Do you even know what a draft is?

LOL even worse he was not a drafted player, its called the free market!

Hey what ever a “Fiwi” is, if you were a Kiwi you would know AT is the 2 letter short form for AOTEAROA not AO!
And please explain WTF is a centralised player “draft”??? Don’t you mean centralised player contract!!! And I know for a fact it wouldn’t bring in a “breath of fresh air” let alone a breathe! It would actually destroy the integrity of my nation’s rugby treasure FOREVER! Who the heck wants to see one province (out of 14 I might add) get stacked with a big bunch of current or recent ABs aswell as most of the current Crusaders? Because thats what will happen if they all say they ONLY want to play for Canterbury on the same salary they’re on now or they’ll all sign overseas for double or possibly even triple! And why would they want to break up the most successful pro rugby side of all time when Central Contract Models can not stop the player for signing with whichever province he chooses?!
If the NPC is to ever become a fully professional comp, following the NRL model of clubs paying majority of wages with a salary cap is the ONLY route to create an even competition. But with added caveats for National Camps and National input into “players of interest” etc but unlike the NRL model and in the interests of NZR each province would be required to have a minimum % of NZ eligible players in each squad of say 66 or 75. And on top of that NZR would pay AB players matchday, squad, camp etc payments.
But for real if Nz went this route Aus would not survive off the Shute Shield and Hospital Cup model you barely mentioned, infact they would have to keep the current SRAu and will need to add atleast 1 maybe 2 P.I sides for it to thrive longterm. (Drua will be guarenteed a spot so you should actually take more interest in what will happen in Aus right?)
Next time question yourself before anybody else! And if you couldn’t tell, my model was only an upgraded and tbh probably alot better one than the one proposed! And possibly a very viable longterm format that suits the needs of NZ, Aus, Jap and the P.I.

SRAt And SRAu, 6 teams in each (MP in At and FD in Au).

Double round robin with 1 bye each followed by GFs to award the winners of each comp.

1 blank w.e acting as a second bye to give time for sides to prepare for the beginning of the “International Component”

Super Rugby Asia-Pacific? All 12 teams from SRAt and Au, plus the 12 highest rank Top League sides split into 4 pools of 6:

Top 4 sides from each SR comp drawn into different pools from their countrymen (obviously with a ranking system so pools are equaled out as best possible), the bottom 2 of each make up the 3rd spot in each pool. (Obviously be an extra game vs a local side, with 2 pools featuring 2 At teams and 1 Au and vice versa for the other 2 pools)

The 12 TL sides are drawn in rankings 1-4, 5-8 & 9-12 and also equaled as best as possible to give a solid 4 pools of 6 sides.

Play each in your pool once over 5 straight rounds, 2 home and 2 away plus one Super Round (with either all 12 games played at a single ground over 1 weekend or divided into 3 monster quadheader nights with 1 venue from each of Oz, Nz and Jap hosting a night of the Super Round?).

Top 2 teams from each pool qualify for the QFs of the “Asia-Pacific Super Cup”? Highest placed from each pool hosts their QF with SFs and the GF either being hosted by a single venue (with each 3 “regions” alternating hostings years) or make highest ranked based on points, aggregate, tries etc the hosts of SF then GF (I prefer a single host venue for the SFs and GF).

Overall every SR side (Nz and Oz) will play a guarenteed 15 games a year, 7 home 7 away and a Super Round plus the 2 byes. The top 2 domestic sides will play an extra 1 for their respective GF, and those lucky enough to make the SRAP finals will get an extra 1-3 games that season to give a maximum of 19 games possible a year. Which was the max amount of games from the original conference format of 2011-2015. If its a game too much why not remove the domestic GF and make it first past the post?

