A way forward for rugby in Australia part two
Roar Rookie 
Sharks player Jannie du Plessis (R) tackles Reds Will Genia during the Super Rugby qualifying final between the Queensland Reds and the Sharks (AFP / Patrick Hamilton)
Related coverage
After my first post last week (a way forward for rugby in Australia), I was surprised how many people agreed with the basic concept, but a common theme in response was ‘we can’t afford it’.
I would like to debate that point.
I believe that the model presented is more affordable, and Super Rugby is the model we cannot afford. Every level of rugby is compromised to suit Super Rugby.
When rugby turned professional, it introduced Super Rugby – arguably the highest level of rugby in the world. A Ferrari. But at what cost when all other levels of rugby have been sacrificed to pay for it?
Briefly, my model is:
Late Feb-June ITM, ARC, Currie Cup. A break in June with inbound tours from northern hemisphere teams. July-early October Heineken cup/knockout style comp involving all teams from three countries, with the Rugby Championship to be played July-September.
This is more affordable, because each country can run its competition to its desired level. For example, eight teams for Australia, 10 for New Zealand and 12 for SA, whatever is the best model for each individual country.
Also, importantly, it will allow each country to fund its teams at a level each country can afford.
How do we pay for it? The domestic comp can be sold by each country to its own broadcasters with hopefully a free to air component introduced. But the main funding will be the knockout/Heineken comp, which will run for three months and involve teams from all three countries. This comp will potentially have up to 30 teams in it. So pay TV will be interested.
What are the advantages? Bloody heaps!
It allows each country to run its rugby at a level affordable to that country, still maintains a competition that involves all three countries, brings back tribalism so supporters can support teams that they believe in and it helps streamline the seasons instead of the ridiculous setup we have now (look at next year’s Super draw and NZ’s ITM cup squeezed into seven weeks).
And what about the expansion possibilities! You could introduce teams from Japan, the Pacific Islands, USA – you name it – to the Heineken cup, without compromising your own national competitions.
I also believe that the level of rugby will still be attractive to fans and supporters. Budgets may be smaller than the current Super teams but as the competition grows so can budgets.
Right now I believe rugby union needs to take a step back, if it wants to move forward. The Ferrari is now 15 years old and the maintenance costs are killing rugby.
- Explore:
- Australian Rugby Union, Rugby Union
October 3rd 2012 @ 10:39am
Johnno said | October 3rd 2012 @ 10:39am | Report comment
.Reiality is in my view is this. NZ is too small to have an independent comp, that will make money.
-What is needed with this format and in general. either keep south africa, or scrap them. And go the way of the NRL, or netball.
-What i would do is have about 15 teams , and only about 3 in NZ.
October 3rd 2012 @ 10:53am
hog said | October 3rd 2012 @ 10:53am | Report comment
NZ currently run 5 super teams, so why can they not have 8-12 provicial teams on slightly smaller budgets, remember that the Heinekin cup comp will provide income (nz has 4 million people and rugby is a religion, Melbourne also has 4 million and funds 9 AFL teams).
October 3rd 2012 @ 11:07am
Leo said | October 3rd 2012 @ 11:07am | Report comment
Most of Melbourne AFL teams are based in one city, New Zealand rugby province are all over the country from down south to the top of the north island.
October 3rd 2012 @ 11:20am
hog said | October 3rd 2012 @ 11:20am | Report comment
So NZ has 8-10 Provincial teams linked to their closest cities eg: wgtn.auck,ham,chch, okay so bugets are less but remember the itm cup now has little value as 80% of NZ top players are not included under the new comp they will be.
October 3rd 2012 @ 11:44am
mace 22 said | October 3rd 2012 @ 11:44am | Report comment
The ITM cup might have little value in your eyes, but for new zealand super franchises it is a most valued part of their feeder system. I have watched most ITM cup games and they would rate up with or even better than any game played at super level. The defenses might not be as good but every team is trying to play a high tempo game, so you would expect the defenses to tire. I would think if every team at super level played to this game plan, you would see the same thing. So to say the comp has little value is missing the main reason the all blacks have the winning record the do.
