Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 193

Thread: SANZAR Meeting

  1. #151
    Veteran zimeric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mandurah
    Posts
    3,128
    vCash
    5000000
    I would take anything coming out of SA with a pinch of salt. The newspapers there specialise in "Alternative facts"

    4 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  2. #152
    Veteran SNOB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Carramar WA (gods country)!
    Posts
    4,061
    vCash
    3481639
    If the ARU are now bowing and scraping to South Africas politicians it's time we quit SANZAAR!

    7 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Last edited by SNOB; 16-03-17 at 14:20.
    May the FORCE be with you!

  3. #153
    Champion Tonkar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    west Kulin / East Wickepin
    Posts
    1,370
    vCash
    5000000
    Quote Originally Posted by Ralto View Post
    Rebels on Horseback
    The Ned Kelly Gang

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  4. #154
    Senior Player
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    955
    vCash
    5008000
    Good to see Dane coming out and fighting for 5 teams.

    DHP backs five Australian teams

    Dane Haylett-Petty has used his own rugby journey as proof five Australian Super Rugby teams are needed to grow the game.

    The Force fullback is the poster boy for the Western Australian pathway to Wallaby gold.

    Born in South African before moving to Perth as a 10-year-old, Haylett-Petty cemented himself as a regular in the Wallabies' best XV in 2016.

    But if it wasn't for the Force, the 27-year-old may never have been handed an opportunity in Australia after four years abroad in France and Japan.

    "I know from my point of view, when we did have a four team model I didn’t have enough opportunity here so I went over to France and developed over there," he said.

    "When the Force came in it was about growing Wallabies and the Force have definitely done that through the years.

    "As well as that on the weekend we had about 10 Western Australians in the team so we are heading towards a team where a lot of the guys have been developed here.

    "I think having four teams definitely blocks out that pathway for a lot of young guys coming through.

    "That pathway is working so it would be an absolute shame to get rid of it now."

    As the Australian Super Rugby CEOs go to ground over the matter, Haylett-Petty said he would like to see a decision made sooner rather than later.

    "At the moment it’s just all rumours," he said.

    "We’ve heard chatter of the Brumbies and Rebels merging or one of those teams going but it’s just rumours.

    "No one knows what’s going on so I think it’s just best we sort it out as soon as possible."

    The Force have the bye this weekend before launching into a Crusaders-Blues road trip which will shape their season.

    The Western Australians have shown flashes of brilliant football in their first three matches but are yet to put together an 80 minute performance.

    "It’s definitely going to take some time," Haylett-Petty said.

    "Any time you try and play a different style of rugby it takes some time and I think with each game we are taking a step towards the style we want to but it’s not quite there yet.

    "It has been frustrating that we have let a couple slip so far but we have a few more opportunities yet."

    http://www.rugby.com.au/news/2017/03...cks-five-teams

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Last edited by volvo; 17-03-17 at 07:36.

  5. #155
    Red Carded
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    gosnells
    Posts
    390
    vCash
    5000000
    The sad thing is where are the administration out fighting in the public arena.
    They have come up with the buy the force idea but have only touch on current members no advertising across the board no TV or radio adverts no bill boards nothing of any substance to create an atmosphere of desperation and the right of survival. There mushroom attitude towards there prospectus release and the lack of detail showing it more as a thought bubble than a plan to be realised.
    They are a real roll over and rub my belly lot and looking to position themselves in the admin of. The ARU with a soft and easy liquidation of the force.
    We sit back and wait as high profile ex wallabies say bone the force , eastern states journolists bag the force and the setup and where lies our response. Let's sit back die a slow death and we will be looked after on the eastern seaboard.
    Perth glory moving to rugby HQ also gives this sneaky bunch a sitting tenant as they exit the state without causing to much mayhem.
    This lot a forming more of an exit strategy than one of fight to the end and leave nothing behind.

