Obviously making some big assumptions here as no one has seen the proposal and it isn’t clear to what extent the consortium and the current Tarneit developer/owner are intertwined, but it might have legs without the Rebels needing to be profitable through the development play.

If they retain ownership of the planned precinct around the stadium then the rent they collect from businesses that feed off the stadium use etc. and the Rebels relocating there might prompt investment from council which will increase the value of their proposed residential lots.

It would take the better part of 10-15 years for the area to grow enough for a team like the Rebels to be sustainable there with current Super funding levels, but if the rents and capital values keep going up in your holdings then your return there potentially eclipses your losses on the team.

What would be concerning is if the consortium and developer were not intertwined enough that the developer can cut and run after ripping the profit out of the land, so the Rebels become loss running again without the property offset.

I completely understand though why RA are hesitant to persevere with the Rebels as it seems like they’ve been running at a loss for close to 10 years.

All of our teams have been in dire straits at times but it seems like the Rebels run at a much heavier loss than the rest.

Yeh there are plenty of better players than him like those you mentioned for legit reasons but the one you’ve gone with is rugby brain?

Not doing yourself any favours.

That is one of the weirdest criticisms I’ve seen levelled against Wilso… He’s got a great rugby brain demonstrated by his work in the wider channels as recent as a couple of weeks ago where 5 metres from the try line he anticipates three defenders flying at him and throws a quick soft pill back on the inside for someone to score untouched.

Are you talking about him running into the teeth of defence? He’s fulfilling his role there of attracting defenders so that a quick recycle will hopefully mean numbers or space out wide. His metres after the collision aren’t amazing but that’s an 8’s role and there isn’t really anyone else in the Reds pack that can do it but I could understand if you thought his post contact metres weren’t good enough.

Yeh don’t know how you came to the conclusion he hasn’t got a rugby brain.

Yep agreed, when I talk about success I mean picking blokes external to local comps as they’ve been successful despite when all the other “successful” teams have a restricted geographical eligibility policy.

I also think that a significant contributing factor to their success is a lot of their game play revolves around physically dominating the other team rather than unlocking games through clever patterns/structures etc.

That’s not to say they don’t have elements of that in their play but if your role is to absolutely flatten people it’s a little easier to get up to speed.

This and what you’ve said above is why I’m a bit hesitant to roll the dice on our eligibility restrictions, particularly if we are only doing it because they’ve had success which could well be an outlier success story. If we do it I would hope its because Schmidt has a game plan that allows for less availability and prep time with squad members.

I’ve changed my mind on this issue so many times over the years that I’m sure I’ll flip flop again but…

As I said great prospect, he hits hard in the tackle and is a great facilitator of men outside him. I think a lot of those stats are full of it, particularly height, I’ve met him and he is not a big dude. Anyway it was more a comment in the context of that backline at international level. I think Flook would need someone more solid inside and out at international level that what is put forward here.

Think you are being a touch harsh on the Force here. They blooded plenty of young Aus locals in the Cheetahs games last year and some of those have been given opportunities before they are probably ready for Super.

The injuries they’ve had have forced them to look at short term Kiwi options for their squad like Prinsep, Bartlett etc. Bringing back guys like Dolly, BPA, Potter and Porter (?) to work along two of the best young backs in the country in O’Donnell and Leahy shows they are on the right track.

I won’t be surprised if the Force give the comp a red hot crack next year as a fully fit starting team of:

1. Robertson
2. BPA
3. Moli/Medrano
4. Carter
5. Rodda
6. Williams
7. Tizzano
8. Harris
9. White
10. Donaldson
11. Potter
12. Stewart
13. Porter
14. ?
15. Beale

could do a lot of damage. They are certainly on a better trajectory than you are suggesting.

I don’t want come across as too rude but I’m sure I will sorry. That backline has a snowball’s chance in hell of being effective at test level against the top teams.

Carter is a strong defender for a 10 not a 12, Flook is a great prospect but is always going to be on the small side, Lynagh has a slight build and Toole, while electric, doesn’t play big like a Kolbe. Unless you’ve back to the future’d us a Lomu on the blind wing I would be hesitant to run that backline onto the field against the all blacks as it would probably breach your duty of care as a coach. Insane stuff.

There probably is legs to that idea as from a high performance perspective you get a few blocks of playing the Kiwis to find out how’re your team is really tracking, while still getting the feel good of an Aus champion.

I don’t think I would ever be satisfied with that format but that’s not the point as I’m rusted on, we need something that attracts new domestic fans. I would like to think sustained competitiveness/success in the current format would do that but maybe the ship has sailed no matter what.