October 3rd 2012 @ 12:06pm
abnutta said | October 3rd 2012 @ 12:06pm | Report comment
I think when hog says little value, it refers to the financial aspects.
I have no doubt that it is the mismanagement around Super Rugby/ITM cup that is sending the unions broke and keeping fans away.
October 3rd 2012 @ 12:10pm
hog said | October 3rd 2012 @ 12:10pm | Report comment
Mace i’m not devaluing the ITM cup this year the crowds are down, ratings are down. Why because the comp is being treated with contempt by the authorities.This is NZ traditional comp i want to see it treated with respect.
October 3rd 2012 @ 12:48pm
Pogo said | October 3rd 2012 @ 12:48pm | Report comment
As to the statement that 80% of NZ top players don’t play in the ITM cup I think you have your proportions reversed, basically only those who are currently playing in the ABs are excluded. All other super rugby players are expected to turn up for their provinces.
October 3rd 2012 @ 11:52am
Johnno said | October 3rd 2012 @ 11:52am | Report comment
coz hog thye will lose all the star players. Your competing on a global labour market.
October 3rd 2012 @ 12:02pm
abnutta said | October 3rd 2012 @ 12:02pm | Report comment
Johnno,
“What i would do is have about 15 teams , and only about 3 in NZ”
I’ve been on the roar since about mid 2010. The above quote may very well be the most absurd I’ve ever read on the roar. There may very well have been others to top it but I certainly can’t recall any.
Let me get this straight (because it sounds so outlandish).
You advocate a transtasman provincial/club RUGBY UNION competition with only about 3 in new Zealand and about 12 in Australia???
October 3rd 2012 @ 12:19pm
Johnno said | October 3rd 2012 @ 12:19pm | Report comment
abnutta yes and I will say why:
NRL only 1 kiwi team maybe 2nd
Australia has 22million, NZ 4.5 million
-I would free up the Aussy teams each team would be allowed to sign 15 kiwi players per team. So kiwis ar not missing out, just like in NRL where lots of kiwis in NRL play. So kiwi talant is still developed by Australians, plus the beinifts of more money so kiwi players stay in Southern Hemphishpere.
Aussy economy is bigger than NZ, just like Japan and French rugby much bigger economies abnutta.
October 3rd 2012 @ 12:26pm
Brett McKay said | October 3rd 2012 @ 12:26pm | Report comment
Johnno, if you’re freeing up the 12 Australian teams to sign up to 15 NZ players each, does that not highlight the stupidity of your 12/3 split??
October 3rd 2012 @ 1:02pm
Johnno said | October 3rd 2012 @ 1:02pm | Report comment
brett full time rugby squads are going to move to 40 players per squad. So lots of australians will get full time pro contracts , and pro training set ups to develop. It works in the NRL, lots of kiwis now. So it can maybe work in rugby. Reiality is i just can’t see an ITM cup surviving on it’s own , post super rugby if it were to end.
October 3rd 2012 @ 12:52pm
Melo-drama said | October 3rd 2012 @ 12:52pm | Report comment
Johnno, what is the point of trying to replicate the NRL, the NRL has been around in 1 way shape or form forever? That in itself is pretty silly, super rugby is fine at the moment probably the best Tier 2 Rugby Tournament in the world. Why doesn’t Australia just use their Super Franchises to have an internal 5 team 10 game round robin during the Invest RC? it gives the youth core more time to play together at the end of the season and can create some good rivalry between the states. I don’t think the give us all your players like the NRL because we dont have the talent is entirely fair…… you take New Zealands talent maker and make it Australian just because you think that thats fair to Australia due to code competitiveness……..
October 3rd 2012 @ 12:57pm
Pogo said | October 3rd 2012 @ 12:57pm | Report comment
“NRL only 1 kiwi team maybe 2nd”
Rugby league massively popular in QLD and NSW, somewhat popular in parts of NZ.
“Aussy economy is bigger than NZ”
But fixated on primarily on AFL and NRL, which is unlikely to change. Even if you conjure up 12 australian teams there will still be 15 (or more) NRL teams and 18 AFL teams competing with them for bums on seats, eyeballs on TVs and dollars in outstretched hands.
