Super Rugby by the numbers (TV)

Fav time for both codes of Australian Rugby for me was 1989-1995 then 1996-2005 for Union and 2002-2010 for NRL. Now it seems like everything is slipping off the rader and the product is stale and corporate.

The NZRU got it right because Super rugby is close to a perfect fit for NZ, it is a f____g disaster for Australia. Now that may be the fault of certain vested interests of people within the code here, sadly however in the long term for rugby to grow in Australia it needs Super rugby to go to closed conferences, it needs to do that to gain a better penetration of the domestic market. That is a fact. That means NZ will have to consider its options, the most obvious option is to run Domestic leagues alongside of each other and also involve cross conference games at the same time. That is why it is suggested that each country can go from 5 super teams to say 8 each. The issue that NZ has to deal with is whether they like it or not the biggest market available to it is Australia, getting it right there will pay of in the long term. Now SANZAR may not go down that road, especially as the people running Aus rugby are so compromised (There is a reason they would need a F___G GPS to find Western Sydney). But if they don't then rugby in Australia will continue to struggle against its rivals and remain a minor sport. That will also effect the coffers of NZ, so in the end money talks

Yeah but at the end of the day it is nothing but a name thing for you ... your 'plan' is basically to sweep up all the NZ talent into 5 or 6 sides to play SR ... sort of how it is now with the only difference being these 5 or 6 sides will have a provincial banner ... kind of how it was initially when SR started until the NZRU noticed the population disconnect outside of these centres .. Whilst you may not appreciated it - the NZRU have basically got their system as close to right as they probably can ... the NPC is smoothed out and every province basically plays on a level playing field - which equals a decent competition which throws up Wellington dropping out of 1 competition to another, Auckland flirting with the same scenario - Tasman and Manawatu winning titles ...from that we see Manawatu, HB, BOP, Taranaki, Tasman etc providing SR rugby players across multiple franchises ... which then can mean these provinces start to enjoy seeing real AB contenders again ... yet your response to all this progress is to drive a potential wreaking ball through it all - just so you can have some historical provincial names attached to 5 sides ...

Vlad those on field suggestions in removing flankers are awful. - Flankers include some of the best and most dynamic players in Rugby. They're also vital in terms of the contest for the ball which is paramount in Rugby. - League well the NRL is down the bosh route. 4 hit ups, easy yards than kick. Super League in the UK and France is more expansive which speaks volumes. - Defensive structures improving so much require more strength building to be able to handle the extra contact required to beat defenders and to handle the higher volume of Rugby being played (at a higher pace too). - Rugby has been rolled out to schools. I've been involved in helping out but there isn't enough money to fund development officers to handle the man hours. The ARU needs to look at what other unions are doing particularly Ireland and France in building up profiles and public awareness of players. They used to do it when Gregan, Eales, etc made regular television appearances on stations like 9 and 7. The Channel 7 show Sportsworld that was on a Sunday (I think it was) was vital as Rugby would get a slot to discuss the matches that had been played or played in the future and it was broadcast nationally. I don't know if that show is still on the box. - Newspapers are dying out but one of the main news services owners in Australia has decided to tuck its online services behind a pay wall which is a disaster as it covers Australian domestic Rugby news that often doesn't make the papers. Rugbyheaven on the Fairfax portal has been a disaster for Rugby's profile in particularly Growden. He is gone now but Rugby is still suffering from the image he portrayed of it in his articles and vilifying players such as Gregan. Sure [snip. pls avoid name calling] like Beale have brought bad press but the constant nitpicking at Gregan when he was in the side by the Sydney press lead by Growden was ridiculous. Fine to offer constructive criticism but it went beyond that and we saw the hole he left when he retired. Burgess his replacement was nowhere as picked apart in the papers and his performances at the basics were beyond woeful.

Sheek It seems, you are missing Emric's point - while we may never see small unions win the Ranfurly ever again; while we may never see days of a Meads and Lochore type player again; there are a lot of things that we will not see in NZ rugby future......one of the most important aspects is there will never be a decline, in the power of the provincial vote at least, not until hell freezes over. Powerhouses like the four main centres, just do not rule NZ rugby when it comes to board voting which may I suggest, is not how I understand, what happens within the ARU hierarchy of voting. Am I glad that the NZ rugby provinces have the right to exercise their votes - damn right I am otherwise the outcome, just may have gone down the same path that AU rugby has been wandering along, these past few decades.

