So after a couple of months of domestic Super Rugby we know our finalists and we know those who have fallen by the wayside.
We’ll do a proper review of the Super Rugby AU and Aotearoa competitions once we know the final winners but there’s still plenty to talk about from this weekend including plenty about the future of the game – so let’s get stuck in.
We need to challenge the Captain’s Challenge
On Saturday we saw all the evidence that should be needed to kill off the Captain’s Challenge concept.
Blues’ skipper Tom Robinson challenged a couple of times and his first claim to the ref was that there was a knock on by the Chiefs in the build up to an important try. The TMO went back to check the knock on and decided that there was no knock on. But before the Chiefs’ players and fans could start celebrating, the TMO went on to say that straight after the knock on, a Chiefs’ player was offside and so the try should not stand.
Now, maybe I’m being pedantic, but the challenge from Robinson was that he believed there was a knock on. He didn’t say “Well ref, I’ll be honest mate, we really don’t want to concede this try cause they are all over us at the moment and I’m quite worried this could break us, so can we just have a look to see if there’s any reason whatsoever that we can get you to not award the score please?”
There wasn’t a knock on according to the TMO so the ref should blow for the try. We can’t have it where the TMO is scanning footage for any infringement at all.
In a sport that is already trying to figure out how to reduce long breaks in play, adding into the rules the ability to slow everything down even more just seems like a bad idea to begin with. But then also allowing the TMO to go beyond the referee’s instructions and go hunting for any and all infringements in the lead up to a try is ridiculous. This trial needs to be canned.
Does this talk of private equity get you excited or scared?
With the Silver Lake – New Zealand Rugby Union investment deal in the final stages of completion and increasing chatter about how Rugby Australia might need to go down a similar path there’s plenty of debate going around.
There are many concerned what a PE mentality will bring to the game where the most important thing will always be profit above all else. But on the flip side, both Unions have had brutal periods from a financial point of view and it’s hard to see how they can recover any time soon without some dramatic action.
There have long been frustrations, especially in Australia, at how many top quality players will head overseas for a compelling combination of experience and bigger money. Could some cash from private equity be the key to holding onto home ground talent and keeping it in the Australian game?
Rugby Australia are in a losing battle it feels against the AFL and NRL. Perhaps with all three competitions being hit hard by the pandemic, now is the time to strike with some big money investment and some ambitious growth plans that look to regain the lost market share over the two big brothers.
There will be those though who feel that external investment is not honouring the culture or values of the sport. That opinion isn’t wrong, but it’s worth considering that the game has been commercialised for a while now and without a big step change, where will rugby in Australia be in five years time?
Rebels season gets worse even when they don’t play
Super Rugby AU claimed another coaching scalp this past week as Dave Wessels stepped down from the Melbourne Rebels.
It’s not hugely surprising that Wessels is moving on – his time at the Rebels hasn’t seen a huge improvement on the field and, while there are plenty of challenges that have been thrown in his way, he’s had four years and the team hasn’t delivered.
But the strange thing about it is that even after the Rebels missed out on the finals, players including club senior Matt To’omua, spoke up saying that they wanted Wessels to stay and that he was their choice.
So was there more to it? Was there a suggestion from Rebels management that it was an exciting time for Wessels to consider other opportunities?
The Tahs lost their coach earlier this season and while the NSW brand carries a lot of power, the Rebels squad has far more established talent in its ranks. This could well make it an attractive opportunity for a coach.
So who do you think will or should get the gig in Melbourne? Would you rather take the Tahs role or the Rebels one?
Dave Wessels (Photo by Kai Schwoerer/Getty Images)
Is this the real breakout year of Rob Valetini?
The Brumbies’ back rower had a big game against the Force and while the WA team might not be the toughest opposition out there, it was great to see Valetini putting in a big performance when it really mattered.
He’s been having a really good year and is proving that he can deliver consistently good quality rugby. He’s currently ninth in carries for the AU and Aotearoa competitions and eighth in tackles won.