October 5th 2012 @ 7:20am
Lust said | October 5th 2012 @ 7:20am | Report comment
I got to admit but johnno i think i have to disagree with almost everything you have said.
Why would NZ want to go down the path of league ??? It doesn’t make any sense sending there players over to Australia to improve when there already being brought up in the best rugby culture in the world. Sending them to AUZ would be the worst possible idea.
1) Australia still cant scrum…… I mean this problem has been going on for over a decade. Its got to be down to junior coaching….. I don’t live in Australia but do people practice scrums in junior levels ??? Honestly i don’t get how this hasn’t been improved.
2) No matter how much you hear the players talk about “Maning up and showing less respect” before a big game you can still tell come 80 mins the next saturday it will be the same old story. Where as the All balcks just quietly go about there business during the week and come game time front up again everyone and then give some more back,
3) People blame the injury’s and don’t get me wrong i just get it as to why Australia so many but even with your best players you have won like 2 maybe 3 tests against the all blacks in recent years. One of those being Donalds miss touch deep inside the goal line….. I know he won the world cup but god he was shambolic for the all blacks at times.
I actually like Hog’s idea a lot, would be the best for all nations. The ITM cup already holds 13 teams, add in the 25 all blacks on tour leaves NZ with a much stronger league then if australia tried putting out 13 teams plus there internationals.
The idea of running a heineken cup style competitions after the individual domestic cup games/ june tests, would be were all the money would be at but the league structure given its proper time frame unlike the shame that is the ITM cup would be great to watch.
I remember watching some of the old air new Zealand game with the all blacks were great. Plus this would benefit Australia rugby more as they don’t even have a domestic cup…. heaven knows how they managed to stay top 3 in the world so long.
Hog send your idea to AUZ NZ SA RFU’s
October 3rd 2012 @ 12:29pm
dog said | October 3rd 2012 @ 12:29pm | Report comment
It does sound quite feasible to have the AB feeder system operating under a predominantly ARU (who are supposed to be a shambles at the moment) banner. Seems to be setting the AB’s up for a future gun fight, but only giving them a knife.
October 3rd 2012 @ 12:50pm
Pogo said | October 3rd 2012 @ 12:50pm | Report comment
“What i would do is have about 15 teams , and only about 3 in NZ.”
You guys struggle to come up with 2 good teams in a year and you want 12? Whichever three NZ teams you keep will come 1-2-3.
October 3rd 2012 @ 11:29pm
hoqni said | October 3rd 2012 @ 11:29pm | Report comment
The number of teams relates to how much interest is there to watch the teams. In % maybe more Kiwis watch rugby but in terms of numbers, you can improve a lot more with Aussies.
More interest, with more Oz teams, and more relaxation for Kiwi talent, can make a real rugby spectacle. Ifnyiu have such spectacle for 3 years, i betcha more 8 y o will want to play rugby – improving the quality of rugby in Oztralisian
October 3rd 2012 @ 11:29pm
hoqni said | October 3rd 2012 @ 11:29pm | Report comment
The number of teams relates to how much interest is there to watch the teams. In % maybe more Kiwis watch rugby but in terms of numbers, you can improve a lot more with Aussies.
More interest, with more Oz teams, and more relaxation for Kiwi talent, can make a real rugby spectacle. Ifnyiu have such spectacle for 3 years, i betcha more 8 y o will want to play rugby – improving the quality of rugby in Oztralisian
October 3rd 2012 @ 11:36am
redsnut said | October 3rd 2012 @ 11:36am | Report comment
Hog, I like the way that you are thinking – especially the FTA component.
If the ARU would only stop being “dog in the manger” about having so much control, and allow private financial involvement, then that could also free up some finance for another go at an ARC type comp again.
If my memory is right (although at my age it could be failing
) isn’t there a private finance involvement in the Rebels?
Even if it were 50/50 the ARU could save an awful lot of money by going down that path.
October 3rd 2012 @ 12:35pm
hog said | October 3rd 2012 @ 12:35pm | Report comment
Thanks redsnut, yes their is private ownership to an extent with the rebels and going forward i see that as important if you are going to set up a comp with say 8-10 club teams in AUS, not exactly the same but you could see simularities with the A-League structure.
