Rethinking the structure of Australian rugby

A structure worth considering Sheek. But I have to ask - where would the money come from?

lol love it Ra i will take your advice bottom from the ground up. I think i do need a NZ tour guide or geography lesson before i coach some under-10's and junior footy you got me summed there. Would love to do some coaching in Taranaki or counties, or Napier, or Hawkes Bay once I get the NZ geography lesson passed. But like I said kiwis know what's best for kiwis mate, and kiwis should have total control of grassroots rugby in NZ, and they always will , that's end of start non-negotiable. But at the elite level Aust/NZ can share and work as a 1 as a team, at the club level im talking about. And I have no issues either I might add if an Aussy coaches the AB'S one day. Why not Ra. We got Dingo coaching us now, why not the other way round. You blokes got Phil Mooney from us. He was coaching down Otago way in the ITM cup not that long ago from memory. But like all sports with trans-tasman stuff, Netball,NRL,NBL, A-league , the trans-tasman alliance has been a hit, and why not rugby. If the kiwis can and many want too but many don't want to swallow there pride on Rugby, but if they do kiwi rugby could make a lot more money with a trans-tasman comp, at keep league, Japan rugby, and French rugby, less influential Ra.

Who said you're gonna take over Johnno?? Get away from your computer screen and go join a club and coach a team of 10 year olds for the next five years to ground yourself, because someone who admits to not knowing where Taranaki is from Auckland is not the guy who should be telling Kiwis, geez have I got a great plan for you guys

Completely agree. The details of some of the teams may vary, but the talent needs to be concentrated. I think we know who to thank for killing the idea last time around. Ego can be ugly.

Where do these 6 games come from? The Sydney comp? If that's the case the problem is that you won't get 5-7k coming to those games. Talent's spread way too thin to be worth watching. What's more, the players don't improve by playing at that level. You may beg to differ, but my guess is you're either a rusted on supporter, have some personal connection with a club, or both. For people with an interest in the game but no connection (like myself), the overall standard of Shute Shield just ain't high enough to pay for.

I’d love to get back to NZ. I was there in 99’ for a high school rugby trip and had a ball. Almost managed to convince the missus for a RWC trip last year but a US trip to visit rellies won out. I’ll make sure I get back there one day soon though.

"Let's go bck to our roots" and finish the job with Rugby becoming a non-competitive force. Well done. Bravo. You are advocating too many teams that would dramatically reduce the quality and overall appeal of the game. Rugby has moved on from the not so good old days and it's about many fans do to.

If you're ever coming to nz, let me know, and we'll hook up.

Actualy, the KiWi ratings are faily poor in erms of te overall representation of them as 1 10th of theleague - but hey, what would I know. As a working political economist I guess I am just out of touch with reality. As to the Aussies playing in NZ - they can play anywhere in the world if they want to. Thats the beauty and the challenge of football. Anyway - this is a rugby discussion - and my view of the overall proposition in the article is that it is a sound one. I think Super Rugby needs to come back a tier and life the grass roots. Ultimtely Australia, in particular, will suffer if the ARU dont do something - and pobably not in the too distant future at the rate the grass roots are dwindiling.

Didi you even ad my comments above. NZ dont have a problem with me - I like em. I a simply making thepoint many others in the game (and some powerfull people too) dont. More pointedly - I am simply refuting the point that the A-League "needs" NZ by arguing that the politics will get them, but not before domestic expansion allows for it. Best you not get your pnties in a bunch with me Ra - you have some real enemies in football. I aint ne of them.

Completely understand NZ’s deep love of their NPC and the important place it holds in the development of countries rugby talent. Last post below I’ve put down my idea for a ‘Trans-Tasman’ calendar and I’d allocate the SH Tour window and TRC as the time to run NPC along with Sydney/Brisbane club rugby. NZ is in a vulnerable position due to its small population and economy and this is why NZ can benefit from forging the ‘right sort’ of ties with Australia. By that I mean a Trans-Tasman competition with rules in place that still protects NZ’s rights to its talent. As I’ve mentioned, our close geographical and cultural ties make the possibility of a Trans-Tasman rugby competition being a raging hot success (with the right rules in place). The credibility of international rugby still needs to be maintained and such a competition shouldn’t lead to AUS/NZ’s rugby relationship resembling a swap meet. And I’ll freely admit, this situation would obviously benefit Australian interests but I think Australian rugby fans wouldn’t want it to come to this and would want to ensure the integrity of the international game.

In an expansion scenario - that seems absolutely plausable. My view is simply that the politics may get them.

I could run with this. We may beg to differ on certain issues, but you do put forward some compelling arguments. What you do have to understand is that we are very protective of our national comp, it may not be what it was, but it is still vital to the ongoing success of the ab's. As it is, I am probably out of touch on this issue, as I am well aware this will probably happen sometime in the future.You are starting to see this with the partial sale of our super franchises. From a nz pov, it's sad to be in a position where we have one of the best player pools ( along with sa), but due to having a small population and economy,don't have the means to protect it.

