. Hardly it is generating interest and making wining clubs.
So aussy rugby really also should of embraced more imports to have higher standards especially at the force which was neglected.
So all in all my reasons why aussy rugby is a mess in 2012, i hope they change there business models the ARU , need to badly to get market share.
September 26th 2012 @ 9:51pm
Minz said | September 26th 2012 @ 9:51pm | Report comment
The AFL apparently realised they were in crisis when their grand final drew only 92,000 fans in the early 1980s. Seems to have worked… when will the ARU realise that rugby’s in crisis? And what will they do about it?
September 26th 2012 @ 5:07am
biltongbek said | September 26th 2012 @ 5:07am | Report comment
Hog, welcome mate.
The issue of administrators is not limited to Australia only. south African rugby have their issues.
There is no collective effort between SARU and the Provinces or Super Rugby Franchises to do what is best for SA rugby.
Currently Australian rugby at least has the benefit that their players don’t play as much rugby as the other two do. Not that it is supposed to be a consolation though.
The question is rightly where will the money come from?
Players want money, it is the professional era, unfortunately no broadcaster will simply sign hundreds of millions of dlollars just for a new domestic competition. So the biggest obstacle is finances.
I would like a shoerter Super XV competition yes.
September 26th 2012 @ 7:08am
kingplaymaker said | September 26th 2012 @ 7:08am | Report comment
biltong, do you believe a system with five elite rugby teams is enough to maximise player exposure and possible markets in South Africa?
September 26th 2012 @ 8:43am
biltongbek said | September 26th 2012 @ 8:43am | Report comment
KPM, in a sense yes. i firmly beleive a pyramid type structure works, I would even suggest as little as four teams are sufficient. The reasoning is this, the fewer teams you have directly under test level the higher the quality of rugby is.
But there is a balance as you require depth in every position, what I like about the NZ system is the fact that NZRU controls player movement.
The idea is if you have your top four players in each position in four different Super Franchises then you have very good depth.
Then under that you must have a next tiered system, such as SA and NZ has with Currie Cup and ITM Cup, in that system 8-10 teams where players can develop, and then as we have a Vodacom Cup system with 14 teams and then an elite club system and then the rest.
That provides increasingly tougher levels for players .
The important question is how to finance it.
September 26th 2012 @ 8:52am
kingplaymaker said | September 26th 2012 @ 8:52am | Report comment
biltong but there is an argument that players only develop to their full abilities when exposed to a higher level, and that Currie Cup level competitions aren’t attractive enough because of scale, money etc..to keep young players interested in the game.
With 4 teams you get a certain amount of revenue to spend on the lower structures and grassroots of the game too, but with 8 teams you would get double that from TV money and even more teams would give even more TV money. The NRL and AFL have triple the number of teams as rugby and over triple the TV money accordingly.
So with fewer teams you may not have the money to support the game and develop players and so lose out on what may be developed.
Another point is that the southern hemisphere teams don’t beat the northern ones necessarily because they have fewer teams and thereby a more intense standard, but because they have better players or better coaches (coaches have been awful in England and France since 2003). So a lower intensity of domestic rugby may not mean the national team plays worth. England were number one with a system of over double the number of elite clubs to their competitors at the beginning of the last decade.
September 26th 2012 @ 9:01am
biltongbek said | September 26th 2012 @ 9:01am | Report comment
I disagree that 8 yeams will bring in more money per team than 4 teams. The season is no long enough to accommodate more matches, so you will still get the same amount of revenue from the same number of games (perhaps a little more) but that revenue must then be split amongst eight teams.
The Currie Cup may be pushed into the background because of the long season, but it is alive and well. The Currie Cup provincial rivalries is strong and fans still identify with their provinces.
As far as money is concerned, we will never compete with France and England who are both countries with economies in excess of 4 times ours.
That doesn’t mean our players all walk away, at the end of the day these overseas teams are still limited with the number of overseas players they can contract, and that has pretty much reached saturation point, they now only replace those that leave.
September 26th 2012 @ 9:10am
kingplaymaker said | September 26th 2012 @ 9:10am | Report comment
biltong just look at TV deals. Where there are more teams, and this applies to England and France as well as the NRL and AFL, the broadcasters are willing to pay more money. There is much more product to show and a far wider range of fans.
