Australia and New Zealand need to force SANZAAR’s Super Rugby hand now

Brett McKay Columnist

By Brett McKay, Brett McKay is a Roar Expert

Tagged:
 ,

369 Have your say

Popular article! 6,890 reads

    Nearly two months ago, when Andrew Forrest made his grand on-field entry into the biggest and worst-handled saga to have plagued Australian rugby since professionalism, I wrote in this very column that SANZAAR and the Super Rugby competition were at the crossroads.

    The ARU was still battling with which team it could or couldn’t cut, and South Africa were on the verge of playing their long-threatened and oft-hinted card, which ultimately saw the Cheetahs and Kings make their northern hemisphere debut in the now PRO14 competition a fortnight ago.

    At the time, there were strong whispers the Sharks might join them, and the Lions and Bulls have been mentioned at different points subsequently, too.

    It was becoming increasingly obvious that SANZAAR’s grip on professional provincial rugby in the southern hemisphere, and Super Rugby as the vehicle that drives that, was being heavily eroded.

    “As an organisation, SANZAAR needs to give serious consideration as to how Super Rugby looks going forward,” I wrote.

    “That was always going to happen heading into negotiations for the broadcast deals from 2021 and beyond, but the Super Rugby landscape is changing so rapidly right now, that those discussions can’t wait that long. If two South African teams are already leaving and a third is giving it serious consideration, how confident can we be that the competition will still have a South African presence come the 2020 season playoffs?”

    Quite incredibly, the response from SANZAAR since that time has been silence. Eardrum bursting, mind blowing, jaw-droppingly frustrating silence.

    Not even the confirmation that the competition has now achieved its stated goal of a 15-team competition for 2018 has drawn a response. No ‘best of luck in the north’ to the Cheetahs and Kings, no ‘thanks for your valued contribution’ to the Force. Not a single word.

    It’s as incredible as it is dumbfounding.

    Meanwhile, the latest development on Forrest’s IndoPac competition front is that the Western Australian billionaire and ARU officials, including chairman Cameron Clyne, met over the weekend, with Wayne Smith in The Australian reporting that a “clear intention that the interests of Australian rugby can be best served by the two parties working together” now exists. This is good news.

    The IndoPac plans as announced last week, let’s be honest, has hairs all over it. The devil is in the detail, as the saying goes, but currently, the detail is more than a bit scant.

    However, if that planning is now heading toward an IndoPac flavour to an expanded National Rugby Championship, as is being reported, then now we’re actually looking in a direction that is starting to make sense.

    And following on from my point late last week, if World Rugby regional development funding can be secured for the Asian and Pacific region involvement – as secured the Fijian Drua’s NRC inclusion – then all the better.

    Finally, some serious thought is being given about what direction the game in this part of the world will take.

    SANZAAR need to be similarly proactive, and if they won’t take the initiative, then Australia and New Zealand need to force their hand and seek a resolution and vision for the future sooner rather than later.

    None of the questions from two months ago have been answered, but the urgency to do so is increasing. And furthermore, the list of questions is growing.

    Is Super Rugby in its current form nearing its natural end of life?

    Will more South African sides drop out of Super Rugby before the end of this current (new) broadcast deal? Could the Western Force be rapidly reassembled to fill any suck gap?

    Does South Africa want to remain in Super Rugby? Why have South African teams now contacted Forrest about his IndoPac competition?

    (And on that, how much bigger can the IndoPac footprint become before all the same timezone and disconnection issues that have plagued Super Rugby transfer across?)

    How do the broadcasters want the competition to look from 2021?

    Will ten teams either side of the Tasman become the foundation for a stream-lined IndoPac-Super Rugby competition?

    Does SANZAAR even know what it wants?!?

    It’s clear the Australian Rugby Union and New Zealand Rugby must take the lead, because they are the countries with the most to lose from a dissolution of Super Rugby.

    Will the NRC in Australia and the NPC in New Zealand be enough to satisfy the provincial rugby appetite locally if Super Rugby falls over? I’m not sure it will.

    A franchise competition sitting above the local game will still be required, and what’s more, that is more likely to bring in the sort of traditional and digital broadcast revenue required to keep the best players in this part of the world.

    The only thing certain in all this is that the longer SANZAAR sits on its hands and does nothing, the further Super Rugby will sink and significantly more likely leading players will be lost to Europe and Japan.

    The silence cannot continue. It’s only the future of the professional game in the south waiting for answers.

    Brett McKay
    Brett McKay

    Brett McKay is one of The Roar's good news stories and has been a rugby and cricket expert for the site since July 2009. Brett is an international and Super Rugby commentator for ABC Grandstand radio, has commentated on the Australian Under-20s Championships and National Rugby Championship live stream coverage, and has written for magazines and websites in Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and the UK. He tweets from @BMcSport.

    Have Your Say



    If not logged in, please enter your name and email before submitting your comment. Please review our comments policy before posting on the Roar.

    Oldest | Newest | Most Recent

    The Crowd Says (369)

    • Roar Guru

      September 12th 2017 @ 6:40am
      Machpants said | September 12th 2017 @ 6:40am | ! Report

      “SANZAAR need to be similarly proactive”

      “Does SANZAAR even know what it wants”

      It maybe that I misunderstand what SANZAAR is, but it is not a decision making or leading type body. It is nothing more than the organising body behind international rugby on behalf of four independent Unions. The Unions need to make decisions, push forward plans etc. SANZAAR may then announce the plans, but its role is to turn the plans in to practise and run them.

      So again, unless I totally misunderstand how it works, SANZAAR had no role let alone right, to make plans. Like any good chief executive to the board they can make suggestions, but never in public and it is upto the board (the Unions) to make the decisions.

      So all this rage against SANZAAR demanding one Ozzie team to be cut is misplaced, the decision was made by all four Unions with the ARU having a veto. Asking SANZAAR to get it’s A into G is misdirected, the Unions need to get their heads together fast and decide where SANZAAR is going. Then announcements can be made to the public.

      • September 12th 2017 @ 6:59am
        cbeb said | September 12th 2017 @ 6:59am | ! Report

        Agree wholeheartedly. SANZAR is purely an administrative arm of the 3 unions that control it. Its up to the ARU, NZRU and the South Africans to come up with a strategy that will help the game as a whole.

        • September 12th 2017 @ 8:03am
          Bakkies said | September 12th 2017 @ 8:03am | ! Report

          Majority of the time they aren’t on the same page.

      • Columnist

        September 12th 2017 @ 8:14am
        Brett McKay said | September 12th 2017 @ 8:14am | ! Report

        No, you’re bang on the money, Mach, SANZAAR is indeed just an administrative body, but they’re also the body to bring the national unions together to answer these questions.

        SANZAAR certainly start the negotiations with the broadcasters though, and that can still happen. The broadcasters will play as much part in the future shaping of the competition..

        • September 12th 2017 @ 11:45am
          Perthstayer said | September 12th 2017 @ 11:45am | ! Report

          Brett – every day the SR saga continues is another day closer to broadcasters having complete control.

          Broadcasters smelt the Unions/SAANZAR’s blood before us. They will have post 2020/201 strategies in place if the Unions fail SR, their respective teams, and the rugby public.

          • Columnist

            September 12th 2017 @ 12:13pm
            Brett McKay said | September 12th 2017 @ 12:13pm | ! Report

            Stayer, if it came to the point where the broadcasters were somewhat united on a product and could present that to SANZAAR and say, ‘this is what we want’, I don’t necessarily think that would be a bad thing.

            That’s over-simplifying things, obviously, but if it can streamline the process, then that’s got to be beneficial, no?

            • September 12th 2017 @ 12:27pm
              Perthstayer said | September 12th 2017 @ 12:27pm | ! Report

              The point I meant to allude to was that if Broadcasters get near total control then the Unions will see their “power” depleted. So yet another reason they need to get the house in order, pronto, as your article rightly suggests.

              Would losing that power be a bad thing? Like you in this circumstance I am not sure. One risk is broadcasters invest less in second tier countries.

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 12:33pm
                Train Without A Station said | September 12th 2017 @ 12:33pm | ! Report

                The broadcasters have had control since the day the players needed to be paid.

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 1:00pm
                The Neutral View From Sweden said | September 12th 2017 @ 1:00pm | ! Report

                One risk is broadcasters invest less in second tier countries.

                Compared to whom? Sanzaar? ARU, NZR, and SARU?

              • September 12th 2017 @ 1:11pm
                Perthstayer said | September 12th 2017 @ 1:11pm | ! Report

                Neutral – You are correct, none of them have.

                But, if an Indo Pacific league of a type being floated/ or guessed at being floated were to succeed then so would coverage, which grows $$’s.

                This is all baby steps closer towards some 2nd/3rd tier countries moving up the rungs.

                And, most exciting thing of all, is someone told me babies grow into adults 🙂

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 1:35pm
                The Neutral View From Sweden said | September 12th 2017 @ 1:35pm | ! Report

                I am with you here Perthsayer.

                And I believe there is way forward here.
                Set up the Indo-Pacific comp now, but do it together with Sanzaar. But the aim for the comp should be get integrated in SR 2021.
                Basically building a new conference for three years before throwing them to the wolves in SR.
                And if SA jumps ship completely, the need for new markets will be massive for NZ and OZ.

            • September 12th 2017 @ 3:34pm
              terry tavita said | September 12th 2017 @ 3:34pm | ! Report

              I don’t think you understand how things work in china..what the govt pushes the govt gets..recently it divested US$100 million into rugby development..

              • September 12th 2017 @ 3:47pm
                terry tavita said | September 12th 2017 @ 3:47pm | ! Report

                oops..dunno how this post ended up in this thread..

              • September 12th 2017 @ 4:08pm
                Spencer said | September 12th 2017 @ 4:08pm | ! Report

                The GoC did not invest USD100 million into Rugby. Alibaba (Jack Ma) did in conjuction with WR. The Ministry of Sport will influence how that money is spent. As an example our social Rugby club in China will get USD15k this year.

            • September 13th 2017 @ 10:08am
              woodart said | September 13th 2017 @ 10:08am | ! Report

              the idea of broadcasters being united as to what they want spread over different countries is as difficult as the different rugby unions being united. with the possible entry of amazon into sports broadcasting , that may be more difficult.

        • September 12th 2017 @ 4:07pm
          Bakkies said | September 12th 2017 @ 4:07pm | ! Report

          I would prefer to see Sanzaar binned and a new organisation put in to its place. New voting system, if you want to leave you have to provide two years notice and a new uniform commercial structure which will see competition wide sponsorship deals not the current dog’s breakfast where each nation has to sign their own naming rights sponsor.

      • September 12th 2017 @ 10:07am
        henry said | September 12th 2017 @ 10:07am | ! Report

        It is nice to come somewhere on the internet where people post sane , well reasoned comments.
        Thanks.
        I too am unsure of the future of Super Rugby .
        As a kiwi, in purely selfish terms, Super Rugby keeps our top players in New Zealand. Without the South African money, I don’t know if that will continue.
        The Mitre 10 Cup and NRC don’t generate enough money. South Africa are looking at big TV money from Europe.

        I don’t believe South Africa are going to dump Super Rugby. The Cheetahs and Kings were the 2 weakest teams, and the Top 14 is a 2nd tier competition, and I see plenty of problems with jet lag, TV viewership, and playing in the South African heat. I’m not sure I see the “win” for the European teams either, they know the 2 RSA teams were the cellar-dwellers; where is the win , 12 hours of travel to go and play in South Africa?

        • September 12th 2017 @ 10:44am
          Bakkies said | September 12th 2017 @ 10:44am | ! Report

          ‘The Cheetahs and Kings were the 2 weakest teams, and the Top 14 is a 2nd tier competition, and I see plenty of problems with jet lag, TV viewership, and playing in the South African heat. I’m not sure I see the “win” for the European teams either, they know the 2 RSA teams were the cellar-dwellers; where is the win , 12 hours of travel to go and play in South Africa?’

          Those questions have already been answered.

          – The Cheetahs and Kings have very few matches scheduled in December, January and February due to the not the Heineken Cup Sponsored by Heineken and Six Nations windows
          – You don’t get jet lag when the time difference is only one or two hours.
          – Super Rugby is also a 2nd tier competition
          – The European teams are getting a break from the European winter and more money. The teams that have to play both SA teams are playing them away in a two week block
          – The Cheetahs have already lured more sponsors since the switch
          – The SA fans want to see European opposition play and they get to see their players who have left Super Rugby to play in Europe
          – Lions and Sharks want out and the remaining two are struggling financially.
          – SA tv viewers get to see the matches in their afternoon or in prime time rather than the morning. Friday games from Aus and NZ are during working hours

          • Roar Guru

            September 12th 2017 @ 1:01pm
            The Neutral View From Sweden said | September 12th 2017 @ 1:01pm | ! Report

            Spot on Bakkies. Spot on.

          • September 12th 2017 @ 1:30pm
            Bakkies said | September 12th 2017 @ 1:30pm | ! Report

            The Kings weren’t also one of the two weakest SA teams this year.

            • Roar Rookie

              September 12th 2017 @ 9:00pm
              Huw Tindall said | September 12th 2017 @ 9:00pm | ! Report

              Kings and Cheetahs teams have been gutted post Super Rugby. Essentially different teams. The Pro 14 results are proving that. Could be a very short lived experiment if they both continue to get belted by Pro 14 teams which are mostly all a step below AVIVA Premiership already.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 10:33am
                Bakkies said | September 13th 2017 @ 10:33am | ! Report

                Are you talking about the same Aviva Premiership that consists of teams that went ten years without winning the Heineken Cup?

