'Super Rugby' 2021
-
@mariner4life said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@KiwiMurph said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
I don't really see why NZ is outright rejecting 5 Aus teams (if they actually are) but are open to 4 Aus teams + Pacific.
Just have a 10 team trans Ta$man comp for 2021 and get on with it whilst figuring out the pacific side for 2022.
because this at least allows for an answer for the inevitable accusations of once again ignoring Pacific rugby
hard to know whats worse, rush it though and be accused of just paying lip service or take time and do it right but be accused of delaying again
@Kiwiwomble said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@mariner4life said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@KiwiMurph said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
I don't really see why NZ is outright rejecting 5 Aus teams (if they actually are) but are open to 4 Aus teams + Pacific.
Just have a 10 team trans Ta$man comp for 2021 and get on with it whilst figuring out the pacific side for 2022.
because this at least allows for an answer for the inevitable accusations of once again ignoring Pacific rugby
hard to know whats worse, rush it though and be accused of just paying lip service or take time and do it right but be accused of delaying again
would there really be much pushback on a delay if they announced a pacific side was entering in 2022? I highly doubt it.
-
@Kiwiwomble said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@mariner4life said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@KiwiMurph said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
I don't really see why NZ is outright rejecting 5 Aus teams (if they actually are) but are open to 4 Aus teams + Pacific.
Just have a 10 team trans Ta$man comp for 2021 and get on with it whilst figuring out the pacific side for 2022.
because this at least allows for an answer for the inevitable accusations of once again ignoring Pacific rugby
hard to know whats worse, rush it though and be accused of just paying lip service or take time and do it right but be accused of delaying again
would there really be much pushback on a delay if they announced a pacific side was entering in 2022? I highly doubt it.
@KiwiMurph i wouldn't but you know someone would, especially after its been so firmly suggested for next year
-
@barbarian said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
But the optimism lasted only until Clarke’s Zoom meeting with Robinson and the NZR’s chief rugby officer Nigel Cass, where the New Zealanders are understood to have reverted to type, utterly rejecting Australia’s proposal of a 10-team competition – with five teams from NZ, five from Australia.
Just noting that Australia utterly rejected the 8 team concept.
The real challenge is what do either side bring to the table. Because it better be good rugby, or good funding (eyeballs), or both. I strongly support a trans-tasman comp, but that doesn't necessarily mean a 5 team Aussie representation.
I tend to agree with RA about the Pacific side though - assuming it gets off the ground, when could it sensibly start playing? A better option would be genuine talent development in the islands... but I can't see that happening in the short term.
We really need Japan in the medium term. Should be talking to them about the timing and feasibility of it
@nzzp the reality is NZ need teams to play and in a Covid fucked world Australia is the most likely (and probably the only realistic) source of those teams. This gives Australia some leverage, though Australia need NZ just as much.
The 'competitiveness' argument is bullshit as evidenced by NZRU's posturing for a Japanese/Pasifika team. Yep, those teams will really bring the high quality NZ so desire.
It's all bullshit posturing and ego. The reality is both countries need each other and the simplest solution (at least for next year) is to incorporate the 10 already existing teams most likely to be able to play each other into a single competition.
Financial limitations and travel restrictions make anything else highly unlikely to be viable. It's worth keeping in mind that 2021 is just going to be another stop-gap, regardless of what is agreed.
If ego stops a TT going ahead, well both nations deserve what they get.
-
@nzzp the reality is NZ need teams to play and in a Covid fucked world Australia is the most likely (and probably the only realistic) source of those teams. This gives Australia some leverage, though Australia need NZ just as much.
The 'competitiveness' argument is bullshit as evidenced by NZRU's posturing for a Japanese/Pasifika team. Yep, those teams will really bring the high quality NZ so desire.
It's all bullshit posturing and ego. The reality is both countries need each other and the simplest solution (at least for next year) is to incorporate the 10 already existing teams most likely to be able to play each other into a single competition.
Financial limitations and travel restrictions make anything else highly unlikely to be viable. It's worth keeping in mind that 2021 is just going to be another stop-gap, regardless of what is agreed.
If ego stops a TT going ahead, well both nations deserve what they get.
@Derpus said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
The 'competitiveness' argument is bullshit as evidenced by NZRU's posturing for a Japanese/Pasifika team. Yep, those teams will really bring the high quality NZ so desire.
They satisfy two different criteria:
- Access to wads of money,
- Being seen to support Pacific Rugby.
Neither of which Australian teams provide., They're there because a five-six team competition isn't sustainable.
-
Good to know NZRU are easily bought, then.
all Australia bring to the table are teams that actually exist and are willing to participate.
You need at least some of our teams and that gives us the leverage we need to say all or none.
As ive alread said. Even if you are right, the cost to us of cutting another team is too great to ever accept. So NZRU can just cut the gordion knot and accept the simplest solution or we can all go down in a steaming heap of shit.
-
When push comes to shove, surely the NZRU won't sink the whole comp just because they think the Force might be easybeats.
While it's nice to see the quality of play factored into decision making, it would have been nicer for SANZAAR to have given it just one fkn iota of thought in the previous 15 years or so.
