Rebels return to form in feeding frenzy over Sharks

The Reds showed in 2010 that a good season will likely show in the second half of the season. The Reds got 22k for the traditional blockbuster vs the Waratahs in their first home game. It took until the last 3 games to beat that crowd again (ended up at 30k for a season high).

Made huge strides in a single metric from a low base. Regressed in other areas. You only count your wins and refuse to acknowledge your losses.

If this game was in Perth if would have got 15,000? What rubbish! The Force drew less than 8,000 vs the Lions last year.

Inflicted the damage then disappeared but but but Cline is still here working his magic, we should have an indication on their success or failure on Fri.

EFF - I believe it will take a successful season or 2 before we will see 17000+ as we had in the beginning of the Rebels

WA made huge strides until incompetent Bill released the nuclear bomb that is still impacting rugby in WA. You must be so proud off him.

Bill Pulver was by far the worst administrator Australia had in the past decades. We are glad he left, just waited far too long to go. He lost a third of the Board and all his executes and dumped rugby into a political mess and ran off when the going got tough and left Castle with a hospital pass to deal with.

If the top superugby team can only get about 8,900 in Australia's second biggest city, I think it is fair to ask if this vain attempt to build a rugby heartland in AFL heaven is really worth it. The TV audiences also continue to disappoint. This is a fair question for those that paid the price for this team to exist as this team was build on the carcass of our team. I still cannot see the logic and do not think Melbourne deserves a team. If this game was played in Perth and the Rebels and Force were merged I am comfortable to project a crowd of more than 15,000.

Wasn't aware any of us disagreed that all 3 teams were around that mark and that it wasnt really acceptable. How is it brag and plaster. Somebody made a blatantly false statement which simplistically disregarded other significant factors. I've responded with what those factors are. The biggest negative on the Force is an undesirable time zone for WA. It reduced their commercial appeal. If you want an echo chamber, go post on twf. I know you aren't actually interested in that though, and you and I have a lot more in common than you are willing to admit.

TWAS, You bluster and blag your way around the truth on crowd numbers and viewers. Can we agree that the Brumbies Rebles and Force were all around the 10k mark. +/- a couple of thousand, which is a difference without a distinction. They are all bad figures... Period, all 3 franchises should have been folded on economic grounds alone. The Storm are filling seats, so the problem is with Rugby, not the potential market. The cold, hard truth is that the ARU demanded that the Vic Government bring a wheelbarrow full of cash ($20 mil). They promptly went down to Bunnings, purchased a Kelso and proceeded to fill it with unmarked, non-sequential bills. The Victorian Taxpayer is now subsidizing the ARU and in turn, the Rebels. I pass no judgment on it how they get their funding, it is of no real consequence as long as there is enough of it. But for many posters here who go on, an on and on about crowd numbers and grass roots, they just didn't factor in the decision making process and has little or no impact, other than perception, on the Rebels future. The litmus test will be economic success of the Force team for the invitationals starting in May, followed by the Pro comp starting next year staffed by the elite players..

How is it at all a surprise we went backwards in registrations? We had been going backwards for years and the impacts of strategies he implemented will only been seen over the next 5 years. Nothing happens immediately with these sorts of things. Under his "watch" increased salaries in Europe have eroded the domestic player base for us and SA, impacting both national teams. Maybe staying where we were was an achievement given the circumstances. it's possible it was a massive failure also. But you don't consider context in your comments. So who outside England has made large strides? Places with low bases. The easiest way to get huge % growth is have a low base. If a country has 100 players and gets 100 more that's 100% growth. Sounds good but is really not many actual people.

Yes womens ,sevens ,asia,Americas north and south,eatern europe to name a few who have made large strides.Yes Billy is a good bloke but under his watch we improved from 4th too 4th, recruited more league players and went backwards in registrations then recruited more admin heads from the elite uni club.TWAS now without your double lawyer speak please call a spade a spade and give me a down to earth sensible reply.

I really don't understand how anybody can get to the view that Australian Rugby is just carrying on doing what it has always been doing. Since Pulver came on board in 2013 it's probably been the biggest shake up in how things have been done since professionalism in 1996. Met with the greatest resistance on the basis of "but that's how it used to be done".

Saying that improvement is at odds of the rest of the rugby world ignores the simple reality that our market is at odds with the rest of the rugby world. That doesn't mean I think everything is perfect. It just ignores that we do not have the capability to be as successful as other places. Also I'm not sure Scotland and Wales are exactly booming. In Scotland one team (Edinburgh) has had to move to a 5,500 seat Stadium. The other (Glasgow) plays in a 6,600 - 10,000 seat stadium. SA's crowds are dire. Rugby in England is booming yes. But this doesn't automatically mean the rest of the world is.

Geoff, point taken, let me stress I do not want RA to fail. what I do see is an urgent need for a major change in the personal involved with the administration and direction of RA. 15 years of bumbling along and Australian rugby has seen no improvement which is at odds with the rest of the rugby world and yes I resent rugby being controlled by so many members, from the same old school tie club. I do believe it is unfair the Rebels have been handed a 6 game start up draw and being lauded as the second coming of Australian Rugby ( one of many ) and I do abhor the waste of millions of very valuable dollars on useless players ( and their smart agents )also high priced players sitting on the side lines while little more is being done at promoting and encouraging at school and high school level. Geoff with respect I don't believe this to be a conspiracy theory, we are both on the same side here and fighting to improve a sick puppy but we will probably carry on doing what we have always being doing to gain the same confusing result.

That's not the case. In some years the Rebels crowds exceeded the Force. In 2017 in the Rebels worst ever year, and one of the better Force seasons, the Force averaged about 1,000 more. But that's not the only consideration. TV numbers have always been lower for the Force. Likewise Perth Wallaby TV numbers. And also Wallaby tests for comparable opponents have generally done better in Melbourne. To answer your question, perhaps refer to the comment you are responding to where I specifically point out exactly how long it has taken other teams to grow crowds after a lull in form.

cuw, ignoring Beale who would you look at for 13? Not convinced anyone is looking like a strong candidate for the position, regardless who plays 12 (and I suspect it will be Beale and/or Kerevi) then who do you look at for 13? Kuridrani is out of form so for me I'd like to see Hodge and Rona given a shot. TK back at his best would do me, but if he is below his best then we need to find other options.

@ Geoff Parkes i think super rugger is not so fly with fans now. crowds are dwindling. did u see the sunwolves match? the stadium was not full. i think its a first. compare with last season - when the stadium was full and then some when teams were visiting Japan. and the funny thing is - wolves have played much better this year than ever.

LOL FIONN do u really believe that? i mean if the yardstick for 13 is an "in form Kuridrani" - where would u rank Hodge on 1-10 scale. i will give him a 5 . not many can play 13 - Kerevei was also poor. I dont know why people keep experimenting with certain players. long years ago NZ put BEN SMITH at 13 . he was miserable and that experiment put a stop to it. the only reason i can think of why guys like Hodge and Kerevi are played at 13 is - becoz Beale has a outright ownership of 12.

His own team where congratulating Rangi for the try, I would say that we shouldn't take it to heart for drawing the same conclusion. As I alluded to earlier - When you are are in Dave's Army, they are team tries, the individual that puts the ball over the line is just the last in a series of steps, each just as important.