          • September 12th 2017 @ 1:39pm
            Tahman said | September 12th 2017 @ 1:39pm | ! Report

            So Bakkies why did the Kings lose 90% of their players and 50% of their coaching staff?

            • Roar Guru

              September 12th 2017 @ 1:57pm
              The Neutral View From Sweden said | September 12th 2017 @ 1:57pm | ! Report

              Tahman, have you ever bother to read anything about how the Kings came about, who owns them and how they have been administered?

              Well, I know the answer to that already.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 3:32pm
                DavSA said | September 12th 2017 @ 3:32pm | ! Report

                Am I missing something here ? This weekend watching a bit of Currie cup I noticed Chris Cloete from The Kings turning out for The Pumas . Thought he was off to Europe . The European season has begun . Also the SA teams in The Pro 14 at this stage truly do not belong . They are at best bottom end Currie cup level . The Kings look closer to varsity cup level.

                I like the idea of SA cross pollination into other competitions but not if 2nd rate teams are sent in to be embarrassed . I can assure all that viewers this side …like anywhere really will switch off.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 3:43pm
                Tahman said | September 12th 2017 @ 3:43pm | ! Report

                Not So Neutral From Sweden Guru whats your point?

                Bakkies was saying how great an opportunity the Pro 12 is and how the other clubs want to follow.

                So my question to him remains with you.

                If its so great why did they lose 90% of their players especially when this year was the Kings best year ever. They had finally started to see all their hard work come through.

                But please feel free to tell me this great insight into how they were formed and how they are administered and whatever it has to do with my question….

                All those reasons Bakkies came up with a second fiddle to the fact there is more money in the TV rights between Europe and SA.

                Please don’t try and argue that the Pro 12 is a superior competition to the Super Rugby, if thats the case then you’re dreaming.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 4:11pm
                FunBus said | September 12th 2017 @ 4:11pm | ! Report

                I don’t think Bakkies was arguing that the ‘Pro-12’ is a higher level of competition than SR overall, but the Kiwi teams and one or two of the SA teams currently carry virtually all the weight in terms of quality.
                Put it this way, ‘tahman’ in a hypothetical world in which the Tahs of the most recent season played in the current ‘pro 12/14’ I’d expect them to finish around mid-table.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 4:14pm
                Tahman said | September 12th 2017 @ 4:14pm | ! Report

                Yeah Funbus and the Tahs had a woeful, terrible, disgraceful season and put that at mid table in the Pro 12. Whats that saying about the Pro 12

              • September 12th 2017 @ 4:53pm
                FunBus said | September 12th 2017 @ 4:53pm | ! Report

                What it says about the pro 12 is that it is a very viable alternative for ALL the SA teams – the union in the SH with the money. Until fairly recently that wasn’t accepted on here, with lots of talk about any SR team winning the Pro 12 easily.
                The SH Union with the biggest bucks is on an inexorable march northwards. There needs to be some serious thinking in both Oz and NZ, but particularly Oz, about what that means.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 4:16pm
                Tahman said | September 12th 2017 @ 4:16pm | ! Report

                Funbus for the record Bakkies said, ” Super Rugby is also a 2nd tier competition”

              • September 12th 2017 @ 4:20pm
                Bakkies said | September 12th 2017 @ 4:20pm | ! Report

                ‘I noticed Chris Cloete from The Kings turning out for The Pumas . Thought he was off to Europe’

                Will go to Munster after the end of the Currie Cup which is not uncommon. The Kiwi players are similar with the NPC. Ranger is still playing NPC and will head to La Rochelle after it has finished.

                ‘If its so great why did they lose 90% of their players especially when this year was the Kings best year ever. They had finally started to see all their hard work come through.

                But please feel free to tell me this great insight into how they were formed and how they are administered and whatever it has to do with my question….’

                Due to the previous maladministration by the Watson led EPRU the union was basically bankrupt before they got back in to Super Rugby last year. SARU have taken control of their affairs. Coach had to sign players on short term contracts until they got their house in order. They have a new CEO who looks like he knows what he is doing.

                There was an article out a few days ago about them trying to get control back from SARU.

                http://www.sarugbymag.co.za/blog/details/running-of-ep-rugby-remains-unresolved

                Like Australia with the uncertainty surrounding Super Rugby a number of Cheetahs and Kings players jumped ship well before the rumours about them going to the Pro 12 started.

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 4:21pm
                The Neutral View From Sweden said | September 12th 2017 @ 4:21pm | ! Report

                Come on DavSA

                So far – and for so more time – everything is stacked against the two Saffa teams in Pro14. And the top teams in Pro14 are very good teams, let’s not forget that.

                To see big improvements I think you have to wait 2-3 years.
                For smaller improvements, I think you just have to wait for this weekend when both teams play at home for the first time.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 4:27pm
                Bakkies said | September 12th 2017 @ 4:27pm | ! Report

                ‘Funbus for the record Bakkies said, ” Super Rugby is also a 2nd tier competition”’

                All comps that sit straight under test Rugby are tier two competitions. NPC, B & I Cup, Currie Cup, NRC are tier three as they are the next development level.

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 4:29pm
                The Neutral View From Sweden said | September 12th 2017 @ 4:29pm | ! Report

                Okay, Tahman. I give you the short version. If you want details, I suggest you google.

                The Kings are not an old Saffa team. They were created by SARU in 2009 to grow rugby in the Eastern Cape region to hopefully speed the development of non-white players.

                The Kings are not part the Currie Cup et al. so SR (before) and Pro14 (now) is all they got.

                Almost all the players that played for the Kings in SR 2017 (and that plays for them in Pro14 now) are there on short term contracts or on loan from other clubs.

                When the rumors started that the Kings would be cut – and a future in Pro14 was just a wild rumor that no-one really thought would happen – players and coaches looked for other options.

          • September 12th 2017 @ 3:36pm
            Nicolai said | September 12th 2017 @ 3:36pm | ! Report

            Bakkies — TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOUR ASSESSMENT!!!

            • September 12th 2017 @ 4:24pm
              Bakkies said | September 12th 2017 @ 4:24pm | ! Report

              The biggest card not mentioned yet is the potential inclusion of the SA teams in to the EPCR competitions.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 4:57pm
                FunBus said | September 12th 2017 @ 4:57pm | ! Report

                Absolutely. Can you imagine a Saracens versus Bulls, Stormers or Lions Semi- Final at prime-time for TV in SA?

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 5:24pm
                The Neutral View From Sweden said | September 12th 2017 @ 5:24pm | ! Report

                I say it is second biggest game-changer Bakkies (and I believe it is in the cards post-2020, too much money for both SA and the Europe to be earned from that).

                The really big one is if SA would be invited to the 6N. That would seriously change things.

                Had a long discussion about this last week with the editor of SA Rugby Mag and a lot of regular Saffa rugby fans on SA Rugby Mags website. I would say about 75 percent of the Saffa fans are positive towards the idea, so anyone who thinks that SA always will stay with NZ could be in for a brutal wake up soon.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 5:39pm
                FunBus said | September 12th 2017 @ 5:39pm | ! Report

                I think that 75% would increase, Neutral, if some guarantee of, for example, bi-annual 3 test tours back and forth to NZ could be confirmed.

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 5:50pm
                The Neutral View From Sweden said | September 12th 2017 @ 5:50pm | ! Report

                I think you are right FunBus.

                That idea of a bi-annual three test tours back and forth to NZ was pitched in the discussion also, and even the ones who are against going to the north like that one.

                And what’s not to like about that? Sounds like pure gold to me. Bar the Lions, that would by far the most attractive Test series.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 7:07pm
                Jacko said | September 12th 2017 @ 7:07pm | ! Report

                Great to see that Neutral, Bakkies and Funbus have decided all NZ rugby decisions…..Pity you couldnt sort out Aus rugby problems as they need your help more than NZ does

              • September 12th 2017 @ 7:22pm
                FunBus said | September 12th 2017 @ 7:22pm | ! Report

                Not sure we offered any ‘advice’ to NZ rugby, Jacko. Neither of us are Kiwis and we, therefore, accept that by some strange evolutionary process the fact that we weren’t born there means we know nothing about rugby so, obviously, wouldn’t presume to comment.
                The point is that big changes are afoot involving the direction of SA rugby that will have a big impact on Oz and even the awe-inspiring collosus to the east (whose name I am unworthy to utter). I’ve long been puzzled why this has only recently been of marginal interest on here given that the implications are very big and it’s been brewing for at least 3 years.

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 7:23pm
                The Neutral View From Sweden said | September 12th 2017 @ 7:23pm | ! Report

                And great to see you coming around to bring some slapstick comedy, Jacko.
                A comments thread without your universal genius would not really be a thread worth reading.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 10:29pm
                Bakkies said | September 12th 2017 @ 10:29pm | ! Report

                ‘Great to see that Neutral, Bakkies and Funbus have decided all NZ rugby decisions…..Pity you couldnt sort out Aus rugby problems as they need your help more than NZ does’

                As NZ Rugby is stuck in the middle of a partnership that decision is decided for you.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 10:43am
                Jacko said | September 13th 2017 @ 10:43am | ! Report

                But it IS NOT decided by you

    • September 12th 2017 @ 6:49am
      melbourneterrace said | September 12th 2017 @ 6:49am | ! Report

      When Super Rugby inevitably collapses, the last thing Australian Rugby should be doing is building any replacement in association with NZRU.

      They have been utterly unhelpful in allowing Super Rugby become a workable competition in it’s own right because they only see it as a glorified All Blacks selection trial and this mentality is half the reason Super Rugby is blatantly unpopular in Australia.

      If South Africa go, do not assist NZ anymore in the development of their national team or let them ruin whatever competition comes next. It’s time Australian Rugby fully broke away and did it’s own thing, even if it means accepting that more players will move overseas (which is hardly the end of the world imo).

      • September 12th 2017 @ 6:53am
        Train Without A Station said | September 12th 2017 @ 6:53am | ! Report

        If we could get the income required to be competitive in world rugby by doing our own thing we would not be in SANZAAR now.

        It’s not by choice, it’s by necessity.

      • September 12th 2017 @ 7:08am
        Sul said | September 12th 2017 @ 7:08am | ! Report

        Sometimes you need to retract to go forward again

        • September 12th 2017 @ 7:52am
          Council said | September 12th 2017 @ 7:52am | ! Report

          Sometimes he needs to lay off the Jesus juice.

          There have been many concessions from the NZRU to help the ARU out, including a return to three test bledisloe series, conference system which allowed the Aussie’s to get the derbies they wanted, and letting the first bledisloe be played at Sydney for a decade.

          • September 12th 2017 @ 7:54am
            rebel said | September 12th 2017 @ 7:54am | ! Report

            The NZRU was also on the grassy knoll.

            • September 12th 2017 @ 10:04am
              Council said | September 12th 2017 @ 10:04am | ! Report

              I thought we weren’t supposed to talk about that though…

              Oh quick, better hush up people is looking.

          • September 13th 2017 @ 10:01am
            Muzzo said | September 13th 2017 @ 10:01am | ! Report

            Agreed,Council, as along with that the NZRFU, actually financed the ARU, in sending the Wallabies away on a tour, many, many moons ago. From memory, I think it was about the middle of last century. But, Oh, NZ has done nothing to assist Australian rugby!!!!

      • September 12th 2017 @ 8:40am
        mzilikazi said | September 12th 2017 @ 8:40am | ! Report

        “It’s time Australian Rugby fully broke away and did it’s own thing, even if it means accepting that more players will move overseas (which is hardly the end of the world imo).”

        melbourneterrace, I think you are correct that Australian Rugby needs to do its own thing….what exactly that is is a harder question though.

        What I am interested in is your comment re more players overseas. That I see as inevitable, and is happening more and more. And NZ are being affected more also. Mind you, we both have a long way to go to catch the Bok numbers playing in Europe and other places….but then SA is a very different country….won’t go into all that again here.

        And you are right, IMO also, it is not an insurmountable problem…in fact it may turn out to be a benefit, in that more Australian and NZ players will get to play a higher level of rugby with the likes of the French Top 14 and Aviva teams, than they would staying at home and stacking up behind established players.

        But it will only be a benefit if the overseas players are in full contention for WB/AB selection. I can see in a few years time zero caps requirement being the norm.

      • September 12th 2017 @ 10:02am
        henry said | September 12th 2017 @ 10:02am | ! Report

        wow – that’s a bit precious !
        are you really THAT jealous of little-ole New Zealand’s rugby success, that you felt the need to don your tin-foil had with that little conspiracy?

      • September 12th 2017 @ 10:23am
        ads2600 said | September 12th 2017 @ 10:23am | ! Report

        So it’s the big bad NZRFU that failed to develop you’re own grassroots/third tier to support your super rugby teams, promote & encourage juniors. Your union got the same slice of the pie & did f$&@ all. Stop blaming everyone else for own problems.

      • September 12th 2017 @ 1:47pm
        To Be Rugby said | September 12th 2017 @ 1:47pm | ! Report

        How is it you think NZ Rugby would destroy any future competition? How is it you think they have damaged this one? Is it the way they take the thing seriously, develop the game and keep winning it year on year? Just curious.