October 3rd 2012 @ 12:48pm
Pogo said | October 3rd 2012 @ 12:48pm | Report comment
I’ll say what I said last time, the ITM cup (NPC) is played when it is because club rugby is played in the first half of the year. Why would we take out the top tier of rugby and move the 2nd so that it overlaps the third?
October 3rd 2012 @ 1:01pm
hog said | October 3rd 2012 @ 1:01pm | Report comment
I understand your point pogo.
But to me the top tier of rugby is killing everything else and is not in the long run a sustainable model. In Autsralia Club rugby is basically bankrupt, this will allow club rugby to go back to being amateur and what i am really proposing is for the 2nd tier to replace the top tier, however i do accept that club rugby will have to be played along side the national comps.
October 3rd 2012 @ 12:56pm
dog said | October 3rd 2012 @ 12:56pm | Report comment
FREE TO AIR COVERAGE! ABC to peak the com’s interest.
October 3rd 2012 @ 12:56pm
Ra said | October 3rd 2012 @ 12:56pm | Report comment
johnno, the kiwis believe we have the best provincial rugby competition in the world, the best super rugby team in the competition, the best 7s rugby team and the best girls rugby team, under 20s and schoolboys rugby teams in the world – Ozzie equals all of that in rugby league. There is no way the NRL is going to down size to suit the Kiwis, so tell me why the Kiwis should disadvantage our rugby status to promote Oziie rugby? What you will have here in Oz, under your systems will be 100s of Kiwis playing for bigger money in Ozzie in front of 1000s of ex pat die heart kiwis. The only way that will help Ozzie rugby is you employ a league like state of origin competition and get ricky stuart and big mal to offer them big money to switch allegiences – but i still think of that poor kid who grew up catching yabbies in a creek outside of orange and dreamed of pulling on the Oziie jumper one day, but some big lug of a kiwi is wearing it – cause he can !!!! How is that helping Ozzie rugby, and Kiwi league????
October 3rd 2012 @ 1:04pm
Johnno said | October 3rd 2012 @ 1:04pm | Report comment
RA coz you don’t have a big enough economy just like Fiji/Samoa/Tonga. Much bigger than those but not the same capital or money as OZ. Deal with it. We will stay pay good money for kiwi players, and kiwi coaches will help aussy rugby union. and all will stay in SH rugby so you will be fine.
What would you rather lose all your coaches to Japan/French rugby/South Africa which is happening now anyway.
I don’t believe in protectionism in the extreme, i believe in a lot of imports try and make Trans-Tasman rugby the best club comp in the world. The NRL has opened it’s borders to foreign imports (England/NZ/Fiji/Samoa/Tonga), and Trans tasman rugby can do the same in a structure like this. But limit it a bit but be pretty free market. And lots of aussies would still get oppututunities just like kiwis get in league in the NRL.
But basically the best aussies get the chances not the duds who are making money out of protectionism business models now. Sorry i want players like Berrick Barnes and Dean Mumm to be put under massive pressure for spots RA. And not all kiwis ar brilliant at rugby , just look at some of your rejects like Mike Harris, Quade, etc.
October 3rd 2012 @ 1:15pm
Melo-drama said | October 3rd 2012 @ 1:15pm | Report comment
Johnno how about you deal with your lack of talent and stop trying to steal NZ’s
October 3rd 2012 @ 1:41pm
Johnno said | October 3rd 2012 @ 1:41pm | Report comment
Melo-drama. I am not stealing NZ talent. One can call it big brother helping little brother, I am keeping NZ talent in the SHemphisphere not going to French rugby, or Japan rugby .
October 3rd 2012 @ 2:01pm
hog said | October 3rd 2012 @ 2:01pm | Report comment
Johnno, if we need to keep players in the southern hemispere then i see my proposal as an answer right now between nz.and aus we have 10 professional teams that will double to about 20 in the new comp.