'is a national comp with the biggest (ie richest, necessarily) Premier Grade clubs from the various states/territories. ' Than it will be a comp between Sydney Uni, Tuggeranong and Qld Uni. The other clubs are struggling financially or don't have the means to play in a national comp. That's why Pulver went to tender to see if the bids were sustainable to not drive clubs in to submission financially.

'The provinces would object and they hold a lot of sway at the nzru' Absolutely. The provinces are the NZRU and as crazy as it sounds they all have a sway at NZRU board level. This makes the ARU set up look sane. Australians wouldn't understand the resentment towards Auckland for example. Basing Super Rugby sides out of the main centres will see more talent out of the regions move to the major NPC side (Manawatu and Hawkes Bay players all move to Wellington for example) and if they also played in Super Rugby they would become far more wealthier than the smaller unions.

or be spent buying out overseas contracts....

'But I have never copped the idea of nameless regions (known only by their mascot) for NZ & SA. I suspect the Saffies can easily swing between two worlds whereby the Natal Sharks in super rugby & Currie Cup are the one & same.' Nope they hate the duplicated derby system and prefer the international games in Super Rugby. SA and NZ created regions merged with Currie Cup and NPC sides that didn't want be referred to by a name of their rival such as Wellington or Auckland. SA is more political. The Currie Cup sides are more commonly these days known by their mascots as well which is generally an animal. Political boundaries have changed so Transvaal no longer exists which took away Transvaal and Northern Transvaal two iconic names that played in the Super 10 and were known well before that. Transvaal became the Gauteng Lions for a year or two then changed with everyone else to an animal. Transvaal merged with Free State (more commonly known as the FS Cheetahs) for Super Rugby so the Cats couldn't be referred to by either name. The only union that stayed the same was Western Province and built up an identity in Super Rugby as the Stormers with Boland wearing black jerseys and completely different logo. Now Boland is a forgotten partner as the Stormers wear WP stripes and even WP gets referred to as the Stormers in the Currie Cup. When SA went to regions the Sharks than had a few of the Kings unions in their region. Eastern Province the major union in the Kings region now use the Kings nickname rather than the Mighty Elephants I am sure that goes down with their other Kings Super Rugby partners. This is all far beyond the ARU and even Sanzar's control and descends in to Rugby and general politics. SA is again changing the format of the Currie Cup the currency and coaching isn't strong enough for it to be solely SA's main professional competition domestic wise. It's been identified due to weaknesses in the SA game that their teams need to be Aus and NZ domestic teams to improve their skill sets. They show up alarmingly when their teams under perform like this season. There is talk of the Currie Cup format changing again to now include Kenya, Zimbabwe and Namibia. I am sure the latter two have competed in the comp previously but creating an extended comp with other smaller SA unions will see them destroyed by the big 5. The big 5 unions include the Cheetahs who are basically a feeder union for the Sharks, Bulls and Stormers.

Exactly. When they bothered to promote their players as great individual athletes it transcended even the grass roots and hooked kids who had never watched it. An obituary in the NYT last year highlighted how the NFL used "big hits" to promote itself in the 60s - 80s. The subject of the obituary made his money by producing a weekly half hour show that used slow motion plays and tackles to highlight the players toughness athleticism and the show is recognised as helping NFL overtake baseball as the biggest money game in the US. I lament the death of skills at the hands of bodybuilding. I hope it plateaus and skill catches up. I prefer the Jonathan Davies, Gavin Hastings, Ella and Campese style of back. Kick, chip, fake, ioverlap, set up the fullback for a break through run at the line, Everything we thought touch would bring to the game but seems to have been skipped altogether. I see that skill in league now. I seriously wonder what a game of 13 would look like. Remove the breakways so there is more distinction between forwards and backs. Would it also make the scrum more stable ? In an era where all forwards are serious weight lifters I think the total weight and power exerted by 6 modern forwards would be near or exceed 8 in days by gone.