      • September 12th 2017 @ 3:58pm
        Tommy said | September 12th 2017 @ 3:58pm | ! Report

        Lol what a joke this coming from an Australia…. bet you for got bout joint hosting rights years ago when Aus had decided they would host rugby World Cup with nz. Karma haha.. I would say to n.z stay with South Africa cause Australia rugby is a joke!!!…..

        • September 12th 2017 @ 4:29pm
          Bakkies said | September 12th 2017 @ 4:29pm | ! Report

          NZ were the sub hosts to Australia. There was no joint host agreement.

          • September 12th 2017 @ 7:12pm
            Jacko said | September 12th 2017 @ 7:12pm | ! Report

            BS bakkies….Joint hosts until Aus rugby went behind the NZRU backs while telling NZ they were supporting their stance on Stadium advertizing….Crapped all over NZ then and also told NZRU they would vote for NZ to host the 2011 WC only to vote against NZ hosting rights…It will one day come back to bite

            • September 12th 2017 @ 8:31pm
              Gurudoright said | September 12th 2017 @ 8:31pm | ! Report

              I like your rant but facts will make it better. The ARU didn’t steal the 2003 from NZ. The IRB (World Rugby) had a policy of the hosting unions having clean stadiums. Meaning the IRB had all stadium advertising rights. NZRU couldn’t and wouldn’t adhere to do that due to contracts they already had in place with the sponsors of their domestic competition. As such the IRB took the co-hosting rights away from the NZRU and gave the sole hosting hosting rights to the ARU. The NZRU stuffed up and it nothing to do with the ARU stealing the World Cup. But hey, without this incident NZ wouldn’t have hosted 2011 by themselves

            • September 13th 2017 @ 10:47am
              Jacko said | September 13th 2017 @ 10:47am | ! Report

              Sorry G…NZ and AUS decided to challange the stadium advertizing bans together and then AUS did a backflip WITHOUT informing NZ of this and backstabbed NZ to get the sole rights themselves…Also they stated publicly they would support NZs bid for 2011 only to privately vote against NZ….again more backstabbing

          • September 12th 2017 @ 10:35pm
            Bakkies said | September 12th 2017 @ 10:35pm | ! Report

            Jacko the NZRU signed a sub host agreement with Rugby World Cup Limited and didn’t meet the terms and conditions. There were no thing as a joint host.

            The NZRU also pushed for the NPC to be played during the tournament.

    • Roar Guru

      September 12th 2017 @ 6:59am
      sheek said | September 12th 2017 @ 6:59am | ! Report

      Brett,

      You’re getting there.

      ARC, NPC, Currie Cup & Argentino Campeonato feeding into a Champion’s Cup (top 2 per nation) then Rugby Championship.

      Each national comp team underpinned by a vibrant district club comp (at least in Australia). Canberra will field 6-8 teams in John Dent Cup all called Tuggeranong, named A to F or A to H.

      NZ don’t care for Trans-Tasman comp & I don’t blame them. Australia will drag down their high standards.

      SANZAAR is useless. They only care about themselves.

      NSW first played Qld in an interstate match way back in 1882. We never bothered to develop a national comp over the next 135 years & now we are massively paying a price for it.

    • September 12th 2017 @ 7:10am
      Luke Ringland said | September 12th 2017 @ 7:10am | ! Report

      Hmmmm. A thought:

      Super Rugby to be streamlined into a 5 NZ, 2 Australian (Reds and Waratahs), and 3 South African teams 18 round home and away competition.

      Of the rest:

      3 South African teams go North.

      The Force and Rebels would join ACT, NSW Origin and QLD Origin (to distinguish them from the Waratahs and Reds) teams to play in a second tier Indo-Pacific competition against NZ NPC sides, a Japanese team, and various teams from the Pacific. The NSW and QLD teams would duke out a State of Origin series every year as an aside to the main competition.

      • Columnist

        September 12th 2017 @ 8:16am
        Brett McKay said | September 12th 2017 @ 8:16am | ! Report

        Gotta say I’m not a fan of any two-tier proposition…

        • September 12th 2017 @ 8:35am
          Luke Ringland said | September 12th 2017 @ 8:35am | ! Report

          Well, the thing is, we currently have one in the form of the NRC.

          To me, this second professional tier — playing against teams of say an NPC standard as opposed to SR — is the right level for the professional game in cities like Canberra, Melbourne, and Perth. The origin concept, as well as playing NZ teams, are part of what would sustain interest for a second tier in Sydney and Brisbane, where I see the NRC struggling the most in terms of interest.

          The whole point would be to do whatever we can to get 30k + crowds back into SR rugby in Sydney and Brisbane, and for me the only way to do this would be to have to very competitive teams playing against top foreign teams. Waratahs V Crusaders would go back to being a huge game.

          On the flip side, the second tier needs to have teams that mean something. For your Perth, Melbourne and ACT leagues, they would be super meaningful, as the only professional side, that is hopefully competitive, and a stepping stone from the local leagues. In NSW and QLD, hopefully a state of origin concept woul;d bring a lot of interest. Another option to the latter could be to have the top Sydney and Brisbane club side respectively play in that league.

        • September 12th 2017 @ 4:21pm
          FunBus said | September 12th 2017 @ 4:21pm | ! Report

          ‘Gotta say I’m not a fan of any two-tier proposition’

          Brett, you currently have precisely that within SR anyway.

          • September 12th 2017 @ 7:15pm
            Jacko said | September 12th 2017 @ 7:15pm | ! Report

            How FB???? SR is a Teir 1 domestic comp…There is no teir above this that is a domestic comp…How do you think they select the Aus league side???? Is the NRL a teir 2 comp?

            • Roar Guru

              September 12th 2017 @ 7:30pm
              The Neutral View From Sweden said | September 12th 2017 @ 7:30pm | ! Report

              Do you have reading disabilities, Jacko?
              Do you ever ponder why everyone else understands what FunBus mean, but not you?

              • September 12th 2017 @ 10:15pm
                Taylorman said | September 12th 2017 @ 10:15pm | ! Report

                I dont see it either NV so you explain how SR is a two tier competition in the same way as Luke has described, ie two distinctly different competitions going on.

                And do you ever ponder how youre able to speak for ‘everyone else’ NV? I dont recall giving you my permission, so how bout you speak for your little old self ok chum?

              • September 13th 2017 @ 10:50am
                Jacko said | September 13th 2017 @ 10:50am | ! Report

                Why is it Neutral that you constantly attack the man….I am just as allowed to differ in opinion to you as you are to me but if I do then you attack me and my integrity or intellergence……Why????? i dont have disabilities but so what if I did? How is that your problem or anything to do with you???

              • September 13th 2017 @ 3:07pm
                Taylorman said | September 13th 2017 @ 3:07pm | ! Report

                True, Fionns the same. They get frustrated in not being able to get a point across then take to…go to logical school, or, gee I wouldnt like to see X or Y running the NZRFU, or worse…talk to others for support.

                All they need to do is stop taking potshots at ‘naive NZers’. Simple really.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 8:34pm
                Fionn said | September 13th 2017 @ 8:34pm | ! Report

                No, Taylorman, you show an inability to engage in actual discussion. You make illlgocal comments and either are unable to comprehend or choose not to comprehend what people actually write.

                I may not agree with Jacko, but at least he bothers to read, comprehend and reply so it’s possible to have a reasonable discussion with him.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 8:57pm
                Taylorman said | September 13th 2017 @ 8:57pm | ! Report

                Hmm….ummm…hmmm….nah😀

      • September 12th 2017 @ 8:48am
        Ex force fan said | September 12th 2017 @ 8:48am | ! Report

        A two tier competition without promotion relegation games sound like it is cooked up by the ARU.

        • Columnist

          September 12th 2017 @ 10:05am
          Brett McKay said | September 12th 2017 @ 10:05am | ! Report

          Two tiers with promotion and relegation would be worse, in my humble opinion. There just isn’t an appetite for it in Australia..

          • Roar Guru

            September 12th 2017 @ 10:06am
            Train Without A Station said | September 12th 2017 @ 10:06am | ! Report

            +1

            People will drop 2nd tier teams here unlike Europe.

          • Roar Guru

            September 12th 2017 @ 11:19am
            sheek said | September 12th 2017 @ 11:19am | ! Report

            Agree +2,

            I don’t know why people still bring up promotion & relegation.

            They tried it in Shute Shield in the late 70s/early 80s, & it was disastrous.

            Players simply abandoned their club if it was relegated & went to another first division club.

            Promotion/relegation works well for Subbies, but not for premier rugby district comps, or even national comps, unless they’re static 1st & 2nd division.

            For example, Tasmania & NT are a long, long way from every being considered top tier. But there’s a place for them in a static 2nd division.

            • Roar Guru

              September 12th 2017 @ 11:35am
              Train Without A Station said | September 12th 2017 @ 11:35am | ! Report

              Losing players isn’t the issue.

              Losing fans is.

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 11:44am
                sheek said | September 12th 2017 @ 11:44am | ! Report

                Whatever.

            • September 12th 2017 @ 10:39pm
              Bakkies said | September 12th 2017 @ 10:39pm | ! Report

              Sheek is right the relegated team loses a lot of players that’s what happened to the Lions when they got relegated from Super Rugby.

          • September 12th 2017 @ 11:38am
            Luke Ringland said | September 12th 2017 @ 11:38am | ! Report

            Agree. I’m certainly not suggesting this. Just imagine the “second tier” as being the NRC, except an NRC that plays against some international teams. The only other difference between what I’d propose and the NRC is that you wouldn’t have the convoluted teams from Sydney and Brisbane.

            • Columnist

              September 12th 2017 @ 11:53am
              Brett McKay said | September 12th 2017 @ 11:53am | ! Report

              Luke, I honestly don’t think the Sydney and Brisbane teams are that convoluted. I think that’s a very easy and convenient excuse used when things aren’t presented on a silver platter.

              Just my opinion.

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 11:59am
                Train Without A Station said | September 12th 2017 @ 11:59am | ! Report

                Brett I think Sydney are.

                They weren’t at first at all, but now they are.

              • Columnist

                September 12th 2017 @ 1:55pm
                Brett McKay said | September 12th 2017 @ 1:55pm | ! Report

                But the teams themselves haven’t changed, TWAS. Just the way they’re recruiting players. (Greater/Western/Greater Sydney notwithstanding).

                In effect, the Sydney NRC teams have worked out that the best way to push for the title is to have the best players possible, in much the same way the Super Rugby sides don’t strictly adhere to the state borders.

                And as we know, players will go wherever the opportunities are..

      • September 12th 2017 @ 9:48am
        Bakkies said | September 12th 2017 @ 9:48am | ! Report

        Luke that would send Aus Rugby back to the 80s.

        • September 12th 2017 @ 7:17pm
          Jacko said | September 12th 2017 @ 7:17pm | ! Report

          So just around the corner would be Aus rugby’s best ever era then Bakkies

        • September 12th 2017 @ 10:42pm
          Bakkies said | September 12th 2017 @ 10:42pm | ! Report

          Australia’s best ever era was from 1998-2002 when the Brumbies and Reds were strong not back in the 80s when the Wallabies were picked from a smaller group of players that represented two states and played in two metro based club comps.

          • September 13th 2017 @ 10:53am
            Jacko said | September 13th 2017 @ 10:53am | ! Report

            1991 WC winner was………….AUSTRALIA…….Just around the corner from the 80s…….

      • September 12th 2017 @ 3:23pm
        frisky said | September 12th 2017 @ 3:23pm | ! Report

        How many times has the ACT topped the aussie comp? Maybe NSW should join the 2nd tier group instead.
        If the Force was still viable, QLD could also be demoted.
        Yeh, I know, I know, NSW+QLD is where the money is.

        • September 12th 2017 @ 5:52pm
          Ed said | September 12th 2017 @ 5:52pm | ! Report

          Brumbies have been the top AUS SR team in 10 seasons.
          Tahs – seven
          Reds – five.

        • September 13th 2017 @ 5:38am
          Luke Ringland said | September 13th 2017 @ 5:38am | ! Report

          Not just the money. The player and fan bases. Take all the Qld and NSW players out of the SR teams from the other areas, and they’re even less competitive.

          ACT, Perth and Melbourne, with a NSW Origin, and Qld Origin, would be true showcases and development pathways for the local talent. Then you have a NSW and QLD Super Rugby presence to showcase COMPETITIVE Australian rugby in a premium, and streamlined, showcase tournament. Just my two cents.

          • September 13th 2017 @ 10:36am
            Bakkies said | September 13th 2017 @ 10:36am | ! Report

            What have the Reds done to deserve a spot in such a competition ahead of the Brumbies. They have only beaten them 5 times (most of them came in the era of the duplicated derbies) in 21 years.

    • September 12th 2017 @ 7:16am
      Bluesfan said | September 12th 2017 @ 7:16am | ! Report

      Why would NZ want to go into partnership with the ARU – they have shown their incompetence very clearly over the last 12 months.

      Personally an expanded ITM cup replacing Super Rugby would not be a disaster. Remembering that the biggest crowds during Super Rugby are the local derbies.

      Australian Rugby should continue to roll out the NRC, which is turning into a great comp.

      • September 12th 2017 @ 8:39am
        Taylorman said | September 12th 2017 @ 8:39am | ! Report

        Yes tend to agree, havent seen a lot of it but it is clearly where the positives are coming from on the ROAR, the rest being the endless commentary of who should or shouldnt be in the Wallabies, around and around on that same theme with no one appearing to agree on much at all, just opting to look for ammo from each outing that supports their theories.

