Super Rugby draft? Let’s not be so hasty

Interesting post BF, although it probably highlights some of the problems Australia baked into SR and now keep tripping up any attempt to move forward. One of their biggest mistakes was to use their two biggest state teams. Professional teams inevitably become franchises, and they could/should have looked at pretty much any professional sport in the world to realise that. The result has been the loss of the entire state team system across Australia, and that they still encourage everyone to think like that suggests they still have no clue. No-one should be expecting that a professional franchise should still be all local. But everyone should be expecting it of their NRC team; it should be a fundamental element of its structure. That is where everyone should still ge able to go see their 'local' team, but RA instead compounded their mistake in continuing to encourage that in SR by completely ignoring it in the NRC and making it franchises-lite. It should have been, should still be, a key point of differentiation between the two levels, but instead they fell entirely between the stools.

Sorry about the "stupidity" comment but you did use "big insecurity!" :laughing: Rassie concentrates on the World Cup because he know that for most of the cycle it's difficult to get the best out of his players with their lack of off season and heavier workload compared to Australia and New Zealand. Both of those countries have been at their lowest ebb for decades and he's got a golden generation in its prime yet he's 25% against one and 50% against the other this cycle. Of course this year his players took the 6n period off and he will have them from July to October so they will be much better placed for the World Cup. As Foster knows well, the all Blacks don't have the luxury of being poor between World Cups. It's not acceptable to the public. We also have a riskier gameplan so a high Ben Darwin cohesion score is needed to succeed. Just like Ireland, we know that we have the best chance of success if we concentrate our players into a few teams. It wouldn't make sense for us to move away from that.

Boks have made no bones about their only goal . In fact when Erasmus took over in 2018 he stated clearly that the target was to win 2023 . 2019 was a bonus …His own words . We know that South Africa prioritizes World Cups probably more than most so what happens in between not important . Before you go at me again I don’t actually agree with that but I’m not the Bok coach ..Also JD inferring that by not agreeing with player restrictions my opinions are based on stupidy simply reinforces my statement that NZ Rugby and its fans indeed have an insecure mindset . I don’t mind at all if you see things differently to me …But maybe ask the players themselves if they would prefer to be able to sell their skills on an open market football style or would prefer a gun to their head forcing them to make choices .Incidentally my post was actually very complimentary to NZ Rugby , suggesting sufficient development and depth to handle ..Cheers.

“NZRFU hasn’t experienced enough pain” is simply not true. They entered into an agreement where-by one of their respective partners continually squandered their resources by failing to invest in grassroots. Got “knifed” in the back twice and has now had to bailout said “partner” financially while constantly getting “rubbished” in the media. The other “partner” turned tail because of their consistently poor results despite larger player depth and finances. Then cried poor when the NZRFU finally called their bluff. (The only sympathy I have is for the constant political interference by the SA government). The NZRFU has definitely endured enough pain by being the only professional organisation out of the three and expecting the same from their so-called “partners”. RA and SARU need to grow up and stop playing the victim.

Also, you’ve currently got a golden generation in its prime and they still can’t win the RC outside of World Cup year. The diaspora isn’t helping. That’s not a criticism, you don’t have a choice. We do have a choice and we are far better off, like Ireland, keeping up our cohesion and standards.

nah not here. And then the control and dictation starts.

They going everywhere with this bar where the problems lay jacko, Many want put crap on the kiwis the kiwi coaches then want our players to fix there problems. No morals with this lot mind you there's a few posters aussie posters that talk sense and understand the issues how and when they started. They want in the door and there's trouble,want want nz made and have had since day dot. If only they just followed what works

It's not insecurity, it's a lack of stupidity. We want our Super Rugby teams to be as strong as possible. A few players going to Australia is what we have now. What's being proposed is lot more than that including current All Blacks and will only weaken our rugby. What we need is for Australia to improve, not us get worse.

How on earth is a handful of players going to Australian teams going to weaken NZ Rugby ..I can conversely argue that there is enough depth in NZ for another Superugby team . Allowing some players out will afford an opportunity for someone else to get SR exposure .Most likely as well the players that Australian franchises would want will definitely not be players in development stage. They will want someone who can bring experience and with a track record otherwise might as well develop one of their own . I'm very befuddled why , despite all evidence of other countries to the contrary , NZ are so terrified of losing these players if they open the system up a bit . That comes across as as big insecurity .

Fantastic article Horse. A great can do attitude.

If you weaken our teams and force our players into an inferior development system that creates an even bigger problem for our rugby. No thanks.

This is a excellent article, Horse. It is the coaching and player pathways that need attention. A national competition is a must, especially to feed 5 teams worth of players and coaches. Cutting down teams will limit geographical growth, and adding kiwi players limits regional growth, and you are correct that NZ will choose home grown first mostly even with drafts, because it just increases regional growth for us. Potentially, the draft could end up over time having 60%+ kiwis making the numbers in Aus, with only a few Aus players in NZ teams. That would only leave about 2 teams worth of Aus players to select for the Wallabies. If a draft was implemented, you would need a cap on movement to protect against that potential development disaster. Just on a legal standpoint, it would be hard to convince top NZ players to move to a poorer coaching setup, and you can't legally force players to move. Even in a draft, you may mostly be flooded with excess NZ players, which is currently a option anyway. The point of the draft is to get to NZ's best, but do the best want to play under Aus coaching and hinder personal development? Maybe for the Brumbies, but they are not the team that need help! I think your concerns are very much warranted, and a draft put in place to even results can have negative side effects that should be scrutinized against the positives carefully.

