The way forward for Super Rugby that's simple and exciting

Jacko This is a creative proposal, which thoughtfully addresses many of the complex issues at hand. Your negative sarcastic comments are neither helpful nor entertaining.

Do you even know what a draft is?

how do you think a draft works?

LOL even worse he was not a drafted player, its called the free market!

Rebel, total viewer numbers. That is probably more important to a broadcaster than individual match numbers. Total value is a different question though...if the overall price has been already set for the next few years, the minimum agreed number of games will cost the least to stage. If that is two or three a week, then providing five is just cost without return. Worse, it might even set the value lower for the next contract.

TJ..why not? Unless the turkeys (NSW and QLD) vote for Thanksgiving (RA reforms) we will continue to be guests in our own competition or a second class rugby community in our own country. Just look at how RA funding is distributed, how Wallaby top-ups are distributed and how difficult it is for a WA based players to get into the Wallabies... The playing field is uneven if NSW experiencing a dreadful season I expect 2022 to be worse.

Paranoid....maybe... or maybe a pessimistic is just an optimist that learned from experience.. I agree that we will not become the best under the proposal above as we are likely to play even less rugby in this proposal. We need to Play NZ competition sides regularly in whatever format the competition end up to be - I would not complain to play NZ franchises including Pacifica and Fiji in an eight team competition if RA fails to include us. Also agree that within a Tier 3 competition there is no sensible pathway for our locals to develop. NSW and QLD still have far too much influence at Rugby Australia and you don’t need to look further than the composition of the Board and who has the majority of votes to realise that RA is still an extension to NSW and QLD rugby. It also appears that reforms to change the constitution of RA has hit a wall...

Joe, I've quite enjoyed your thoughts on potential structures that could be used going forward and largely agree with them all. That being said, I'm not super keen on the idea of the 'Super Bowl' game that has been proposed. I'd rather see some kind of pool based Cup competition introduced instead running concurrently. But different from the pool based system in the north or a straight knockout as you have suggested. I'd like to see the Cup/Plate/Bowl/Shield format used in a progressive way. Where in the first round teams are randomly drawn against others. Winners progressive in the Cup divsion while losers fall into the Bowl. In the second round of games similar happens again with the winner in the Cup continuing with the losers falling into the Plate semi-finals. While the winners in the Bowl continue while the losers fall into the Shield. This would ensure each team gets 3 games in the structure while maintaining a reason to keep playing at each round. I would also like to see the end of inbound tours from NH teams in June/July. We tend to get weakened squads sent anyway. I'd prefer they are replaced by a proper Pacific Nations Cup and a Spring Nations Cup. The Pacific Nations Cup would feature Aus, NZ, Japan, the PIs, the USA and Canada. Split into two pools of 4 with the top 2 teams playing in the semi final stages. While the Spring Nations Cup would feature the 6Ns teams plus SA and Argentina alongside the 6 REC teams (that's Georgia, Romania, Russia, Spain, Portugal and the Netherlands), South America 1 (likely Uruguay) and Africa 1 (Namibia). Again with pools of 4 with the winner of each pool moving forward. I would also like to see the November window changed up to a alternating schedule. So one year half the NH would host tests while the other half tours and vice versa with the teams from the PNC. The 6N, RC and respective regional competitions would remain in their current windows. This would provide a lot of teams with more exposure to T1 nations on a far more regular basis while allowing other nations the opportunity to qualify via their regional competitions.

RF The sooner its done and dusted the better. Yes I think we could all go on for a while about RAs administration. NZR is far from great but they have made SR work and Aus hasnt. Hopefully PE comes in and RA can set up a NRC as that is crucial to the future of rugby in Aus.

No it doesnt have to be that way either Hog. It needs to be a whole lot of discussions held behind closed doors and RA needs to back off on the public demands before they have even been discussed at any level at all. There are reasons that the game is struggling for fans and for quality and RA is making the decisions to deliberately not fund a NRC level comp which would help a hell of a lot with the development and would probably also bring fans in. From what I saw in the TT there is a lot of improvement in the current Aus squads. RA needs a NRC. That is a certainty, and maybe thats an area where PE could be a godsend.