        SANZAR look to have done their run. Since 2011 theyve cut it up, brought in new, changed the format, are now axeing sides and attracting lawsuits, poor crowds, lack transparency etc etc, all signs theyre ready to fold or give up on Super Rugby. They got too greedy too quick and are paying for it with revolt and lack of confidence.

        Think we are going to see a collapse from within at some point.

        • September 12th 2017 @ 10:02am
          puff said | September 12th 2017 @ 10:02am | ! Report

          We have some folk who believe NZ is adding to our fractured disposition, the fact is NZ are also concerned that we are not walking to talk. The quality of our super and domestic competition is missing most of the bells and whistles when you compare comparative competitions at any level in other regions. Even with the poor governance of SR one nation continues to win the chocolates which places pressure on all the underperforming franchisers which very quickly diminishes receipts, membership and financial stability. When local teams are not competive the message is loud and clear, more investment is required. There is no winner here, not even in NZ. The AB’s are a known quantity and a household word in many non-aligned rugby countries. Why, NZ have invested considerable time supporting all the different code levels of both genders. Now we are whining and bemoaning their success, when we should be picking the eyes out of their model to see what works for us. Regardless of their situation WA are the only affiliate heading in the right direction. It time to forget SANZAAR’s and wake-up.

      • September 12th 2017 @ 10:47am
        Bakkies said | September 12th 2017 @ 10:47am | ! Report

        Wouldn’t blame them given the ARU’s financial and political situation. However in the long term with a new board in place NZ will need to deal with a more professional ARU as you need opposition in Rugby.

        • September 12th 2017 @ 2:26pm
          Hertryk said | September 12th 2017 @ 2:26pm | ! Report

          The words “professionall” and ARU in the same sentence does not equate.. …

          • September 12th 2017 @ 2:27pm
            Hertryk said | September 12th 2017 @ 2:27pm | ! Report

            sorry typo. Professional.

      • September 12th 2017 @ 11:32am
        Fionn said | September 12th 2017 @ 11:32am | ! Report

        Bluesfan, once again another Kiwi fan who is unable to grasp the economic reality of the situation.

        It would be better for NZ rugby if it could adequately finance a domestic competition in order to keep its stars in New Zealand. However, it simply does not have the financial clout by itself (nor does Australia), but together with Australia there will be more money flowing and should help stem the tide of departing players.

        I’ve heard a bunch of nonsense arguments about how NZ is in a good enough financial place to do so, but in reality, it isn’t. Despite being a part of SANZAAR NZ is already starting to lose more and more players overseas, this will become a tide if it is just NZ by itself.

        NZ has to choose between (a) joining Australia for more $$$ or (b) having a domestic competition that essentially feeds Northern Hemisphere elite rugby, where, rather like soccer, all good players play in Europe and you get developing players and guys close to retirement playing in their domestic leagues.

        • Roar Guru

          September 12th 2017 @ 11:42am
          Train Without A Station said | September 12th 2017 @ 11:42am | ! Report

          Well NZ is in a good enough financial position to do so.

          But it won’t be sustainable.

          • September 12th 2017 @ 2:16pm
            Fionn said | September 12th 2017 @ 2:16pm | ! Report

            TWAS, I think we’re in agreement, but by definition NSRU isn’t in a good enough position to do so.

            It needs to be sustainable because bleeding savings for a few years and then running out of money isn’t any sort of position at all.

          • September 12th 2017 @ 7:23pm
            Jacko said | September 12th 2017 @ 7:23pm | ! Report

            The problem is tho that you think from an Aus perspective…Not an NZ one….You look at things being all about money and about winning without working out that to get money and to win is to do the correct setup and the right attitude to the game…Its not all about money…Its not about setting out to win…its about getting all the processes right and the rest looks after itself…..And you all seem to apparently know EXACTLY what the NZRU is planning for the 10 year plan…..NOT
            Is it amazing??????? No its AMAZON

            • September 12th 2017 @ 7:36pm
              Fionn said | September 12th 2017 @ 7:36pm | ! Report

              So Amazon is going to pay above market rates for a domestic NZ competition (like Mitre 10) that no one outside of NZ has proven any interest in watching?

              … Seems unlikely. Just the fact that it is Amazon doesn’t mean they will pay above market rates. In fact, as such a intelligent company I doubt they would be so silly.

              I am 100% certain NZRU isn’t think like some NZ fans on here that believe a country with the population the size of Sydney can go it alone.

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 8:05pm
                The Neutral View From Sweden said | September 12th 2017 @ 8:05pm | ! Report

                I find it hilarious that some deluded Kiwis fantasies that Amazon is gonna shower them with gold for the rights to show Mitre10 and Home Tests with the AB’s.

                When did big global companies start to give out handouts?

                Another thing that makes me giggle is that whatever someone pays for Mitre10 (a great bid or a horrible bid compared to predictions), that is, in fact, the market value.

                As a reality freak TV-show, it would be great watching, to see guys like T-man, Jacko, and the usual suspects, take charge of NZR. I wonder how fast they would destroy over 100 years of excellence?

              • September 12th 2017 @ 10:44pm
                Bakkies said | September 12th 2017 @ 10:44pm | ! Report

                ‘So Amazon is going to pay above market rates for a domestic NZ competition (like Mitre 10) that no one outside of NZ has proven any interest in watching?’

                The NPC is a good quality competition but some of the games at broadcast at 4:30/5:30 in the morning in the biggest Rugby viewing markets Europe and SA.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 11:27pm
                Taylorman said | September 12th 2017 @ 11:27pm | ! Report

                Im not interested in running the NZRFU, I watch the game now as a past time. I leave our future to those that have kept us in the top position in the pro game while assisting more countries than anyone else to success at the sane time whike you sit on your behind acting out some fantasy where you thing your opinion rehashed in a million versions of the same is important.

                What I find amusing is that non players like you like to get off by spending large parts of the day acting out some oh so superior take on the sport to convince those who actually have the game running through their blood just to feel importtant.

                You dont know rugby Swede, you dont know jack, youre just another pretender in the stand watching and wanting to have a say where youve nothing but youtube and Stuff, google and a few kiwis in a bar in mongolia to call your own rugby ‘experience’, and think thats enough to think youre an authority on the game.

                I for one wouldnt want you running the game because for one, you wouldnt even know where to find a rugby ground, let alone know how to use it.

                So carrying on wasting your time with stargazing our games future. Im flattered for our game that someone would even bother. I certainly wouldnt.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 1:03am
                Keith of WA said | September 13th 2017 @ 1:03am | ! Report

                Neutral / Bakkies

                I wouldn’t poobah the comments about Amazon so fast as they are quite active world wide and are working with the darkness already…

                I understand they are currently ’embedded’ with the team including during the Lions series and Rugby Championship to film an Amazon Original series to be screened in 2018. It is a behind the scenes style program including team, coaches, community interaction etc..

                They are also bidding on all sorts of things such as NFL, cricket (for indian market), tennis, motor racing etc for streaming to Prime members as part of a cable style live tv channel.

                All Blacks have denied they are in discussions to live stream test matches…..

                Cheers

              • September 13th 2017 @ 10:56am
                Jacko said | September 13th 2017 @ 10:56am | ! Report

                Above market value?????? What is market value eh?????? ABs will get market value….nothing more …nothing less….

              • September 13th 2017 @ 11:09am
                Fionn said | September 13th 2017 @ 11:09am | ! Report

                Jacko, exactly right.

                And if you think that market value for the All Blacks is enough to keep top NZ players in NZ without Super Rugby than you are sorely mistaken.

                The ABs are currently being paid market value (it doesn’t matter if it Amazon or Sky or Fox paying market value, it is still market value) and despite that + the Super Rugby revenue the tide is already starting to turn.

                If it is just a NZ domestic comp then no way on planet earth will the All Blacks raise enough money to keep top NZ players in NZ.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 2:23pm
                Jake said | September 13th 2017 @ 2:23pm | ! Report

                “You dont know rugby Swede, you dont know jack, youre just another pretender in the stand watching and wanting to have a say where youve nothing but youtube and Stuff, google and a few kiwis in a bar in mongolia to call your own rugby ‘experience’, and think thats enough to think youre an authority on the game.”

                ha ha. Olympic gold.

              • September 14th 2017 @ 5:28am
                Killaku said | September 14th 2017 @ 5:28am | ! Report

                How come every game of the Npc is live and your Nrc is shown a couple of games?Because among those 650,000 Kiwis living here,There is a big following and i know alot of Aussies that are supporting some teams and find the rugby is better to watch and dont know what the Nrc is.

            • September 13th 2017 @ 3:29am
              Tommy said | September 13th 2017 @ 3:29am | ! Report

              Your absolutely right jacko but time & time again Australia keep thinking they’re right??? What’s this (economic) Fiona did you not watch the Americans Cup them clever kiwi……

        • Columnist

          September 12th 2017 @ 11:55am
          Brett McKay said | September 12th 2017 @ 11:55am | ! Report

          Well said Fionn. I think the (current) NZ quality and Australian economic strengths are obviously intertwined into a single product that benefits both markets..

          • Roar Guru

            September 12th 2017 @ 1:11pm
            The Neutral View From Sweden said | September 12th 2017 @ 1:11pm | ! Report

            Indeed well said Fionn.

            Brett: Right now this intertwined product does not benefit both markets/partners. The Aussies share the dollars, but NZ does not share the quality. That equation will never work long term.

            • Roar Guru

              September 12th 2017 @ 1:34pm
              Ralph said | September 12th 2017 @ 1:34pm | ! Report

              In the current financial structure of professional rugby, the day you let money buy quality is the day Southern Hemisphere rugby dies.

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 1:37pm
                The Neutral View From Sweden said | September 12th 2017 @ 1:37pm | ! Report

                Really? Why? Enlighten me please Ralph.

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 2:46pm
                Ralph said | September 12th 2017 @ 2:46pm | ! Report

                Because we are poor Mr Sweden.

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 3:03pm
                The Neutral View From Sweden said | September 12th 2017 @ 3:03pm | ! Report

                Well, if you are poor, maybe it is time to look for paths that will make you rich? Or do you think that is impossible?
                The current setup is already under serious attack from the riches of the north. If you just sit around and do nothing, things a very unlikely to get better.

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 4:25pm
                Ralph said | September 12th 2017 @ 4:25pm | ! Report

                Oh there is a plan A and and plan B, I in no way am suggesting NZ do nothing. Quite the contrary, NZRU has been executing on its long plan A since the game went professional.

                But as tiny as NZRU are we are fighting the tide. There no current way to match the amount of money in the north and fight the rear guard in the hope the tide stops one day. Whether it does or does not will be almost completely an externality to us.

                Expanding the game is our friend.

                Maintaining our quality of product is a cornerstone.

                To engage the north in some kind of quality/money dance would be to court a gorilla. And in the words of Billy Bob Thornton, ‘when you are having sex with a gorilla, it’s not over until the gorilla says its over’.

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 4:44pm
                The Neutral View From Sweden said | September 12th 2017 @ 4:44pm | ! Report

                I hear what you are saying, Ralph. And NZR has done exceptionally well since the game went pro.
                But I believe they can compete (and dominate at Test level) even in the long term future. Some things just need a rethink (which I am sure Mr. Tew & Co. is doing already).

                I see the NZ future in rugby in the same way I see Canada in ice hockey. The Canadian teams in NHL are very competitive, but they are far from dominating. But their national team is close to unbeatable, hence all their top talent is spread out in really good teams and when the Olympics comes around they are eligible for the national team.

                All these non-Canadian teams are easy to watch and follow for the Canadian audience and every single time an American team comes to Canada, local fans can be sure of seeing a couple of top Canadian players.
                And more importantly, almost every single time a Canadian hockey fan watches a game in NHL, he can be sure of that the game will be competitive, even, and unpredictable.

                I see no need for NZ rugby to try to co-operate with the NH, your BBT quote is very fitting for that. But BBT golden words do not apply to a reconstructed SR with more legs in Asia.

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 4:53pm
                Ralph said | September 12th 2017 @ 4:53pm | ! Report

                Sure, I suspect NZRU is pretty pragmatic and clear about what it is trying to do and has been for a very long time. Compared to us SARU is a political nightmare and the ARU is a irresponsible mess.

                But we must never forget, the whole place is no bigger than a reasonably sized city.

            • September 12th 2017 @ 7:29pm
              Jacko said | September 12th 2017 @ 7:29pm | ! Report

              The Aussies share the dollars, but NZ does not share the quality.

              What $$$ does Aus share????? The ones people pay to watch the Best???? Surely if you think Aus and NZ getting the same is all in NZs favour then you need to look at where the QUALITY is coming from…..Watch the Best???? is that Aus rugby????? And as for sharing the players well Aus SR sides had 21 Kiwis…Oh did you mean we should give you all our ABs…That wont wortk either because your silly coach would soon turn the worlds best into also rans

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 7:43pm
                The Neutral View From Sweden said | September 12th 2017 @ 7:43pm | ! Report

                Jacko. So much have been written about this already. That you still fail to understand that NZR and ARU are very dependent on each other is very sad, and I wish I could help you but I can’t.