I meant revenue in terms of TV money: the other revenue just goes to the franchises/clubs.
The size of the economy isn’t the relevant factor here, but the number of teams. The NRL and AFL can win over a billion each in TV money from populations of 10 million or so each (I mean each commands about half the country’s fans), while England and France are 5-6 times larger. But because the number of teams is great, the NRL and AFL can still get these huge deals. In South Africa who knows how many teams could get good crowds.
September 26th 2012 @ 9:24am
biltongbek said | September 26th 2012 @ 9:24am | Report comment
KPM, strictly speaking of the SA market, a large proportion of our population do not have the means for pay TV, thus our television market is at its limit for revenue, currently the revenue is very much unevenly split due to the spread of wealth in SA, the Bulls, Stormers and Sharks pull the biggest gate revenue and has the highest merchandise sales.
This happened purely because they had the means to buy strong teams and unless SARU puts controls or a drafting system in place to ensure even split of talent, our other franchise wether it be 5 teams or 8 teams will not be competitive, hence an inferior “product” and therefore not more money.
September 26th 2012 @ 10:07am
kingplaymaker said | September 26th 2012 @ 10:07am | Report comment
biltong certainly the spread of talent in South Africa does look very strange from the outside. I would guess that if you took the 40 man larger squads of the Bulls, Sharks and Stormers, there would be two Super teams of talent in each while there would hardly be a single Super team in a combined Cheetahs/Lions squad.
If there was something resembling a fair distribution of talent South Africa I think would have five very strong franchises instead of three, and to be honest probably more than five given the tremendous playing numbers in the country.
September 26th 2012 @ 7:36pm
Bakkies said | September 26th 2012 @ 7:36pm | Report comment
Where would the Sharks be without Grey College- Bloemfontein?
September 26th 2012 @ 7:43pm
biltongbek said | September 26th 2012 @ 7:43pm | Report comment
More importantly where would the Cheetahs be if they could hold on to their players?
September 26th 2012 @ 11:36am
Emric said | September 26th 2012 @ 11:36am | Report comment
Biltongbek
The ITM Cup is being wracked by the NZRU and Super Rugby … without the ITM Cup New Zealand Rugby will slowly die.. the Super Teams have almost no loyalty as they do not identify with any region. The entire system is flawed half the games are played in South Africa at 3AM NZ time which is bad for ratings.
A new system needs to be looked at
September 26th 2012 @ 7:09am
mania said | September 26th 2012 @ 7:09am | Report comment
biltongbek and hog – u need to get over the premise that all players need to be paid. ITM is finding out that it cant afford to pay everyone a salary. ITM is a stepping stone and should be enforced as one. before these kids get thrown 6 figures they should learn how to scrape and survive with their own wits and resources.
ITM doesnt have to make a huge profit it just has to be able to survive.
September 26th 2012 @ 8:45am
biltongbek said | September 26th 2012 @ 8:45am | Report comment
Mate it isn’t me advocating players play for money only, the proof is there for everyone to see, our Currie Cup, Vodacom Cup and even Super Rugby players run after the money as soon as some guy with a pound or Euro in his pocket knock on their door.
September 26th 2012 @ 6:01am
Pogo said | September 26th 2012 @ 6:01am | Report comment
From a NZ perspective playing the ITM cup from march to june as suggested would overlap with club rugby, from which half of the players in the ITM cup are picked and which is an important stepping stone for many players on their way up to the top. I would imagine there would be similar problems in south africa.
I think biltongbek does strike close to the point, which is that super rugby pays the bills. If you get rid of super rugby you will have three development competitions for the european and japanese clubs to peruse like a player supermarket.
September 26th 2012 @ 7:19am
Rough Conduct said | September 26th 2012 @ 7:19am | Report comment
Yes, yes, yes! Super Rugby is a hindrance to Rugby development in the Southern Hemisphere, a proper provincial championship is and always has been the solution. No other sporting comp in the world operates anything like Super Rugby. Try explaining the difference between Canterbury and The Crusaders to an outsider, or Bulls and Blue Bulls, or the fact that Kiwis and South Africans support one team for the first half of the year, then another for the second half. Australian professional players meanwhile just go and play park footy for the second half of the season? Try and explain that regular season fixtures involve trans-continental travel? It just does not make sense.