I have a left solution/concept for the replacement of the NRC, bare in mind I am a Kiwi and don’t know all the intricacies of Australian Rugby.
But it seems obvious to me that the major downfall of the NRC was due to the NSW and possibly some QLD club sides and them wanting their own National Club Championship, am I right?
So why not have the best of both worlds? A Joint Venture sort of comp between the NRC and Nsw & Qld premier clubs, with an old school Nz spin on things.
A quick look on wiki shows there are curently 13 sides in the Shute Shield and 10 in Qld premier comp. So with that in mind I propose to give them their coveted National Club Championship.
An old school Nz NPC style comp of 3 divisions featuring the 23 Nsw & Qld club sides, plus 2 each from ACT (maybe Vikings JV with Nsw Southern Inlands and best of the rest Canberra Kookaburras side?), WA (Perth Spirit & Perth Gold?) And Victoria (Melbourne Rising & Victoria Axemen?). Note each of these sides would have a specific catchment of clubs to represent and choose players from.
On top of these 29 sides I propse to add the Nsw Country side and the Qld equivalent aswell as the representative teams from South Australia, Northern Territory and Tasmania to give a total of 34 teams.
1st Division includes top 5 Nsw clubs, top 4 Qld, plus 1 each from Act, Vic and Wa. This gives a 12 team premier division with a round robin of 11 games each (5 home, 5 away and a Super Round?), with top 4 featuring in semis and final to give a 13 week competition.
2nd Division: Next 4 from both Nsw & Qld and same deal 1 each from Act, Vic and Wa. 11 rounds 10 games and 1 bye each plus 2 week finals to give a 12 game 13 week competition with the final winner gaining automatic promotion to the 1st div. and the bottom placed side relegating to the 3rd div.
3rd Division: Bottom 4 SS sides and bottom 2 from QPR, Nsw Country, Qld Country, South Australia, Northern Territory and Tasmania. Same format as div. 2 with the winner gaining promotion up.
Obviously there will logistical issues/costs with this but surely it could be plausible? This is what the clubs supposebly want so wouldn’t supporters follow their side to make this a success? And with the 9/Stan deal this could help to bring in more viewers if there is a fta game each week for each division aswell as help to bring more subscribers to stan.
Any way I look forward to your feedback good or bad, right or wrong.

Yes I do have a problem with Jap sides linking pretty much merging into Oz sides with pretty much zero gains for them.
1. The 3 Sydney sides are all Shute Shield teams who after playing that co.p earlier in the year are then going to morph into completely different sides merged with with TL teams, I can’t see why ypu would want to do that tbh. Also as others have mentioned they don’t represent all of Sydney. Why not NS Rays, Sydney City and WS Rams plus a NSW Country side instead?
2. Been a Kiwi yes I can’t see why we would want an Oz mashup side in our conference instead of say a Pacific Island or an NZ expansion side. Also don’t know who would support this side, would the fierce Force fans who have stood tall against the ARU support such a side? I don’t think so.
3. Well yes you’ve got to have a full round robin.
4. I actually thought this wasn’t all that bad as a suggestion or working title but tradition is tradition.
5. I’ve been a big fan of bringing back the North Vs South game for years. But with the league version being so big would a best of 3 rugby series gain as much traction as your hopping for or would it be better as a one off match each year? Pretty much a national trial game per say. Or why not a Heartlands XV (Nsw & Qld) Vs All States aka All Stars (Rest of Oz) All Stars type concept instead?
6. Well if M10s at its rightful place of being after the club rugby season then what starts your calender? A 10 week TT comp followed by Inbound tests and TRC? I can’t see it happening.
7. I get this is pretty much a current situation type thing aka Covid 19, no travel, trans tasman bubble etc etc. But I would rather see a full Trans Tasman Asia Pacific Comp, say 17 team comp made up of the 5 Oz sides, 5 Nz plus Central North Island, and either 6 or 5 Jap sides (City/Region based with possible ownership by joint ventures of the Top League sides/corporations in said City/Region and possibly between the local RU or JRU) and a P.I side (based between Auckland West Sydney and the Islands) if Japan only has 5. But if not encourage all sides to signs P.I players and rotate sides taking games to the Islands each year.
Each team plays each other once over a full round robin and having 2 byes each to give each side 16 games over 18 weeks (as is current format) followed by a full 3 weeks quater finals format to give a total of 21 weeks.
SA could also replicate this format with Argentina/South America and USA/Canada with a possible Rugby Super Bowl being held each year featuring the winner of both.

What did I just read?

So many flaws I’m not going to bother going into it. But No just No.