                Your NZ bias is off the scale, and that makes it virtually impossible to discuss anything with you, bar AB’s selection or what players look promising in the Baby Blacks.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 9:27pm
                FunBus said | September 12th 2017 @ 9:27pm | ! Report

                Jacko, NZ rugby is in a bad place if the movers and shakers share your complacency. Remember, NZ will have neither a home RWC nor a Lions tour to top up the coffers for at least 12 years (and I suspect much longer). No-one in the world outside NZ has shown any interest in Mitre 10, and I’ve got a sports package where I live in the UK with 25 channels that probably shows Mongolian semi-professional throat-warbling if I had time to surf them all.
                SA may well be on a clear path to the ‘north’. Argentina is not a player financially and, as yet, does not generate much global interest. If you think that the financial security of NZ rugby can be secured by 5 SR teams handing out regular pastings to 4 Oz SR teams and a ‘best of 7’ Bledisloe Series every year, than you’re in cloud cuckoo land.
                There needs to be some creative thinking that can marry the relative financial strength of the Aussie sports market with NZ’s culture of rugby excellence.
                Talk of some Asian/Pacific rugby revolution is a long time in the future. Personally, as an England rugby fan, watching two of our rivals think they see a light at the end of the tunnel when it is in fact on oncoming train has its amusing aspects – as a rugby fan though, I worry.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 11:34pm
                Taylorman said | September 12th 2017 @ 11:34pm | ! Report

                Funbus, if NZ rugby is in such a bad place then how come The NH clubs need to pay hundreds of millions to our players and coaches ‘just to even play it’?

                I think your definition of bad place needs to be explained. You really mean…oh gee, Ive looked a my…or the Swedes if you havent got one yet…crystal ball and have seen it in the tea leaves…you mean that sort of bad place…

                Cos right now, last time I looked we are still no. 1, and we are still propping up your game.

                Where is this bad game that you talk of currently FB?

              • September 13th 2017 @ 12:20am
                FunBus said | September 13th 2017 @ 12:20am | ! Report

                Geez, Tman, have you been on the sauce?

                They’re not difficult concepts to grasp. First this idea that (let’s take England as an example) we need NZ to ‘operate’. There are 12 teams in the English league needing very large squads given that they play while the Autumn internationals and 6 Nations are on and the range of competitions. Currently, a side like Saracens is on the same general level as the Crusaders (as impossible as I know you’ll find that to believe). To compete the other 11 clubs seek to reach the same level. The fact that part of this striving will involve seeking to attract the best players from around the world doesn’t mean there aren’t excellent development pathways for home-grown players. There are, hence the Under -20 success and the torrent of young players breaking into the England squad.
                If there were only 5 English teams, there’d be much less of a ‘foreign’ presence.
                Your constant chest-beating that ‘we’re number 1’ (putting aside the psychological concern that, because of your birth certificate you seem to think that it means YOU are ACTUALLY number 1 – I’ll leave that to your counsellor), there is an interesting debate about whether the direction of the game will work against NZ and for others. It might not but it’s, you know, a DEBATE on a rugby blog.
                The game went professional in 1995 but for a number of countries (England is one of them) this simply meant players starting to get paid. NZ used it as a stimulus to even greater excellence. England, partially blinded by the lucky nature of producing a great 15 between 2000-2003 did not and carried on the same old amateur way. That’s recently changed for England and it might for others as well.
                In the private sector bankruptcy courts are full of companies that were ‘number 1’ and thought it was a part of the natural order that could never change. You ‘debate’ these issues as if we were discussing the individual character merits of members of your family.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 12:48am
                Taylorman said | September 13th 2017 @ 12:48am | ! Report

                FB im not the one getting my posts mixed up, quoting ones directed at someone else then self correcting at the end of it.

                I keep pushing the number 1 to be mildly annoying because its the same condascending tone as playing the same rhetorical NZ naievity card. Can you not dtect a certainly level of irony in these repetitive nuances or do you take everything at face value.

                The swede for instance rocks up to every discussion and drones on and on about the future of the game, a million posts saying the same thing every single time…

                1 the future is in Europe
                2 NZers are naive to think the status quo will remain

                Thats it. Every single comment on this or other article is firmly locked in on one of the two themes, the second one of course to feed the need to adopt some sort of superior position, why I dont really know. Mustnt have a lot else going on.

                Where you probably do have a bit more to do with rugby, being English I presume and knowing a bit more about the local scene.

                But your posts also tend to reflect a certain envy of NZ rugby, so the number one thing is about pushing buttons because Im just tired of foreigners trying to tell us whats right in this game, particularly since weve ‘done’ rugby better than everyone else so far. Strange you cant see that.

                And until these ideas are actually realised, we’ll keep doing it, and not talking about doing it, and talking down those that shoulder the current position, as we get here by Swede and others.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 1:05am
                Taylorman said | September 13th 2017 @ 1:05am | ! Report

                And Saracens are not on the level of the Crusaders and here is why. Firstly the Crusaders have domianted the Super rugby in terms of titles, finals and placings virtually since the tournament started.

                Saracens have not. How many titles have Saracens won? As far as I can see theyre just the current ‘flavour’. Leceister tigers were not so long ago the bees knees.

                The Crusaders have developed a culture based on the best of Canterbury rugby and dont rely on a large number of players from overseas bar one or two signings a season like Ioane and Nadolo.

                During their long and unrivalled tenure the Crusaders played the best players from the countries mostly ranked 1,2 and 3 in the world, including most of their matches against sides with current All Blacks, the the Saracens have not got near that level of competition. Lately the rankings are somewhat different but that is only in the kast year or two.

                Besides, Sarries didnt even win last year so no, Saracens are not even close to the level the Crusaders are at.

                Heres an exercise for you.

                Write a list of the best 50 players the Saracens played last year…when they didnt win.

                And Ill give you fifty the Crusaders did play when they did win.

                I think your list will pale in comparison. And I bet it will be filled with ex NZ, oz or Bok players.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 1:09am
                FunBus said | September 13th 2017 @ 1:09am | ! Report

                ‘Im just tired of foreigners trying to tell us whats right in this game, particularly since weve ‘done’ rugby better than everyone else so far. Strange you cant see that.’

                ‘Foreigners’? We’re a Kiwi and a pom on an Aussie rugby website – we’re both ‘foreigners’. This idea that discussing NZ rugby in anything other than polite, hushed, awe-inspired tones should be met by hurling insults around seems to be a Kiwi national psychosis. What gets up a lot of people’s noses is this belief that Kiwis are, by dint of their nationality, imbued with some special gift of rugby insight. I would have thought 10 minutes perusing any comment thread on Stuff would cure you of that but each to their own. I’ve no idea about your rugby background (and despite what you confidently write, you’ve no idea of mine); nor do I know NVFS’s. I do know he’s got as much right to his view as you have and, as an aside, nothing in both of your long record of posts shrieks greater rugby knowledge than the other – perhaps your transcendental rugby wisdom doesn’t translate into the written word very well.
                Maybe I should give it a go, though. I’m off to find the biggest foreigner I can and challenge him to a fight. When I win that I’ll find the fittest and challenge him to an iron man contest. England has a dozen world boxing champions and the two best triathletes, should be a breeze – after all I’m English.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 1:40am
                FunBus said | September 13th 2017 @ 1:40am | ! Report

                ‘FB im not the one getting my posts mixed up, quoting ones directed at someone else then self correcting at the end of it.’

                I’m getting my posts mixed up because I’m being continually modded – ironically because I’m cutting and pasting some of your ruder comments aimed at others. It’s a puzzle I’m still trying to figure out.

                ‘And Saracens are not on the level of the Crusaders and here is why.’

                There’s a bizarre list of arguments here, Tman, understandable given that as you admit you don’t know anything about English club rugby and that presumably includes Saracens.

                Let’s start with ‘history’. I know you’re a history buff and this allowed you to confidently predict the 3-0 drubbing the Lions didn’t just get, but I fail to see the relevance. What does the Crusaders historic record matter to the current respective strengths of the teams? Anyway, wasn’t that the first Crusaders win since 2008?
                Saracens maybe the current ‘flavour’ but that’s the point, isn’t it? It’s a very strong ‘flavour’. They’ve won back-to back European Cups and Aviva Premierships. The reason they didn’t win their third consecutive Aviva Premiership was that they lost in the last minute, away from home, trying to back up 6 days after winning the European Cup in France.
                The rest of your arguments make no sense. Regardless, surely judging whether two teams are roughly on a same level usually involves a really weird thing like, comparing the players. Here’s the first choice Saracens pack (at least the one I’d pick):

                1. Vunipola
                2. George
                3. Vincent Koch
                4. Kruis.
                5. Isiekwe
                6. Itoje
                7. Schalk Burger
                8. Vunipola

                Isiekwe made his England debut on the recent Argentina tour. So that’s 6 England internationals (4 of them starting Lions and it would have been all 5 if Vunipola had toured) and two Boks. In reserve they’ve got Brits, Skelton, Figallo, Tolofua as well as a whole slew of up and coming England under-20 stars.

                Can’t be bothered to go through the backs as well, but they are all internationals with players such as Liam Williams and Farrell. As an aside, there isn’t a Kiwi in sight. We can debate who would win most games if they played each other 10 times, but the idea that this side isn’t near the same level as the Crusaders is nonsense.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 2:50am
                Matt M said | September 13th 2017 @ 2:50am | ! Report

                I think you’re going to have a hard time convincing NZ fans that their rugby setup is struggling or needs radical change. Most kiwis have complete confidence in the NZRU to keep NZ at the top and for good reason.

                The All Blacks have been consistently the best team in the world since the game turned professional and virtually unstoppable over the last 5 years. They have long term global sponsors in Adidas and AIG. And they’re sitting on cash reserves of 60 million excluding Lions earning from this year.

                If you consider the size of the NZ market, the results both on and off the field are pretty impressive.

              • Roar Guru

                September 13th 2017 @ 6:14am
                taylorman said | September 13th 2017 @ 6:14am | ! Report

                Nah its not. Youve just failed to respond to my of my very clear reasons.
                So if history means nothing then all your really saying is your favourite team, not even the current champ is as good as the Crusaders?

                You fail to address the level of competition both have to face and even the names you list are mostly contracted professionals from outside England.

                How many Saracens over the years were born and grew up within say a hundred mikes the vicinity of the home base?

                Ill bet very few, where more than 50% of the Crusaders over the years will herald from the South Island.

                Grass roots.

                Thats what your pay on demand rugby brings. Cant make em so lets ship em in.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 9:18am
                Fionn said | September 13th 2017 @ 9:18am | ! Report

                ‘This idea that discussing NZ rugby in anything other than polite, hushed, awe-inspired tones should be met by hurling insults around seems to be a Kiwi national psychosis. What gets up a lot of people’s noses is this belief that Kiwis are, by dint of their nationality, imbued with some special gift of rugby insight.’

                Funbus, I’d give up the expectation of any sort of quality of debate with Taylorman. Not only have I found him to be unbelievably biased and unable to give credit to any foreign players or teams (whether they’re Australian, English, Irish or South African) he has also demonstrated issues with two basic concepts required for debate (a) logic and (b) comprehension.

                You can make as many logic arguments as you like and Taylorman will either talk past them or fail to comprehend them / not bother reading them and straw man you.

                He is also seems unable to understand that ‘history’ does not dictate current form. What occurred in the past does not necessarily reflect the present, or else the Persian and Spanish Empires would still be major world powers.

                In regards to the Sarries vs Crusaders debate I would really like to see the two teams play. I have a feeling that the Crusaders might be the better team, but that might be my SH bias and the fact I don’t watch as much of Saracens as the Saders. It would be cool to see them play in a neutral venue.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 11:07am
                Jacko said | September 13th 2017 @ 11:07am | ! Report

                Fionn it has zero to do with it……..The fact is that you, funbus Bakkies Neutral are all deciding what NZ rugby should do to solve Aus rugbys problems…..NZ rugby is well run…and has been for years…it is solvent…and will befor years due to current contracts…..and it is a very successful organisation. You expect NZ to change everything and be as badly run as Aus rugby is and as for me feeling smug and relaxed about the future well why would I not be…Why would I presume that the same people who have got it right for so long will suddenly get it wrong…They have proven to be VERY capable of running NZ rugby so they have earnt my complete trust in their ability to continue to do this…..I am happyto say there is going to be many challenges ahead for rugby but I have faith in the ability of NZs administrators to get NZ thru these challanges……

                1 Question for you all….Wouldnt a transfer fee in world rugby mean NZ would be getting back millions from NH clubs to buy our players? See Im disabled according to Neutral but there is a possible money spinner there….Lots of sports have it in place already so why not rugby eh

              • September 13th 2017 @ 11:15am
                Fionn said | September 13th 2017 @ 11:15am | ! Report

                Jacko, New Zealand is a well run organisation, which is why I am sure they are smart enough not to go it alone.

                You and Taylorman seem oblivious to the fact that since rugby went professional NZ has been inextricably connected to Aus and SA. If SA goes north then the NZRU will be smart enough to realise that they need Australia as much as Australia needs New Zealand.

                No matter how well NZRU is run, it can’t change the fact that New Zealand has a population the size of Sydney and an economy smaller than Sydney. Economic realities are economic realities, regardless of how efficiently run NZRU is.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 5:14pm
                Taylorman said | September 13th 2017 @ 5:14pm | ! Report

                Yes Fionn but you do not know the future do you!

                Well do you?

