Aussie Pro Rugby
-
@NTA That's great Nick!
-
@Catogrande oh an apparently there is a guy who had 900 games running around a few years ago (playing prop) but that was two different clubs, so it barely counts
@NTA said in Aussie Rugby in general:
@Catogrande oh an apparently there is a guy who had 900 games running around a few years ago (playing prop) but that was two different clubs, so it barely counts
Pfft!
-
Sorry to change the subject ... but ... (I only made it to 45 with some 7 years out from about 28 to 35) had a physio appt today with a bloke I used to prop with here in the Bay (about a complaint that led to aforementioned hiatus ... prolapsed disc) and we chatted about footy funnily enough.
You may have mentioned previously but he mentioned "individual registration" is killing country clubs. May not be doing you guys much good either?
Basically, where previously clubs paid rego and then it was up to them to get the dollars back from the players it's now down to individuals to register. You can pay $35 (or so) per game but not economically viable if you pay more than 3 or 4 games.
Tough on country clubs when you have so many casual players.
Idea is that ARU takes a cut. Is bullshit really. Money should be flowing the other way. To the clubs not from them
-
Sorry to change the subject ... but ... (I only made it to 45 with some 7 years out from about 28 to 35) had a physio appt today with a bloke I used to prop with here in the Bay (about a complaint that led to aforementioned hiatus ... prolapsed disc) and we chatted about footy funnily enough.
You may have mentioned previously but he mentioned "individual registration" is killing country clubs. May not be doing you guys much good either?
Basically, where previously clubs paid rego and then it was up to them to get the dollars back from the players it's now down to individuals to register. You can pay $35 (or so) per game but not economically viable if you pay more than 3 or 4 games.
Tough on country clubs when you have so many casual players.
Idea is that ARU takes a cut. Is bullshit really. Money should be flowing the other way. To the clubs not from them
@booboo said in Aussie Rugby in general:
Sorry to change the subject ... but ... (I only made it to 45 with some 7 years out from about 28 to 35) had a physio appt today with a bloke I used to prop with here in the Bay (about a complaint that led to aforementioned hiatus ... prolapsed disc) and we chatted about footy funnily enough.
You may have mentioned previously but he mentioned "individual registration" is killing country clubs. May not be doing you guys much good either?
Basically, where previously clubs paid rego and then it was up to them to get the dollars back from the players it's now down to individuals to register. You can pay $35 (or so) per game but not economically viable if you pay more than 3 or 4 games.
Tough on country clubs when you have so many casual players.
Idea is that ARU takes a cut. Is bullshit really. Money should be flowing the other way. To the clubs not from them
That literally sounds like a complete shite idea.
-
@booboo in our competition (NSW Suburban Rugby i.e. Sydney Park footy) it is still the case where you pay rego for each Grade you enter. It breaks down like this:
- $1950 for insurance
- $550 for registration of Grade ($500 for Colts)
- $775 for the ARU Participation fee ($1000 from 2018)
We try to get all the rego up front to cover gear costs etc and help pay these fees. That doesn't include the club registration fee of $660 per year. And I'm in a 3-Grade division.
Paying $35 per game is fucking ludicrous, quite frankly. I've asked my guys facing hardship to chip in $20 per game until they can find the grand total of $220 (that doesn't include those guys I've been forced to let back in for free to help save the club). Highest rego I've seen is $390 for a First Division club.
But your mate is right: those individual rego fees are a royal pain in the arse. They try to sell it as allowing players to pay online, and therefore take the responsibility of cash handling etc out of the club's hands. But the problem is it means the ARU are getting WAY over the odds for people who, as you say, are casual players.
For break-even entry including playing kit, its about 28 players per grade fully paid up. Currently sitting on the equivalent of 24 across two grades. That is: 17 fully paid up, and another 30 with something down.
My new plan is to hit the local South African supermarket with flyers containing Afrikaans phrases. Find some big fuckoff voortrekkers to bolster the ranks so I can tell the non-paying among us to fuck off. There are a fair few Saffers in the area and that is an untapped resource IMHO.