From a Trans-Tasman point of view this is the season/competition structure that I would go for: Trans-Tasman League: - 16 teams with 8 teams from both AUS and NZ. - 15 regular season rounds plus a 3-4 week finals series (18-19 week competition). Mid-Year Test window: - 3 week window with 3 games against NH touring sides. The Rugby Championship: - As is. Super Rugby (or Indian/Pacific Cup): - Involves 8 teams from AUS, NZ and SA. Plus 4 teams from ARG and JAP (could eventually be brought down to 2 with the inclusion of 2 teams from both US and CAN). - 8 groups of 4 (avg. group includes a teams from AUS/NZ/SA and the final spot filled by a JAP/ARG team). - Group stage played home and away (6 games) and played over a 4 week window. - Finals involves round of 16, QF, SF, GF. - 8 week tournament in total. End of Year Test window: - 4 week window with SH teams touring NH for 4 games each (as is).

CK we need South Africa to keep the game fully professional in Australia. They are the biggest players in the Sanzar tv market.

NZ netball is 'A' powerhouse of the sport. Australian netball is also 'a' powerhouse of the sport. Aren't 2 powerhouses working together to grow and benefit the game in their respective countries better than 1? I think the ANZ Cup is a testament to that.

I think you’re missing the point Richard. I think you’ll find most basketball fans in Australia (and the world over) would also follow the NBA and have a team that they’re a fan of. But don’t you think that NZ basketball fans would also like to have a local team of their own that they can get behind that’s playing in a league, that while not being anything like the standard of the NBA, is still a recognised professional basketball league (and has been recognised as the second best league in the world before). The fact that the 11/12 finals series drew record crowds of over 9,000 twice says that there may actually be a few people who don’t mind the Breakers being involved in the NBL. And having a team involved in an Australian league in a sport like basketball provides the NZ sport public a standard that they would never achieve by ‘going it alone’ and creating their own domestic league. I don’t see NZ being a potential NBA expansion area any time soon so I’m thinking that basketball fans in NZ would be pretty happy with what they’ve got and wouldn’t be too keen on the idea of losing their premiership winning team.

I agree with you Richard in saying that if increasing the number of teams at the elite level meant Australia went hunting for prospective NZ talent to play for our franchises and possibly our national team, then the concept for a Trans-Tasman league would be ugly. I also agree that Australia would ‘need’ some NZ talent to help our franchises be competitive. But I would like to think that if such a league were put in place, there would be ways to get around this problem. I’ve engaged with yourself and others in regards to cleaning up international eligibility and the irb making it harder for individual players to change allegiances. I still hold out hope that these rules will come under review in the future. Going over and above that I think Australia and New Zealand could enter into an agreement where if a player is born in one country and stays there until he’s finished high school (17/18) then he can move to Australia (or NZ) and play for one of its franchises but at international level it’s a hands off policy and no matter how long he stays in Australia he can only represent NZ. Putting rules in place that creates a free market between the 2 countries and allows both unions to break down restrictions on where players can play is an ideal situation. Under such an arrangement there would be huge benefits for NZ rugby. It would mean that roughly, NZ might have 9 to 10 team’s worth of players playing the game professionally who are all eligible to represent the AB’s. It would still benefit us because we’d still have at least one extra team worth of players making a living from rugby. Over time I’m sure the ARU would hope to increase the number of eligible Australians involved in the competition too. The big benefit for both markets is the fact that more fans will be represented by professional rugby. I see increased domestic coverage at the elite level as a huge positive for Australian rugby and it’s something that can help the game get out of the shadows of the NRL and AFL. I know you have the NPC in NZ which is in just about every nook and cranny of the country, but surely an increased presence at the top of the domestic tree wouldn’t exactly be a negative.

I agree Emeric, NZ doesn’t use anybody but neither does Australia. Is it really that hard a concept for people (not yourself obviously) to grasp that these professional sporting league expansions are business decisions made in the best interest in of all parties involved. If people in NZ had no desire to have the Warriors, Phoenix and Breakers in our national sporting leagues then pretty simple… they wouldn’t exist. We’re geographically and culturally similar so why not feed off each other and build relationships to benefit both parties in sport. The ANZ Cup is a perfect example of a competition that (rightly so) has an equal standing across both countries with 5 teams from each and has been a raging success since its inception. I believe a Trans-Tasman rugby competition (with 8 teams from each) has got similar potential by taking over the role of Super Rugby as both countries elite competition and providing both countries with benefits that SR cannot. Eg. more teams for more talent to be making a living from rugby and more fans being represented by professional rugby, plus a more localised league that’s easier for fans to follow with all games in time zones that are fan friendly.

Why are you bringing cricket into this conversation, the situation is completely different. These players weren't targeted by NZC in the hope they would be available for nz.A complete role reversal from what oz rugby is doing, which is targeting nz rugby talent with the carrot of wb selection. For hardcore fans of basketball, yeah, it matters, but my guess is they follow the NBA, more than they would follow the oz comp - I have heard people describe it as a piss weak comp.; the only comp that has any real traction in nz is the nrl. I stand by what I said, if nz didn't compete in the basketball, football and netball comps, most nzers would get over it. The real comps are overseas i.e NBL in oz or NBA in America; NL in Australia or Premier League in England etc. Just as an aside, I'm assuming your an aussie living in nz? Peace!