Aussie Pro Rugby
-
@Chris-B. maybe Digby took one look at the Reds, thought "fuck that, i wouldn't mind winning a couple of games".
A lot of frustrated Wallaby fan friends are sharing that Jones interview and agreeing whole heartedly. I can't agree with much except the fact that what they are doing now isn't working. He's in the private schools-Sydney Clubs-NSW/Qld-Wallabies model that existed in the 80s. Typical of Jones, a lot of mouth and soundbite, very little in the way of thought.
And why do all these commentators assume that the NZRU want to play in the provincial trans-tasman comp?
@mariner4life said in Aussie Rugby in general:
@Chris-B. maybe Digby took one look at the Reds, thought "fuck that, i wouldn't mind winning a couple of games".
A lot of frustrated Wallaby fan friends are sharing that Jones interview and agreeing whole heartedly. I can't agree with much except the fact that what they are doing now isn't working. He's in the private schools-Sydney Clubs-NSW/Qld-Wallabies model that existed in the 80s. Typical of Jones, a lot of mouth and soundbite, very little in the way of thought.
And why do all these commentators assume that the NZRU want to play in the provincial trans-tasman comp?
Maybe add one team to the provincial comp and call them the Australian Warriors ?!?
-
@Chris-B. maybe Digby took one look at the Reds, thought "fuck that, i wouldn't mind winning a couple of games".
A lot of frustrated Wallaby fan friends are sharing that Jones interview and agreeing whole heartedly. I can't agree with much except the fact that what they are doing now isn't working. He's in the private schools-Sydney Clubs-NSW/Qld-Wallabies model that existed in the 80s. Typical of Jones, a lot of mouth and soundbite, very little in the way of thought.
And why do all these commentators assume that the NZRU want to play in the provincial trans-tasman comp?
@mariner4life said in Aussie Rugby in general:
And why do all these commentators assume that the NZRU want to play in the provincial trans-tasman comp?
Speaking generally.
I think at least part of the reason is that in general Australian rugby fans don't seem to have the same affinity with South Africa that we do. To us the Springboks are our greatest rivals, but from what I can tell, to many Aussies they're just a pain in the neck. They can't understand why we would value playing S.A. teams at least as high as we value playing Australian teams.
Over at GAGR the prevailing sentiment seems to be that either Super Rugby becomes a Trans- Ta$man comp (with post season games against the S.A. conference) or they should walk away entirely and go it alone. I doubt that is the view of the ARU, but it is a popular view amongst Aussie fans on that site.
-
@mariner4life said in Aussie Rugby in general:
@Chris-B. maybe Digby took one look at the Reds, thought "fuck that, i wouldn't mind winning a couple of games".
A lot of frustrated Wallaby fan friends are sharing that Jones interview and agreeing whole heartedly. I can't agree with much except the fact that what they are doing now isn't working. He's in the private schools-Sydney Clubs-NSW/Qld-Wallabies model that existed in the 80s. Typical of Jones, a lot of mouth and soundbite, very little in the way of thought.
And why do all these commentators assume that the NZRU want to play in the provincial trans-tasman comp?
Maybe add one team to the provincial comp and call them the Australian Warriors ?!?
@dK said in Aussie Rugby in general:
@mariner4life said in Aussie Rugby in general:
@Chris-B. maybe Digby took one look at the Reds, thought "fuck that, i wouldn't mind winning a couple of games".
A lot of frustrated Wallaby fan friends are sharing that Jones interview and agreeing whole heartedly. I can't agree with much except the fact that what they are doing now isn't working. He's in the private schools-Sydney Clubs-NSW/Qld-Wallabies model that existed in the 80s. Typical of Jones, a lot of mouth and soundbite, very little in the way of thought.
And why do all these commentators assume that the NZRU want to play in the provincial trans-tasman comp?
Maybe add one team to the provincial comp and call them the Australian Warriors ?!?
And only NZ and SA refs who always seem to see one side's offences
-
@mariner4life said in Aussie Rugby in general:
And why do all these commentators assume that the NZRU want to play in the provincial trans-tasman comp?
Speaking generally.
I think at least part of the reason is that in general Australian rugby fans don't seem to have the same affinity with South Africa that we do. To us the Springboks are our greatest rivals, but from what I can tell, to many Aussies they're just a pain in the neck. They can't understand why we would value playing S.A. teams at least as high as we value playing Australian teams.
Over at GAGR the prevailing sentiment seems to be that either Super Rugby becomes a Trans- Ta$man comp (with post season games against the S.A. conference) or they should walk away entirely and go it alone. I doubt that is the view of the ARU, but it is a popular view amongst Aussie fans on that site.
@Damo said in Aussie Rugby in general:
Over at GAGR the prevailing sentiment seems to be that either Super Rugby becomes a Trans- Ta$man comp (with post season games against the S.A. conference) or they should walk away entirely and go it alone. I doubt that is the view of the ARU, but it is a popular view amongst Aussie fans on that site.