Ummmm, Liverpool have been here twice since 1863. Let's not kid ourselves about what Australian football fans want. The A-League is our 'bread and butter'. Most Australian football fans didn't attend the pre-season friendlies and ICC games, but they can't wait for the FFA Cup and domestic and continental leagues that feature our teams week in, week out. I did go to an ICC game and let me assure you, that was no football crowd.

The A-League doesn't need to outrate Super Rugby averages and it doesn't need to have averages at grounds any higher than clubs need for sustainability in order to stick a camera in front f a game. To get the TV coin football provides a huge number of year round competitive, national level games, a truely national reach and to and keep slowly building the other fundamentals. Football is doing all of those things whatever the variation over the media term. I went to a lot of NSL. I never talk down the nations first domestic sports national league, however by the indicators you chose to make your argument - it was a disaster. The 'rise of football' is being spoken about because it is self-evident. Being an ostrich won't help save rugby. PS: crowds and TV numbers are under pressure in the league and AFL in the last 2 seasons, not just football. This is a function of general economic malaise. Football opened its 13/14 season just as the economy turned. It'll also be the first game to come out.

I agree with all of that, especially how football was in a worse position. I have been making this argument sporadically in this place for years. There are some big parallels between the two games, notwithstanding the differences. Football was like a hibernating bear however. It has sooooo much 'grass roots fat' it could go to sleep for 18 months and survive. Rugby, not so much. It does though have to take a big lead from footballs reform. It is important to also understand football's reform is the result of about 25 - 30 major reforms across a huge range of the games various dimensions and Phase-2 is about t get underway. Rugby will have to take a very, very long view and reform the game from top to bottom to hope for success.

DS, I appreciate the sensitivity of Kiwis here, but often find the resistance illogical. At least to me. Never have I said get rid of smaller rugby unions, but clearly, they're never going to be big players at the big table. The days when smaller unions like Wairarapa-Bush, South Canterbury or Marlborough can win the Ranfurly Shield just doesn't happen anymore. It was evident when the NPC was introduced in 1976 that leading players began migrating from smaller to larger unions to either enhance or protect their All Blacks candidacy. The days of Colin Meads repping the ABs from King Country or Brian Lochore repping the ABs from Wairarapa-Bush are truly gone. Today these kind of guys would have to move to say, Waikato & Wellington respectively. So, why can't the NZRU say okay, this is the 'big 6' - Auckland, Canterbury, Hawke's Bay, Otago, Waikato, Wellington. Or, for a 'big 8', add another two, examples being say Manawatu & Tasman. Or North Harbour & Southland.

8 teams is to many in my personal opinion. Five super rugby teams across NZ means that the younger guys with raw talent coming through get to learn from some of the older guys in the team who have more experience. If you spread the talent to thin then your going to end up with teams becoming weaker.

actually the NZ cricket analogy is wrong (and not just because of the provincial make up you've sandwiched into the wrong associations) ... how is say CD for example any different to a SR team ? ... you do realise that below the first class scene there is a provicial cup competition - which, if you're looking for a rugby comparison, could be akin to the NPC ... so if the Hurricanes for instance changed their name to Central Districts - would that make you any happier ?

You are right. In 99, going around to primary schools , I couldn't distribute quality A3 gloss posters of Tim Horan,John Eales etc etc quickly enough when I visited schools trying to get a team together as the local club was shy on numbers. Within a week I had too many kids and then had to run them all off and on to give them a run. It's so easy to get kids and their parents in, providing there is just a little glamour in their heads. Rugby is hardly promoted except to those already involved.

Skynz faced some tough competition for the rights from csm and the rights to sanzars TV deal increased by a rumoured but unconfirmed 30 to 40 % on what sky paid last time. The numbers are also slight off as sky replay some games on delay on prime TV in New Zealand so people without sky can watch some games still I think it added another 100,000 viewers to the final stats

Well they accepted 5 Super Franchises okay, in the end money talks. Can they go to a closed conference model if Australia does, is the question. Really 8 teams for the size of NZ would give a pretty even spread

Love it. Best idea yet.