Exodus 2018
-
Thought this was interesting development in light of recent discussions on here. I’ve thought for a while that there needs to collaboration between NZRU and like minded unions on development and keeping of talent.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news/article.cfm?c_id=80&objectid=11987747
-
Thought this was interesting development in light of recent discussions on here. I’ve thought for a while that there needs to collaboration between NZRU and like minded unions on development and keeping of talent.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news/article.cfm?c_id=80&objectid=11987747
-
@bones I was more a Marshall type 9, my pass was shite, and the rest of my game was suited to the side of the scrum, so I moved there when our team had a real 9.
And you’re joining the Exodus 2018...?
-
And you’re joining the Exodus 2018...?
@billy-tell not sure yet, havent had my call up for the Brisbane 10s....I'm in the right age bracket.
-
@billy-tell not sure yet, havent had my call up for the Brisbane 10s....I'm in the right age bracket.
@taniwharugby said in Exodus 2018:
@billy-tell not sure yet, havent had my call up for the Brisbane 10s....I'm in the right age bracket.
I think the way things are going Brian Lochore better start polishing the boots in case the Canes need some extra forwards.
-
Interesting comment from Gregor Paul here. Hard to disagree with him honestly. Although surely there is more to it and discussions have already begun for the NZRFU announcement?
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11989674
-
Interesting comment from Gregor Paul here. Hard to disagree with him honestly. Although surely there is more to it and discussions have already begun for the NZRFU announcement?
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11989674
@majorrage I find it pretty easy to disagree with him, NZR are trying to think up a way to not lose so many players overseas long term. That's not arrogance. Oh, wait it is, because Paul is using the heebee jeebees to pull the subliminal messages floating out there. It makes sense for NZR to make deals with a few clubs as it does allow them a little bit of control. Whether any club would be willing to do that is another thing, but it hardly hurts NZR to try.
Do all rugby journalists eventually just become trolls? This is the kind of article that Ratpoo would write in his on going war with NZR (and rugby in general).
-
@majorrage I find it pretty easy to disagree with him, NZR are trying to think up a way to not lose so many players overseas long term. That's not arrogance. Oh, wait it is, because Paul is using the heebee jeebees to pull the subliminal messages floating out there. It makes sense for NZR to make deals with a few clubs as it does allow them a little bit of control. Whether any club would be willing to do that is another thing, but it hardly hurts NZR to try.
Do all rugby journalists eventually just become trolls? This is the kind of article that Ratpoo would write in his on going war with NZR (and rugby in general).
You don't think there is any arrogance at all in the announcement / plans?
They are only prepared to make plans with clubs which they feel have "sound coaching structures and support systems"? Really? It's coming across as very we own the players and we'll only let them go to clubs which we feel follow our model and way of thinking.
Don't get me wrong - I appreciate the need to move with the times etc, but the announcement made it seem like these clubs would be almost part of the AB system. Which is Pauls' point.
It's arrogance personified.
-
You don't think there is any arrogance at all in the announcement / plans?
They are only prepared to make plans with clubs which they feel have "sound coaching structures and support systems"? Really? It's coming across as very we own the players and we'll only let them go to clubs which we feel follow our model and way of thinking.
Don't get me wrong - I appreciate the need to move with the times etc, but the announcement made it seem like these clubs would be almost part of the AB system. Which is Pauls' point.
It's arrogance personified.
@majorrage Why wouldn't a professional organisation want agreements with other professional organisations? Why would we not want our players to go to "sound coaching structures and support systems"?
I'm glad the NZR are wanting to do that and not letting players go to the NH rugby equivalent of the Warriors.
Seriously, what organisation doesn't try and make deals with the best possible other organisations they can?
-
This is absolutely in line with my thinking so it’s a big yes from me.
More inter union collaboration please.
-
@majorrage I find it pretty easy to disagree with him, NZR are trying to think up a way to not lose so many players overseas long term. That's not arrogance. Oh, wait it is, because Paul is using the heebee jeebees to pull the subliminal messages floating out there. It makes sense for NZR to make deals with a few clubs as it does allow them a little bit of control. Whether any club would be willing to do that is another thing, but it hardly hurts NZR to try.