Hahahaha What a collection of retards. If New Zealand stopped supporting Australian rugby, they'd immediately go to back to their highs of the 1970s
-
@mariner4life said in Aussie Rugby in general:
And why do all these commentators assume that the NZRU want to play in the provincial trans-tasman comp?
Speaking generally.
I think at least part of the reason is that in general Australian rugby fans don't seem to have the same affinity with South Africa that we do. To us the Springboks are our greatest rivals, but from what I can tell, to many Aussies they're just a pain in the neck. They can't understand why we would value playing S.A. teams at least as high as we value playing Australian teams.
Over at GAGR the prevailing sentiment seems to be that either Super Rugby becomes a Trans- Ta$man comp (with post season games against the S.A. conference) or they should walk away entirely and go it alone. I doubt that is the view of the ARU, but it is a popular view amongst Aussie fans on that site.
@Damo said in Aussie Rugby in general:
They can't understand why we would value playing S.A. teams at least as high as we value playing Australian teams.
Which is what's so weird about how we ended up where we are; some saffer teams don't even play one of your lot this year
-
@Damo said in Aussie Rugby in general:
They can't understand why we would value playing S.A. teams at least as high as we value playing Australian teams.
Which is what's so weird about how we ended up where we are; some saffer teams don't even play one of your lot this year
@NTA I'm warming to the concept of three conferences; moving the Sunwolves into Australia's and the Jaguares into New Zealand's. Then you could play a Champions Cup style format from the top three of each conference.
-
@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.
@Chris-B. said in Aussie Rugby in general:
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.
From memory Digby had a pretty significant falling out with the QRU, who were backed by the ARU on their stance, which probably explains why he's not keen to go anywhere near either again.
-
The biggest problem with trying to rebuild rugby in Oz is that it doesn't have a good foundation.
Relying on private schools in Sydney and Brisbane won't cut it any more and any radical restructure of the game has to get past the traditionalists that refuse to see the game dying around them.
The ARU needs to implement an overhaul from junior rugby up. If certain traditional schools and clubs don't want to join in then cut their little paddling pools adrift.
A strong investment at a very young age in rippa rugby emphasising the key difference of rugby union being a game for everyone, acceptance and cameraderie will win over many parents. If schools want to be involved then they must be affiliated to a club and cater for more than just the elite players. The aim must be to keep players in the game and provide the right levels for them to enjoy playing.
Create clear pathways that don't rely on favouritism. Club selection and management cannot be controlled by one strong group. -
@antipodean said in Aussie Rugby in general:
@NTA I'm warming to the concept of three conferences; moving the Sunwolves into Australia's and the Jaguares into New Zealand's. Then you could play a Champions Cup style format from the top three of each conference.
I've got no issue with that either as it's an improvement on the bullshit we have now.
Won't help our quality of rugby but will at least make it a bit more sensible for this number of teams
-
@antipodean said in Aussie Rugby in general:
@NTA I'm warming to the concept of three conferences; moving the Sunwolves into Australia's and the Jaguares into New Zealand's. Then you could play a Champions Cup style format from the top three of each conference.
I've got no issue with that either as it's an improvement on the bullshit we have now.
Won't help our quality of rugby but will at least make it a bit more sensible for this number of teams
@NTA said in Aussie Rugby in general:
Won't help our quality of rugby but will at least make it a bit more sensible for this number of teams
Depends on what the ARU's long term goal is. Having five SR franchises is good if you want to expose more players to that level of training and competition. Then when they play in the NRC that flows down into another level. Of course, that means you don't have as stacked SR franchises as you would with only three, but there's greater depth.
Having two tiers isn't a problem from a development pathway either. NSW has coped with Subbies rugby. The question is how to better align school and club competitions for that age group and retain the talent before the NRL gets their cotton-picking fingers into them.
-
@NTA said in Aussie Rugby in general:
Won't help our quality of rugby but will at least make it a bit more sensible for this number of teams
Depends on what the ARU's long term goal is. Having five SR franchises is good if you want to expose more players to that level of training and competition. Then when they play in the NRC that flows down into another level. Of course, that means you don't have as stacked SR franchises as you would with only three, but there's greater depth.
Having two tiers isn't a problem from a development pathway either. NSW has coped with Subbies rugby. The question is how to better align school and club competitions for that age group and retain the talent before the NRL gets their cotton-picking fingers into them.
@antipodean said in Aussie Rugby in general:
@NTA said in Aussie Rugby in general:
Won't help our quality of rugby but will at least make it a bit more sensible for this number of teams
Depends on what the ARU's long term goal is. Having five SR franchises is good if you want to expose more players to that level of training and competition. Then when they play in the NRC that flows down into another level. Of course, that means you don't have as stacked SR franchises as you would with only three, but there's greater depth.
