Aussie Pro Rugby
-
@Duluth slowly building. Putting the club players next to the pro players is definitely assisting them in understanding how far behind they are in their little flat-track club competitions in Sydney and Brisbane.
Mostly its giving people coaching experience, and forcing them to learn fast as they only get about 10 weeks in total, and it follows right on the heels of the Sydney and Brisbane Premier Club competitions.
This is a challenge in itself as, for example, the team based in Western Sydney had two of its feeder clubs in the finals two years ago - and they needed a two week stand down so one NRC team is under strength for 2 games out of 7.
They're adding a Fijian side based in Sydney this year which should be great - we lost one team last year as NSW was fielding effectively 4 teams and it was hurting performance compared to Queensland (2), ACT (1), Melbourne (1) and Perth (1).
Sydney Premier Rugby is well shitty with the idea of NRC. Clubs like Sydney Uni and Randwick seem to think they can go it alone, but the QRU, for all their faults, understood that it was important for all levels to pull together to get them out of their shit hole.
Again: Sydney in general has big fish, little pond syndrome.
-
While there are much bigger issues, I do think some of the coaching and strategy by Australian Super teams leaves a lot to be desired, as has been mentioned, a lot of rookie coaches currently.
On Friday night the Rebels defensive system was more of the same from them, placid. They didn't try a rush defense nor did they try to attack the breakdown, they simply fanned out and conceded possession and field position. The Tahs meanwhile kicked the ball a lot but their kick chase was dire (to go with a lot of average kicks). Crusaders themselves put in some average kicks but their strong kick chase meant that they weren't burnt by it. At least the Force played a spoiling game that suits their current cattle and got the closest of the Aussie sides.
Meanwhile someone like Ewen Mackenzie has been lost to Australian rugby.
-
While there are much bigger issues, I do think some of the coaching and strategy by Australian Super teams leaves a lot to be desired, as has been mentioned, a lot of rookie coaches currently.
On Friday night the Rebels defensive system was more of the same from them, placid. They didn't try a rush defense nor did they try to attack the breakdown, they simply fanned out and conceded possession and field position. The Tahs meanwhile kicked the ball a lot but their kick chase was dire (to go with a lot of average kicks). Crusaders themselves put in some average kicks but their strong kick chase meant that they weren't burnt by it. At least the Force played a spoiling game that suits their current cattle and got the closest of the Aussie sides.
Meanwhile someone like Ewen Mackenzie has been lost to Australian rugby.
@KiwiMurph Another thing that is pretty odd in my mind, given the player shortage in Oz, is that the Crusaders have Australians Digby Ioane, Michael Alaalatoa and Pete Samu on their books.
Having Alaalatoa and Oli Jager - neither NZers - as the back-up tighthead props is quite a concern actually.
-
@KiwiMurph Another thing that is pretty odd in my mind, given the player shortage in Oz, is that the Crusaders have Australians Digby Ioane, Michael Alaalatoa and Pete Samu on their books.
Having Alaalatoa and Oli Jager - neither NZers - as the back-up tighthead props is quite a concern actually.
@Chris-B. said in Aussie Rugby in general:
@KiwiMurph Another thing that is pretty odd in my mind, given the player shortage in Oz, is that the Crusaders have Australians Digby Ioane, Michael Alaalatoa and Pete Samu on their books.
Having Alaalatoa and Oli Jager - neither NZers - as the back-up tighthead props is quite a concern actually.
I do find it odd when any NZ team has foreign players, not so much PIs I guess but other Tier 1, but find it weirder that the Crusaders do it - especially considering one of them was Volavola.
-
@Nepia Why is it "weirder that the Crusaders do it"? Haven't all NZ franchises signed foreign players at some point? The Chiefs with several Japanese players last year; the Highlanders with Guy Millar, Tanaka, Geldenhuys, Haskell etc.
I have no problem with NZ franchises signing non-Kiwis, whether it's Fijians like Nadolo or Volavola (apart from the fact that he's not good enough and, therefore, dropped by Robertson), or Aussies, or English, or Irish, or South African, or Japanese etc etc. If franchises think that those players are better than what's available in NZ (= not under contract) at that time, so be it.
The fact that there aren't sufficient good players available in certain position, that's a concern indeed, but why should a franchise risk it's possible success by hiring a lesser - Kiwi - player?
PS: if anything, the signing of foreign players in certain positions, indicates a weakness in NZ depth at SR level. Prop is clearly one of them. That's something that should be addressed at NPC and academy level. With priority.
-
-
@Nepia Why is it "weirder that the Crusaders do it"? Haven't all NZ franchises signed foreign players at some point? The Chiefs with several Japanese players last year; the Highlanders with Guy Millar, Tanaka, Geldenhuys, Haskell etc.
I have no problem with NZ franchises signing non-Kiwis, whether it's Fijians like Nadolo or Volavola (apart from the fact that he's not good enough and, therefore, dropped by Robertson), or Aussies, or English, or Irish, or South African, or Japanese etc etc. If franchises think that those players are better than what's available in NZ (= not under contract) at that time, so be it.
The fact that there aren't sufficient good players available in certain position, that's a concern indeed, but why should a franchise risk it's possible success by hiring a lesser - Kiwi - player?
