The Roar
The Roar

Paulo

Roar Rookie

Joined April 2017

80.6k

Views

4

Published

3.1k

Comments

Rugby mad and sports crazy. Passionate about my teams and a firm believer that sport can transcend boundaries beyond the field or court.

Published

Comments

You do see some dodgey catches in cricket on the boundary. The law is just a little convoluted. Just saying. I agree I don’t like this kind of catch, but at least they say you have to catch it, you can’t just bat it inside.

Should this Crusader's absolutely insane catch even be legal?

The impact of the player drain on the available player stocks left in Australia show that there is a lack of depth, rather than showing that depth is there. All SH countries face the NH drain, the countries with more depth can absorb this loss better than Australia as Australia does not have the depth. They couldn’t afford to lose a Ben Lam caliber player without feeling it, but NZ lost him last week and it won’t even be a blip on the AB radar.
This exodus does need to be slowed down and I don’t have an answer for that. But the fact that the respective Unions are trying two quite different tactics shows they don’t really have a clue either. NZRFU try to make the AB jersey priceless, thereby using this carrot to negate the actual real life money in the North. And RA do… well… I don’t know… nothing?

Debunking the lack of depth myth

Well, XV is in Roman numerals, seeing as they spoke Latin which is the root of English, XV is English really. 😛
If you wanted the digits 15, well, you should have said “Arabic please” 😂

NRL may bend the rules in order to sign Joseph Suaalii

It wouldn’t be viable having pro/rel from those lower comps. Those lower comps essentially are made from breaking up the SR franchises. If Canterbury won the NPC and get promoted to SR, how does that work?

The pub test: What is actually plausible for 2021?

*XV

NRL may bend the rules in order to sign Joseph Suaalii

Nice summary Brett. I think you have outlined the most plausible scenario and the one that will eventuate. It requires the least set up and establishment. Every other option either involves creating a team or disbanding teams, or a mixture of both. That is a lot of work for maybe a one off season, and in the time frames we have. Nothing else is really feasible in my mind.

The pub test: What is actually plausible for 2021?

Do you really think the Rebels, Tahs, and Reds are that good?

NRL may bend the rules in order to sign Joseph Suaalii

Interesting that this article ignores that RA has denied offering him that much. It also doesn’t mention he currently plays for Randwick, so it isn’t like RA trying to steal him from League.

Also interesting to see all the talk about ‘good for the game’, and no mention at all about what is good for a 16-17yr old boy. Very few of ‘the next big thing’ school boys go through without issues, maybe it is time the codes started to look at this in more detail.

NRL may bend the rules in order to sign Joseph Suaalii

I think the stats show that the US national team has not benefited from having Canadian talent comprising the bulk of the playing rosters. Rankings aside, they have not won an abundance of competitions, especially when measured against Canada’s success. The relative position of the sport in each country is very analogous to Rugby in NZ so I think the comparison is somewhat apt and the facts I posted are accurate.

The US hockey team has not been hugely successful. So I infer the free player movement, has not helped the US to be competitive in its own right.

If I take your point that the Canadian talent has made the NHL a more attractive Comp and therefore supported lucrative clubs that have employed US talent; this still has only maintained the US in mediocrity. It has maintained the status quo. I suggest the Wallabies want to improve their relative strength, not just sit where they are.

You want to say free market movement is good for the game, then you point out in your example that the clubs do not take the international game seriously or place importance on it – of course they don’t, why on earth would they? Look to Soccer or League or English and French rugby – all markets with high player freedom of movement and all sports where clubs and international priorities clash.

That supports the fact that clubs tend to look out for self-interest over national interest (except where centrally controlled). This is why NZRFU maintains central control, which it would lose if 2 squads worth of players were contracted to Aus clubs, who have no interest what so ever in helping the ABs. Quite the opposite in fact.

If your suggesting the equivalent of 5 NZ teams, 3 Aus teams, and 2 NZ teams playing for Aus clubs – why would NZRFU go for this over 7NZ teams they can control and 3 Aus teams? Ratings suggest this would be just as popular in Aus. I just don’t see how this is a win/win.