                Yet we are the naive ones. And your preaching to us that we are oblivious to facts.

                What facts? That we do t have a large population? Well gee. Didnt know that.

                So you enlighten me.

                What is going to happen?

              • September 13th 2017 @ 5:59pm
                Jacko said | September 13th 2017 @ 5:59pm | ! Report

                Fionn my annoyance at people like you, bakkies , funbus etc is about the fact that you know nothing more than anyone else about NZ rugby but you are telling all and sundry that NZ rugby needs to do this or that to suit Aus agenda…or they need to come cap in hand to Aus because you have a bigger economy…or NZRU must allow their players to be selected for the ABs no matter where they play…or NZ rugbynis in financial trouble…well they will be if they dont do as you lot suggest…..All of what you say will happen may well happen but I would back the NZRU to make the right decisions to enhansce rugby in NZ as they have done for the past 100 plus years…..Why do you constantly want to rubbish NZ rugby when you should be concentrating on the mess you have in Aus rugby…..Your Biases are VERY CLEAR…VERY CLEAR…

              • September 13th 2017 @ 8:38pm
                Fionn said | September 13th 2017 @ 8:38pm | ! Report

                Never said anything about NZs selection policy.

                You’re entitled to your opinions, but these are indisputable facts.

                1. New Zealand has the population of Sydney

                2. New Zealand has a smaller economy than Sydney

                3. The NH is already starting to take more and better NZ players despite the Super Rugby revenue (market of NZ + Aus + SA)

                4. If New Zealand goes it alone it doesn’t have the economy or population to compete with the NH by itself, but will be less behind if it massively increases its market with Aus

                You can give as many opinions as you’d like, and you’re wrong saying I don’t think anyone is entitled to an opinion, but you’re not entitled to your own facts. The above facts are indisputable.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 9:07pm
                Taylorman said | September 13th 2017 @ 9:07pm | ! Report

                Once again, your logic lessons have let you down.

                As an Indisputable fact, number 1 is extremely poorly worded.

                1. Does NZ actually have the Sydney population? The same people in two places? Or are you saying the numbers are same? Exactly? Id dispute that as a fact.

                4 is not a fact, it is a theory, not an undisputable fact. For example, if NZ were to go it alone, then the world blew up completely….Youd be wrong. Very wrong.

                For one who regularly suggests Logic school to others Id say youre a few classes behind yourself so next time you want to specify a list of indisputable facts…(get the diploma first). 😀

              • September 13th 2017 @ 9:31pm
                Fionn said | September 13th 2017 @ 9:31pm | ! Report

                Okay, Logicman,

                1. It isn’t poorly worded, Comprehensionman. New Zealand has a population of 4.8 million according to the New Zealand population clock, whereas Sydney has a population of over 5 milllion according to the ABS.

                2. No, it is a fact that New Zealand doesn’t have the population or economy to compete with the NH.

                It is a theory of mine that that will result in more players leaving. This is an opinion you can disagree with. However, it is a fact that the NH generates far more rugby revenue to pay salaries than NH.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 9:46pm
                Taylorman said | September 13th 2017 @ 9:46pm | ! Report

                Digging a deeper hole. Indisputable facts shouldnt need clarification. You have a completely new no. 1 now. Now, apparently it isnt the same people and the population isnt the same. Veeeeery different from indisputable fact no. 1 version 1.

                With 4 you are bringing in new information about the present, that wasnt there in indisputable fact no. 4 earlier. Yes we know the NH pay higher salaries. But that is a far cry from making a theory a fact. The truth is, you have no idea what will happen.

                Youve spent endless posts trying to convince people of things that havent happened yet to the extent that you think theyre naive if they arent thinking the way you are.

                And whats odd is you think thats ok. You think youre right, I think youre wrong. Thats it. Or are you somehow going to prove the future?

              • September 13th 2017 @ 10:17pm
                Fionn said | September 13th 2017 @ 10:17pm | ! Report

                ‘Indisputable facts shouldn’t be red clarification’.

                Weird logic.

                Besides, it only needs clarification for you, Comprehensionman.

                Comprehensionman, I’ve never once complained about you having a different opinion. I think anyone who believes that NZ can go it alone against the might of the NH is either living in fantasy land or wilfully blind, and I have the right to point out where you make assertions based on dubious beliefs (most of your posts).

                No, I take issue with condescension towards all things in-NZ, and your inability to actually discuss issues in a logical fashion.

        • September 12th 2017 @ 2:22pm
          Matt M said | September 12th 2017 @ 2:22pm | ! Report

          Hi Fionn,

          Is NZ losing any more players to Europe now than in say the last 5-10 years? To be honest i don’t think there is much difference. Players have always left for one reason or another (primarily money) and the effective on NZ rugby has been minimal.

          And there has to be a saturation point too. I believe most European comps have limits on overseas players.

          As for NZRU and ARU teaming up, I can’t see that happening either. Simply put, what do Australia bring to the table?

          • September 12th 2017 @ 2:31pm
            Hertryk said | September 12th 2017 @ 2:31pm | ! Report

            what does the ARU bring to the table.????.nothing of any consequence.. !! Greedy self serving comes to mind.. I could add a few more but I would probably be arrested…and like the ARU oops ERU I am unable to afford the lawyer costs..

          • September 12th 2017 @ 2:31pm
            Fionn said | September 12th 2017 @ 2:31pm | ! Report

            Matt,

            I can’t pretend that I’ve crunched the numbers but my gut feeling is that they are losing more and more fringe or bench All Blacks than they did before.

            This is the biggest worry.

            Even if NZ can keep their first 23, it is the second and third string 23s who provide the depth and competition, and these guys (like TKB and Cruden) are valued extremely highly in the NH.

            Salaries up north have also grown exponentially over the last 5 years.

            Australia bring money to the table. This is the single most important thing to New Zealand, and the only thing that they can’t provide themselves.

            Imagine what would happen to SH based players if there is a recession in Aus/NZ and the value of our dollars decline? At least if we pool our financial resources we will be able to compete somewhat more easily.

            • September 12th 2017 @ 2:46pm
              Matt M said | September 12th 2017 @ 2:46pm | ! Report

              I haven’t crunched any numbers either, it just doesn’t feel like there is any change to me.

              And as I said, I don’t think Europe can handle too many more Kiwi players. If a professional league in the States could get off the ground then we might have an issue. But that seems a long way off, if ever.

              I’d assume the NZRU earns the majority of their income offshore so don’t imagine the value of the NZ dollar plays that bigger part.

              I thought the ARU was almost broke? How are they bring money to the table?

              • September 12th 2017 @ 2:54pm
                Fionn said | September 12th 2017 @ 2:54pm | ! Report

                There is a saturation point, but why would they continue ti buy average Aussie players when they could buy excellent Kiwi ones?

                The Australian market massively expands the viewers in Aus-NZ.

                Further, Mitre 10 Cup is not very popular internationally, whereas Super Rugby is. A trans-Tasman competition would I am pretty certain have much more appeal in Europe.

            • September 12th 2017 @ 6:03pm
              Ed said | September 12th 2017 @ 6:03pm | ! Report

              The ABs may be losing players north Fionn but they know players with potential could be tempted to improve their trade in NZ.

              http://www.canberratimes.com.au/sport/act-sport/super-rugby-waikato-chiefs-keen-on-canberra-rugby-prodigy-will-goddard-20170727-gxk3f6.html

              Laurie Fisher was recently scathing about the cutting of academies, particularly at the Brumbies. Another one of JON’s great initiatives.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 7:50pm
                Fionn said | September 12th 2017 @ 7:50pm | ! Report

                Ed, pretty despicable behaviour from the Chiefs in my opinion.

                New Zealand already has the best rugby talent in the world and a massive number of young players, New Zealand know that Australian rugby is struggling and yet they nonetheless target young Aussies.

                Seems like the equivalent of us giving Nabuli a cap and now he can’t play for Fiji. Maybe I am being cynical but that seemed suspicious to me.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 10:04am
                Ed said | September 13th 2017 @ 10:04am | ! Report

                It is like that but again an Australian player is considering going overseas at a young age as he thinks he will become a better player.

                I guess if he wants to be a professional player, he wants to learn from whom he considers will improve his craft. Again, this is an indictment on our setup, particularly with coaching.

                I wouldn’t be surprised Will Skelton will return from Saracens a better, fitter and stronger player than he left. Will has been under Cheika’s care first at the Tahs then the Wallabies, whom it appears values fitness above skills.

                Below is a link to an Irish podcast, the Hard Yards, where ILienster and Irish backrower Kevin McLaughlin talks about the differences in preseason training under Cheika and Joe Schmidt. McLaughlin says Cheika threw the sports science “out the window,” while Schmidt had very short, intense sessions with rugby related drills. This sounds similar to how Pep Guardiola and Jose Mourinho train their sides for fitness.
                Listen from around 8:00.

                https://soundcloud.com/thehardyardssportsjoe/ep-25-ian-madigans-time-in-france-rogs-pre-season-and-south-africas-pro14-team

              • September 13th 2017 @ 11:17am
                Taylorman said | September 13th 2017 @ 11:17am | ! Report

                Oh really Fionn, yet no sympathy for the hundreds of NZ players being targeted. Our teams pop for one and you call it dispicable. Get with the programme Fionn, WE didnt open that door.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 2:06pm
                Fionn said | September 13th 2017 @ 2:06pm | ! Report

                Most Kiwi players that leave New Zealand shores do so because they have little chance of making the All Blacks, or at least consistently making them.

                New Zealand has no shortage of talent for their super rugby teams either, which kee dominating.

                New Zealand knows Aussie rugby is in a bad place and needs all of the young prospects it can to remain competitive, and yet NZRU and many New Zealand rugby fans whinge about how uncompetitive Australian super rugby teams are, and yet nonetheless take lots of core guys that would help strengthen Aussie teams and help make us competitive.

                Kiwis can’t have it both ways, bemoan how uncompetive Aus is and yet take our prospects.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 6:05pm
                Jacko said | September 13th 2017 @ 6:05pm | ! Report

                Yes How dispicable of Waikato to be APPROACHED by this guys teacher and say yes we may be keen…The kid is being shopped around Aus and NZ…Clever management

              • September 13th 2017 @ 7:28pm
                Taylorman said | September 13th 2017 @ 7:28pm | ! Report

                No Fionn they leave because they can be paid more overseas. So wrong again.

                If they were paid the same or more here theres no way they would want to play in Europe, in second rate comps, away from family and friends, All Blacks or not.

                And yes it would be second, or third, rate if all our players were playing Super rugby here. The NH club scene would pale against our Super squads if the hundred plus players were fighting for spots here.

                So our clubs have to fight to compete as well. They dont want players like Cruden to go, but the cant afford him, so they shop for whatever they can get, just like the NH clubs.

                And you call them dispicable for having the guts of their teams ripped out every year, players that they have invested years in, for appealing to one player in Oz.

                Again, No idea. Double standards at its best. And youre saying NZ cant have it both ways? Say whaaaaat? You argue on and on its a given that our players get bought overseas yet we shouldnt do the same? Logic school for you chump.😀

          • Roar Guru

            September 12th 2017 @ 2:32pm
            The Neutral View From Sweden said | September 12th 2017 @ 2:32pm | ! Report

            Is NZ losing any more players to Europe now than in say the last 5-10 years?

            Yes, they are. And they get younger and younger. Before it was unseen that a player in his prime who is in AB’s contention left for Europe.

            And there has to be a saturation point too. I believe most European comps have limits on overseas players.

            They do. But if you consider the European clubs get richer and richer, that means the “salary pool” for the overseas player gets bigger every year. That means they can target the very best players (AB’s starters) in NZ eventually. And since they have a limit on how many overseas players they can have, they will for sure target the best of the best to get maximum use out of their overseas players.

            Simply put, what do Australia bring to the table?

            MONEY!

            • September 12th 2017 @ 2:57pm
              Matt M said | September 12th 2017 @ 2:57pm | ! Report

              Nick Evan and Carl Hayman spring to mind as players who left in their prime. There is plenty of others too, always has been.

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 3:13pm
                The Neutral View From Sweden said | September 12th 2017 @ 3:13pm | ! Report

                If you want to believe that it is up to you.

                Only this year several players in AB’s contention and in their prime has left (Cruden, Faumuina, Luatua, Ranger, Kerr-Barlow, Fekitoa)

              • September 12th 2017 @ 4:03pm
                Matt M said | September 12th 2017 @ 4:03pm | ! Report

                Neutral, every year players in their prime and AB’s contention leave. I don’t think there has been anymore this year compared to previous.

                And if you go through your list you will see there is already players coming through to replace them.

                You make it sound like it’s all doom and gloom for NZ rugby. I think the exact opposite.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 4:29pm
                Taylorman said | September 12th 2017 @ 4:29pm | ! Report

                Yes Matt its the sort of thing people do when they have no vested interest in the status quo, regardless of whether its under threat or not.

                Ill just watch our own rugby. Im not interested in watching a bunch of players running around in jerseys at 4am that Ive never seen before who have no commonality other than the dollars they earn.

                Rugby is a passion, it thrives on its grass roots, and we still have that here. I wont watch Euro club rugby because its synthetic, manufactured. People like Swede will because hes never known what its like to live within, play and support a rugby community. So the typical rugby audience demographic or profile will have to change to those who have never actually played it. Stuff that. A bunch of never playeds all trying to intellectually analyse a game they have no personal experience of. Imagine those conversations in a pub where theyre all trying to impress with their tv knowledge of the game.