PS: if anything, the signing of foreign players in certain positions, indicates a weakness in NZ depth at SR level. Prop is clearly one of them. That's something that should be addressed at NPC and academy level. With priority.
@Stargazer The Crusaders have been our strongest team throughout Super rugby - so I'm asking why they thought they needed to bring Volavola (I can understand the value of Nadolo as he almost singlehandedly won them a competition). I said at the start of that sentence I find it odd for any NZ team to bring in foreign players and I was replying to KiwiMurphs post where he mentions three Oz eligible players who contracted by the Crusaders.
I've got no problem with NZ franchises signing up tier 2 players (PI preferred) but I don't think we should sign up too many tier one players - especially in positions of depth in NZ. The NZRU pays the salaries of the franchises so I think we should reserve most spots of NZ eligible players.
-
Overseas players can only be signed to 1-year contracts so the NZ teams need to seek NZR approval each season.
-
Working from the left of the Crusaders ear
Red Beard, NTA then DK -
@KiwiMurph I was basing my comment on this recent article about Leitch.
-
@Stargazer The Crusaders have been our strongest team throughout Super rugby - so I'm asking why they thought they needed to bring Volavola (I can understand the value of Nadolo as he almost singlehandedly won them a competition). I said at the start of that sentence I find it odd for any NZ team to bring in foreign players and I was replying to KiwiMurphs post where he mentions three Oz eligible players who contracted by the Crusaders.
I've got no problem with NZ franchises signing up tier 2 players (PI preferred) but I don't think we should sign up too many tier one players - especially in positions of depth in NZ. The NZRU pays the salaries of the franchises so I think we should reserve most spots of NZ eligible players.
@Nepia said in Aussie Rugby in general:
@Stargazer The Crusaders have been our strongest team throughout Super rugby - so I'm asking why they thought they needed to bring Volavola (I can understand the value of Nadolo as he almost singlehandedly won them a competition). I said at the start of that sentence I find it odd for any NZ team to bring in foreign players and I was replying to KiwiMurphs post where he mentions three Oz eligible players who contracted by the Crusaders.
I've got no problem with NZ franchises signing up tier 2 players (PI preferred) but I don't think we should sign up too many tier one players - especially in positions of depth in NZ. The NZRU pays the salaries of the franchises so I think we should reserve most spots of NZ eligible players.
We do reserve most spots.
On the Volavola signing, I think it was more a case of timing and who was available. Exodus of players plus other up and comers being captured by WTG's.
We were fortunate that Hunt came up this season. He was our third 10 option behind Richie and McKenzie. But he took his chance and is now our man to run the cutter.
Sometimes players just don't work out local or foreign.
With Samu though, he's played ITM for a couple of years now and looked good and probably doesn't want to leave now that he's in.
-
Just heard on the news that kiwi teams have beaten Aussie teams 33 from the last 36 games , that's pretty abysmal if true.
They followed it up with fascist queen Alan Jones moaning about Australian schoolboy rugby being ignored.
@jegga said in Aussie Rugby in general:
Just heard on the news that kiwi teams have beaten Aussie teams 33 from the last 36 games , that's pretty abysmal if true.
They followed it up with fascist queen Alan Jones moaning about Australian schoolboy rugby being ignored.
Didn't the Blues have a draw against an Aussie team last year? The Reds?
Edit: Yep, Week 4. By my count it's 33 wins from 37 games (25 regular season and 1 QF last season + 11 this season).
Still shit news for the Aussies but shoddy reporting.
-
@Nepia said in Aussie Rugby in general:
@Stargazer The Crusaders have been our strongest team throughout Super rugby - so I'm asking why they thought they needed to bring Volavola (I can understand the value of Nadolo as he almost singlehandedly won them a competition). I said at the start of that sentence I find it odd for any NZ team to bring in foreign players and I was replying to KiwiMurphs post where he mentions three Oz eligible players who contracted by the Crusaders.
I've got no problem with NZ franchises signing up tier 2 players (PI preferred) but I don't think we should sign up too many tier one players - especially in positions of depth in NZ. The NZRU pays the salaries of the franchises so I think we should reserve most spots of NZ eligible players.
We do reserve most spots.
On the Volavola signing, I think it was more a case of timing and who was available. Exodus of players plus other up and comers being captured by WTG's.
We were fortunate that Hunt came up this season. He was our third 10 option behind Richie and McKenzie. But he took his chance and is now our man to run the cutter.
Sometimes players just don't work out local or foreign.
With Samu though, he's played ITM for a couple of years now and looked good and probably doesn't want to leave now that he's in.
@ACT-Crusader Agree on Volavola - we had to cast the net wide since we'd lost three test-capped first fives and needed to dredge up at least one who was Super rugby standard. And Richie came through for us - Mitch Hunt is helping to replenish the stocks.
Digby Ioane is the one that makes me raise my eyebrows - how on earth was he not on an Aussie franchise's radar? I don't much mind that we've got him - he looks like a major asset, but I'm still mystified as to how the Aussie teams have let him slip through their fingers.
I'm less pleased about Alaalatoa and Jager, because I perceive we have a shortage of tighthead props. Even worse, last year the Highlanders had a couple who weren't AB eligible (Geldenhuys and Halanukonuka) and I think the Chiefs had a Japanese tighthead as well? That's too many foreigners in that position.