Know when to hold 'em, know when to walk away

Perfect example Rob9, it shows why NZ talent in Aus teams will not help Wallaby success.

Canada bolsters the clubs in Canada in the US, meaning their talent is developed at the expense of US talent. Clubs do this to better themselves, not the country. This benefits Canada far more than the US.

Canada is 1st ranked team. US is 6th (Canada has never been lower than 5th).

Canada has won the world champs 26 times, US has won it twice (last time was 60yrs ago).

The stats do not support the US team getting better by comparison than the Canada team by letting Canadian play for the clubs that develop that talent. Clubs recruit to support their own success not their countries.

If you let Aus SR recruit Kiwis without impact on their eligibility, you will help the clubs, but not the Wallabies.

It bandages over the real issues; Development of grassroots and talent retention. If clubs gain success by recruiting ready made players from NZ and abroad, they will take this option as the resulting benefit is immediate. Either through game results or public exposure with a high profile signing, the immediate impact is too big a lure to pass by. What incentive is there for player development and investment by the clubs?

Know when to hold 'em, know when to walk away

The issue might lie in positions where NZ have a lot more depth, when that talent is exported to Aussie, then that is one less Aussie player getting developed. Like #10, NZ has an abundance of 10s but is a position Aussie don’t have much top shelf talent right now.

Know when to hold 'em, know when to walk away

If the competition is only hotly contested because NZ has to provide talent, why even bother?

Let NZ set up it’s own comp, and televise it in Aus. See how that works. In the mean time, Aus can figure out how to develop its own talent without having to sponge off NZ. Let the unions try and stand on their own, and then they might come to the negotiation table with my open minds.

Know when to hold 'em, know when to walk away

Keep in mind this is probably only for next year with the likely travel restrictions. No one is actually advocating for a 5 team Comp for the long term. If Aus don’t want to play with NZ once travelling is more feasible it will hurt both countries, but that won’t stop a Comp being put together and running. It just won’t be as good without the Aussies in it. They will sort it out, I have faith.

After the Aratipu report, can’t we all just get along?

Although I don’t think 5 teams is the way forward, if it was 5 teams it wouldn’t get that boring, it’s just a 100m dash instead of 800m. We still have the NPC which will fill a rugby fix. And the quality of rugby will negate the shortness of the comp.

But it won’t be a 5-team Comp. Aussie will get their act together and they will sort something out. Neither party is as stupid as the posters advocating, ‘fk em, we’re taking our ball and not gonna play with you’. Not playing each other benefits neither party, so after the huff and bluster they will eventually sit down and Zoom this stuff out.

After the Aratipu report, can’t we all just get along?

Fair enough. And completely agree. If the agreed path forward is together then maybe it should have been a joint review to see what is best for both parties, but a review conducted by one to see what is best for that one party was always going to be one sided no matter which side procured the report. Seems like they went about it the wrong way.

Critics keep coming for NZ Rugby over proposed breakaway comp

So, RA may want the Force and the Force May want RA, but nothing is signed and sealed yet. Playing hard ball and posturing for ‘the 5 SR teams’ seems like putting the cart before the horse.

Critics keep coming for NZ Rugby over proposed breakaway comp

There is a lot of noise here and a lot of d*€k swinging.

I’m confused with RA saying it’s all 5 SR teams, my understanding was the Force was in SR Aus for this year as a once off and not as ‘part of the RA fold’ again. Not saying this won’t change or that it shouldn’t happen. But I just wasn’t aware of the Force being a reinstated SR team. Unless this is meant to be another ‘once off season’ next year, especially given travel will still be stuffed. In which case why all the legal talk from the Saffas? Surely it’s better to plan for a travel ban and get something sorted now?

Seems to be a lot of outrage here. If the master/servant relationship needs to change, why has RA sat back and waited for the NZRFU report and offer, why not do their own review and ask NZ teams to apply to them for acceptance? RA can’t let NZRFU into the drivers seat unless they are prepared to be the passenger.

Critics keep coming for NZ Rugby over proposed breakaway comp

Sorry mate, I did mean Cookie and did not mean to throw your name in there. Really didn’t mean to associate you in all that.