                Now that might make me a Dinosaur but I wont be the only one and if the domestic scene erodes here so will our ability to produce players, because no one will care.

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 4:57pm
                The Neutral View From Sweden said | September 12th 2017 @ 4:57pm | ! Report

                You might be a dinosaur, but most of all your thinking is elitist. You want to claim that you own the game more. Complete rubbish T-man.

                And in case you don’t know it, the game was invented in England and to this day, there are many people in Europe who live and breathe rugby in communities just like the one claim to belong to (I thought you belong to The Roar community, hence it appears that you talk way more rugby with the “plastic Swede” than your so called pals at the pub).

              • September 12th 2017 @ 5:01pm
                RahRah said | September 12th 2017 @ 5:01pm | ! Report

                “The plastic Swede” – do you come flat packed? 😀

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 4:42pm
                Ralph said | September 12th 2017 @ 4:42pm | ! Report

                I am a Crusaders fan.

                We just signed Braydon Ennor to join outside backs George Bridge, Israel Dagg, Digby Ioane, Jone Macilai, David Havili, Seta Tamanivalu, Ryan Crotty and Jack Goodhue and Tim Bateman.

                I am super excited about our title defence.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 5:09pm
                Taylorman said | September 12th 2017 @ 5:09pm | ! Report

                Yes thats right Swede, the game was invented in England and as with any sport they invented, they stuffed it up, and now others own it and made it a much better sport.

                Now theyre wanting to buy it back. Well good on them. Im entitled to want to keep the status quo and dont have to but into your oh so superior view of the sport in the new world.

                Left in your hands and those you kneel down before as the games saviours in Europe will stuff it up again, put it on display like monkeys in a zoo and the real heart of rugby will be lost.

                I dont buy the fact that the game is able to be expanded in a commercial sense any bigger way than it is now, because most just wont understand the point of the game without its grassroots concept.

                The picture you paint as the future of our game makes me ill. And thats why it wont work.

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 5:34pm
                The Neutral View From Sweden said | September 12th 2017 @ 5:34pm | ! Report

                Sometimes you must really unlucky when you are thinking T-man.

                If you cared to really read what I am writing, you would see that I am pitching ideas how to keep NZ as top dog in the rugby world long term.

                And how full of yourself are you? Your last sentence is the most self-centered comment I have ever seen on The Roar (and there is some seriously stiff competition)

                The picture you paint as the future of our game makes me ill. And thats why it wont work.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 6:07pm
                Matt M said | September 12th 2017 @ 6:07pm | ! Report

                Neutral, the NZRU has kept NZ rugby as the top dog for the majority of the last two decades.

                Pitching a tent with the ARU would be one of the fastest ways to undo all that!

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 6:09pm
                The Neutral View From Sweden said | September 12th 2017 @ 6:09pm | ! Report

                Wow Matt M… how can you overlook the fact the during these two decades when NZ has been top dog, they have cooperated closely with ARU?

              • September 12th 2017 @ 6:26pm
                Matt M said | September 12th 2017 @ 6:26pm | ! Report

                What does “Cooperated closely with the ARU” have to do with anything? I’m sure they have cooperated closely with the other SAANZAR partners too. And all the other major unions around the world for that matter.

                The NZRU have used the SAANZAR partnership to grow NZ rugby into a world force with NZ rugby as a whole working together. Unfortunately the same can’t be said of the ARU.

                Australia will get back there I’m sure, but until that point, or unless they approach the NZRU for help, we should leave them to sort out their own mess

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 6:53pm
                The Neutral View From Sweden said | September 12th 2017 @ 6:53pm | ! Report

                What does “Cooperated closely with the ARU” have to do with anything?

                That means by far and away that ARU has been NZR closest partner since rugby went pro. So it means a lot.

                I’m sure they have cooperated closely with the other SAANZAR partners too. And all the other major unions around the world for that matter.

                With SARU yes, not so much with anyone else, hence there is really no-one else bar Argentina (who is the new kid on the block and frankly bring almost nothing commercially) in Sanzaar.
                Yes, NZR has done deals with other Unions but on a much much smaller level.
                And in case you live in a cage, you should know that SARU might not be around for so much longer.

                The NZRU have used the SAANZAR partnership to grow NZ rugby into a world force in NZ rugby as a whole working together. Unfortunately the same can’t be said of the ARU.

                Yes, that is true. So what makes you think they could do it by themselves? Without dollars from SA and OZ, the current NZR setup will not work.

                Australia will get back there I’m sure, but until that point, or unless they approach the NZRU for help, we should leave them to sort out their own mess.

                Unless you want to join them down in the basement, you better start looking at options that will make OZ rugby strong also, not only NZ rugby. Long term the success of NZ and OZ rugby are very dependent on that the other is strong.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 7:29pm
                Matt M said | September 12th 2017 @ 7:29pm | ! Report

                Hi Neutral, we clearly have different views on this. I just don’t think NZ rugby is that dependent on the strength of rugby in Australia.

                As I commented on another thread, I think in the short term the NZRU and SARU should team up and show the ARU the door.

                Go back to a Super 11 or 12/13 if SA go back to 5 or 6 teams. Most agree the round robin format with teams alternating home and away matches each year was the best setup and it means less travel vs the current system. And the overall standard of the comp should see a jump with 6 of this year’s bottom 8 gone.

                With the majority of revenue for the NZ teams coming from SA, and Europe I doubt there would be much difference in funding. And the teams would have less travel which would help reduce costs.

                Radical maybe but I would trust the NZRU to make it work. And it might just be the catalysis Australia needs to rebuild their game and win back the support of their fans.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 7:49pm
                Jacko said | September 12th 2017 @ 7:49pm | ! Report

                Maybe the ARU should learn what cooperating means

              • September 12th 2017 @ 10:09pm
                FunBus said | September 12th 2017 @ 10:09pm | ! Report

                ‘Yes thats right Swede, the game was invented in England and as with any sport they invented, they stuffed it up, and now others own it and made it a much better sport.’

                I won’t bother engaging with this childish myth, Tman, I know what a comfort blanket it is for Kiwis, but it really is irrelevant. NZ rugby can stamp its little feet like a 5 year old with a lisp screaming ‘but I’m weally, weally, weally, weally great, it’s not faaiirr’ all it wants, it’s not going to alter rugby economics. Steve Tew already received an important lesson when he tried the tactic of doubling down on the arrogance and hubris by DEMANDING that England give up half its profits for the sheer honour and joy of being allowed to enter the same pitch as the ABs. The polite decline was followed by an increasingly exasperated ‘get your own economic house in order’ before demanding to benefit from the fruits of those who already have.
                There are some facts that can’t be avoided:

                1. SA are probably on an inexorable march northwards over the next 5 years.
                2. The Mitre 10 is of zero interest to anyone outside of NZ.
                3. There will be neither a home RWC nor a Lions tour to top up revenues for at least 12 years and, in my view, probably much longer.
                4. The appetite outside NZ to watch 5 kiwi SR teams hammer 4 Aussie SR teams week after week is likely to be increasingly limited.
                5. Best of seven Bledisloe Cup series every year doesn’t seem to be the route to increase revenues.

                If you can’t see the need to think outside the box for ways to marry the relatively large Aussie sports market with the NZ rugby culture then, while I may get a good giggle about watching NZ rugby disappearing up its own fundament, I’m not sure it’s good for the game as a whole.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 10:32pm
                Taylorman said | September 12th 2017 @ 10:32pm | ! Report

                Swede NZ has done a good job of keeping itself at the top of the game without you… ‘finding a way to keep NZ at the top’…

                Of any country NZ knows more about this game that anyone so I siggest you start with us.

                We have more players and coaches plying their trade in more countries in the world than anyone. We have coached more 6N winning sides than anyone outside the
                Uk and Ireland and have had an influence in both SA and Oz in both SA and Oz, Ackerman crediting former NZ coaches as part of his success.

                We have had players captain many international sides bother in tier one and below countries.

                So in terms of playing and coaching no one has a more global appreciation of rugby than NZ. We have the finger on the pulse in this game in more places in the world than youve had hot dinners. And despite our significant cobtribution around the globe we still maintain a clear no. 1 status using only domestic based coaches and players.

                So you can go on preaching NZs naivety in this game but Id suggesr to you NZ is well on top of this game in terms of the future of it.

                You meanwhile are just a gas bag on a web site with no involvement whatsoever in the game pitching a hundred tired old variations of Europe has moola and NZers is too far away they know nothing.

                Never seen such an empty, condascending bag of wind discuss this game before with so little pedigree in the game harping on about exactly the same thing in as many variations as he can possible conjure up.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 10:35pm
                Taylorman said | September 12th 2017 @ 10:35pm | ! Report

                Mitre 10’has zero interest outside NZ FB? Then how come your poachers are continuously down here looking at it to find players instead of looking at their own? Oh theyre interested alright.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 10:38pm
                FunBus said | September 12th 2017 @ 10:38pm | ! Report

                ‘Rugby is a passion, it thrives on its grass roots, and we still have that here. I wont watch Euro club rugby because its synthetic, manufactured.’

                Geez, the arrogance knows no bounds. Why is Auckland Blues SR team (established in 2006) the very essence of authenticity, while a club like Exeter in the Aviva Premiership (established 1871) artificial?
                You wear the ‘I don’t watch European club rugby’, (while pontificating upon it ad nauseum), like a badge of honour.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 10:56pm
                FunBus said | September 12th 2017 @ 10:56pm | ! Report

                ‘You meanwhile are just a gas bag on a web site with no involvement whatsoever in the game pitching a hundred tired old variations of Europe has moola and NZers is too far away they know nothing.

                Never seen such an empty, condascending bag of wind discuss this game before with so little pedigree in the game harping on about exactly the same thing in as many variations as he can possible conjure up.’

                How the hell do you know what my involvement in the game is? The arrogance, bordering on psychological disorder, of many Kiwis (and you’re something of an exemplar) when it comes to rugby is comical. You bask entirely in reflected glory. Currently England has a dozen world boxing champions and the two best triathletes in the world. I don’t pick fights with massive blokes in the pub expecting to win on this basis nor think I can win iron man challenges. There are many Kiwis who know a lot about rugby, just as there are many English, Aussies, Scots, Irish etc etc etc. There’s only one nation that breeds people who demand to be treated as rugby ‘gurus’ just because what appears on their birth certificate, however. Kiwis are no morte immune to spouting drivel about rugby than any other nationality.
                There are many reasons for Kiwi rugby success over the decades. Mostly, they tend to boil down to the incredibly central place the game has within the national myth, something that has no comparison anywhere in the world where the game is a minority interest or of no interest at all. It allows NZ to punch well above its weight. However, it’s not a law of nature. Aussies used to laugh at pom swimmers for example, and indeed, in the 1990s there was hardly a British swimmer that didn’t need water wings, and the Olympics team in general was a joke. In the last Olympics the team finished second behind the US, and the swimming team just won more gold medals in the world swimming championships than the Aussies.
                You can trace the changes back through structural changes in funding and development pathways. If Kiwis believe that uniquely in the long history of sport, NZ rugby is immune from such possible shifts in forces than you’re more hubristic than even I believed.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 11:06pm
                FunBus said | September 12th 2017 @ 11:06pm | ! Report

                Mitre 10’has zero interest outside NZ FB? Then how come your poachers are continuously down here looking at it to find players instead of looking at their own? Oh theyre interested alright.

                The reply I just made to you has yet to pass the mods, Tman. While I did note the comical levels of arrogance and hubris that seems to be the defining feature of Kiwi rugby fans, it was, in general polite,r than the one from you to me, so I assume it will eventually appear.

                Your Mitre 10 argument is weird and I can only assume you’ve lost your temper and what little sense of balance there was to begin with. Taking the Aviva Premiership, the development pathways are absolutely thriving. The quality of young players coming through will in the next few years shock those who, like you, pontificate on the subject but know nothing about it (despite your birth certificate – apparently the only claim to rugby expertise required).

                My point was that AUDIENCES outside NZ have no interest in Mitre 10 and therefore no revenue for NZ rugby will be forthcoming. However, as you’ve raised the point of ‘poaching’ (fascinating as we’re all debating how brilliant Fifita was – yet another graduate from the ‘scholarship’ programme I believe) increasingly there will be no interest, certainly from England, in Mitre 10 players. Despite the 12 teams and need for very big squads, they’ll start to cherry-pick established ABs rather than ordinary Mitre 10 players.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 11:48pm
                Taylorman said | September 12th 2017 @ 11:48pm | ! Report

                FB, the post you are quoting of mine in terms of rugby pedigree starts with Swede…did you miss that? I have no idea what your rugby background is somhavent read the rest, thats probably all part of your miscomprehension as well.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 11:55pm
                Taylorman said | September 12th 2017 @ 11:55pm | ! Report

                Mitre 10 is a domestic comp with domestic players, why would there be any interest though I have seen the matches discussed by overseas watchers here regularly so ‘no interest’ is clearly a little porky.

                I have no interest in the UK domestic comps other than to watch them fall over themselves trying to play the game. I dont even care about the NZ players grabbing all the headlines either. Nobody much watches the Aviva here, besides it being a joke and a drop in standard to whatbwe are used to its tucked away on our over expensive rugby channell.