October 3rd 2012 @ 2:09pm
M.O.C. said | October 3rd 2012 @ 2:09pm | Report comment
Johnno, looking at the state of world rugby at present, do you honestly think that “little brother” needs “big brothers” help?
October 3rd 2012 @ 2:12pm
Johnno said | October 3rd 2012 @ 2:12pm | Report comment
Not right now, but long term yes . Global rugby is booming and developing NZ , is going to bleed more coaches worldwide even more than they are now over the next 20 years. NZ rugby will always stay strong, but they need better business models to stay strong otherwise they may turn into larger
Fiji/Samoa/Tonga’s – Just there to be picked off by other countries.
October 3rd 2012 @ 2:30pm
M.O.C. said | October 3rd 2012 @ 2:30pm | Report comment
You clearly are not from NZ Johnno.
October 3rd 2012 @ 6:23pm
Ra said | October 3rd 2012 @ 6:23pm | Report comment
hmmm I actually have a lot of time for both Harris and Cooper. Harris is steel, and Cooper is silk. A great combination.
October 3rd 2012 @ 1:15pm
richard said | October 3rd 2012 @ 1:15pm | Report comment
Ra , that is exactly what oz would do, just like they are doing in league with SOO. I have seen johnno go down this road before, we (nz) having to undermine our comp, for oz’s benefit.I have had this out with johnno before, but you will find he won’t let this go; its almost as if some aussies think we are here solely to serve the interests of oz rugby!
October 3rd 2012 @ 6:53pm
Ra said | October 3rd 2012 @ 6:53pm | Report comment
Yeah Rich, I have said in here a few times now and Aussie writers don’t seem to read too good. The best way of improving Ozzie rugby is for the ARU to negotiate to have at least two club sides, one in Sydney and one in Brisbane join the ITM competition the same way that the Warriors are in the NRL, and the Breakers and Wellington are in the basketball and soccer competitions respectively on this side of the ditch. They should also have their next tier of players infiltrate our club system at home, especially their tight-five players, and learn their tight forward craft. Nothing too much wrong with Ozzie outside backs; put the Ozzie backline behind an All Blacks forward pack and they will run riot. But their tight-five can do with lots of help “in depth” i.e. at all levels, and that could happen with involvement in tougher competitions. Weakening the Kiwi competition to build up Ozzie one just won’t happen johnno, and if Ozzie rugby want Kiwi coaches, to build the game at home; then there is a competitive market out there, and the strong Ozzie dollar is as good in Kiwi pockets as in anyone elses.
I have to agree with some peoples concerns about the low numbers watching ITM Cup at home though Richard, but that could be factored in by a number of things; there is a lot of viewer choice around now-a-days; there is the saturation factor, but from what im seeing from my arm chair here in Oz, the quality of rugby is quite outstanding – damn Waikato party-poopers !!!
October 3rd 2012 @ 2:17pm
James said | October 3rd 2012 @ 2:17pm | Report comment
Not gonna happen, anyboy who knows anything about NZ rugby understands that the ITM Cup is on struggle street and arguably in a termial decline. There are those who are a week bit deluded about the situation, and will talk about ‘provincial pride’ and the like, but when only 8k turn up to watch Canterbury v Auckland, you know that the situation is pretty bad. If people really cared about their local unions, they would show up regardless of the competition format or the players on the field. But they don’t.
Provincial rugby is dying, taking away Super Rugby is not going to see NZers suddenly fall back in love with the ITM Cup. A trans-tasman competition with the 10 NZ/Aus teams is a better solution.
October 3rd 2012 @ 2:24pm
chuck said | October 3rd 2012 @ 2:24pm | Report comment
Your dreaming Johnno your forgetting I.T.M. belongs to the people of N.Z. and N.Z.R.U. will never agree too 3 teams from New Zealand when they have a huge rugby infrastructure in place from schools too the international level too take into consideration before going off in a journey like that.
A/B brand sell its self . and will keep on backing the I.T.M.thats where the next batch of all black are coming from Australia has too find
it own way.what the N.Z.R.U.has is a goverment that will support them in torrid times.