You’re right about the double standard around ex-pats.

More, not fewer, Australia-based Super Rugby teams are needed to save the game

Shackle-dragger has a much nicer ring than Sheep-shagger – we agree on that too haha

More, not fewer, Australia-based Super Rugby teams are needed to save the game

Couldn’t agree more Micko, it was not right or sustainable for Kiwis to keep coming here and dole bludging. But cutting it off entirely was a fairly blunt approach. There could have been a 5yr time limit – work here for 5yrs before being eligible, you only get 12 weeks, then nothing until you have worked 2yrs, out in place a standard pathway to citizenship, or a multitude of other options.

Keep in mind that this was a generation ago and we are still paying for it – albeit some recent changes have helped with citizenship pathways now available. Kiwis now contribute far more than we take, we all have to work, and the stats show our average salary is higher than the overall Aus average, so we certainly contribute multiple billions in tax. I think we have laid back that dole bludging debt by now.

Just to clarify, the generosity is born from a reciprocal agreement between NZ and Aus. It wasn’t a one sided hand out, although the balance of net migrations at time did mean Aus bore the brunt of that, which as I said at the start, I agree was wrong. We should contribute before we get benefit, but I do think we should be entitled to that benefit and not be punished any further for the faults of the previous generation.

More, not fewer, Australia-based Super Rugby teams are needed to save the game

As you know Ken, completely agree. I’m embarrassed that people were treated that way in my country. Without justifying or legitimising the behaviour at all, I think it stems from this generationally ‘bloody Aussie’ idea that is handed down, coupled with the much larger multicultural aspect of the larger Aus cities creating more tolerance for the ‘other’. I think also, some people see support as binary; if I’m fanatical for the ABs I need to be fanatically against the Wallabies (and vice versa), which is a fundamentally flawed concept of course. As attitudes change and we all become far more multicultural I hope these attitudes back home mellow out.

More, not fewer, Australia-based Super Rugby teams are needed to save the game

Hi Ken, it wasn’t taught at school. Probably more likely handed down by parents generationally, most of whom had never actually been here to be honest. Takes a while for it to wear off, even longer depending on the criticism or back handed compliments Kiwis may receive from the minority once they get here.

It’s a symptom of the human condition, to always look at the ‘other’ and criticise, if only to help reinforce the idea of the ‘other’, as this in turn helps reinforce the idea of ‘self’. You can’t have ‘self’ without ‘other’.

Some people end up expressing this through criticism as they lack the nuance or self awareness to recognise and appreciate difference in any other way. Ironically, the perceived divide between NZ and Aus is so nuanced on a world stage, many people fail to see any difference at all. We do, in the end, have far more in common than we do differences, it’s just that usually we are blinded to this and only see that which the ‘other’ is not.

More, not fewer, Australia-based Super Rugby teams are needed to save the game

As always Ken, the voice of reason 😊

More, not fewer, Australia-based Super Rugby teams are needed to save the game

We can’t help it, it’s so much fun seeing the smoke coming out your ears when we do. Nah, I’m just winding you up… it comes out your nose too.
Seriously though, being thoroughly self-aware yourself, I’m sure you’re aware that it is made abundantly clear to Kiwis in Australia that we are still Kiwis and NOT Australians.
But to be fair, most Kiwis I know in Melbourne are mad Storm supporters, so it may depend on the circles you’re in.

More, not fewer, Australia-based Super Rugby teams are needed to save the game

So, the fact they were in the Australian Army and by extension were willing to die for Australia doesn’t make them Australian enough; they should go for the Wallabies if they REALLY want to be considered Australian? Do you actually hear how silly that sounds?

They shouldn’t have been ragging on the Wallabies, I don’t agree with that part, who ever you support, go for it, I have no issue – even if your an Aussie in NZ and still supporting the Wallabies – but I don’t agree with ragging on the opposition.

Also, what made them ex-Kiwi and ex-Fijian? Did you decide that or them? And Fijian is an ethnicity, I’m not sure you can be ‘ex’ your ethnicity?

More, not fewer, Australia-based Super Rugby teams are needed to save the game