Super Rugby 2022
-
@stargazer said in Super Rugby 2022:
I don't quite get why some people are keen to add US or Jap teams to the comp. The rugby is of a very average standard overthere, esp. the USA. It would mean more boring, one-sided matches, esp if they play the NZ teams. It would make sense if there was a two-division SR comp; they could enter in the second division and try to climb their way up. But in a one-tier comp, no thanks.
for me its about variety
and i really enjoy the style the japanese teams play
@kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2022:
@stargazer said in Super Rugby 2022:
I don't quite get why some people are keen to add US or Jap teams to the comp. The rugby is of a very average standard overthere, esp. the USA. It would mean more boring, one-sided matches, esp if they play the NZ teams. It would make sense if there was a two-division SR comp; they could enter in the second division and try to climb their way up. But in a one-tier comp, no thanks.
for me its about variety
and i really enjoy the style the japanese teams play
Alot to be said for playing a team once a year, makes rivalries a thing again. Currently, lose to Team X, there's always next week. Waiting a year would sting.
-
@kiwiwomble I think you're right but that won't be back for a while, if ever, with Air NZ cutting is long haul to the essentials
@machpants said in Super Rugby 2022:
@kiwiwomble I think you're right but that won't be back for a while, if ever, with Air NZ cutting is long haul to the essentials
Just checked. Doesn't appear to be direct flights to Buenos Aires right now
-
The only advantage I see of adding Japanese and US teams is for the dollars, not for the rugby.
I think most people prefer competitive opponents and not lopsided games. Introducing Japanese and US teams may add competitiveness at the bottom of the comp, but not at the top. I think most Kiwis, including players, do prefer the derbies, but just not too many consecutive derbies. SRP will fix that like SR TT couldn't. No need for more weaker teams. Lopsided games are the most boring of all.
-
The only advantage I see of adding Japanese and US teams is for the dollars, not for the rugby.
I think most people prefer competitive opponents and not lopsided games. Introducing Japanese and US teams may add competitiveness at the bottom of the comp, but not at the top. I think most Kiwis, including players, do prefer the derbies, but just not too many consecutive derbies. SRP will fix that like SR TT couldn't. No need for more weaker teams. Lopsided games are the most boring of all.
@stargazer said in Super Rugby 2022:
The only advantage I see of adding Japanese and US teams is for the dollars, not for the rugby.
I think most people prefer competitive opponents and not lopsided games. Introducing Japanese and US teams may add competitiveness at the bottom of the comp, but not at the top. I think most Kiwis, including players, do prefer the derbies, but just not too many consecutive derbies. SRP will fix that like SR TT couldn't. No need for more weaker teams. Lopsided games are the most boring of all.
im not sure "most"people do, i think there are a lot of more casual fans who would be interested in teams for new places, "what, there's a Japanese/Argentinian team? cool!"...and then another group of fan that will rock up for a try fest
The beauty of a comp with a bit of everything is there is something for everyone, the hard core fans that appeciate the techincal aspects and the tight game can still rock up for the derbies...but more casual fans can still turn up for other games
@canefan said in Super Rugby 2022:
@machpants said in Super Rugby 2022:
@kiwiwomble I think you're right but that won't be back for a while, if ever, with Air NZ cutting is long haul to the essentials
Just checked. Doesn't appear to be direct flights to Buenos Aires right now
yeah, not sure now the best time to check, lockdown and all, i was more meaning on the idea things start to open up again once vaccination targets are met etc
-
The only advantage I see of adding Japanese and US teams is for the dollars, not for the rugby.
I think most people prefer competitive opponents and not lopsided games. Introducing Japanese and US teams may add competitiveness at the bottom of the comp, but not at the top. I think most Kiwis, including players, do prefer the derbies, but just not too many consecutive derbies. SRP will fix that like SR TT couldn't. No need for more weaker teams. Lopsided games are the most boring of all.
@stargazer said in Super Rugby 2022:
The only advantage I see of adding Japanese and US teams is for the dollars, not for the rugby.
I think most people prefer competitive opponents and not lopsided games. Introducing Japanese and US teams may add competitiveness at the bottom of the comp, but not at the top. I think most Kiwis, including players, do prefer the derbies, but just not too many consecutive derbies. SRP will fix that like SR TT couldn't. No need for more weaker teams. Lopsided games are the most boring of all.
And growing rugby, which is good for all of us. Not an insignicant goal for a minority world sport.
Like I said, we already have 5 weak teams in a 12 team comp. Could be as much as 6 or 7, so there is an argument that adding in 3 more is just the same standard and would be less lopsided games.