October 3rd 2012 @ 2:27pm
Johnno said | October 3rd 2012 @ 2:27pm | Report comment
Chuck well we aussies are bigger . Just going to have to face financial facts. And if you have such confidence in your government they didn’t chip in to keep SBW. He would of been perfect investment, for spending only $1-$2 million a year on taxpayers money, he would have been massive good investment to keep in NZ all the new players he would of attracted to rugby.
October 3rd 2012 @ 2:32pm
M.O.C. said | October 3rd 2012 @ 2:32pm | Report comment
You don’t get it do you Johnno – NZ is not too upset at losing SBW – believe it or not, there are plenty more SBWs waiting in the wings.
October 3rd 2012 @ 2:49pm
allblackfan said | October 3rd 2012 @ 2:49pm | Report comment
As an example, Johnno.
There’s a block called Jason Emery playing for Manawatu who I believed has been signed for Highlanders next year. Only out of school this year and he is, I believe, a couson of Stacey Jones. He’s looking sharp at the moment and could do well at the next level.
October 3rd 2012 @ 8:29pm
Emric said | October 3rd 2012 @ 8:29pm | Report comment
how about Ardie Savea
October 4th 2012 @ 5:35pm
chuck said | October 4th 2012 @ 5:35pm | Report comment
Johnno
S.B.W had no intention in staying with N.Z.R.U.and why should the government prop a indervigil hes your perfect investment,
We aussie are bigger, then whats your problem!!!! .will I think the I.T.M. comp is doing fine in attracting player with out S.B.W.
N.Z.R.U. put a contract in front of SBW and said this is what you worth,and said he ws commited too going back to N,R.L on a hand shake Good luck too him and you call that a good a investment when his heart is else where !!!yea right!!
October 3rd 2012 @ 2:26pm
Grumpy Wee Scotsman said | October 3rd 2012 @ 2:26pm | Report comment
Here here Dog (!?!)
I am an avid rugby fan that talks about rugby to anyone that cares to listen. If we keep televising international matches at ridiculous times of the night on free to air television (when youngsters are tucked up in bed), the interest in rugby will soon die out.
Same goes for the Super comp, I attended the Rebels’ home games last year and went over to NZ for the RWC 2011 but did not get to see anything else as I cannot justify to my missus re the cost of taking out a subscription to watch games on pay tv.
October 3rd 2012 @ 3:55pm
dog said | October 3rd 2012 @ 3:55pm | Report comment
Netball saved my super rugby bacon. I missed years of rugby due to the total lack of interest from the commercial channels. Then Netball sold their rights to Fox. I was ordered to get Pay TV, ASAP!
I can’t understand why this is not a bigger issue. To have Joe Sportsfan flick through the channels and land on rugby, he may take an interest. If it’s not there, it’s not going to happen.
October 3rd 2012 @ 2:27pm
Melo-drama said | October 3rd 2012 @ 2:27pm | Report comment
I would see in Rugby terms as New Zealand (Big brother) and Australia being (little brother), I think in terms of Australia’s national competition they have already tried to create a National comp and they pulled the plug after a season due to “apparently the guy living next door isn’t really seen as a hero” mentality of Australians but you can’t blame them for trying. ARU needs to think outside the box, come up with something different with what they do have rather then creating something new and expecting people to tag along.
Nothing is going to be easy but what the ARU should be doing is planning long term and taking the steps needed to get their rather then handing the money over for pointless investments, and then have the attitude oh it was a failure……. I dont think Australia and NZ creating the SANZAR coup for a NZ/Aust comp and not including SA is going to go down well with our South African friends, they’ll just shoot off back to the Northern Hemisphere and beg to be chucked into the 6 Nations.
I dont think anyone in NZ is going to let Australians compete for the ‘Log’ (Ranfurly Shield) so what happens to that when you propose a joint competition??? You cant let all that history go to waste…
October 3rd 2012 @ 2:35pm
hog said | October 3rd 2012 @ 2:35pm | Report comment
Yes James the ITM cup is on struggle street , because it has been treated like S__t for the last 15 years nz loves it’s rugby but it has so much of it shoved down it’s throat it i amazed that anybody still turns up you cannot just keep churning out more product without people eventually turning of. I think kiwi’s will support their provinces especially if they know that after the ITM cup they will be involved in a super style comp afterwards.