Having shown that he can provide impact off the bench at the international level, you have to think that he’ll get a starting jersey this year as Dave Rennie looks for 15 men who can compete with the All Blacks.
The key now is that Valentini delivers again in the Final. He doesn’t have to become a strong line out jumper but if he continues to have that weakness then he has to deliver in all other parts of his abilities and on the big stages.
His strong ball carrying and tackling is exactly what is going to be needed to put the Reds on the back foot in the Final.
Rob Valetini. (Photo by Mark Kolbe/Getty Images)
Who is going to win the finals?
We know our finalists – the Reds will take on the Brumbies and the Crusaders will go up against the Chiefs.
In the AU competition, the Reds will be favourites but it’s a tight game to call and really could go either way. The extra week off should help freshen up the Reds and a win in the Final really would be a ringing endorsement for the plans and culture the club have been building under Brad Thorn.
The Brumbies have been here before and know how to get the job done. They haven’t fired on full cylinders in as many games this season as they would like which makes them a bit of a tricky weapon to predict. They have the players and game plan to beat the Reds without a doubt but they haven’t managed to do it yet this season.
In the Aotearoa competition the Crusaders are strong favourites to wrap up yet another title but it would be such a wonderful story if the Chiefs could upset the bookies and steal the win. They’ve shown that they’ve got the game to unsettle any team and their forward pack has really impressed after a shaky start. The Chiefs obviously need Damian McKenzie to have a good game but just as important is that those around him step up – they can’t rely purely on the smirking assassin.
Hear me know, believe me later – Reds and Crusaders to take the titles.
(Photo by Cameron Spencer/Getty Images)
Another Puma heads to join the party and is making a lot of headlines
The news that Pablo Matera is going to join the competition and be part of the Crusaders has been met by a range of feelings.
Plenty of people are ecstatic that one of the world’s best players is going to be playing week in week out in New Zealand and Australia – as the old Super Rugby evolves into the new Super Rugby, it’s crucial that the competition capture as much talent as possible and stop it from heading to the more lucrative leagues up north.
There are those that are happy he’ll be in the comp but disappointed that he’s joining a team already so strong as the Crusaders. Sour grapes perhaps but it is a bit frustrating that his talents are being deployed at a club where they could help that team make a genuine step change and make the comp more competitive.
Then there are those that think the guy shouldn’t be welcome here at all given his previous racist comments. Given the efforts made at the Crusaders to adjust their brand after the 2019 massacre, it’s curious that they would sign the star.
So where do you stand? Is it a good thing that Matera is rejoining Super Rugby?
Paulo
Roar Rookie
Good luck too mate. Obviously going for a Saders win, but it would be a great fairy tale and redemption arc for the Chiefs. And to school in the Tron and have family there, so always a soft spot for me. And yea, I’d be annoyed with a ref mistake, and I would do my best not to voice it too much on here – without promising everything. But also, I think if we live by the sword we die by the sword. In regards to the ref mistake in that game. Yea, all the things that happened after the incorrect call shouldn’t have happened. Playing to the whistle though, the Chiefs need to take the lesson. The PT and YC for example, that decision was correct based on the 9s actions and where it was. And yes, the pass should have been called back. But it wasn’t, so the chiefs just needed to play on. It was the 9s decision to take the action that lead him off. It was a card-able offence. That’s the part where I mean the Chiefs needed to have played better and/or smarter. Albeit they shouldn’t have been in that situation to begin with.