I imagine the kiwis would like it as some of the Aussie games would be the breather they need from belting each other each week…

I’ve made this comment on other platforms but I think there should be a 10-20 year strategy to create a sustainable 3rd tier that doesn’t rely on broadcasting $ or the expensive process of creating new teams that you hope are sticky with fans.

You would do this by leveraging the only advantage left that rugby clubs have over other codes (who became financial through pokies etc.) which is location. Due to the age of our code, a lot of rugby clubs are in locations where, even though it’s council owned, the dirt is really valuable and would support a number of alternative uses.

RA should look at a way to help facilitate development loans for clubs that could accommodate office, retail, residential (build to rent), aged car, hotel and student accommodation without compromising its ability to function as a footy club. Once a loan is paid off, some clubs could have rental returns of $1-2m a year and be able to pay 3rd tier wages and RA wouldn’t have to chip in much at all. I’ve seen a golf club do a deal with an aged care mob where it’s pretty much just a land lease and after 30 years the bricks and mortar become the property of the golf club. No reason our code can’t do something like that, particularly those that have 3 fields.

The clubs that become part of that sustainable 3rd tier would have to limit their senior sides or the like to ensure there isn’t player saturation there but if they partnered up with subbies or other clubs the community connection wouldn’t be lost.

It would waylay club comps around the country as some clubs are promoted while others aren’t, but if the strategy was executed correctly you could have a truly scalable national comp that isn’t a financial drain on RA.

I was at a function before the start of Super and met a former high level administrator from the Tahs set up who was happy to have a yarn with a drunk idiot who talks way too much about back of house rugby without having any real expertise there… Anyway we were talking about centralisation and he related how when he was at the Tahs, someone from the ARU or RA would pop in every few years to talk about how to streamline operations or find efficiencies and wouldn’t be able to find anything because it was already as lean as possible with one individual covering multiple roles etc already because there wasn’t much in the tin.

I definitely want greater separation between the community and professional set ups but it was an interesting anecdote in that things may be already running as lean as they can with the exception of player salaries? Grain of salt given his background but he wasn’t coming across as defending anything, more resigned about the uphill battle he’d been fighting.

I think a fund is a good idea if it is set up so that the larger percentage of the returns are what is invested into community programs to grow the game (and the fund was structure so those monies could only be used for that purpose). If they put $50m in post WC and find a way for benefactors/organisations to match it then $7-$8m a year or whatnot going to community programs is a good starting point. I know that level of investment into community is low but at least it will be siloed and build over time. Next time the Lions roll round you top it up or set up a new one for coaching development etc.

Revenue fro

I think Harry’s article a few weeks ago was pretty accurate in that consistent losses to NZ teams across has taken the sting out of the interstate rivalries here. We all get more excited about beating kiwi teams than we do beating other Aus teams and celebrate when a rival Aus team beats a kiwi team.

That certainly encapsulates my experience as I remember hating the Tahs when I was growing up but now I’m happy to see a good game between them and the Reds?

A part of me would hate to leave Super regardless of how much sense it might make as it would feel like we are running away and admitting our teams will never have primacy.

Yeh I feel a bit differently around that as we’ve seen a leveller playing field at age group levels against NZ since 2018. If we keep that up, it will eventually wash through to Super. Where it breaks down is young players who don’t go directly from 20’s into starting super sides, haven’t been getting the same quality level of games below Super like NZ does with the NPC.

The standard in the Brisbane club comp has made a big jump in the last few years and I think if it continues on that trajectory in Sydney and Brisbane we can bridge the gap.

A rising tide of talent coming through should create a more competitive market and give our Super teams a better negotiating platform. You could see this slowly forming in Melbourne where they were realistically 5 years away from having a predominantly Melbourne bred squad which would have gotten the wage bill down.

An extra $10m a year from a broadcast deal would solve it. A $10m reduction kills it…

I have very fond memories of Hunter playing outside a really young Carter Gordon and Isaac Henry at my club. The three had a great combination and if CG makes his way north post the Rebels situation would love to see them put on a Reds jersey together. They would carve up again.

That’s the big question with walking away from Super before 2030, what are the repercussions from tearing up the agreement with NZ? If we walked early, would the settlement payment or whatnot to NZ be less than the losses sustained by remaining in a comp that sucks cus we suck again? You would think so.

Its frustrating because you can see that if we maintain some squad stability over a few years the current product would improve even more and all 5 teams could conceivably be able to mix it with all the kiwi teams rather than the current hit and miss performances.

Good article. For a long time I’ve felt that the likely drop in broadcast revenue from a solely domestic comp made the current format the best option. But if the crumbs over at Newscorp aren’t just slinging mud and a new broadcast deal that is down $10m a year on the current one is the best anyone will offer the code, then honestly there is no point in sticking with it. It’s chump change.