    Stand up and fight you spineless bunch stir the blue army up show that people power can influence decisions before it's to late

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  6. #156
    Player yungfen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Duncraig
    Posts
    495
    vCash
    5000000
    sevenmile what would be the point of getting all of the money from the own the force move if the Force was still the team chosen to be given the boot?
    The expression of interest and the sponsorship deal with the Road Safety Commission is the testimony that WA is behind the Force. It is a sign that the Force would be financially stable for years to come and that is something very positive and which will affect the decision of the ARU of which Australian franchise to cut if it ends up being required.

    2 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  7. #157
    Immortal Contributor shasta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Mandurah
    Posts
    15,726
    vCash
    5470000
    Consultant warns Super Rugby killing the code in Australia.

    An 18-team Super Rugby should never have gone ahead and needs to be blown up and rebuilt – on Australia's terms.

    That's the view of the veteran sports consultant who designed the Super Netball concept and twice warned the Australian Rugby Union it was jeopardising its very existence by going down the expansion path with South Africa and New Zealand.

    http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/un...16-guzcop.html

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    "The main difference between playing League and Union is that now I get my hangovers on Monday instead of Sunday - Tom David


  8. #158
    Player yungfen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Duncraig
    Posts
    495
    vCash
    5000000
    I don't think that he is a hero for what he did in the Netball competition structure. Quite a bit easier when you are working with the number 1 female sport in the country. Rugby has a much more complex dilemma to deal with.
    What would people say if the ARU did something drastic and end up failing, would we say good on you for trying something drastically different or attack them and say what were you thinking?

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  9. #159
    Immortal Contributor shasta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Mandurah
    Posts
    15,726
    vCash
    5470000
    Quote Originally Posted by yungfen View Post
    I don't think that he is a hero for what he did in the Netball competition structure. Quite a bit easier when you are working with the number 1 female sport in the country. Rugby has a much more complex dilemma to deal with.
    What would people say if the ARU did something drastic and end up failing, would we say good on you for trying something drastically different or attack them and say what were you thinking?
    Fact is he was right about the 18 team 4 conference clusterf@ck. But you didn't need to be Einstein to have that figured out before a ball was kicked. It's been a disaster from the start.

    I'm starting to favour cutting ZA adrift if a sensible outcome can't be reached. They own a large slice of the blame for the mess. ATM we seem to be at the mercy of ZA because of their subscription numbers, despite the exchange rate of the Rand. BUT I wonder how much of the interest in Europe for on-sold rights is because of the NZ teams, and to a lesser extent our teams. Could a Tasman/Pacific tournament generate enough cash from the NH to help make it viable. If I was a gambler - and I am - I'd bet on it. The hard job would be convincing NZ.

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    "The main difference between playing League and Union is that now I get my hangovers on Monday instead of Sunday - Tom David


  10. #160
    Player yungfen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Duncraig
    Posts
    495
    vCash
    5000000
    I agree Shasta as long a you can attract enough broadcasting money and sponsorship. Can't see too much Europe money for on-sold rights of a trans tasman competition. Live games would be too early for them and they already have a lot of rugby on offer (It being arguably of a slightly lower standard).
    On top of that they need to get to the end of the current broadcast deal first anyways, so Australia would still have to drop a team according to most sources.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  11. #161
    Immortal Contributor shasta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Mandurah
    Posts
    15,726
    vCash
    5470000
    Quote Originally Posted by yungfen View Post
    I agree Shasta as long a you can attract enough broadcasting money and sponsorship. Can't see too much Europe money for on-sold rights of a trans tasman competition. Live games would be too early for them and they already have a lot of rugby on offer (It being arguably of a slightly lower standard).
    On top of that they need to get to the end of the current broadcast deal first anyways, so Australia would still have to drop a team according to most sources.
    Gotta admit my thoughts on TV rights are a little simplistic when you factor in the time zones.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    "The main difference between playing League and Union is that now I get my hangovers on Monday instead of Sunday - Tom David


