• Categories
Collapse

The Silver Fern

Can we replace Super Rugby?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Sports Talk
73 Posts 23 Posters 2.5k Views
Can we replace Super Rugby?
    • 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.
  • TimT Away
    TimT Away
    Tim
    replied to Stargazer on last edited by
    #9

    @stargazer Hamilton and Waikato are double the size of Dunedin and Otago.

    StargazerS BovidaeB 2 Replies Last reply
    0
  • StargazerS Offline
    StargazerS Offline
    Stargazer
    replied to Tim on last edited by
    #10

    @tim Maybe, but Nelson and Pukekohe arent'.

    KirwanK 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • KirwanK Offline
    KirwanK Offline
    Kirwan
    replied to Stargazer on last edited by
    #11

    @stargazer said in Can we replace Super Rugby?:

    @kirwan Only if players from an area can't play for franchises based in other areas. As long as talent from the Auckland area gets the opportunity to play SR (for one of the 5 franchises), there's no need for two franchises in the Auckland area. I doubt two franchises in Auckland would both be able to attract sufficient crowds to fill big stadiums.

    They would if they tap into the tribalism that Sir John is talking about.

    Two sides, Harbour and Auckland would go great.

    And so generous of you to send the Auckland region players around the country to prop up their miserable depth.

    StargazerS 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • StargazerS Offline
    StargazerS Offline
    Stargazer
    replied to Kirwan on last edited by
    #12

    @kirwan Well, they also sign players from outside Auckland, so why not?

    KirwanK 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • KirwanK Offline
    KirwanK Offline
    Kirwan
    replied to Stargazer on last edited by
    #13

    @stargazer said in Can we replace Super Rugby?:

    @tim Maybe, but Nelson and Pukekohe arent'.

    Population of Counties Manukau is over 500,000. Dunedin is 120,000.

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • CrucialC Offline
    CrucialC Offline
    Crucial
    wrote on last edited by
    #14

    SJK is correct in one thing. The provincialism aspect is a huge thing to draw on. This thread already shows that. First time in ages we have had partisan debate on rugby (instead of religion, politics etc) and the replies are coming thick and fast.

    TimT KirwanK 2 Replies Last reply
    2
  • KirwanK Offline
    KirwanK Offline
    Kirwan
    replied to Stargazer on last edited by
    #15

    @stargazer said in Can we replace Super Rugby?:

    @kirwan Well, they also sign players from outside Auckland, so why not?

    In one post you complain about your province potentially losing local players, but you are happy for the same to happen to Auckland.

    If I was uncharitable I’d call that hypocritical.

    StargazerS 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • DuluthD Offline
    DuluthD Offline
    Duluth
    replied to Tim on last edited by
    #16

    @tim said in Can we replace Super Rugby?:

    It's crazy that a tiny place like Dunedin has a franchise.

    Teams Population
    Crusaders 783,700
    Chiefs 1,308,200
    Hurricanes 1,00,400
    Blues 1,363,900
    Highlanders 332,200
    TimT 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • TimT Away
    TimT Away
    Tim
    replied to Crucial on last edited by
    #17

    @crucial I'm going to run for Parliament at the next election on a platform of ending the Highlanders and giving Harbour their rightful place in Super Rugby.

    KirwanK 1 Reply Last reply
    7
  • StargazerS Offline
    StargazerS Offline
    Stargazer
    wrote on last edited by
    #18

    You can't convince me. Population size isn't everything. If they'd pull the Highlanders in favour of another franchise in the Auckland area, that would kill off rugby in the south of the South Island. All local rugby talent would move north. You can see what's happening in Southland. That would also happent in Otago. I don't see any justification for that.

    TimT 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • KirwanK Offline
    KirwanK Offline
    Kirwan
    replied to Crucial on last edited by
    #19

    @crucial said in Can we replace Super Rugby?:

    SJK is correct in one thing. The provincialism aspect is a huge thing to draw on. This thread already shows that. First time in ages we have had partisan debate on rugby (instead of religion, politics etc) and the replies are coming thick and fast.

