• Categories
Collapse

The Silver Fern

'Super Rugby' 2021

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Sports Talk
1.9k Posts 81 Posters 133.9k Views
'Super Rugby' 2021
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • KiwiwombleK Offline
    KiwiwombleK Offline
    Kiwiwomble
    replied to Crucial on last edited by
    #1238

    @Crucial said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    We have discussed before how a draft wouldn't work in NZ.
    IMO we fucked up a lot of the parochial aspect of NZ rugby and the supporters bragging rights when we set up the franchises. It fucked up even more when the franchise based provinces became the route to pro rugby.
    Over time at least we stemmed that a little by the re-jig of NPC and franchises showing more willingness to appoint from 'lesser' unions and the franchises have been going long enough that they have attracted their own support levels.
    Re-setting all that again is crazy. I wouldn't want to become a Blues supporter. It has taken me decades to get my head around supporting a Waikato based team.

    agree with the first half of that....but you know there no rule saying you have to support the team covering your area

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • RapidoR Offline
    RapidoR Offline
    Rapido
    wrote on last edited by Rapido
    #1239

    Rough populations: (if split Auckland in 3, and re-jig the Auckland/Manukau border)

    North Auckland: 585,000
    Auckland: 682,000
    South Auckland: 563,000
    Chiefs: 806,000
    LNI: 580,00
    Hurricanes (Greater Wellington): 527,000
    Crusaders: 818,000
    Highlanders: 337,000

    (based on 2018 data)

    pukunuiP 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • RapidoR Offline
    RapidoR Offline
    Rapido
    wrote on last edited by Rapido
    #1240

    and my original proposal, splitting the Chiefs.

    North Auckland: 585,000
    Auckland: 1,245,000
    Greater Waikato: 482,000
    BOP + Gisborne: 374,000
    LNI: 580,00
    Greater Wellington: 527,000
    Crusaders: 818,000
    Highlanders: 337,000

    SnowyS 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • SnowyS Offline
    SnowyS Offline
    Snowy
    replied to Rapido on last edited by
    #1241

    @Rapido Got something like registered player numbers to base that on?

    The demographics might change a bit if you include the over 70s women in the BOP region for example.

    taniwharugbyT 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • taniwharugbyT Offline
    taniwharugbyT Offline
    taniwharugby
    replied to Snowy on last edited by taniwharugby
    #1242

    @Snowy I thought that Delloitte State of the Nation report detailed player numbers?

    It will be on this site somewhere I expect...đź”­

    SnowyS 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • SnowyS Offline
    SnowyS Offline
    Snowy
    replied to taniwharugby on last edited by
    #1243

    @taniwharugby Not sure that I would trust that.

    We are all Polish women after all?

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • SnowyS Offline
    SnowyS Offline
    Snowy
    wrote on last edited by
    #1244

    @taniwharugby Yep. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/nz/Documents/consumer-business/nz-en-2019-state-of-the-unions-report.pdf

    Also:

    https://www.nzrugby.co.nz/assets/Insights-Tool-Guide.pdf

    https://www.nzrugby.co.nz/assets/Insights-Tool-Guide.pdf

    A bit more there and a link to the guide.

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • pukunuiP Offline
    pukunuiP Offline
    pukunui
    replied to Rapido on last edited by
    #1245

    @Rapido Got to admit. Yours is probably the worst proposal I have seen out of all of them.
    It simultaneously kills the golden goose that is our 5 strong franchises, throws away the 20 years of history built on those “new” teams, creates new artificial teams with no existing united supporter base, dilutes the player quality in the comp overall, severely depletes the NI sides while keeping a team that has dominated 4 season in a row (and frankly much of the last 20 years) intact and will probably damage the npc by filling some of the gap between the current levels.

    If we are going to destroy our Super sides then can them altogether and build a robust two tiered system with the existing npc and heartland sides. No crossover games but automatic promotion and relegation.

    1 Reply Last reply
    9
  • sparkyS Offline
    sparkyS Offline
    sparky
    replied to mofitzy_ on last edited by
    #1246

    @mofitzy_ said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    A Pasifika team only makes sense if they are based in Suva or Honolulu etc.

    Agree with this. People saying Auckland needs a Pasifika Super Franchise have forgotten about the Blues.

    M 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • M Offline
    M Offline
    Machpants
    replied to sparky on last edited by
    #1247

    @sparky said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    @mofitzy_ said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    A Pasifika team only makes sense if they are based in Suva or Honolulu etc.

    Agree with this. People saying Auckland needs a Pasifika Super Franchise have forgotten about the Blues.

    SnowyS 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • SnowyS Offline
    SnowyS Offline
    Snowy
    replied to Machpants on last edited by
    #1248

    @Machpants said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    @sparky said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    @mofitzy_ said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    A Pasifika team only makes sense if they are based in Suva or Honolulu etc.

    Agree with this. People saying Auckland needs a Pasifika Super Franchise have forgotten about the Blues.

    What happened there? I got nothing.