The Chiefs poor decision making, including the 9s offside play that resulted in a YC and PT, and the inability to deal with 10mins a man down But if the ref gets it right none of this happens does it! Instead of the Chiefs going a man down from the REF ERROR and the saders scoring a PT the Chiefs should have been kicking out of their own half from the scrum base because of the Mounga knock-on. Then Jordan does not have a big space to run thru to score a bit later as the YC'd half would have been there. But that wasnt a refs error was it! The WORST part about all that was that the TMO looked at it and somehow did not manage to see what the rest of us all clearly saw and he ONLY looked at 1 replay before deciding. Why only 1 replay for a Captains challenge? Why not at least 2? We see them looking 15 times at some things. Yes us Fans are biased towards our teams and we see things differently to the oppositions fans but when a TV replay shows my side knocked on or committed foul play Im happy to accept and move on. Why disagree with the facts being presented? But when we see blatant errors in favor of the opposition we do get angry. Lets just say that I think if the Chiefs win this weekend by incorrect refs decisions I wont care, but you, as a Saders supporter will be pi$$ed off... Thats just human nature...100% understandable!!! One thing that always proves bias is getting ex All Blacks to select a team. The selected team will always contain more players from their own Provence than it should. WHY? Because thats also Human nature!! Why do we expect Refs to be any different and this "Monday apology" does nothing for a fan when the error costs the win or a bonus point etc... Anyway lets hope there isnt any controversy this weekend and that the team who takes their opportunities is the team that holds the trophy.... Good luck...Just not to much LOL...
Paulo
Roar Rookie
Ok, I think we’re both being a bit pedantic here. I’m not arguing that game and those decisions as it was done to death at the time. Yes, the pass from RM should have been called a knock on/forward pass. It wasn’t, and that’s a mistake. My point was that as a fan, we see things a certain way. Any decision is going to favour one side over the other, but to say that one side consistently gets the favourable result - across multiple games, multiple refs, multiple grounds both home and away - is a big stretch. And just as you will say it’s absurd when people inevitably say it about the ABs, I say it’s absurd when people say it about the Saders. People will still feel like they get all the calls, their way, but they don’t. There are a number of reasons for this perception though, and while Ref bias is the easy one people go to, it is likely the least important, if it exists at all. What is more important, and what contributes to any particular call being more noticeable, is the ability of the team to make that decision matter. Take your example, one bad decision, had a domino effect and, by your count, cost 14pts. If the Saders had not scored at all, then we wouldn’t still be talking about it. The Chiefs poor decision making, including the 9s offside play that resulted in a YC and PT, and the inability to deal with 10mins a man down - despite multiple scrum resets. Add to that, the ability of Saders to exploit any advantage. And that call mattered. Although should be noted it didn’t decide the game.
Malotru
Roar Rookie
GentleGeorge, I think the Moaman has a fair point. The comment doesn't appear to be mocking the indigenous people of Australia, rather simply questioning the name.
Maybe true but I note you wernt able to correct me on those decisions I sighted as they were definate Ref errors and that cant be dismissed as SEEMS when its DOES favor one side…..I’m not claiming its purposeful bias Im saying its reality. You are hung up on my use of the word seems as tho that means its in appearance only but its not in appearance only when it happens on a constant basis. EG Looking at the SRA record it seems as thu the Saders are the best side. Thats not stating that the Saders appear to be the best side from some peoples perspective thats stating that the Saders have been the best side based on their record.
CUW
Roar Rookie
No the problem is they dont want to cancel out each other - or make anyone lose face on national tv. so they go along with whatever is said - irrespective of what is right or wrong. for eg - there was a tv review in the crusaders match when TMO says the ball came off red - when everyone clearly see it comes off blue. but the ref says nothing. granted rugger has less technology involved in decisions - unlike cricket which is very technology driven ( even tho they still manage to screw up ) but let the tmo do it alone and hang himself - right or wrong . management committees are good for board rooma - and usually they bore u to death :unhappy:
Seb
Guest
Regarding Matera the information that came from Argentina was not entirely into context Yes what he wrote was awful, but a lot of people in Argentina jokes about anything, nothing is off limits, the chants in soccer stadiums are way worse than what he wrote and everybody laughs at it. He wrote that when he was 18 or 19, Twitter was in its infancy and was mostly used in Argentina to mock teachers and general high school pranks. There is a lot of hatred between different socioeconomic groups and rugby union there is considered the high class rich kids sports that can get away with anything because of their rich parents So, he did and wrote things that a lot of people says on regular basis, he wasn't famous then, and he's not a kid anymore, but someone who was pissed off because the Pumas didn't "honor" Maradona's death, used that against him and other players..... It was wrong, very wrong but not into context
Paulo
Roar Rookie
I am sure we will hear the same thing when the ABs start playing and seem to get all the favourable calls. It is usually against a typically very strong side and it usually involves the team we barrack for on the wrong side of the decision. So I’m not surprised the example is a Chiefs/Saders game. It’s what we fans see when we are passionate.