I like and have thought out a similar proposal before. But atm I think it would be disastrous to drop Argentina to a 2nd tier comp, as the majority if players would leave or not develop tp their full potential.

They could easily be fitted into such a comp by adding an extra side to reduce travel and help development and by playing home and away in blocks of 2, 3 or 4 matches.

My proposal would see 6 Nz sides (Central N.I), 5 Oz (bring back the Force), 2-3 Jap/Asia, 2 Arg, 1 P.I (anymore than one would be unsustainable).

This would equate to a 16-17 team comp with a full round robin of 15-16 games plus 1 or 2 byes followed by finals.

I believe this to be the perfect solution should Sa leave. It keeps Arg in a Tier1 comp aswell as bringing in more Jap or Asian sides and also solves the P.I situation. Not to mention bringing back all the disfranchised W.A fans and bringing Nz down a little bit by adding another side.

It wouldn’t have to be a top AB as such maybe a fringe AB or mid tier SR player, like the ones we’re losing quite regularly to Europe atm.

But my understanding is that in Oz there are allowances for TPA. So if you were a corporation in Oz and maybe sponsor a local SR why would you not want to explore the possibility of a TPA with an AB? That could be huge for your company aswell as the side and could even see alot more expats come to said teams’ games or watch them on TV just to see that AB play. It would also bring more exposure for your company by having an AB in board.

Yes bro its a win win both ways and by capping the amount clubs can sign it would prevent sides from becoming flooded with foreigners.

Alot of the commenters on here are against such a thing and think it would hurt the national sides. But if done right it can only help everyone involved by players learning other nations styles, training and coaching regimes etc.

The biggest concern seems to be the loss of ABs from NZs shores. But I honestly can’t see a host of top line ABs leaving to play in Oz unless they get a offer too good to pass up. More than likely it would mostly be fringe ABs or mid tier SR players (guys who are leaving at quite a big rate atm) and its alot better to have them still eligible for their national side than being loat forever. Also with the original SANZAAR Unions (unsure if Arg do this) all having some form of a top up or dual contract system they would still have the ability to sign the top 30-50 players out right, therefore keeping a big base of the best players at home.

I believe he fitted in better in the Reds system than he did the Blues and actually played alot better too, but if you look at Waisake Naholo, Malakai Fekitoa, Ben Lam etc a few players have left the Blues and played alot better.

Same thing happened with Jason Woodward played well with the Rebels was told by Shag if he wanted to play for ABs had to come back to Nz so he did and didn’t fit in and fit in aswell at the Canes as he did the Rebels.

I can’t speak on the Oz $ situation but if the comp is run independently from the Unions but by the clubs for example (but say the Oz and Sa sides must give 20% ownership to the national union) then they can work out whats best for them and with the unions having some or in Nzs case majority ownership they still get some say just the major say they get atm.

Im not saying they shouldn’t still work towards International rugby they just shouldn’t do it to the point where the comp is nothing more than a feeder comp. For exsmple I read an article the other about SR being very poor in the social media side compared to NRL, where NRL post highlights and such mid games SR shows nothing until after the games are well and truely over and then you have to go looking on sky or foxtel etc, these are the parts where SR is lacking because irs a feeder comp and not a unified league such as the NRL, AFL, NFL, NBA etc.

Im not saying let all ABs go let alone half. All I’m saying is let the odd player play in Oz, Sa, Arg or Jap and still be eligible.

If anyone had read my firsr comment in this post it was about capping the amount of Int players each franchise can sign based on each nations relative strength and then again capping the amount of T1 players they can sign so there are spots for T2 players.

In any case NZR will still have their top up system so the top 30-50 players will still be based at home. But whats the problem with say the Reds offering someone like Lima Sopoaga the $600-800 k that QC’s on and he takes it and still be eligible for the ABs? Hes going overseas anyway yet a deal like this could have kept him close to home and still play for ABs if selected.

Players are going overseas much earlier than ever before, NZR need to consider all options possible and they are with the Northampton deal but this could be something better

And yes I agree that coaching and structures in Oz need to be better but something like this could provide a short to medium term fix while the long term problems are bein sorted.

Rugby is becoming more and more a world game if we don’t find ways to keep up we could eventually get left behind and be forced to pick players from overseas anyway just this way they’ll be England or France, maybe one day even Spain, USA or Germany.