We are struggling to keep the players we need to be competitive in Super on current funding let alone reduced and we will go back to being whipping boys without those players. I think the current Super comp is of a standard that is worth fighting to keep but not if from 2026 we are doing it without 10m a year.

I don’t know what the repercussions of a decision like that would mean for our relationship with NZ but I can’t see them getting anything out of trans Tasman fixture against much weaker teams (unless we played their NPC teams, food for thought), as I would have thought they would be better served commercially and in high performance outcomes by doing a three game north vs south origin fixture outside of their provincial and international games. The real question there is would they continue with their Super teams at all or supercharge their NPC and have it align with northern calendars so it doesn’t clash with the international window? Either way us walking away from Super wouldn’t go down well…

Going solo raises the discussion point around making our teams sticky with fans. The problem with Super rugby AU is 10 rounds plus a final is not enough footy for clubs to make money off memberships etc, and I don’t think playing teams 3 times in a season works either. It also isn’t scalable unless the Reds and Tahs become Brisbane and Sydney teams and I almost think you want to keep those as representative “brands” for cross Tasman games if NZ will agree to that.

Ideally you want to get to a 8-10 team comp. If wanted two teams in Qld you would learn from the mistakes of the ARC and go with North and South Brisbane, as which side of the river is better is the only talking point that illicits a tribal response in these parts. GC would be somewhere you might expand in 10 years time if things were going well.

Sydney sounds like it divvies well into three teams of North, East and West. Force, Brumbies and “Rebels” stay as they are and give the comp legitimacy by having familiar teams, even though they won’t have anywhere near the quality of cattle they previously did. It’s scalable but still expensive to set up, so can’t be done without broadcaster or PE buy in anyway…

Fun and sad discussion

The ones whose bums weren’t on seats… There are a myriad of reasons why Super has faded in popularity over the years on both sides of the ditch but even at my footy club in Brisbane a lot of the kiwis didn’t care about Super and remarks like “who cares, Saders are just going to win the comp anyway” were thrown around when discussing the comp.

As long as the product is consistently good it will start to pull those fans back in. Word of mouth goes a long way but it’ll take years of consistency in performance and a lot of that depends on squad stability. If we can’t slow down the player drain we’ll be in trouble again but hopefully we’re better prepared to sustainably mitigate that with the Lions and WC money.

And if you make the same comparisons in 2006-2009 between the Force and Reds you’ll see that the Force had the better squad at times and the depth you’re talking about, just like the Rebels did in 2018-2019 and at other times throughout their history when compared to the Tahs or Reds.

You don’t finish higher on the table years at a time if you have what you call a “vast difference in quality and depth” in a squad and you certainly don’t if you’ve only got “two or three big names” if the others are supposedly warehousing talent. Coaching certainly isn’t going to outweigh squad depth and quality to that extent year on year…

The stupidity of this discussion can be traced back to your earlier comment that it is only recently that the Rebels and Force are being “allowed” to have good squads. The Force squad this year is no where near the best they have had, and the Rebels squad of not long after inception and 5 years ago is pretty much as good as this one. Again you consistently make easily challenged or wrong statements as fact.

Thanks, missed that completely. Horror story to scare the children with given the precarious nature of rugby finances around the world.

Wasn’t there chat about the French barely breaking even with the last WC? That never made sense to me but would love someone who understands it better to enlighten as to how the frogs could do so poorly and four years later we make a motza?

If that document is legitimate then once RA sort the Rebels situation out and finalise the next broadcast deal, the code will financial certainty again. How weird will that be?

I did a trip with a mate a few years back to watch both NPC finals and we did the road trip from Auckland to Christchurch. In Auckland everyone wanted to have a yarn about the Broncos when they found out we were from Brisbane whereas in the South island everyone just wanted to tell us why the Wallabies were shit and how we should fix it.

Imagine what that sort of coin would have done for the game here without the debt. If you don’t laugh you’ll cry…

It’s a really good point about the front row depth across the Aus Super teams. There are good prospects at LH in Shoupp, Kailea, Vella and Lambert but on the TH outside of Nonggorr and De Lutiis, the cupboard is looking pretty bare…

Honestly, even as a Reds fan and as much as I’d love him back up here, it might be best for Aus rugby if he went there? Reds have shored things up nicely but Tahs still lose games because HJH should be playing LH. You could say the same for the Force so would be happy if he went to either if the Rebels sitch can’t be resolved.

I remember saying it years ago but Aus rugby really missed a trick through the Tahs poor roster management having to force HJH to move across. He was on such a good trajectory as a LH and the Wallabies could be enjoying a rotation of him, Bell and Slipper at LH…