-
The natives are restless...
http://www.rugby.com.au/news/2017/05/17/04/54/rupa-vru-call-for-egm
The Australian Super Rugby saga is getting messy, with the Victorian Rugby Union and the Players' Association voting for a special general meeting of the ARU board.
To be held as soon as possible, the meeting will seek transparency from the ARU regarding the decision as to whether the Force or Rebels will be cut.
It will also move to bring all board members together to determine the best course of action regarding rugby's future in Australia.
RUPA officials met with Rebels players in Melbourne after training yesterday and action has now followed.
RUPA CEO Ross Xenos was scathing in a RUPA statement released this afternoon.
"The ARU’s intent to axe an Australian Super Rugby team has lacked transparency and consultation with key stakeholders," he said.
"Today’s unanimous RUPA Board resolution illustrates the commitment of players from all across the country to take action towards a constructive solution to this ongoing fiasco.
“The ongoing uncertainty and secrecy of this process continues to do unprecedented damage to the reputation of the game and has placed unacceptable distress on players and their families.
"In every Australian team there are players and staff whose livelihoods and wellbeing have been compromised through this protracted process.
"If there is no clear way forward for Australian rugby that provides the necessary cost savings to justify altering our current professional rugby footprint in the middle of this broadcast cycle, then it’s about time we stopped uppercutting ourselves, backed the retention of five Super Rugby teams and got on with fighting our common enemies outside the tent."
Xenos also questioned the ARU's rumoured move to buy the Rebels from Andrew Cox - for a reported asking price of $6 million.
"The most consistent narrative we hear from the ARU is about the financial challenges the game faces and how tough times are," he said.
"Axing an Australian team and disenfranchising a rugby community was justified five weeks ago by the ARU based on financial savings.
"Now, anywhere between six to ten million dollars promised to be invested into the game, including at the grassroots level, could be burned so that the ARU can cull a team and save face around the SANZAAR table.
"Why are we are cutting a team at all and limiting Australian rugby’s future if there are such discretionary funds within the game that ARU can afford to buy a license, only to scrunch it up and throw it away?"
-
What a friggin mess!
I wonder what the NZRU have in place with regard to franchises for this type of situation?
It does seem strange that SANZAAR can make a ruling (or be dependent on making one due to the need to secure a broadcasting deal) but the respective Unions don't have anything in place to implement changes.
Is it as simple as saying 'you can continue as an entity but we don't have a competition for you to play in'
Surely yhere is something that franchises sign up to that has clauses regarding removal?
-
The natives are restless...
http://www.rugby.com.au/news/2017/05/17/04/54/rupa-vru-call-for-egm
The Australian Super Rugby saga is getting messy, with the Victorian Rugby Union and the Players' Association voting for a special general meeting of the ARU board.
To be held as soon as possible, the meeting will seek transparency from the ARU regarding the decision as to whether the Force or Rebels will be cut.
It will also move to bring all board members together to determine the best course of action regarding rugby's future in Australia.
RUPA officials met with Rebels players in Melbourne after training yesterday and action has now followed.
RUPA CEO Ross Xenos was scathing in a RUPA statement released this afternoon.
"The ARU’s intent to axe an Australian Super Rugby team has lacked transparency and consultation with key stakeholders," he said.
"Today’s unanimous RUPA Board resolution illustrates the commitment of players from all across the country to take action towards a constructive solution to this ongoing fiasco.
“The ongoing uncertainty and secrecy of this process continues to do unprecedented damage to the reputation of the game and has placed unacceptable distress on players and their families.
"In every Australian team there are players and staff whose livelihoods and wellbeing have been compromised through this protracted process.
"If there is no clear way forward for Australian rugby that provides the necessary cost savings to justify altering our current professional rugby footprint in the middle of this broadcast cycle, then it’s about time we stopped uppercutting ourselves, backed the retention of five Super Rugby teams and got on with fighting our common enemies outside the tent."
Xenos also questioned the ARU's rumoured move to buy the Rebels from Andrew Cox - for a reported asking price of $6 million.
"The most consistent narrative we hear from the ARU is about the financial challenges the game faces and how tough times are," he said.
"Axing an Australian team and disenfranchising a rugby community was justified five weeks ago by the ARU based on financial savings.