September 26th 2012 @ 7:19am
hog said | September 26th 2012 @ 7:19am | Report comment
Thanks for the feedback guy’s, i know it seems a radical solution scrapping Super Rugby, well in a way it’s actually just restructuring it, sort of replacing it with ITM ARC Currie.
In NZ currently they are complaining of spectator fatigue simply to much rugby and that began with Super every other form of rugby has been compromised to fit in Super.
Money well i think that can be debated the format suggested will be able to bring in revenue and i believe increase it.
September 26th 2012 @ 7:48am
Johnno said | September 26th 2012 @ 7:48am | Report comment
Long term Aussy rugby and kiwi rugby will do a NRL and Netball, and just haves a trans tasman series.
USA/Canada do it in the there sports comps to and it works well. NBA,NHL,MLB,MLSoccer.
We long term don’t need Argentina and south africa and they don’t need us.
We should still play them in a RC but maybe don’t need super rugby.
Argentina will join the america’s USA/Canada/Brazil/Mexico/Chile/columbia/uruguay/venuzala as these teams get better.
In october the IRB is having an America’s championship. It will be the B eams of these countries, and a full strength urugauy
Going to be in Canada . will be fun
Like in soccer Australias/NZ future is the Asia Pacific
-Japan,fiji samoa,tonga, Kazaksthan,China/india.hongkong,south koirea,malaysia,phillipines,thailand,sri lanka.
All getting better.
But with in 10 years Argentina will ditch the RC by end OF rugby world cup 2023.
We will never see a USA/Canada/brazil/argentina super rugby teams, a total waste of money, and player welfare logistical nightmare, not going to happen.
And Japan has benighted staying away from super rugby,. And south africa we don’t need long term or now to be honest.
I think revenue wise fans will just as easily watcha Fiji/Samoa/Tonga test in pacific nations cup over a test vs the books or argues any day.
-I would much rather watch Australia/Samoa in sydney, or NZ/Samoa in Auckland, or Fiji/Samoa in Auckland any day of the week over a boks test.
-Boks are in Africa not in Asia-pacific. Keep it local and save the continents test for world cups or june test window.
-I think it would be great if Australia/NZ joined the pacific nations cup each year would be awesome.
September 26th 2012 @ 8:03am
Elisha Pearce said | September 26th 2012 @ 8:03am | Report comment
Thanks for contributing Hog. Supery Rugby is somewhat of a 15 year old Big Bash League. Made for TV, having lots of games and meant to be flashy. Without Fox Sports rugby would be in serious trouble in this country. The problem is that fox sports and super rugby IS rugby in this country, we don’t have a whole lot else.
You make a lot of sense when you say that there needs to be a real regional tournament between the best clubs of the region. I think that should be the ultimate goal. I don’t know how it would get done with a straight cut and change, but it needs to be a progression at least.
I don’t know what the current administration are working on though. They tend to keep fans in the dark about their planning.
September 26th 2012 @ 8:05am
Pillock said | September 26th 2012 @ 8:05am | Report comment
NRL & AFL get the $$$$’s precisely because they have the structure that you propose. However try as they might both codes cannot grow the game beyond Australia in any meaningful way.
Rugby is a different beast with it’s strength being the international appeal and as such has grown from the provincal sides and has been very much the focus of the administration.As such the only money that rugby gets is from the Super 15 & International arenas.
While a ITM / Currie Cup style program might well be the best way to develop players the problem is that you would go broke in the process and lose the top talent along the way. The fact is that Australian Rugby uses all it money on paying the Wallabies, JON salary and a top up for a few of the Super 15 sides. There is simply no money for a third tier and your living in lala land if you think more dollars will come from broadcasting. Local rugby has not had a TV deal worth a penny for 30 years and that is unlikely to change.
September 26th 2012 @ 9:04am
Rob9 said | September 26th 2012 @ 9:04am | Report comment
Pillock I agree with your sentiments here:
“NRL & AFL get the $$$$’s precisely because they have the structure that you propose. However try as they might both codes cannot grow the game beyond Australia in any meaningful way.”