                The amount of discussion re club rugby on the ROAR is practically non existent, in fact theres far more Mitre 10 so it goes both ways.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 9:37am
                Fionn said | September 13th 2017 @ 9:37am | ! Report

                ‘I have no interest in the UK domestic comps other than to watch them fall over themselves trying to play the game … besides it being a joke and a drop in standard to whatbwe are used to its tucked away on our over expensive rugby channell.’

                Pathetic comment, Taylorman.

                The arrogance you display, and your condescending attitude towards foreign players and fans (of all countries) would be sad if it wasn’t so funny for the rest of us.

                Look how much the UK domestic comp is worth vs how much the Mitre 10 is worth. Clearly a heck of a lot more people have an interest in watching the UK domestic comp than the NZ domestic comp. You ever think that the reason Mitre 10 cup is more discussed on here than Aviva or Pro14 is because there are more Aussie and Kiwi posters than British or Irish?

              • September 13th 2017 @ 11:21am
                Taylorman said | September 13th 2017 @ 11:21am | ! Report

                Oh? So FB belittling the Mitre 10 is ok in your eyes? I do the same and then you jump.

                No idea Fionn, your double standards are clear. Youre all over the place. At least I a, consistent, deal with the real world and not whats in todays tea leaves.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 2:13pm
                Fionn said | September 13th 2017 @ 2:13pm | ! Report

                Don’t act like a child, pointing out that more people are interested in the Aviva premiership than Mitre 10 is not ‘belittling’ Mitre 10. Instead, it is a fact that reflects the fact that New Zealand is a country of 4.5 million and its matches are on at about 4am for those in Britain and Ireland.

                England is a country of about 40 million or so, and the British and Irish teams all play each other closely (European Cup) and South Africa is considering joining the NH, AND the English domestic comp is on at prime time for SA, all of Britain and Ireland.

                Your inability to accept basic facts of population and global interest is mind boggling. News flash: opinions in New Zealand do not reflect global opinion.

                And I happen to be more interested than Mitre 10 than Aviva as I know the players from SR and it is on at a better time. Doesn’t change the fact that global interest.

                Please enlighten me as to my double standards? I don’t think I have any. Instead, I think that you become offended and defensive whenever someone doesn’t sit down and worship at the altar of all matters of rugby connected to New Zealand.

                Irony is I love the All Blacks and am a sucker for guys like Federer or Aussie cricket teams. I love seeing the best in the world at full flight. However, you become offended whenever someone questions the dominance of NZ in anything related to rugby – whether that is individual players, analysis, the All Blacks or super rugby teams, or, apparently, Mitre 10 vs Aviva.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 3:02pm
                Taylorman said | September 13th 2017 @ 3:02pm | ! Report

                Geez Fionn you really do struggle with trying to understand a comment.

                Its simple, if someone says something inflammatory like ‘no one cares about Mitre 10 outside NZ’ an obviously factually untrue statement, then I will comment.

                I dont care about NH club rugby so I said so.

                Now Im to understand you are now taking offense at that?

                Tough. Do I really want to know about nunbers? Nope. So why waste your time droning on. An opinion is an opinion. Is there a part to that you dont understand? If so let me help you.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 3:16pm
                Fionn said | September 13th 2017 @ 3:16pm | ! Report

                ‘Do I really want to know about numbers? Nope.’

                That’s the problem, you want to live in a fantasy land where your opinion is of equal or greater value as facts.

                News flash, you’re entitled to your opinion, but not your own facts. And your opinion is meaningless when it is contradicted by facts.

                I never said that ‘no one’ outside of New Zealand cares about Mitre 10. Again, you have basic comprehension problems.

                Besides, even if I had said that, it is largely true. Very, very few people watch or follow Mitre 10 outside of NZ except for the Kiwi diaspora. It’s the same with the NRC and Currie Cup. You have delusions of grandeur.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 3:29pm
                Fionn said | September 13th 2017 @ 3:29pm | ! Report

                I also don’t mind whatsoever whether you’re interested or disinterested in NH rugby.

                I take issue with your constant belittling and condescension towards rugby outside of New Zealand. Rubbishing other people’s teams, players and interests. The rest of the world respects New Zealand rugby regardless of whether people are interested in it, perhaps you could do the same to the rest of the world, eh?

              • Roar Guru

                September 13th 2017 @ 3:50pm
                PeterK said | September 13th 2017 @ 3:50pm | ! Report

                Fionn – I have to agree with your last comment wholeheartedly.

                I admire The Neutral View From Sweden for taking such an interest in the sport , following it, and understanding it as complex as it is.

                He has the temerity to point out what he sees as imperfections in NZ rugby and cops immense flak.

                It is unbelievable the arrogance, dismissiveness , and derogatory attitude that taylorman expresses to him. It seems his respect for people and their thoughts is a direct correlation with how good their national rugby team.

                Just because his is a vicarious existence it seems everyone’s else’s is too.

                His lack of logic and critical thinking however is no surprise.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 6:13pm
                Jacko said | September 13th 2017 @ 6:13pm | ! Report

                hahahahaha if you go to Channel 503 RIGHT NOW in AUS on FOX you can watch mitre 10 rugby….That comp that a lot of you say has zero interest outside NZ…..Im in Aus and I AM WATCHING…And Im interested…haha

              • September 13th 2017 @ 7:58pm
                Fionn said | September 13th 2017 @ 7:58pm | ! Report

                You’re a part of the New Zealand diaspora, Jacko…

              • September 15th 2017 @ 6:04pm
                Jacko said | September 15th 2017 @ 6:04pm | ! Report

                Yes Fionn Of course I am….Isnt that what drives pay TV all around the world????? Ex-p-ats -have $$$$ t-o spend just like everyone else….And if the Mitre 10 cup is my spending choice then they get my money…..Just like in Europe..

            • September 12th 2017 @ 2:58pm
              Matt M said | September 12th 2017 @ 2:58pm | ! Report

              And where is the ARU getting this money from? I thought they were borderline broke?

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 3:15pm
                The Neutral View From Sweden said | September 12th 2017 @ 3:15pm | ! Report

                It is broadcasting money. I thought that was pretty damn obvious…

              • September 12th 2017 @ 3:24pm
                Matt M said | September 12th 2017 @ 3:24pm | ! Report

                I thought the majority of Super rugby income came from SA and Europe?

                If for some reason Australia dropped out of Super rugby, would the total revenue the NZRU and SARU receive drop? I doubt it, sure the broadcasting deal would be less but so would the teams needing their percentage.

              • Roar Guru

                September 12th 2017 @ 4:50pm
                The Neutral View From Sweden said | September 12th 2017 @ 4:50pm | ! Report

                Indeed the big money comes from SA and Europe.

                Broadcasting money is highly dependent on time zones. NZ is not in a good spot. OZ is in a little better spot (still not good, but much better than NZ). SA is in an excellent spot (but that is another topic).

                Right now it a much bigger chance that SA drops SR than OZ. Much much bigger.

                Even if the numbers in OZ rugby are small compared to AFL, NRL et al. the numbers look pretty good when they are compared to NZ.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 5:18pm
                Taylorman said | September 12th 2017 @ 5:18pm | ! Report

                NZs in a great spot. Best spot on the planet.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 7:14pm
                ethan said | September 12th 2017 @ 7:14pm | ! Report

                Yes T-Man. NZ is in such a good spot for international broadcasting, being on a North/South axis with the pacific Islands, Antarctica, and far flung corner of Russia.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 7:53pm
                Jacko said | September 12th 2017 @ 7:53pm | ! Report

                I guess if no one is giving money to NZRU to watch NZ rugby then no one will be buying NZ players as they WONT SEE THEM….

              • September 12th 2017 @ 10:40pm
                Taylorman said | September 12th 2017 @ 10:40pm | ! Report

                Probably a good thing jacko because Im starting to tnink they dont deserve to.

                Its hilarious that with all this so called money we have so jany players and coaches in demand that they cant with the hundreds of millions of people produce their own talent.

                Last 6N we had the winning captain and three of the six coaches were Nzers.

                Just shows how terrible they are for resources, and the knowledge in hiw to create winning teams.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 11:27pm
                FunBus said | September 12th 2017 @ 11:27pm | ! Report

                ‘Just shows how terrible they are for resources, and the knowledge in hiw to create winning teams.’

                But, Tman, despite your birth certificate which conveys by definition deep insight into all factors of the game, you constantly admit with pride you know absolutely nothing about European club rugby and the associated development pathways.

                I suppose that’s why you draw big conclusions about the ‘resources in the game’ from the fact that last years England captain was a half-English bloke who moved to England from NZ as a 16 year old. Good job I’m not so simplistic as to draw attention to the fact that the latest AB star is yet another graduate from the ‘scholarship’ programme – you know that selflessly designed altruistic NZ effort to provide opportunities to the youth of the Pacific Islands – providing they’re brilliant at rugby, of course. Whoops, my bad.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 11:58pm
                Taylorman said | September 12th 2017 @ 11:58pm | ! Report

                Sorry FB, dont get any of that, you seem to be talking to, then correcting, youself.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 6:17pm
                Jacko said | September 13th 2017 @ 6:17pm | ! Report

                I suppose that’s why you draw big conclusions about the ‘resources in the game’ from the fact that last years England captain was a half-English bloke who moved to England from NZ as a 16 year old.

                So he’s a Kiwi then…..So Tman was 100% spot on eh

            • September 13th 2017 @ 11:11am
              Jacko said | September 13th 2017 @ 11:11am | ! Report

              You can balance these young guys leaving with a lot of guys playing longer in NZ. Maybe a transfer fee like in Soccer

        • September 12th 2017 @ 4:16pm
          mzilikazi said | September 12th 2017 @ 4:16pm | ! Report

          “a domestic competition that essentially feeds Northern Hemisphere elite rugby, where, rather like soccer, all good players play in Europe and you get developing players and guys close to retirement playing in their domestic leagues.”

          Fionn, have felt this will happen for some time now. Interesting times though, with foreign players keeping emerging, and currently “second tier” players out of the major teams. France have cited this as a problem for a few years now, and a comment from Bakkies recently suggested that Ruan Pienaar was encouraged to move on from Ulster as he was keeping local talent out.

          Pienaar must be getting near the end of his career now at 33. I see he is listed as a Montpelier player now.

          • September 12th 2017 @ 4:35pm
            Bakkies said | September 12th 2017 @ 4:35pm | ! Report

            ‘France have cited this as a problem for a few years now, and a comment from Bakkies recently suggested that Ruan Pienaar was encouraged to move on from Ulster as he was keeping local talent out.’

            Pienaar was told by Nucifora to go as the IRFU wouldn’t register his contract extension. This caused a lot of tension between Ulster fans and the IRFU.

          • September 12th 2017 @ 7:58pm
            Jacko said | September 12th 2017 @ 7:58pm | ! Report

            So maybe the SH to NH player drain will slow down then?

            • September 12th 2017 @ 9:34pm
              Fionn said | September 12th 2017 @ 9:34pm | ! Report

              Or maybe they’ll just focus on getting better players rather than fringe ones? Why have Pienaar when you can have Cruden.

              • September 12th 2017 @ 11:37pm
                FunBus said | September 12th 2017 @ 11:37pm | ! Report

                ‘Or maybe they’ll just focus on getting better players rather than fringe ones? Why have Pienaar when you can have Cruden.’

                This is precisely what will happen, Fionn. There are 12 teams in the Aviva; now 14 in Pro 14, and another 14 in the French league. They all have long seasons and need big squads, Certainly, the French have damaged their game by hoovering up talent from all over the world (not just SH), but the English, Irish, Welsh and Scots look like they’ve avoided that. It’s a big mistake to think there’s any problem with the development pathways. It’s never been healthier than it is in England at the moment. Six players on the recent senior tour to Argentina were eligible for the U-20 championship.
                What will happen is that the clubs will cherry-pick the better players. As you say, Cruden rather than Pienaar.

              • September 13th 2017 @ 11:14am
                Jacko said | September 13th 2017 @ 11:14am | ! Report

                Fionn on other posts you have lauded Mo’unga as the next big star 10 of NZ rugby so Cruden leaves and another on steps up….Brynn Gatland looks ok…Oterre Black is sort after…Thats NZ rugby…However its almost time a transfer fee, just like soccer, comes into play

      • September 12th 2017 @ 3:25pm
        frisky said | September 12th 2017 @ 3:25pm | ! Report

        Why was it dropped ?

    • September 12th 2017 @ 8:04am
      Ron49 said | September 12th 2017 @ 8:04am | ! Report

      The major problem is not SANZAAR but the quality of Australian teams below the Wallabies. Until they become competitive with the successful franchises (at the moment, they are not) it’s pointless speculating about changes at the Super Rugby level. This quality deficit has led to diminishing crowds and viewers which will bring dire future financial consequences. A move to bolster the NRC competition, which hopefully leads to a vast improvement in Australian standards, is essential. Lastly, please don’t involve NZ teams for any proposal to bolster Australian rugby, as though they are a transferable commodity able to be traded at will. It’s annoying and demeaning. NZ rugby is at it’s zenith, holds all trophies including the three World Cups, so to have it treated Willy Nilly for Australia’s purpose is just not on.

      • September 12th 2017 @ 8:40am
        TT said | September 12th 2017 @ 8:40am | ! Report

        Don’t forget they’re also the current holders of both the men and women’s 7’s world cups Ron.

        Full house:-)

    Explore:
    ,