I think that is how rugby has been run for over a hundred years. At the moment the only opinion that counts is McLennan's. He was the Board's choice for Chairman and he will hold sway until he doesn't. We are yet to hear about his long term plan and vision for rugby and there is no evidence that he has been consulting widely in the game to inform his views. The only concrete statements he has made is the need for PE and why it is needed. The one good and sensible thing Castle did was refuse to talk to the media until she had travelled the country to fathom the challenges for the game. A first class strategy and she went everywhere. All downhill from there, nothing from her on what the challenges were and what the vision was. This was all the ten captains really asked for, a comprehensive review of the game. McLean said the board were already doing one. Nothing heard from them either and it either wasn't done or was extremely narrow and shallow.

Rebel the first round TT rated very similar to the SRAU and only started dropping off after the second round. If the 12 sides play each other in a rnd robin rather than 5 straight it means the Aus sides could be winning plenty of those games every week and may well be leading the comp well into the middle rounds and winning will generate more eyes. Also their will be sides that improve against NZ sides compared to this year as the format was a real hit and run type set up. I also dont see this year ( 1st ever fta in 26 years ) as being worthy of basing a future 10 year or more comp on.

Actually it’s a fact that TT rated lower. Regular season average SRAU - 78.2k SRTT - 66.0k That’s a 16% reduction in viewership from SRAU. If you include the finals (which broadcasters stump up cash for due to eyeballs and ability to sell advertising space) SRAU - 89.7k SRTT - 67.3k Which is a 25% drop in ratings from SRAU to SRTT. As someone that has spent a lot of time in market research, please explain to me why I would provide a recommendation for my client to go with the later option?

You must be Joe King!! There is no part of this that is less than laughable :laughing: Diamond humour mate :thumbup:

No I don't mean centrally contracted. A draft is a pool of players from which all provinces would have access to. NZ Super Rugby operates this system. for example: Aaron Smith is NOT a South Island player: he just plays for a Southern team.

Hey what ever a “Fiwi” is, if you were a Kiwi you would know AT is the 2 letter short form for AOTEAROA not AO! And please explain WTF is a centralised player “draft”??? Don’t you mean centralised player contract!!! And I know for a fact it wouldn’t bring in a “breath of fresh air” let alone a breathe! It would actually destroy the integrity of my nation’s rugby treasure FOREVER! Who the heck wants to see one province (out of 14 I might add) get stacked with a big bunch of current or recent ABs aswell as most of the current Crusaders? Because thats what will happen if they all say they ONLY want to play for Canterbury on the same salary they’re on now or they’ll all sign overseas for double or possibly even triple! And why would they want to break up the most successful pro rugby side of all time when Central Contract Models can not stop the player for signing with whichever province he chooses?! If the NPC is to ever become a fully professional comp, following the NRL model of clubs paying majority of wages with a salary cap is the ONLY route to create an even competition. But with added caveats for National Camps and National input into “players of interest” etc but unlike the NRL model and in the interests of NZR each province would be required to have a minimum % of NZ eligible players in each squad of say 66 or 75. And on top of that NZR would pay AB players matchday, squad, camp etc payments. But for real if Nz went this route Aus would not survive off the Shute Shield and Hospital Cup model you barely mentioned, infact they would have to keep the current SRAu and will need to add atleast 1 maybe 2 P.I sides for it to thrive longterm. (Drua will be guarenteed a spot so you should actually take more interest in what will happen in Aus right?) Next time question yourself before anybody else! And if you couldn’t tell, my model was only an upgraded and tbh probably alot better one than the one proposed! And possibly a very viable longterm format that suits the needs of NZ, Aus, Jap and the P.I.

Sadly, opinions may be all the big decisions eventually come down to. I dread to think whose.

Nope.

What?!?

True but where is the RA research and data on what might work? It all depends on opinions about where the long term value lies. At least the Waratahs have started surveying former members to find out why they did not renew.