    Always cared more about Auckland rugby than the Blues. Same with posters like TR and Hooroo for their teams.

    Byproduct of the manufactured nature of SR teams and the draft designed to weaken Aucklands dominance.

    CrucialC 1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • TimT Away
    TimT Away
    Tim
    replied to Duluth on last edited by
    #20

    @duluth The obvious adjustment to make is to remove the Highlanders and have two Auckland based teams: Counties-Manukau/Auckland, and North Harbour/Northland. About 1,800,000 people in the Auckland and Northland regions, with Auckland growing at 45,000 per year.

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • StargazerS Offline
    StargazerS Offline
    Stargazer
    replied to Kirwan on last edited by
    #21

    @kirwan said in Can we replace Super Rugby?:

    @stargazer said in Can we replace Super Rugby?:

    @kirwan Well, they also sign players from outside Auckland, so why not?

    In one post you complain about your province potentially losing local players, but you are happy for the same to happen to Auckland.

    If I was uncharitable I’d call that hypocritical.

    You're confusing Super Rugby and NPC.

    KirwanK 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • KirwanK Offline
    KirwanK Offline
    Kirwan
    replied to Tim on last edited by
    #22

    @tim said in Can we replace Super Rugby?:

    @crucial I'm going to run for Parliament at the next election on a platform of ending the Highlanders and giving Harbour their rightful place in Super Rugby.

    +one vote.

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • KirwanK Offline
    KirwanK Offline
    Kirwan
    replied to Stargazer on last edited by
    #23

    @stargazer said in Can we replace Super Rugby?:

    @kirwan said in Can we replace Super Rugby?:

    @stargazer said in Can we replace Super Rugby?:

    @kirwan Well, they also sign players from outside Auckland, so why not?

    In one post you complain about your province potentially losing local players, but you are happy for the same to happen to Auckland.

    If I was uncharitable I’d call that hypocritical.

    You're confusing Super Rugby and NPC.

    It’s the main topic of this thread genius.

    StargazerS 1 Reply Last reply
    3
  • TimT Away
    TimT Away
    Tim
    replied to Stargazer on last edited by
    #24

    @stargazer New Zealand needs to maximise the value of its domestic competitions. The best way to do that is to concentrate on the largest populations. The investment of a franchise for 300,000 people just can't be justified.

    StargazerS 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • StargazerS Offline
    StargazerS Offline
    Stargazer
    replied to Kirwan on last edited by
    #25

    @kirwan Obviously, my comment about small provinces losing players to other provinces was only related to NPC.

    KirwanK 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • StargazerS Offline
    StargazerS Offline
    Stargazer
    replied to Tim on last edited by
    #26

    @tim Again, revenue from games doesn't come from crowd numbers but from sponsors and broadcasting deals.

    TimT KirwanK 2 Replies Last reply
    0
  • CrucialC Offline
    CrucialC Offline
    Crucial
    replied to Kirwan on last edited by
    #27

    @kirwan said in Can we replace Super Rugby?:

    @crucial said in Can we replace Super Rugby?:

    SJK is correct in one thing. The provincialism aspect is a huge thing to draw on. This thread already shows that. First time in ages we have had partisan debate on rugby (instead of religion, politics etc) and the replies are coming thick and fast.

    Always cared more about Auckland rugby than the Blues. Same with posters like TR and Hooroo for their teams.

    Byproduct of the manufactured nature of SR teams and the draft designed to weaken Aucklands dominance.

    Same with me. Counties is my Team. Chiefs are a pro rugby set up that I follow.

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • TimT Away
    TimT Away
    Tim
    replied to Stargazer on last edited by
    #28

    @stargazer More people will watch if they have a team representing them, if they're being intensely marketed too. The Blues have never represented the North Shore, Rodney, or Northland.

    KirwanK taniwharugbyT 2 Replies Last reply
    5

Can we replace Super Rugby?
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.