"Now, anywhere between six to ten million dollars promised to be invested into the game, including at the grassroots level, could be burned so that the ARU can cull a team and save face around the SANZAAR table.
"Why are we are cutting a team at all and limiting Australian rugby’s future if there are such discretionary funds within the game that ARU can afford to buy a license, only to scrunch it up and throw it away?"
@NTA said in Aussie Rugby in general:
The natives are restless...
http://www.rugby.com.au/news/2017/05/17/04/54/rupa-vru-call-for-egm
The Australian Super Rugby saga is getting messy, with the Victorian Rugby Union and the Players' Association voting for a special general meeting of the ARU board.
To be held as soon as possible, the meeting will seek transparency from the ARU regarding the decision as to whether the Force or Rebels will be cut.
It will also move to bring all board members together to determine the best course of action regarding rugby's future in Australia.
RUPA officials met with Rebels players in Melbourne after training yesterday and action has now followed.
RUPA CEO Ross Xenos was scathing in a RUPA statement released this afternoon.
"The ARU’s intent to axe an Australian Super Rugby team has lacked transparency and consultation with key stakeholders," he said.
"Today’s unanimous RUPA Board resolution illustrates the commitment of players from all across the country to take action towards a constructive solution to this ongoing fiasco.
“The ongoing uncertainty and secrecy of this process continues to do unprecedented damage to the reputation of the game and has placed unacceptable distress on players and their families.
"In every Australian team there are players and staff whose livelihoods and wellbeing have been compromised through this protracted process.
"If there is no clear way forward for Australian rugby that provides the necessary cost savings to justify altering our current professional rugby footprint in the middle of this broadcast cycle, then it’s about time we stopped uppercutting ourselves, backed the retention of five Super Rugby teams and got on with fighting our common enemies outside the tent."
Xenos also questioned the ARU's rumoured move to buy the Rebels from Andrew Cox - for a reported asking price of $6 million.
"The most consistent narrative we hear from the ARU is about the financial challenges the game faces and how tough times are," he said.
"Axing an Australian team and disenfranchising a rugby community was justified five weeks ago by the ARU based on financial savings.
"Now, anywhere between six to ten million dollars promised to be invested into the game, including at the grassroots level, could be burned so that the ARU can cull a team and save face around the SANZAAR table.
"Why are we are cutting a team at all and limiting Australian rugby’s future if there are such discretionary funds within the game that ARU can afford to buy a license, only to scrunch it up and throw it away?"
Interesting how the players reconcile their on field performances (tackling, passing, chasing kicks for example) with the pitfalls of their administrators.
I mean is the ARU also responsible for the poor on field performances?
And while I'm being uncharitable, I feel the angst at not knowing if you're going to have an extremely well paid job - well welcome to our world fuckers! (except the well paid bit).
You're working for an organisation that's not making money - but I'm sure that's not your fault. Poor wee bubsMight be better to resist slagging off the bosses and instead start making a few tackles for now
-
Does RUPA not realise that the ARU, through SANZAAR, sell a product and they need to provide the best product to the buyer?
What would happen if broadcasters said to SANZAAR that they will only pay for a 10 team comp? where do the excess teams go?
I'm quite curious on how it works contract wise with the franchises. NZRU has sold 7 year licences to run it's franchises to various commercial parties. I wonder how those get dealt with should we ever be in Australia's position. -
RUPA - like most unions - gives a serious shit about how many paying members it has.
What's confusing for them here is the slice of the pie doesn't change for the players. Player contracts are a guaranteed percentage of the broadcast contract.
I'm not sure whether the players pay a percentage to be part of RUPA or a flat fee.
-
Does RUPA not realise that the ARU, through SANZAAR, sell a product and they need to provide the best product to the buyer?
What would happen if broadcasters said to SANZAAR that they will only pay for a 10 team comp? where do the excess teams go?
I'm quite curious on how it works contract wise with the franchises. NZRU has sold 7 year licences to run it's franchises to various commercial parties. I wonder how those get dealt with should we ever be in Australia's position.@Crucial said in Aussie Rugby in general:
Does RUPA not realise that the ARU, through SANZAAR, sell a product and they need to provide the best product to the buyer?