The top NZ sides will still be thrashing most teams in this format, or my pie in the sky version.
-
@stargazer said in Super Rugby 2022:
The only advantage I see of adding Japanese and US teams is for the dollars, not for the rugby.
I think most people prefer competitive opponents and not lopsided games. Introducing Japanese and US teams may add competitiveness at the bottom of the comp, but not at the top. I think most Kiwis, including players, do prefer the derbies, but just not too many consecutive derbies. SRP will fix that like SR TT couldn't. No need for more weaker teams. Lopsided games are the most boring of all.
And growing rugby, which is good for all of us. Not an insignicant goal for a minority world sport.
Like I said, we already have 5 weak teams in a 12 team comp. Could be as much as 6 or 7, so there is an argument that adding in 3 more is just the same standard and would be less lopsided games.
The top NZ sides will still be thrashing most teams in this format, or my pie in the sky version.
@kirwan it would also give the NZ a couple more games to blood younger guys and build stronger overall squads, when all games matter you end up having to play aaron smith every week and Fakatava doesn't get game time
-
I don't quite get why some people are keen to add US or Jap teams to the comp. The rugby is of a very average standard overthere, esp. the USA. It would mean more boring, one-sided matches, esp if they play the NZ teams. It would make sense if there was a two-division SR comp; they could enter in the second division and try to climb their way up. But in a one-tier comp, no thanks.
@stargazer said in Super Rugby 2022:
I don't quite get why some people are keen to add US or Jap teams to the comp.
Simple, world's richest and third richest economy. Any Rugby presence in those countries is going to bring in revenue and support the financial viability of the competition.
-
Only way expanding to include Jap/US sides works is if NZ agree to weaken their sides.
Watching the Crusaders roll out a test match side against Aus/US/Jap/Pacific flogs week in week out will be boring as fuck after year 2.
The main issue with SRTT or whatever format working is that there is no one within a feasible distance that could come close to being competitive year in year out with the NZ SR sides. If we put forward the Wallabies i wouldn't be at all surprised if they didn't top that comp.
You guys want to keep the AB machine running but you have no fodder left to feed it.
-
Only way expanding to include Jap/US sides works is if NZ agree to weaken their sides.
Watching the Crusaders roll out a test match side against Aus/US/Jap/Pacific flogs week in week out will be boring as fuck after year 2.
The main issue with SRTT or whatever format working is that there is no one within a feasible distance that could come close to being competitive year in year out with the NZ SR sides. If we put forward the Wallabies i wouldn't be at all surprised if they didn't top that comp.
You guys want to keep the AB machine running but you have no fodder left to feed it.
-
@tim said in Super Rugby 2022:
@derpus Would you be in favour of a longer competition with up 10 NZ based teams?
Chucking the NPC sides in there would certainly even up the competition, I'd be for it.
-
@kirwan agreed
-
@tim said in Super Rugby 2022:
@derpus Would you be in favour of a longer competition with up 10 NZ based teams?
Chucking the NPC sides in there would certainly even up the competition, I'd be for it.
@kirwan said in Super Rugby 2022:
@tim said in Super Rugby 2022:
@derpus Would you be in favour of a longer competition with up 10 NZ based teams?
Chucking the NPC sides in there would certainly even up the competition, I'd be for it.
A bit like the old South Pacific championship and Super 10. What does it do to the rest of the NPC?
-
@tim said in Super Rugby 2022:
@derpus Would you be in favour of a longer competition with up 10 NZ based teams?
Chucking the NPC sides in there would certainly even up the competition, I'd be for it.
@kirwan said in Super Rugby 2022:
@tim said in Super Rugby 2022:
@derpus Would you be in favour of a longer competition with up 10 NZ based teams?
Chucking the NPC sides in there would certainly even up the competition, I'd be for it.
I'm not sure that it would help, as we'd probably end up with 4 strong sides and 6 weak ones, mostly due to central contracting.
As long as players can choose their provinces/Super sides with no real salary cap in place, we'd end up with some have very muches and some have fuck alls.
Plus, NZ rugby would need to run 10 fully professional teams.
-
@kirwan said in Super Rugby 2022:
@tim said in Super Rugby 2022:
@derpus Would you be in favour of a longer competition with up 10 NZ based teams?
Chucking the NPC sides in there would certainly even up the competition, I'd be for it.
I'm not sure that it would help, as we'd probably end up with 4 strong sides and 6 weak ones, mostly due to central contracting.
As long as players can choose their provinces/Super sides with no real salary cap in place, we'd end up with some have very muches and some have fuck alls.
Plus, NZ rugby would need to run 10 fully professional teams.