Plenty of players not in AB considerations yes

Yes practically what I have said above with capping spits due to the relevent strength of each nation aswell as capping spors for T1 players to get more T2 and lower players involved.

Agree that SR needs to produce a better product and think the solution could be by united the comp by giving Sanzaar the duty of running the comp without everyone poking there fingers in it all the time but still getting a member on the board aswell as independent members.

Thats why I have added another Arg side so they would have one less game overseas each year aswell as adding another week for those on this side so their not traveling so far for a one off game.

Also each Nz and Oz side would rotate their away games to Jap and Arg so one year play Jap sides away the next the 2 Arg sidea away and vice versa and so on.

Also the 2 Arg sides would play 3 away games in Nz each year which could one block of away games and 2-3 in Oz aswell as 2 Jap/P.I so on the years they play 2 in Oz they could do a 4 week trip to Oz and Jap/P.I (as they do atm and recently won all 4) and the other would see another 3 week block aswell as a 2 week block. It is a bit of travel but made into blocks with home matches and byes inbetween it would offset some of it.

I think it is a good point you state although I disagree on the part of the upside being limited when it could potentially be unlimited.

What if the oz sides having a few kiwis, saffas, argies, islanders etc here and there sees their sides performance lift considerably which then lifts attendences (with a heap of expat kiwis n islanders in oz this may gain more interest from them), viewership, merchandise aswell as sponsorship and then this leads to better performances from the WBs and again the same thing attendences, viewership etc.

That could potentially see another golden period in Oz Rugby aswell as adding more value to SR and more $$$ to the money jar for everyone.

It is only a minor step as only a few ABs if that would actually go to Oz but how is it not better having them go to Oz, Ss, Arg or Jap yet still play SR and still be eligible for the ABs?

Players are leaving these shores every year this could stop some being lost to NZR forever. And its not like players haven’t gone to Oz before a few have gone on to play quite well there but are ineligible to play for ABs and some have come back and not fitted in aswell as they did over there and didn’t make it to ABs.

Jeremy Thrush just signed with the Force for 2 years what if they were stilk in SR and we have a lock crisis and only have 2-3 with AB experience fit for the RWC, Thrush could come back in in an instance with AB and WC experience and shore up that crisis instead if having to pick an unproven player. How is the not for the overall betterment of our game?

Personally I can’t see an expanded NPC being the answer as we are such a small market and most unions only have populations of 100 to 200 thousand.

I think keeping the 5 clubs we have now plus a Central N.I side, 5 from Oz (bring back the Force), 2 from Arg (as they will be doomed without SR and another side will aid their development and slighty lessen travel), 2-3 from Japan (as like you said there is big $$$ in Japanese corporations and rugby is growing there) and 1 P.I side (possibly based in Hawaii but stil take games to Fiji, Samoa and Tonga).

This would make a comp of 16-17 sides with a perfect round robin of 15-16 games over 16-17 weeks plus finals.

It would only be unpopular if all the best players plays in Oz and not Nz. But with NZR’s top up contract system they would still be able to sign dual contracts therefore keep most of the top ABs at home with only those on the fringes, or ath the middle tier (those currently jumping ship early in their career) and some top players being offered big money deals would consider.

Atm Nz and everyone else are losing a few players each year for better pastures if this sees some move to a different country but remain in SR and eligible for their nation then why not??

A possible case study is when Daniel Braid left the Blues for the Reds and was one of the best 7’s in the comp then came back to the Blues on the ABs request and wasn’t able to fit in and play aswell as he was at the Reds therefore not getting picked for the ABs where if he had stayed at the Reds and still been eligible for the ABs he most likely have been picked for the best ABs. Samething happened with Jason Woodward at the Rebels.

Yes apart from the fact that currently this rules them INELIGIBLE for the ABs therefore stopping any interest right there and then.

Beacause otherwise SR will continue to decline therefore affecting NZR’s ability to retain talent.

What happened to the Canes when Ma’a Nonu, Andrew Hore, Piri Weepu and Aaron Cruden all left in the same year? They found replacements who are now on equal terms if not better then those before them, now they are having their best run ever even winning their first title. Its what sets NZR apart from the rest one player goes another steps off the production line.