G'day Busted one. You are not alone, tribalism plays a massive part. Even when it comes to seeing Aussies in general, not just players from our state/locality. My market research exercise the other day delivered a very one sided result. 37 to 3 in favour of Carter Gordon playing 10 for the Rebels rather than Hamish's suggestion of Damian McKenzie. Seeing a young Aussie do well is more important to most of us, rather than having the best player a team can get their hands on.

G’day jez. You got me thinking to the point I have offered a comment of my own. Have a look if you’ve got time. BF

G’day horse. You and jeznez have got me thinking. Firstly, not a fan of the draft. At least, not here and certainly not our current rugby environment. For quite a while now, we’ve been hearing about the need for tribal connection to our teams (particularly from the SS clubs when it came to NRC, who, unlike the rest of Australian rugby, couldn’t find a way to engage with a new tribe.) In Queensland and NSW, the majority of our teams’ personnel have been local products. For the other three franchises, their playing rosters have been built around players from the nursery states of our nation. I would suspect that for those three a draft may not be as daunting an idea as it would be for the supporter bases of Q’ld and NSW. I’m already somewhat concerned by the fact that current players refer to their teams as “Clubs”, while coaches like Brad Thorne still try to instil in their players that they are playing for their state. At the same time, I have appreciated the marquee player who has come to Q’ld, played at their best for the team/state and become honorary Queenslanders. But that is not as a result of a draft. In the event of a draft, would the team/club, based in Sydney, still call themselves the Waratahs? More importantly, would the supporters identify a team that, eventually, could be made up of a large number of New Zealanders and some Aussies and Pacific Islanders, coached by a kiwi, as a team representing their state? The same question stands for Q’ld, the NZ provinces and the Pacifica teams. Traditionally, our tribalism has been based on school and local club that feed into state team. Take away that pathway and my interest will stop at club level, and I’m not sure that I would jump the SR level and rejoin at the National level, especially if it was that level of governance that changes my tribal state side. Am I alone with these thoughts? I don’t think so. Or am I one of a small minority that would be lost to Super Rugby?

NZ has dropped way below 3 before. I've seen them lose many matches on the trot eyc and quite simply put they have had an absolute golden run, unpartalled by any other team, but that's life. Sinking to 3rd eh. How shocking. I've read way better informed people than you saying the NZ rugby sky is falling. England are a basket case, France and Ireland have finally made pro rugby work. Good on them. They will go thru cycles too. That's life

Another point that I have been extremely vocal that Australian rugby is not up to scratch when measured against the Kiwi teams. That is an Australian problem. Um no .....That is also very much a NZ problem. Its a Superugby problem . Healthy strong competition drives standards and stimulates interest . ( yes in NZ too ) .

World in union. I was actually replying to the claim that the NH comps are better. They fail on so many fronts to be referred to as better its funny. The SA sides joined them and won very quickly. Something they have failed at in SR very often. The Aus way of looking at SR is bought about by being perennial lovers but refusing to do anything to improve that. Collective thinking works when you have possible agreement but that's not possible when everyone has very different agenda's. RAs agenda is a strong Wallabies side but they refuse to do work to achieve that. To be basic around it the NPC in NZ produces 29 coaches a year, 400 plus players, 90 assistant coaches and CEOs etc every year. Imagine how much Aus rugby would improve! Even a 10 team NRC gives 10 coaches,30 assistants, 150plus extra players and then the support staff. It also brings friends, family to become rugby followers even if its not there first choice sport to follow. How can you possibly have collaborative thinking when things are so unequal between what each party brings to the table?

Jacko, your comment illustrates that NZRU has not experience enough pain to realize that a commercially successful Superugby competition is in their own interest and that gains that Australia, Fiji, Samoa and in the future Japan's can make are also theirs. If you look carefully, you will see cracks. The Highlanders exposed declining depth, the AB are losing regularly against teams like England, Ireland and France and dropped to #3, there are concerns about the player drain post RWC that could leave NZ with gaps in key positions (e.g. # 10) with the future coach expressing a desire to open up selection for overseas players etc . I hope it doesn't take too long for NZ to connect the dots as it will be more difficult to rebuild Superugby if NZ first need to get to a similar position as Australia and South Africa before they are prepared to act in a collaborative way.

Jacko, you've actually reinforced the difference between competitive thinking and collaborative thinking. The results that your comment focuses on are AB success and the Saders being world beaters. This is competitive thinking which is a good thing, except when discussing how to improve the appeal of Super Rugby. The results that collaborative thinking focuses on is Super Rugby fan support, i.e. fan support for the whole Super Rugby comp and each team within it (not just the Saders). To make Super Rugby the best it can be, NZ and Aus need to collaborate. Of course this shouldn't compromise AB success which is the main NZ concern. Understandably therefore it's hard to make the switch from competitive thinking to collaborative thinking.