@gt12 said in Super Rugby 2022:
@kirwan said in Super Rugby 2022:
@tim said in Super Rugby 2022:
@derpus Would you be in favour of a longer competition with up 10 NZ based teams?
Chucking the NPC sides in there would certainly even up the competition, I'd be for it.
I'm not sure that it would help, as we'd probably end up with 4 strong sides and 6 weak ones, mostly due to central contracting.
As long as players can choose their provinces/Super sides with no real salary cap in place, we'd end up with some have very muches and some have fuck alls.
Plus, NZ rugby would need to run 10 fully professional teams.
So basically the same as the old pre-Super era NPC then...
-
@kirwan said in Super Rugby 2022:
@tim said in Super Rugby 2022:
@derpus Would you be in favour of a longer competition with up 10 NZ based teams?
Chucking the NPC sides in there would certainly even up the competition, I'd be for it.
I'm not sure that it would help, as we'd probably end up with 4 strong sides and 6 weak ones, mostly due to central contracting.
As long as players can choose their provinces/Super sides with no real salary cap in place, we'd end up with some have very muches and some have fuck alls.
Plus, NZ rugby would need to run 10 fully professional teams.
@gt12 said in Super Rugby 2022:
@kirwan said in Super Rugby 2022:
@tim said in Super Rugby 2022:
@derpus Would you be in favour of a longer competition with up 10 NZ based teams?
Chucking the NPC sides in there would certainly even up the competition, I'd be for it.
I'm not sure that it would help, as we'd probably end up with 4 strong sides and 6 weak ones, mostly due to central contracting.
As long as players can choose their provinces/Super sides with no real salary cap in place, we'd end up with some have very muches and some have fuck alls.
Plus, NZ rugby would need to run 10 fully professional teams.
The exiting npc teams are all at least part time funded plus the funding from the super teams would have to go a long way to paying for them, single “brands” might also be even more attractive to sponsors rather than having to choose between the super team or the box team to sponsor
-
@gt12 said in Super Rugby 2022:
@kirwan said in Super Rugby 2022:
@tim said in Super Rugby 2022:
@derpus Would you be in favour of a longer competition with up 10 NZ based teams?
Chucking the NPC sides in there would certainly even up the competition, I'd be for it.
I'm not sure that it would help, as we'd probably end up with 4 strong sides and 6 weak ones, mostly due to central contracting.
As long as players can choose their provinces/Super sides with no real salary cap in place, we'd end up with some have very muches and some have fuck alls.
Plus, NZ rugby would need to run 10 fully professional teams.
The exiting npc teams are all at least part time funded plus the funding from the super teams would have to go a long way to paying for them, single “brands” might also be even more attractive to sponsors rather than having to choose between the super team or the box team to sponsor
@kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2022:
@gt12 said in Super Rugby 2022:
@kirwan said in Super Rugby 2022:
@tim said in Super Rugby 2022:
@derpus Would you be in favour of a longer competition with up 10 NZ based teams?
Chucking the NPC sides in there would certainly even up the competition, I'd be for it.
I'm not sure that it would help, as we'd probably end up with 4 strong sides and 6 weak ones, mostly due to central contracting.
As long as players can choose their provinces/Super sides with no real salary cap in place, we'd end up with some have very muches and some have fuck alls.
Plus, NZ rugby would need to run 10 fully professional teams.
The exiting npc teams are all at least part time funded plus the funding from the super teams would have to go a long way to paying for them, single “brands” might also be even more attractive to sponsors rather than having to choose between the super team or the box team to sponsor
None of that matters unless there is a real salary cap for teams.
-
I like the new SR comp with one exception, remove the 3 random games.
I'd also like to see an old style top 5 instead of practically everyone making the finals. Alternative is those three games get replaced by a Japanese team, an Argie team and one form the US. If the US teams isn't strong enough, maybe have two from Japan?
8 finalists out of 15 would be better, otherwise 5 of 12 is good.
Like the name.
@kirwan said in Super Rugby 2022:
I like the new SR comp with one exception, remove the 3 random games.
I'd also like to see an old style top 5 instead of practically everyone making the finals. Alternative is those three games get replaced by a Japanese team, an Argie team and one form the US. If the US teams isn't strong enough, maybe have two from Japan?
8 finalists out of 15 would be better, otherwise 5 of 12 is good.
Like the name.
No. Too much travel. I’m glad they’re keeping it local. Get the quality up and the travelling down.
-
However, Fiji Rugby chairman Conway Beg has announced the team will be based entirely in Australia for “at least” the inaugural 2022 season. He said the intention was for the team to return to Fiji for 2023.