jcmasher
Roar Rookie
Yeah and I think at times the referee needs to just say no to the TMO input. They do this with ARs where they’ll ignore a call so why not the TMO?
AndyS
Guest
All the press to date has been very consistent in noting that the PE make their money on the revenue generated, not the profits. If the organisation runs at 10% profit on the turnover, they may be taking all of it. But if it were otherwise, they would need a say in how every cent was spent as that would all be money out of their pocket.
Noodles
Roar Rookie
That’s interesting Mark. So the ABs don’t think their rights have been managed effectively? And the PE guys clearly must think so. But strictly it’s not equity in anything other than media rights? I must say one thing I’ve thought odd is the failure of global organisation to make use of streaming. Rugby really should be on a global streaming platform with direct consumer fees. The money distributed according to viewing. Boring teams would get less than entertaining teams. There’d be whole programs on red cards and refs. And a comic section for Alan Jones.
Mark
Guest
Will if the PE model is the same as NZ - then it works like this PE will have a % stake in the media rights (which they pay the RU for) PE will drive the increase in the media rights (as this is their area of expertise) They make their money on the profits generated (if they have a 10% stake they get 10% of the profits - which means the RU takes the other 90% - in simplistic terms - depending on the deal - perhaps the deal allows them 20% for the 1st 5 years for example) They can then sell their % stake to anyone else (unless the deal provides a provision that the majority stake holder has to approve) and generate profit based on increasing the capital value of the rights
Unanimous
Guest
I didn't say Wallabies top ups should move to the Super Teams. I would have thought that was clear. There are ways to distribute players that don't involve player payments at all. There are methods of distributing things that are more effective than free markets: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Envy-free_item_allocation
Mark
Guest
I would have thought so - if the ball has gone backwards - even if the player is in front he has to go back to get the ball - and it was general play - so how is that different than going back to retrieve a kick Gatland was right - the refs and TMO were wrong But that isnt the first poor decision this season and prob. wont be the last No doubt Mohunga will get away with throwing the ball forward in the final for a Try and Codie Taylor will be allowed 4 attempts to ground the ball close to the line that wont be called double movement
Mark
Guest
100%
Mark
Guest
Ha - the Highlanders iniated a Foul Play review and had the penalty given against them
Mark
Guest
Lose the Captains Challenge Lost the Goal Line Dropouts This is Union - not League - and both are rubbish additions for no reason
NZ reffing is abysmal – i mean seriosly a country that plays great rugger and super rugger has school level refs !!! Yep seriously bad last year and this year. I think all the rule changes are too much in a season then they switch back to old rules or different interpretations. The refs seem to concentrate on the new rules at the detriment of other area's of their game...
Looks to be gone for the TT anyway...
Yeah the match I had in mind was v the Saders…..19 points from incorrect decisions…Remember the Captains referral to show that Weber had hit the hand and not the ball? And remember that he was then YCed in that movement when the TMO failed to take 2 looks at the Saders knock-on? 12 points scored for that wrong decision and then the TMO claimes he cant see the grass move under the Wingers foot when we all can watching the replay. more decisions that not only seemed to favor the Saders but did favor the saders. Not the players fault or the fans fault but they were still faults which clearly favored 1 side over another but there is no answer as it may well go the exact opposite this weekend. Its funny how we fans dont have issues with winning from some decisions but hate losing with some… :laughing: :laughing: