CONFIRMED: Rebels fall into voluntary administration as Rugby Australia seeks 'sustainable and successful future'

4. Repetitive scrum setting because the ref insists on perfection. Just let the play continue if the ball comes out in favour of the non-offending team. This suggestion is dangerous. A scrum may need to be reset/bowl up because of the danger to the players, especially the tight 5.

That is more the case of existing super rugby players moving around. I am thinking more of young potential stars opting to move, say, from Sydney to Perth to come through into the NRC side faster. I would not be allowing NRC sides to just go and sign up Sydney and Brisbane players every year. NRC is another whole can of worms though. JON started down the build and they will come path though in 2003. There was no post 2003 strategy, either developed from the time we won the hosting rights, when it should have been done, or even after the cup was finished. We are seeing that happening again now, and have just watched soccer do it. Additional SR sides were certainly seen as a top down strategy; add a team and you get more revenue. There has been no investment in the so called entertainment business. Reliance has been basically placed on private schools and clubs in Sydney and Brisbane to keep producing players. RA/ARU has made no attempt to replace the successful national coaching scheme of 1974-94. Imagine the success, or lack thereof, of an entertainment industry without sufficient trained actors, let alone stars. If anything WA and Victoria have been outstanding in establishing a base for rugby in those states. Who would have thought there would be this many Victorian grown Wallabies. If RA ever gets around to addressing the vacuum in Western Sydney they should put WA and Victoria in charge of it. Establish a Western Sydney District (the footprint is significantly larger than the SS area), bring a NRC team in drawn wholly from that area, and use it as a feeder for WA and Victoria. RA is broke because of financial and operational incompetence across the country. Cutting the Rebels is the easy option, that is all. It will improve the performance of RA to the same extent as culling the Force did. It will probably slow the demise of rugby in Australia, but that is all. There is no point borrowing a whole lot of money if you can't invest it to grow the game, and support for the game.

Rugby Australia seeks 'sustainable and successful future'. As the Irish saying goes, well I wouldn't be starting from here. Rugby Australia has already bet the farm on the Lions tour and the World Cup making enough money to redeem the loan they've taken out. Which means that, once those events are over, RA will find itself (at an absolute Panglossian optimistic best) in the same parlous position as they are now, but with no big event bargaining chips to offer the bank when they beg for their next survival loan.

I know you are a bit of a history buff Sheek which is why I shared. Of course the Americans like to promote their own heroes and if that means making stuff up.so.be it, but the march by Santiago and his aggression and ruthlessness never gave any of them a chance either by escaping or help arriving in time. I actually think.the Santiago story more interesting thsn portrayed in tbe movie. But you are right, movies need their big moments :happy:

AgainAgain, All good. I'm always up for having my knowledge improved. It used to happen more often (expanding knowledge) on The Roar a decade or so ago, but much less so now (ouch). I've read the story of the Alamo a few times, but no-one has ever said (that I recall) the sword in the sand speech never happened. Although when I googled such there were plenty of disclaimers! But as you say, it doesn't change the overall thrust of my post. And it WAS a great scene in the movie!

It doesn’t change the main thrust of your post, just interesting how many people think the grand gesture that Travers made waa true. The Texans had asked for help from the American’s and Santiago being the hard angry general he was marched his troops hard with little rest to the Alamo. He lost men and horses during the march so hard and relentlessy did he push. That was quite a feat in itself, the distance they covered in the time. Once they arrived they set themselves up and hoisted the flag letting all know they would be killed and there was no escape. In light of that it would be a wasted gesture by Travers. However as ypu know, people who make movies and write recreations of historic events like grand gestures. But Jim Bowie of the infamous Bowie knife was deathly ill. He was dying either way and wasn’t heavily involved in the action as he was lying in his sick bed on his last legs :happy: All I can say is be wary of tv and books based on historical facts but are more interested in telling a story than being an accuratte report on actual events. It can be quite misleading. As you know better than anyone in the age of social media people are easily misled and believe all sorts of made up nonsense.

One of the objectives of future structures should be to encourage younger players coming into the fringes to relocate to other states for opportunity. Yes, that's true and valid, but aren't we seeing that anyway. Will Harris and Ben Donaldson went to the Force. Pasitoa, originally from Perth, went the Brumbies and then back to Perth to get more opportunity. Taniela Tupou wanted to stay in Australia (or was strongly encourage to do so) but didn't want to stay at the Reds and he is down in Melbourne. I would like Melbourne to stay in but, if it's a choice between Melbourne going bankrupt and not having a team, and Australia going broke and us not having any professional teams, then I would, sadly, have to go with option A. Hopefully they will be able to struggle through to the BIL and WC money comes in and the crowds etc (everywhere), TV subscribers etc grow enough everywhere that it's supported. But I do think the decision to bring in a team in Melbourne came a little bit early personally. I don't think our numbers nationally, or the local numbers in Victoria, were quite up to where they needed to be to support a team there. But, at the time, I think SANZAAR were pushing us to have another team because SA wanted to have 6. We have this "if they build it, they will come" mentality. Well that might work to bring ghostly baseball players out of a corn field but I think, personally, that what we needed to build at that time was the level or levels underneath. So, by all means, Melbourne could have had a place in an NRC, and more funding and focus on local community and schools rugby. But plopping a fully professional SR team into the city and populating it from outside and having all the costs associated with that, I think was too much and too soon and not money well spent. Ironically, we are starting to see those local junior players come through into the Rebels now - not at the numbers required to populate enough of the side but still there are Wallaby standard playing coming out of the Melbourne system. So I hope they can hang on. But I don't think there issue is that they aren't getting enough "top" players from other states.

Remember that NZR's broadcast contract is more than just SR. NZR "could" do it, but hard to imagine them giving Australian clubs money required to keep the teams competitive. All theory though, as I can never see it happening, but if it does there would need to be a NRC in Australia.

There is no way NZR would pay enough money to an Australian based club to keep it viable and competitive. There's evidence that NZR could. That $8 million NZR is gifting RA each year could be transferred to one or two Australian clubs. I'm sure that would be gratefully received. That's probably more than they receive from RA now. Remember: NZR's broadcast contract is worth nearly 3X RA's.

The problem there is that the best players will go and play for the SR sides, assuming they'll have more cash, and that will then devalue the club competition. A long time ago, the Test players would still turn out for their clubs, which is why the club comp thrived. Then SR and professionalism arrived and the clubs never saw their players again. The Waratahs, Reds etc became the new 'clubs'. Imagine if none of the international players for Manchester City or Barcelona never actually turned out for the club games, how long would that last? There's no reason we couldn't have clubs in Melbourne and Perth, we'd just need a way to work out a competition structure. As dire as it seems now, rugby has an embarrassment of playing riches. League only has a club comp plus a State of Origin series which is the crown jewel. They have internationals but they're a pretty poor show. AFL ONLY has a club competition - that's it.That's why the games are so well-attended, there's nothing else to watch. Rugby has club teams, provincial teams, and international games against a large pool of competitive countries. We just have to work out the way to make this sustainable, and tiering the games like rugby in Europe does, or international football does, is the way to go.

Is 5 weeks better than nothing ?

AgainAgain - Damn! :unhappy:

Barry did you ever serenade Miss Piggy.

First we take Manhattan, then we take Berlin.

100% , Super was never intended to be the sole comp when it started , it should just be a quick 8 week comp.

Right... And when did they take over?

Okay awesome.

Genia and Cooper certainly made a big impact as well as stars at the peak of their careers like JOC, Beale and Cipriani? Quite a number of those listed started their careers at the Rebels, some have not actually started yet and some were nothing other than journeymen. All irrelevant anyway as you do not believe NSW or Queensland or ACT receive any benefit from RA paying top up contracts. All I started asking was that if we knew the numbers then we could better understand the context of the Rebels' "financial failure". We are possibly being bullsh**%ted by RA on where the problems lie, and who is responsible. Since that is the default RA strategy, imo it is highly likely that is what is happening.

That was before they took over. Haven't heard a thing since have we...

Gary, the U19 comp goes for 5 weeks but the same in League goes for the whole season. A 5 week comp is not a pathway. Also re SR, the way the top players are made to rest from such a short tournament is crazy.