The NRL and AFL do get their pesos from more leagues that have a more domestic focused that have a significant amount of coverage in their traditional markets and a few dots on the map outside their heartland boundaries. They aren’t international games but it’s not the NRL and AFL’s jobs to change that. They should concern themselves with consolidating their heartlands, growing the game in the non heartland states and just being as strong as they can possibly be within the Australian landscape. I’d argue that this should be the sole focus for the ARU in Australia.
Build a similar structure (obviously on a smaller scale) to what these two dominant sporting codes have and focus on generating domestic interest and growing the game at home. As the NRL and AFL can attest to, the money will come.
I also don’t think Hog is advocating a third tier. I agree, there isn’t the money in the coffers for a whole new tier in Australia. But it does make sense to restructure our second tier to suit our own needs.
September 26th 2012 @ 4:21pm
Col Quinn said | September 26th 2012 @ 4:21pm | Report comment
This comment is one of the reasons why RU struggles in Australia. There is an inability to accept facts because they aren’t part of your vision. RL is a global game that is growing at a similar rate to RU. RL is nowhere near as big as RU but Murdoch love of the game and Sky Europe has introduced RL to different market resulting surprising growth across Europe. As I have said countless times on these forums, RL is rapidly becoming the second string game to Football in Germany. The game has re-established itself in France and numerous extinct clubs have come back to life and rejoined the Elite completion. RL has expanded across England and Wales, while RU is dying in the north of England and it looking fragile in some of the more economically depressed areas of Wales. Stop throwing dirt at RL and start looking at why RU is faltering in Australia. RU is nearly broke in Australia, you should be asking why such a good product has been let to flounder. As some commentators have alluded NZRU is also having difficulties with is domestic competitions. The IMT is very attractive RU but attracts no spectators. Why? Two of the problems might be that although the players are professional, the rules and the games administrators are still amateurs.
September 26th 2012 @ 5:50pm
Rob9 said | September 26th 2012 @ 5:50pm | Report comment
Calm down Col and actually read what I’ve written before you go making completely rash statements like ‘this comment is why RU struggles in Australia’. I and I believe Pillock are both looking at the NRL model (albeit at a reduced scale) as the way forward for RU in Australia. That’s a huge compliment to the game. Like Rugby, I’m a huge supporter of Rugby League and have absolutely no interest in bogging myself down in a code war between the 2 sports. As this article has nothing to do with Rugby League and seeing as you’re frothing to be a part of some sort of RL/RU pot stir, why don’t you go and comment on a certain article that was posted the other day that is just begging for people like you to get involved.
But while you’re on the topic of ‘accepting facts’, before digging yourself into a whole that you can’t get out of, do yourself a favour and accept the fact that Rugby League isn’t a global sport as you say it is. I’m one of these rare breeds who has the benefit of a rational perspective as I support both codes equally. As this is the case I know that rugby is actually a global sport (and is one of its strengths) that is contested at the international level by more than two competitive nations. Rugby League is not a global sport. The ‘facts’ are that outside of Oceania and England the game has a miniscule presence in most markets it’s in or would classify as a minor niche sport at best. However, I know and am happy to say (again as a RL fan) that it is the dominant football code on the east coast of Australia which from my perspective is its great strength.
Sure RL might be growing in some foreign markets, which (again) as a league fan I’m happy to hear about. But seriously man get a dose of reality before you start harping on about its ‘rapid growth’ in Germany and it being a ‘global sport’! It’s NOT and who cares?? Why do you (and some other delusional RL ONLY posters on here) judge a game by its international presence? League has next to none but I love it all the same. And if the truth be told, as a Rugby Union fan as well, I’d sacrifice global presence for being in the shoes of RL and AFL in Australia any day!
Using Germany (and I’m sure you’ll come back with state of the game in Jamaica and some game they played against Canada in Toronto) as an example for how ‘global’ RL is demonstrates how seriously behind the 8 ball the game is outside of those traditional markets that I’ve spoken about. The reality is the game is unknown in Germany. But I won’t lose any sleep over it. I wish RL all the best in its quest to gain a presence internationally (one last time, as a fellow RL fan), but your attitude is not healthy. You need to have a better understanding of where the game sits and what can realistically be achieved in international growth. Otherwise your setting yourself up for an uphill battle that’s full of disappointments. I on the other hand have no mud to sling at a code I love, but I choose to develop my local and international opinions about it from a position that resembles planet earth as opposed to la la land.