Do all rugby journalists eventually just become trolls? This is the kind of article that Ratpoo would write in his on going war with NZR (and rugby in general).
@nepia said in Exodus 2018:
@majorrage I find it pretty easy to disagree with him, NZR are trying to think up a way to not lose so many players overseas long term. That's not arrogance. Oh, wait it is, because Paul is using the heebee jeebees to pull the subliminal messages floating out there. It makes sense for NZR to make deals with a few clubs as it does allow them a little bit of control. Whether any club would be willing to do that is another thing, but it hardly hurts NZR to try.
Do all rugby journalists eventually just become trolls? This is the kind of article that Ratpoo would write in his on going war with NZR (and rugby in general).
+1. It was very Ratpoo-ish in content and style. Yawn.
The NZRFU are being proactive, there won't be anything stopping off-contract players signing with whoever they want, but if they can come to an arrangement with a few targeted clubs, it could be a win-win.
There is quite a constant chip-on-shoulder anti-NZRFU vibe from a fair few NZ journalists.
-
You don't think there is any arrogance at all in the announcement / plans?
They are only prepared to make plans with clubs which they feel have "sound coaching structures and support systems"? Really? It's coming across as very we own the players and we'll only let them go to clubs which we feel follow our model and way of thinking.
Don't get me wrong - I appreciate the need to move with the times etc, but the announcement made it seem like these clubs would be almost part of the AB system. Which is Pauls' point.
It's arrogance personified.
@majorrage said in Exodus 2018:
They are only prepared to make plans with clubs which they feel have "sound coaching structures and support systems"? Really? It's coming across as very we own the players and we'll only let them go to clubs which we feel follow our model and way of thinking.
It reads to me as the NZR saying if players want to be a hope of coming back, then they're best served by going to clubs that have structures in place to maximise that possibility. Otherwise they can go play anywhere and take their chances.
I find it consistently amazing that New Zealand leads the world in so many aspects of rugby, but clearly comes dead last in its media driven analysis and reporting.
-
We are the best, and have been basically forever, but most especially over the last 8 years. If we can't be arrogant now, when are we allowed to be?
This is a plan that has a bit of merit. I'm not actually sure it's as workable as the NZR think it will be, but it's certainly thinking.
-
Reality is that players who leave rarely come back and players are leaving earlier and earlier. I'm not saying the y are arrogant for trying to do something about this - not at all.
We have a right to be arrogant about certain things but you can't be when trying to cut deals with bigger, richer unions than us.
Talking about approved lists, limited playing time etc ... thst is what I'm talking about. Can you imagine Saracens etc thoughts to the approach?
Maybe some clubs would be keen - I dunno ... but I highly doubt it. When you can afford to buy the players outright, why cut a restrictive deal?
-
@majorrage said in Exodus 2018:
They are only prepared to make plans with clubs which they feel have "sound coaching structures and support systems"? Really? It's coming across as very we own the players and we'll only let them go to clubs which we feel follow our model and way of thinking.
It reads to me as the NZR saying if players want to be a hope of coming back, then they're best served by going to clubs that have structures in place to maximise that possibility. Otherwise they can go play anywhere and take their chances.
I find it consistently amazing that New Zealand leads the world in so many aspects of rugby, but clearly comes dead last in its media driven analysis and reporting.
@antipodean said in Exodus 2018:
@majorrage said in Exodus 2018:
It reads to me as the NZR saying if players want to be a hope of coming back, then they're best served by going to clubs that have structures in place to maximise that possibility. Otherwise they can go play anywhere and take their chances.
It's arrogant to assume players want to come back. Fuck all do.
I find it consistently amazing that New Zealand leads the world in so many aspects of rugby, but clearly comes dead last in its media driven analysis and reporting.
I can certainly agree with that, but I think Paul has a point here
-
That article seems like a massive overreaction. The overseas exodus is one of the biggest threats to NZR, and this is something they're looking at to try and mitigate it. Overseas clubs may or not go for it, but it's worth trying. Frankly anything is worth is a try, except doing nothing and hoping for the best.
We won't learn anything from these clubs? We're not learning from them now anyway. We get nothing from them except a player drain.