What happened to the Crusaders after they lost DC, Colin Slade, Tom Taylor and Tyler Blyeendal all around the same time?? 3 AB capped 1st 5’s and a top up and comer. Richie Mo’unga stepped off the line and into glory 2 years later.

It is also not as if all or even any sides stadiums are selling out regularly so your point is moot there. True fans will still support their sides even if they lose a top player or 2, this way they still get to see them play and might actually watch a ozzy game if some one like Beauden Barrett was playing in it. And even if we can’t find a suitable replacement at home will still have International player slots of our own to sign any player around the world until a junior is ready to step up.

Look at my comment above about capping Int spots, it is a good idea and can work both ways.

Like I said before NZR will still top up the top 30-50 players who wish to stay at home and I don’t think alot of top level AB’s will go to Oz or Sa etc but maybe lower level ABs to the middle tier of SR players will.

You forget O’Neill had a second coming and played a big roll in the change to conferences and double rounds to make up for no “NPC”. Sa also wanted guarenteed home finals spots for S14 but it wasn’t feasible at the time.

NZR would still have its top up system therefore would still be able to keep most of its best players at home and under contract. While NZR’s top interest is itself it also needs to allow SR to become its own competition without so many agendas.

All the worlds best sports leagues allows players from foreign countries to feature, why should SR be different?

Players will still be eligible for ABs they just wouldn’t be playing on these shores for SR.

This is something I have thought about immensely and believe if done right it could work great. The competition needs to become one united comp not a 3 way split.

To allay everyones fears you would have to cap the international eligible players depending on the strength of each nation. I would also cap the amount of Tier 1 players also so Tier 2 or lower nations (such as P.I in Nz and Oz, Kenya or Namibia in Sa, North and South American in Arg and Asia in Jap) can get contracts and further thir development.

Note the second cap is only the maximum amount of T1 players each side can sign, meaning if they want all spots can be taken by T2- players.

So with that in mind I would have a cap of about 8 overall Int eligible players in each Oz side with a cap of say upto 4-5 for T1.

Nz, Sa and Arg/Jags you would probably cap them all at 6 spots with a cap of 3-4 for T1.

While Japan has had a few good wins in the past few years they are still a T2 side therefore are still developing so I would give the SunWolves the most spots and that would be 10 with a max of 5 or 6 for T1.

I believe this would be for the betterment of the comp and would also help the development of its players by learning different styles and possibly by learning from better players. The notion that having ABs in Oz SR sides would stunt players development isnt entirely correct as I think up and coming players learning their position from the best player in the world is alot better for their development then learning from the best in their state, you could also cap contracts at upto 5 years so they are not holding back local talent for too long.

Steve Tew also is locked into a binding contract untill the end of 2020, so obviously can’t do anything without getting NZR sued for multimillions of dollars. He also said as much and is open to talking to “Twiggy” with Sanzaar.

There is alot of Nz talent left over after SR teams are full and I bet there is some to look to within NRC. Top League has alot of big names who do sweet fa for half a year and the P.I’s are allow pushing out future players of the game.

There are the players there if this comp is done right and maybe he shouldn’t be pushing it as a ‘rebel’ comp so not to get WR etc off side. Nz has enough talent and supporters for another team and I for one would base it in the Central or Eastern North Island who barely get any SR games. Add a P.I combined side or a side each for the big 3 nations and a Jap or 2 plus one each from HK and Singapore (who actually bidded for the SunWolves licence) and this thing could get off the ground and possibly meege with SR if or when Sa decide to leave or even if it gets enough traction

Nz cut the draft when they changed the SR system from clubs only able to choose players within their catchment of provinces to sign any Nz eligible player they want and 2 non eligible players. It was also only for the last 5 players of the squads. Don’t think it would work as some young players won’t want to move halfway across the world and would prefer to play closer to home. A better idea would be for clubs to sign 75% nationally eligible players (or those who sign an agreement to become eligible after they meet the residency requirement) and 25% international players with all players being eligible to play for their country if they are apart of Sanzaars catchment including P.Is, Africa and Americas etc.