Roar Forum: Which Aussie Super Rugby team should get the chop?

TO THE EDITORS AT THE ROAR, How about you show some guts, & redo this poll with another alternative; 'Cull no Aussie teams'. Then let's see where people really stand on this issue.

Not true Rep, a lot of people say that's what it would take to get them there... :)

Yeah, you have to wonder what sort of geniuses they have at the ARU..."sell" the license by promising to continue giving the team the same funding as the other teams, and throw an extra $6M in on top, and front-end load it, and then put in a bunch of clauses about damages. They must be a hell of a sitting target for telemarketers...

This just through my google alerts from yesterday's Age " The Rebels have maintained throughout the debate over Super Rugby's future they won't be cut from the competition due to guarantees in their franchise agreement signed in 2015 when the Imperium Group took over as private owners of the club" http://www.theage.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/melbourne-rebels-confident-private-ownership-will-keep-them-in-super-rugby-as-chaos-reigns-20170314-guxpza.html

Not the worst Idea. The Best of the NRC Play the Best of Mitre 10 and Whatever Comp the Saffas have to end the season. It's more about player development, less about TV ratings. I find the NRC far more accessible, I sit on the Hill with my kids at the local University sports ground. The game intensity is high, the beer prices are low and the kids run on the field at half time and kick a ball about.

Share the Games around, every fourth one in sunny Canberra or sweltering Melbourne

Is the measure of a team's worth it's Win/Loss record or is it an accounting thing. And yes, the 2 are intimately linked, who want's to back a loser. It would be good to see some of the stats of the bottom 2 SA teams in this debate. The Force and the Rebels will come out smelling of roses.

Take a leaf out of English Soccer - "A" League The bottom 2-4 teams get relegated each year and the Top 2-4 move up from the other group. You could Have Quotas - 3 Au, 3 NZ, 3 SA, and 3 Others The rest Bash it out in the kiddies comp. Inspired by the news that Fiji will join the NRC, Expand the game to include Fiji, Tonga and Samoa, they are being poached to make up at least 20% of the SR teams already. The "B" Groups are all local, like NRC - Playing each other and maybe the top 2 from each country have a finals playoff ..

Look at how the US NFL works. Franchises get relocated all the Time The Melbourne Brumbies works for me. I am all for dumping the Tah's over the Force or Rebels, but that is an emotional response based on my dislike of a number of overrated players. They have the largest following underpinned by Sydney club Rugby, They will be the last to go as they will have the funds to pick up the cream of the displaced players IF! they cull one of the Aussie Teams. I honestly think that the Cheetahs are using an old magician's trick: Hey look over there! hoping that nobody notices that they are the team that should really be cut.

actually best option is to drop an oz team and 2 sa teams to make super 15. Round robin comp everyone plays each other.

.....I agree but this won't happen because its a commodity that exists to expand in terms of potential market, which my never be realised but these bankers are all gamblers deep down........

#five2survive ?

Agree! Find a better solution! You get paid the big bucks so earn them...

.......but the brand name which is very recognisable would have to change, since wild horses hold zero symbolic affinity with Melbourne.

Totally agree Sheek. It's the 4 pool problem thing. You can just have three by six with Jags with NZpool,Sunwolves become cannon fodder for our pool..?...All six SA sides. Play all way through without June Test window to allow playing everyone plus extra domestic games. Except in a Lions year where you don't play one side in each other pool. Makes test rugby more to saviour when it happens. You've got to embed the game into the hearts and minds and the only way to to do that is to actually make it stick with permanency. It takes time, the game being brilliant and improving all the time (which inmy opinion the other aren't or as much at least), and market the best way smart thinking rugby people would and not OTT. I think they do an ok job so far but there are so many ways you could market this game of rugby. The courage and commitment people have to play rugby probably only past rugby players really get but I think it's a plus and a massive difference to our soccer step brothers and sisters! I can think of several hilarious adds already...

You're right about the media in Melbourne. But here also there are plenty of safes Kiwis and poms who are into rugby. And it is played in schools. And i believe the school comp is growing. We have produced many fine players here despite afl being no. 1. From Weary Dunlop to Ewen McKenzie ,Christian Lealifano, Digby Ioane and more coming through. The Rebels U20 are doing pretty well with mostly local developed talent. Melbourne most definitely is NOT a waste of time. Keep all teams is what i say

I don't think mergers work. e.g. wests tigers in nrl - balmain is basically forgotten Brisbane lions in afl merger or relocation of fitzroy. Always used to have "FFC" on back of shirts. but doesn't mean anything. Fitzroy are gone. I believe Racing 92 and Stade Francis are going to merge in Paris. What for? and what will they be called and where will they play. I'm in Melbourne and a Rebels member. Before we had them I would travel to Canberra once a year for a game. That would be about as much as I could make if they shared games, which i think is silly, as we have enough times between games as it is. A comp where you could have a home game every other week is the go for mine. Play everyone minimum of once a year. I'd like to see (sadly) Sth Africa go their own way, have five in Oz five in NZ and a couple others, maybe japan and an island team. All in agreeable time zones. Don't think it'll happen but you can hope

Argentina in the NZ conference is a bit tough, why not Arg into SA conference, Japan into OZ and create another NZ team. NZ could easily manage 6 sides.

Once, before last year the Force had received no financial help from the ARU at all over 10 years, apart from "recruiting concessions".

while we are all throwing up spurious statements and calling them "facts" i thought id have my 2 cents worth; firstly; the force have 13 players in their current squad that have come through the force academy, not to mention many you have come through and are playing for clubs all over the world; some notable names include Godwin, Zack Holmes, Longbottom to name a few; secondly since the force's inception in 2006, they have "won" the wooden spoon twice, and so have the rebels (with a 3rd looking ominous, early days tho). statistically speaking, The rebels have spent more of their existence at the foot of the log than the force have (33% compared to the force's 20%), and if we're just looking at results alone, the Force have achieved 4 "mid table" finishes over 11 years to the Rebels 0 over 6 (1 if you count 10th/15). If we're comparing the 2 teams over their first 6 years of competition results: Force (out of 14): 14,7,8,8,13,12; Rebels (out of 15) 15,13,12,15,10,12. Ergo, From results and players produced comparison, The force have been the more successful out of the 2 expansion sides. However, we know that non of this really matters because it will, sadly, be the brumbies that get the axe, while The Force and Rebels get to live another day to fight for the title of Australia's worst franchise.