Why Super Rugby is broken and how Australia must shift the focus to save domestic game

Fantastic article, you told the truth honestly about the state of RU in this country. Year after year, we are told the same dishonest rethoric, while the game is dying . RU writers and administrators never give credit to AFL and NRL, for the great achievements they have done for their sports, maybe RU could have learnt something. Since RU began, it has always been handicapped by , elitist arrogance. This attitude has now, finally, destroyed Australian RU. The British RU is in a similar position, it could follow our destructive path. Australian Rugby Union will never admit, (when the game fails) they, were and are wrong, by pursuing a policing, of alienation against potential followers , with their arrogance and elitist rethoric, against other football codes. Australian Rugby Union has destroyed itself. Michael

Ace.Yep unfortunately a once in a generation player like Wilson has been shunted out of a Wallaby Jersey as a certain player wearing sky blue must be selected.

With Rob Valetini, Rob Leota, Harry Wilson and Lachlan Swinton seemingly in a four-way battle for just two jerseys, what chance one or more of them takes a big offshore offer? Harry will have to go overseas as Rennie seems to favour Swinton and Leota at 6.

That just shows how dumb the present setup is: you're from NSW but don't support them, as the Waratahs are on the nose, and aren't really a state side anymore. You should have more options of Sydney pro franchises you could support! :thumbup:

It seems to me we need a 10-12 comp, but don’t have or can’t afford to have 300 Australians to play in it. We could be better off sticking with Super Rugby TT with 5 teams, but both strengthening them through hiring the best players we can from any country, and also letting our best play anywhere but still be available for the Wallabies. I’d still cheer for the Reds if they had an Argentinian front rower, a Kiwi no 7 or a Fijian (full international) winger. We may end swapping out expensive Australians for affordable Pasifika players, but still have a strong national team.

It's a national team to represent Australia based off AFL players, which you claimed doesn't occur. Obviously it's a hybrid game though, similar to how the Kangaroos & All Blacks were supposed to face off in a hybrid rugby game, but alas it didn't happen!

I just don't see how a NRC quality comp without your best players gets the masses excited Ken. Probably the best compromise is a double round robin SRAU and a short Champions League. At least you have most of your best players in that and everyone gets some exposure to different ways of playing.

@Jez Yes agree but the alternative has to be better I say. RA should be doing detailed assessments of all viable options. And publishing the reports for benefit of all rugby fans. But we've got know idea what they're doing - probably nothing :laughing: Jez - you need to switch support to another province you can be proud of and enjoy watching. I played for NSW school boys back in the day but I switched to Brumbies 15 years after going to a Tahs v Brums game at Moore Park. Waratahs totally ruined that game as a spectacle with very cynical & negative play. I vowed never to attend another game with them playing and have kept that promise. I've been a happy Brumbies fan ever since. If you can't stomach Brumbies try the Reds :thumbup:

Brodie Retallick (NZ) -- ever hear of him? And Ian Jones before him? Not to mention Willie O was a gift to Aust from NZ thanks to visa issues.

Yes, you can see the actual spend on players. Are you saying you do indeed believe the 100 non-Wallabies are splitting $7.5M? Just my opinion, but I tend towards the view that any destination that can be achieved by mismanagement, incompetence and accident is perhaps not the direction to head intentionally.

Is that seriously what you think, that the other 100 non-Wallabies players in SR only share $7.5M between them? I didn't ask you to put any numbers up, I used one of the few hard numbers to show that regardless of how you go about approaching an 8-10 team domestic competition to replace SR, it will end up costing more than SR if it maintains almost any level of professionalism. That is not just your proposed competition (although a belief that it would save loads of money was a central starting point for your article), but any such comp. Which you now seem to acknowledge, so the inevitable starting point for any such domestic-only structure for Australian professional rugby is that there will be no less money spent on wages, to produce on a significantly lower standard competition, while losing any direct control over the Wallabies and all of their potential replacements. Which is a point of view, but that money remains the key problem - if such a change is made in one fell swoop, it becomes an all-in bet with the whole future of Australian rugby that the new comp will immediately start to make significantly more money than SR ever did and everyone will do the right thing when it comes to releasing international players. If not, the game will take a fast swan dive down the drain hole and revert entirely to amateur status. So if you genuinely believe that the best outcome for Australian rugby is to spend their earnings on developing a large pool of entry level players for other countries to pick over, in the hope of getting some of the leftovers back as a national team, then my suggestion would be to look at ways to do that in manageable steps that allow for corrections if all those assumptions about broadcasting, sponsorships and audience appeal don't in fact go to plan. Or just hold your water for a few years...RA already seems to be all over getting the good players to leave, selecting the Wallabies from OS, requiring the SR teams to be development teams, lowering standards as a result while still spending all the money. Well on the way to your destination really; just need to drop the ball on SRP, add a few more teams and they'll be nearly there... :silly:

I totally understand that sheek, maybe a tier 2 club comp between both countries? the costs would be lower.

Thanks JD. Yes, I get that. I meant a split second behind in logical time, not linear time. Just had a chat today with a mate who works for NSW rugby. His personal opinion unprompted by me - ‘we can get money from Lions and RWC in coming years but that influx of funds won’t in itself increase participation. We need heart beats and bummed seats (structure and culture) more than we need money, and we need money a lot, and a lot of it.

@hog no exaggeration imo. Going it alone and isolating has been a disaster for every country, industry or sport that's gone this route in an increasingly globalised world market place. Many examples, including Nth Korea, Mianmar. In sport, Sth African Rugby during the Apartheid period is another good example. All that would happen in Aust is that all our best players would immediately leave for bigger money contracts OS. The Aust only comps would struggle to get any pay TV contracts. Game attendances and TV ratings would dive as WBs were increasingy flogged by all the top 10 nations.

@ Jez haha cynical play. I've not see any from Brumbies in recent years but you say you only watch Tahs play out of sense of duty. That's not true for me or any other Brumby fan I know. Yes, I' ve seen and complemented your previous aarticles on alternatives to current SR. Many of your ideas need detailed assessment imo, but isolating and going it alone is not one of them. Recipe for disaster I say. As is every other example of a country, sport or industry who tried the go it alone route. So until someone comes up with a better alternative than what we've got now I say stick with it :thumbup:

Trouble is Ken, the money simply won't follow in a split second... You're talking decades if at all. You just have to look at France and England.