    M 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • M Offline
    M Offline
    Machpants
    replied to Snowy on last edited by Machpants
    #1249

    @Snowy QFT

    Quoted For Truth

    nah I just fucked up, don't even know what I was typing in there when I got interupted

    antipodeanA 1 Reply Last reply
    3
  • CrucialC Offline
    CrucialC Offline
    Crucial
    replied to Rapido on last edited by
    #1250

    @Rapido said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    @Crucial said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    a Blues supporter

    Who did you support in the Lomu and Vidiri Blues years? Genuinely curious.

    I'm not sure how many times I have explained this. Usually it is after the usual derision for changing allegiance.

    When Super first started I only took a passing interest. It was a gimmick based in the big towns.
    You are correct that, in theory I should have been a Blues supporter and while I watched them to see those two players the underlying feeling was that the AUCKLAND Blues didn't give a rats about genuinely selecting from Counties. Players were overlooked in favour of average Aucklanders. I felt very little connection. I viewed these new teams as just companies. They didn't warrant my support just by being.
    A little later I was living in Wellington with a young son keen on going to matches with his mates. He was playing for a local club and getting all the promotional stuff. When you have Jonah, Cully and Tana all playing it was pretty hard to not go to games and therefore I 'followed' the Canes more than being a supporter but over the years they were the team I cheered for.
    That all changed when the Hammatuer decided he could change the whole culture of the team and along with it the exciting style that was fun to watch. I got sick of that clown quite quickly. It coincided with the change to the NPC and the way players were being selected. CM players finally had a proper pathway and I got to watch many of them play at the next level in the Chiefs. Chiefs have my support because generally they select and develop more CM players than other franchises.

    1 Reply Last reply
    4
  • antipodeanA Online
    antipodeanA Online
    antipodean
    replied to Machpants on last edited by
    #1251

    @Machpants said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    @Snowy QFT

    Quoted For Truth

    nah I just fucked up, don't even know what I was typing in there when I got interupted

    Still in the top 50% of posts

    SnowyS 1 Reply Last reply
    3
  • SnowyS Offline
    SnowyS Offline
    Snowy
    replied to antipodean on last edited by
    #1252

    @antipodean said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    @Machpants said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    @Snowy QFT

    Quoted For Truth

    nah I just fucked up, don't even know what I was typing in there when I got interupted

    Still in the top 50% of posts

    Harsh.

    @Machpants said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    nah I just fucked up, don't even know what I was typing in there

    That is one of the greatest posts . Top 3%.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • M Offline
    M Offline
    mikey07
    wrote on last edited by
    #1253

    I struggle to see how the Force can be included they were the whipping boys for the Aussie teams how are they going to go having to come over and play in NZ

    antipodeanA 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • antipodeanA Online
    antipodeanA Online
    antipodean
    replied to mikey07 on last edited by
    #1254

    @mikey07 said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    I struggle to see how the Force can be included they were the whipping boys for the Aussie teams how are they going to go having to come over and play in NZ

    That's easy to answer: "Something, something, Twiggy, 20 year plan."

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • sharkS Offline
    sharkS Offline
    shark
    replied to Rapido on last edited by
    #1255

    @Rapido said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    @mariner4life said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    @Rapido said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    BOP: gain East Coast and Poverty Bay (just tokenism really, can't be a single province franchise. But trying to add another largish NPC union like Hawkes Bay would just create another Frankenstein, BOP is where the growth is)

    did you see the BOP team on the weekend? What would that do v the Crusaders?

    Get thrashed, Crusaders got thrashed repeatedly in 1996. But getting thrashed is only temporary if the structure of the competition doesn't entrench it.

    Although the thread is Super Rugby 2021, my proposals are for a permanent structure not a one-off quick fix.

    Lots of teams will get thrashed in 2021 by the Crusaders in the likely format. 3 of the Australians plus the Pasifika team will get reamed by them. But, worse, that will probably be a permanent state of affairs. Pasifika because of money and Australian franchises because they're trying to create 5 teams outs of 3 teams worth of talent, hamstringing themselves with players needing to be Australian qualified or potentially qualified, in a comp that includes another country creating only 5 teams but out of 6 teams worth of talent.

    So your solution is to dilute NZ's talent and have 8 teams??

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • M Offline
    M Offline
    Machpants
    wrote on last edited by
    #1256

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/super-rugby/300109840/super-rugby-aratipu-advised-against-sixth-kiwi-team-pasifika-doubts-persist

    pukunuiP 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • pukunuiP Offline
    pukunuiP Offline
    pukunui
    replied to Machpants on last edited by
    #1257

    @Machpants said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/super-rugby/300109840/super-rugby-aratipu-advised-against-sixth-kiwi-team-pasifika-doubts-persist

    Now watch them ignore those recommendations and add a “pacific” team aka NZ number 6.

    They will be rubbish and then the whinging will start about the NZRU sabotaging them by not allowing them to sign players who are contracted to other franchises already.

    1 Reply Last reply
    1

'Super Rugby' 2021
Sports Talk
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.
  • First post
    Last post
0
  • Categories
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.