Secret Super rugby review: Axe a team from Australia and South Africa



  • Secret Super rugby review: Axe a team from Australia and South Africa
     
    A secret review of the much maligned Super Rugby competition has recommended Australia and South Africa axe one team each.
    The Sydney Morning Herald has revealed the recommendation for a new 16-team Super Rugby model was presented to the Australian Rugby Union board last week.
    The news outlet claimed other proposed models were also being looked at including the possibility of South Africa losing two teams. Another version actually advocates expanding the tournament even further.
    The revelation comes as the Sanzaar joint venture plans out its next 10 years around a competition that is lucrative yet deeply unpopular among fans over its current 18-team format.
    Consultancy group Accenture is driving the review but is still at least two months away from settling on a preferred structure.
    The Herald reported that Accenture has just completed a lengthy consultation process with 28 stakeholders, including the 18 current teams, the national unions from Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Argentina and Japan, plus the host broadcaster from each country.
    The news outlet claimed the ARU board spent considerable time at its meeting discussing the prospect of Australia surrendering one of its Super Rugby licences in time for the 2018 season. A 16-team competition could be played under a more workable four conference format.
    The Herald nominated the Perth-based Western Force as the most likely victims but said any move to axe them would "represent a major strategic retreat by the ARU from its commitment to a national footprint".
    But it noted the ARU will need to consider the dire action as an "immediate solution to rugby's intractable financial problems".
    "Less than a year after the new SANZAAR broadcast deal delivered the ARU a record $A285 million cash injection over five years, the celebrations have come to an abrupt end," said the paper.
    "The ARU has informed the five Super Rugby franchises they can expect a $A500,000 funding shortfall from head office next year, while the ARU searches for a new sponsor for Super Rugby and gets to grips with the true financial picture at the Western Force and the Brumbies."
    The Herald pointed out that the ARU did not secure a naming rights sponsor for the June Test series against England, or this year's Rugby Championship. And also that the Force were bailed out by $A800,000 of additional funding from head office, the Canberra-based Brumbies also have significant financial issues and the Waratahs reported a small $A100,000 profit last year.
    In addition in Melbourne the Rebels are being propped up by private owners while the Reds are embarking on a re-building phase with a new coach and chief executive after posting a loss of more than $A1 million last year.



  • Didn't see that coming at all .



  • I see Moffitt has come out and said we should drop a kiwi team too..yeah..nah



  • Do we really need a separate topic for this? Again? It's cluttering the forum.



  • I guess I could see the ARU dropping the Force but the SARU are never going to go back down to 5 teams, too much politics involved.
     
    Not an encouraging sign if this is the best idea these consultants can come up with.



  • Man I hope this comes to pass. Very few of the Force players are truly super rugby standard and the 6-7 out of their whole squad who are would be welcomeadditions at other teams in Australia. I think if the other franchises can become better by absorbing those players, then they will win more games andhopefully revenues will go up.Will cross my fingers this comes to pass. This will do good things for Aussie Rugby.I am less fussed about SA having so many teams. But yeah the Kings weren't much chop last season.



  • The Force have the worst travel schedule out of just about anyone. Give them the arse.
     
    Then watch the rugby public in WA absolutely cut sick about it.



  • How many of the Force and Rebel players are actually local products of their rugby systems?   Maybe the teams that get cut could play in another second tier comp or join other comps.  Could two SA teams play in Europe?  Could the Force play in Japan?



  • How many of the Force and Rebel players are actually local products of their rugby systems?   Maybe the teams that get cut could play in another second tier comp or join other comps.  Could two SA teams play in Europe?  Could the Force play in Japan?

    With different seasons it is unlikely. South Africa also has the Currie Cup. The Japanese season is short and a bit weird. You don't want test rugby players playing there.



  • How many of the Force and Rebel players are actually local products of their rugby systems?