What would happen if broadcasters said to SANZAAR that they will only pay for a 10 team comp? where do the excess teams go?
I'm quite curious on how it works contract wise with the franchises. NZRU has sold 7 year licences to run it's franchises to various commercial parties. I wonder how those get dealt with should we ever be in Australia's position.Good points. I assume/hope that something is written into the contract for broadcaster and performance contingencies, much like players often have various 'out' clauses.
Force gave another inspired example of why the Aussies have too many teams, but hey, happy to wake up to yet another shellacking of an Aussie team.
-
@Crucial said in Aussie Rugby in general:
Does RUPA not realise that the ARU, through SANZAAR, sell a product and they need to provide the best product to the buyer?
What would happen if broadcasters said to SANZAAR that they will only pay for a 10 team comp? where do the excess teams go?
I'm quite curious on how it works contract wise with the franchises. NZRU has sold 7 year licences to run it's franchises to various commercial parties. I wonder how those get dealt with should we ever be in Australia's position.Good points. I assume/hope that something is written into the contract for broadcaster and performance contingencies, much like players often have various 'out' clauses.
Force gave another inspired example of why the Aussies have too many teams, but hey, happy to wake up to yet another shellacking of an Aussie team.
@Godder said in Aussie Rugby in general:
@Crucial said in Aussie Rugby in general:
Does RUPA not realise that the ARU, through SANZAAR, sell a product and they need to provide the best product to the buyer?
What would happen if broadcasters said to SANZAAR that they will only pay for a 10 team comp? where do the excess teams go?
I'm quite curious on how it works contract wise with the franchises. NZRU has sold 7 year licences to run it's franchises to various commercial parties. I wonder how those get dealt with should we ever be in Australia's position.Good points. I assume/hope that something is written into the contract for broadcaster and performance contingencies, much like players often have various 'out' clauses.
Force gave another inspired example of why the Aussies have too many teams, but hey, happy to wake up to yet another shellacking of an Aussie team.
I concur that seeing them get beaten like a rented mule week after week is quite satisfying on one level on the other hand.......
......... nah I've got nothing.
-
So Stephen Moore is going to be Captain this year.
@Tim That is the oddest thing for a coach to say; that captaincy is leadership and not based on selection. So your captain may not take the field... Surely your captain has to be a bolt on starter and only come off the field in the event of injury or the game is effectively sewn up?
Then again, Cheika thinks 'Moore's playing quite well'
-
@Tim That is the oddest thing for a coach to say; that captaincy is leadership and not based on selection. So your captain may not take the field... Surely your captain has to be a bolt on starter and only come off the field in the event of injury or the game is effectively sewn up?
Then again, Cheika thinks 'Moore's playing quite well'
@antipodean said in Aussie Rugby in general:
@Tim That is the oddest thing for a coach to say; that captaincy is leadership and not based on selection. So your captain may not take the field... Surely your captain has to be a bolt on starter and only come off the field in the event of injury or the game is effectively sewn up?
Then again, Cheika thinks 'Moore's playing quite well'
The Alan Shearer theory - named as captain for England because he was the first name on the team sheet.
-
Played another full game of First Grade at loosehead yesterday. Fuck I'm old. But not quite as old as the tighthead.
@NTA said in Aussie Rugby in general:
Played another full game of First Grade at loosehead yesterday. Fuck I'm old. But not quite as old as the tighthead.
"another full game of First Grade at loosehead" - as honorable endeavor as a man can pursue, well done!
It was a good day for intelligent front rowers on Saturday - I enjoyed watching the Highlander's Siosuia Halanukonuka, a red haired Tongan, motoring towards the posts in the second half there and, when he arrived just short of the line, remembering the Laws of Rugby on advancing the ball (to Lienert-Brown's benefit).
-
Moore has been shit for years, that's not a good start to selection.
They should put together a competitive 15, but it falls away fast
@mariner4life you pick your 15 and then find the captain, don't name your captain then pick the team, unless your captain picks himself.
That said, I haven't watched any Aussie rugby bar when playing NZ teams so are there any better options?
IMO Moore needs to go back to playing rugby and stop being the whiney petulant baby he has been the past few seasons.