September 26th 2012 @ 6:07pm
NF said | September 26th 2012 @ 6:07pm | Report comment
Rob9
You might be a RL fan but the fact is you’re primarily a RU fan. Now I’m realistic about where RL sits internationally and in my ideal world both RL & RU would be on equal footing but I know realistically it will never happen. Since we’re talking about sacrifice, if RL was to give up it’s spot as the number 2 spot in Australia to grow the code internationally I would of taken into Rob9.
Unfortunately, RL is where it’s at and RU is the only international code out of the two which is fine with me. But Rob9 since you’re a fan of both codes like me I’m sure it would of been if both codes were on international level not just one but it will never occur realistically.
September 26th 2012 @ 7:13pm
Rob9 said | September 26th 2012 @ 7:13pm | Report comment
Hi NF,
Thanks for telling me what I’m primarily a fan of… but you’re wrong. I couldn’t be any more split down the middle mate. I grew up in Cronulla in the 80’s wanting to be a Shark. Then the family moved to Brisbane in the 90’s and I attended a GPS school where I played rugby. When SR began a fixed my allegiances to the Reds. Still play rugby today and support the Reds/Wallabies and still a diehard Sharks fan (proud interstate member) and suffering fan of my state (NSW…). If you look at my previous comments you’d find that they’ve been pretty evenly split between the 2 codes and the majority of my comments centre around how I think each game could be better. I truly have a (equal) passion for both.
I know you’re passionate about RL’s international game and growth NF. I’ve read other comments of yours that suggest this. I have complete respect for that and also the fact that you’re realistic about where the game is currently situated and how far it can go. Not many international RL nuts have that level of rationality about them.
But you’re dead right. It would be a perfect world if RL had a greater international presence and RU had a greater domestic one. Unfortunately I don’t see great change occurring on either of these fronts. AFL is always going to dominate their states and RL will always dominate NSW and QLD. RU will be left to pick up the leftovers and continue to operate as a major niche sport player within the Australian sporting landscape. Growing RL internationally is a huge challenge. To have an impact on a sporting landscape is equivalent to having an impact upon a national culture and identity. Becoming a well exposed and popular sport is not an easy task and is bordering on impossible. Regardless, I’ll always continue to support both to be the best they possibly can be and continue to provide my opinions on how I believe each should go about it.
September 26th 2012 @ 6:57pm
Col Quinn said | September 26th 2012 @ 6:57pm | Report comment
Rob9,
Sorry to fly off the handle but I tire at RU guys sniping at RL. Always trying to blame RL for RUs problems. To get RU going again the ARU is going to have be disbanded a new body implemented that can work with the NZRU to start a trans-Tasman interclub series. The NRL has too much of a head start and now money for RU to threaten RL but the promotion of RU must be more competitive. Target the AFL, hard. Sydney and Brisbane have already a good RU market.
Now, for many years up to this year I spend sometimes up to 4 to 5 month a year in Germany for business. I have now retired. RL is very well know game, due to Sky and RL is now being played across Germany with local games shown on the Evening news. The German nation RL team is recognised as one of Germany’s better known rep sides. Germans seem to like RL.
September 26th 2012 @ 7:26pm
Rob9 said | September 26th 2012 @ 7:26pm | Report comment
No problem Col, and apologies for biting back hard but I tend to get a bit passionate when I’m accused of letting off cheap shots towards a code that I love and support when really all I’m doing is making educated observations. Not slinging mud. I’d like to think both of my favourite sports in the world can live happily side by side… too much to ask for some though.
With regards to your observations here on RU I think you’re pretty close to the money. In no way am I suggesting RU would ever overtake RL or AFL. That’s never going to happen. But it doesn’t mean that steps can’t be taken in an already established marketplace to see RU become a more successful code than where it currently sits. That’s really what my comments here are concerning.
With regards to the situation in Germany, your experience suggests you’re the man in the know there. I wouldn’t have thought RL in Germany to have any sort of footing and expected RU to be head and shoulders above. As a fan of both codes I’m happy to be proven wrong. I believe playing second fiddle only to soccer is a bit farfetched but again will be happy if that eventuates.