    It's a low percentage, but some are quite good



  • It's a low percentage, but some are quite goodWhat is the Rebels player Jordie Reid's background, was he a local product? I have a man crush on him and wish he was in the AB wider training group and don't know why he isn't in theAustralian squad as a back up player.



  • What is the Rebels player Jordie Reid's background, was he a local product? I have a man crush on him and wish he was in the AB wider training group and don't know why he isn't in the
    Australian squad as a back up player.

    Sydney boy - similar to George Smith in terms of pathways via Manly rugby club etc. He's a hard-nosed unit, that's for sure.



  • Thanks for that NTA.Australia seem to have the best depth in the number 7 shirt in the world and always seem to have as far back as I can remember. I think I have chattedwith a few aussie fans before about it and they told me that in high school rugby it is a very coveted playing position. While in NZ everyone aspiresto be a number 10 or a number 8.I do hope that Australian rugby finds a spring in its step. I think all of the Wallabies are very humble blokes and they are a good advertisement fortheir country.



  • Thanks for that NTA.Australia seem to have the best depth in the number 7 shirt in the world and always seem to have as far back as I can remember. I think I have chatted
    with a few aussie fans before about it and they told me that in high school rugby it is a very coveted playing position. While in NZ everyone aspires
    to be a number 10 or a number 8.
    I do hope that Australian rugby finds a spring in its step. I think all of the Wallabies are very humble blokes and they are a good advertisement for
    their country.

    Nah, I think that is rubbish and clouded by your man crush on that dreadlocked Rebel, we've always had as much depth at 7 as the Wallabies, just that our number 1 was so far ahead of the pack and they tend to give all of theirs a test jumper at some time or another. Considering we tend to convert 6s to 8 these days I highly doubt 8 is our favoured position.



  • I hope they reduce the team numbers and return to the old system of each team playing each other once, then quarters/semis/finals. I know the travel sucks, but has to be better than the current clusterfuck competition that drags forever and stops and starts for the international window.
     
    The conferences are a joke. It is fucking ridiculous to watch NZ teams playing NZ teams over and over, and the winner of the Aussie conference getting a spot when this year that conference was just dire. Ditto for the Chiefs playing a woeful Stormers in South Africa and the home team getting spanked - they hadn't even played ONE NZ side all year.



  • Nah, I think that is rubbish and clouded by your man crush on that dreadlocked Rebel, we've always had as much depth at 7 as the Wallabies, just that our number 1 was so far ahead of the pack and they tend to give all of theirs a test jumper at some time or another. Considering we tend to convert 6s to 8 these days I highly doubt 8 is our favoured position.I think you are completely underselling Reid. He is a quality number 7. McMahon is also "isn't bad". That gives Australia 4 International quality number 7s.Hooper, Pocock, Reid, McMahon not to mention Gill isn't bad either and by memory it was gill who had the most turnovers out of Australia's number 7slast year.Who does New Zealand have - Cane? I would have Hooper and Pocock ahead of him anyday. Behind Cane we have Savea who is very good I guess, but then whoMatt Todd...Major LOL. I distinctly remember a super match towards the end where a wellington player ran straight over the top of him and Todd looked like chump.



  • I think you are completely underselling Reid. He is a quality number 7. McMahon is also "isn't bad". That gives Australia 4 International quality number 7s.
    Hoopah, Pocock, Reid, McMahon not to mention Gill isn't bad either and by memory it was gill who had the most turnovers out of Australia's number 7s
    last year.Who does New Zealand have - Cane? I would have Hoopah and Pocock ahead of him anyday. Behind Cane we have Savea who is very good I guess, but then who
    Matt Todd...Major LOL. I distinctly remember a super match towards the end where a wellington player ran straight over the top of him and Todd looked like chump.

    You're out of your fucking mind.



  • You're out of your fucking mind.Computer says no.



  • Cane won't even be the starting AB number 7 two years from now. His decision making as evidenced in silly penalties he takes in super rugby alone indicatehe is not a disciplined player.



  • Hurricane you're talking massive quantities or rubbish


Log in to reply