October 3rd 2012 @ 3:27pm
AndyS said | October 3rd 2012 @ 3:27pm | Report comment
That is a huge all in bet though Hog. If they don’t, or the supporters are even a bit slow in coming to it, the money dries up and the players leave. Once that happens, you can’t just go back. The contract would be for 5 years and, even if you tried to re-establish what you had, the players are no longer around and you won’t get paid. We’ll all be well down the drainhole.
The approach has to be slow and step-wise, feeling our way from where we are to where we think we need to be. If it turns out we are wrong and need to adjust the plan, we can’t afford to do too much damage in the meantime. The idea of completely scrapping what we have and starting from a blank piece of paper is simply not a realistic option.
October 3rd 2012 @ 4:00pm
hog said | October 3rd 2012 @ 4:00pm | Report comment
I accept your point Andy yes their is an element of risk, but i will make the point i don’t see it as just scrapping super rugby you are merging it within the current domestic comps (yes australia has to start one) but everyone on this site knows that Aus needs a national comp, i don’t see it as staring from a blank piece of paper more the current comp evolving to a more sustainable and flexible comp with a brighter future.
Look at it this way in 2016 the new rights are up for grabs in its current form how will super generate any more revenue.
October 4th 2012 @ 12:26am
AndyS said | October 4th 2012 @ 12:26am | Report comment
I’m not entirely sure, but I remain to be convinced that it will be by cold swapping the Super Rugby teams out for ITMC/CC/ARC teams and suddenly reducing the standard of both derbies and international match-ups. If it happens, it will be by adding a team each for the next couple of contract negotiations, allowing them to settle in and hopefully identify new talent/attract a fan base. The ITMC/CC could then eventually be knocked quietly on the head and the Super teams perhaps renamed. It is another more measured route to exactly the same place as you are proposing, as having Canterbury replace the Crusaders would only see the same players playing regardless of their current provincial affiliation. More to the point, any player in a Championship or Heartland province would only have to move to an “ITM Cup” province if they wanted to progress their career. Imagining that they would remain genuinely provincial sides is ridiculous – it will be exactly like now, except that the top players will never again be seen back in the provinces that developed them.
October 4th 2012 @ 12:16pm
abnutta said | October 4th 2012 @ 12:16pm | Report comment
AndyS,
“Imagining that they would remain genuinely provincial sides is ridiculous – it will be exactly like now, except that the top players will never again be seen back in the provinces that developed them.”
You seem to be coming from the premise that Provincial representation in the ITM cup is as “pure” now as it has always been. This is exactly correct… and cold swapping Super Rugby teams with provinces won’t change a thing in reality.
All through history, for every great All Black that can be termed a “provincial stalwart” (Gary Knight, Colin Meads, Sid Going, Brian Lochore etc) there is and has been great All Blacks that have plaayed for a province(s) that didn’t develop them…
George Nepia, Sir Wilson Whineray, Ian Kirkpatrick, Kel Tremain, Ian MacRae, Bruce Robertson etc. The great centre Bert Cooke won the Ranfurly Shield with four different provinces.
October 4th 2012 @ 3:59pm
AndyS said | October 4th 2012 @ 3:59pm | Report comment
Understood, but my concern was more about the damage to the underlying competitions. Players are currently selected into the ABs purely on form from Super rugby. Once that is over, all the other players currently return to their province to play. Many of those will be going back to Championship and Heartland teams, not just Premiership teams. By my estimate, even eight or so of the current All Blacks play for Championship teams.
All that stops if the Premiership replaces Super rugby. There will be no professionals in the Championship or Heartland teams, they will all play for the Premiership teams. So will all the All Blacks. The Premiership teams will actually represent their provinces to precisely the same extent that the Super teams currently do. But more importantly, a huge gap will open up between the Premiership and the other competitions which will become as relevant to the NZ system as Perth or Melbourne club rugby is in Australia (i.e they’ll merely feed players to teams located elsewhere). It actually heads in precisely the opposite direction from strengthening the provincial competitions.