Having two tiers isn't a problem from a development pathway either. NSW has coped with Subbies rugby. The question is how to better align school and club competitions for that age group and retain the talent before the NRL gets their cotton-picking fingers into them.
I disagree that spreading the talent makes for greater depth. Currently the signs are (both in Oz and SA) that having more players with the talent spread actually dumbs things down.
Basically you should be aiming that 90% of your squad are potential starters on merit. If you are only making up the squad numbers with barrel dwellers there is no pressure on the incumbents to improve and the weaker squad members find it difficult to be dragged up a level.
A young player with potential will improve much quicker surrounded at training by a majority of high level players than he will surrounded by mediocrity. -
There's a happy medium to achieve, but look at it this way: 90 excellent players doesn't help as much as 150 very good players. At some point, they need dispersal to the lower levels. Improving the base is what drives the depth - that's the secret.
-
Will Skelton signs with Saracens for two years.
We just don't have the depth to cope with losing players of his ilk. There must be 20-30 players of his abilities in Europe right now.
Losing him isn't a huge blow in and of itself, but it adds up to such a toll that we just can't compete anymore.
-
Will Skelton signs with Saracens for two years.
We just don't have the depth to cope with losing players of his ilk. There must be 20-30 players of his abilities in Europe right now.
Losing him isn't a huge blow in and of itself, but it adds up to such a toll that we just can't compete anymore.
@barbarian said in Aussie Rugby in general:
Will Skelton signs with Saracens for two years.
We just don't have the depth to cope with losing players of his ilk. There must be 20-30 players of his abilities in Europe right now.
Losing him isn't a huge blow in and of itself, but it adds up to such a toll that we just can't compete anymore.
That's a big loss to depth. It's not like you are that rich in the locking dept.
-
Will Skelton signs with Saracens for two years.
We just don't have the depth to cope with losing players of his ilk. There must be 20-30 players of his abilities in Europe right now.
Losing him isn't a huge blow in and of itself, but it adds up to such a toll that we just can't compete anymore.
@barbarian said in Aussie Rugby in general:
Will Skelton signs with Saracens for two years.
We just don't have the depth to cope with losing players of his ilk. There must be 20-30 players of his abilities in Europe right now.
Losing him isn't a huge blow in and of itself, but it adds up to such a toll that we just can't compete anymore.
He'll go well up there. The slower rugby will suit him down to the ground.
-
@barbarian said in Aussie Rugby in general:
Will Skelton signs with Saracens for two years.
We just don't have the depth to cope with losing players of his ilk. There must be 20-30 players of his abilities in Europe right now.
Losing him isn't a huge blow in and of itself, but it adds up to such a toll that we just can't compete anymore.
He'll go well up there. The slower rugby will suit him down to the ground.
-
@barbarian said in Aussie Rugby in general:
Will Skelton signs with Saracens for two years.
We just don't have the depth to cope with losing players of his ilk. There must be 20-30 players of his abilities in Europe right now.
Losing him isn't a huge blow in and of itself, but it adds up to such a toll that we just can't compete anymore.
That's a big loss to depth. It's not like you are that rich in the locking dept.
@Crucial said in Aussie Rugby in general:
That's a big loss to depth. It's not like you are that rich in the locking dept.
The talent pool has certainly weakened since about three years ago when we had good potential at all franchises. Problem is the guys like Hugh Pyle weren't pushed enough in our system, but were good enough to go overseas.
-
@NTA What are your thoughts on David Begg? He's the head of the Sydney Rugby Union, the governing body for Sydney's 12 Shute Shield clubs. He joined the latest GAGR podcast for 20 odd minutes. He came across relatively well I thought, was obviously pushing the value of club rugby, but also acknowledged the need for everyone in Aus rugby to join together.
-
I agree. Was pleasantly surprised by how upbeat he was about rugby and the ARU. Think he made a lot of very valid points and I liked his 'infrastructure fund' proposal. Wish it had been raised when things blew up last year, he's the type of reasonable voice we are lacking in club rugby...
-
I think some positive thinking is required, but I also think Begg's pragmatism is built on the knowledge that Premier Rugby isn't going anywhere soon. As @barbarian says: wish we had a voice of reason when club rugby decided to attack the ARU and vice-versa last year.
Premier Rugby in Sydney and Brisbane has been the bedrock of Aussie Rugby for decades BUT it suffers deep flaws IMHO in its structure and simply doesn't have the depth or strength of competition these days to be more than a bit player.
By the time mid-season rolls around, and Super Rugby players start heading back to the big clubs, the competition is effectively over for any mid-table clubs. Parramatta and Penrith are kept on for lip service about supporting Western Sydney, but NSW Rugby and the ARU simply don't have a big enough pie to slice up that much.
Doesn't help that the attitudes of some people in club land (and Penrith in particular) is still basically amateur.