-
Yeah I reckon we'll have to end up with 5+5 and a PI to come, Ozzie won't take anything less, and the fact is there is no one else. I mentioned it at the start that any member of the NZR board needs to stop the drugs if they think Ozzie will take anything less than 4, and probably 5. It might not be best for a great comp, but it is political reality. In addition no way you could cobble together some random team of left over PI players for next season - with pre season starting in 6 month. I agree that NZR are right in that a comp with 5+3+1 would bne ideal. But we're not going to get it, and Ozzie media re right that we need them as much as they need us. The whole 'we invite expressions of interest' before even talking to SA, let alone Oz, is pretty shit. It should have been done behind closed doors.
I'm just still hopeful this is all negotiation posturing, but maybe both boards are incompetent, over optimistic, jingoistic idiots. In a time of Covid we need real politik.
-
Everyone seems to be focusing on the strength of the teams, but is there a window in current schedule for a 22 week tournament?
March to May gives you about 13 weeks, June is incoming tours (can't see the NH agreeing to move those tests), July-August gives you 9 weeks, Sept-Oct for Rugby Championship and then Eoyt.
So yeah it fits (just).
That 9 week period in the middle of the season might suck with a lot of return matches between the top teams and the ones that are already out of the running.
-
Seems to be a bit of a rant but i gather NZRU have directly approached the franchises. Divide and conquer and all that.
-
I'd take everything the Aussie media write with a grain of salt; they're even worse than the NZH.
@Stargazer I doubt they'd manufacture direct quotes though. That's treading into defamation territory.
-
I think it is pretty bloody stupid going out an and antagonising potential partners, the NZR Board must be pretty far up their own arses. Not professional at all. Sure you have the results of a study, publish them, but to come out an say 'we might deign to let you in our comp' is just plain dumb. And now they've unleashed a shit storm, and the AR Board (who may well be as dumb) may cut of their nose to spite their face and tell NZR to fuck off, like the majority of their supporters and press have said.
I'm pretty pissed by the whole thing, initially I thought it was just media bullshit, but it looks like NZR really beleive they can decide what Ozzie teams play rather than negotiate it.
-
I think it is pretty bloody stupid going out an and antagonising potential partners, the NZR Board must be pretty far up their own arses. Not professional at all. Sure you have the results of a study, publish them, but to come out an say 'we might deign to let you in our comp' is just plain dumb. And now they've unleashed a shit storm, and the AR Board (who may well be as dumb) may cut of their nose to spite their face and tell NZR to fuck off, like the majority of their supporters and press have said.
I'm pretty pissed by the whole thing, initially I thought it was just media bullshit, but it looks like NZR really beleive they can decide what Ozzie teams play rather than negotiate it.
I agree with some of that, but equally the Force were considered to be too weak/not useful for Super rugby before, so for RA to bet the house on them being back in the competition now seems strange.
Personally, I’m happy enough with a 5+5 although I think a better comp would be two separate competitions followed by a finals series for Australasian champion. That’s three main sponsors and two competitions each, sharing spoils of the TV deal of one between us.
It’s also expandable and could easily include SA plus future partners.
NZRU, you can send my check in the mail.
-
I agree with some of that, but equally the Force were considered to be too weak/not useful for Super rugby before, so for RA to bet the house on them being back in the competition now seems strange.
Personally, I’m happy enough with a 5+5 although I think a better comp would be two separate competitions followed by a finals series for Australasian champion. That’s three main sponsors and two competitions each, sharing spoils of the TV deal of one between us.
It’s also expandable and could easily include SA plus future partners.
NZRU, you can send my check in the mail.
-
@gt12 yeah, seems weird that the Force are now the hill to die on when they weren’t even in Super rugby at the start of the year.
-
This is starting to remind me of the good old days when the aussies stole the World Cup hosting because of the signage rules
Next Bledisloe is going to be great.
@Kirwan said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
This is starting to remind me of the good old days when the aussies stole the World Cup hosting because of the signage rules
Next Bledisloe is going to be great.
I wonder how much of this is being drummed up as something it's not in order to concoct a narrative of discord and bring more interest to events on the field...?
-
Thing i dont really get is, if a couple of teams did decide to randomly abandon Australia and join the NZ comp - they wouldn't be any stronger than they are now? Sure NZ would have probably managed to destroy Australian rugby forever - but for what? Very confusing.
-
Thing i dont really get is, if a couple of teams did decide to randomly abandon Australia and join the NZ comp - they wouldn't be any stronger than they are now? Sure NZ would have probably managed to destroy Australian rugby forever - but for what? Very confusing.
@Derpus I read the IRB constitution a while back and there was a provision in there that states a national union needs to sanction all games within their jurisdiction so its not really possible for say the waratahs to rebel against the wishes of the RA.
-
@Derpus I read the IRB constitution a while back and there was a provision in there that states a national union needs to sanction all games within their jurisdiction so its not really possible for say the waratahs to rebel against the wishes of the RA.
@SidBarret said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@Derpus I read the IRB constitution a while back and there was a provision in there that states a national union needs to sanction all games within their jurisdiction so its not really possible for say the waratahs to rebel against the wishes of the RA.
What does jurisdiction mean, though? Are you talking about a geographical area or something else?