  12. #162
    Player yungfen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Duncraig
    Posts
    495
    vCash
    5000000
    Little oversight but you never know as they might still be interested due to the level and quality of rugby played.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  13. #163
    Immortal Contributor shasta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Mandurah
    Posts
    15,726
    vCash
    5470000
    Just noticed SMH running a poll on who should be cut. closing on 19,000 votes and The Rabble are topping the charts. The accompanying article seems a masterpiece gobbledygook. I think the author was trying, and failing, to be funny.

    http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/su...16-gv05la.html

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    "The main difference between playing League and Union is that now I get my hangovers on Monday instead of Sunday - Tom David


  14. #164
    Immortal Contributor The InnFORCEr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    West Leederville
    Posts
    16,871
    vCash
    3102000
    The headline is straight from the pages of TWF too.

    I always vote for Waratahs on these polls

    3 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    80 Minutes, 15 Positions, No Protection, Wanna Ruck?

    Ruck Me, Maul Me, Make Me Scrum!

    Education is Important, but Rugby is Importanter!

  15. #165
    Veteran chibi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Chinatown, Roe St
    Posts
    3,020
    vCash
    5346000
    Is this from anyone on this forum?

    Australian Rugby Fans Unite – a report from the Western Front


    Messages from the West don’t always make it through to Rugby HQ, so it was thought high time that the Eastern States got a full report on how things are progressing out West.

    In short, right now. Not well.

    We are currently flicking between disbelief and anger. For different, overlapping reasons. All of which centre around one issue – the future of Australian Rugby as seen through the lens of the Western Force (though I imagine our friends in Melbourne and Canberra may be familiar with some of this).

    We don’t intend to lecture at great length about the virtue of the Western Force – as to why they should be preserved in future incarnations of Super Rugby. We also promise to do our level best to avoid the temptation to take shots at the East Coast along traditional lines (And yet we are sure you are reading this on a lovely NBN connection paid for with our share of the GST).

    We will not bang on about how consenting to the removal of the Western Force would be stupid in the extreme, setting rugby in WA back decades or how, just as local player development is taking off… unwise in our opinions. Such choices will be business decisions as much as rugby decision. And such decisions are largely out of the control of the fans. The one thing that we can’t wrap our heads around is in our control – the reaction of the Australian Rugby public (that’s you and me).

    THE EFFECTS OF A CUT
    We would like to invite Australia to undertake a thought experiment that we have done ourselves.

    Think of the Australian Super Rugby franchise you know the least / would miss the least;
    How many players in their latest starting XV can you name? (In our experience, without having read team sheets recently, 8 is about average, 12 is good);
    Divide that number by 4 (let’s say you can name 12 and that leaves you with 3);
    Add those 3 players to ‘your team’;
    Does your team now beat the Chiefs?
    (Hell – Do those players you borrowed even make the starting 15 with ease?)
    The clever among you (forwards, explain this to the backs) will have figured out what point we’re trying to make. Even if you dissolve a team and sprinkle its players among the rest of Australian rugby, we are not suddenly going to be on even footing. Shrinking is not a panacea for fixing what ails Australian rugby. This is the first thing we cannot get out heads around: the Australian rugby public seems to accept it on faith, that four Super Rugby teams will be more competitive.

    We can’t see any reason to believe they will be.

    It might make use marginally more competitive over the short to medium term as some teams enjoy a slight bump in skill level. Yet it seems to be accepted as gospel that Australian rugby will flourish with, and because of, four Super Rugby teams.

    Hogwash.

    We know Australia can support five Super Rugby teams, because we have been supporting five Super Rugby teams. And we are now into our 6th season of doing so. Yes, the Rebels and Force have not performed as the other Australian teams in that period. But across that same period:

    the Lions made the finals once (topping a conference that included the Kings and Jaguares), the Cheetahs made the finals once and banging on about the Kings just seems mean;
    there have been two Australian Champions. South Africa have had zero.

    While we acknowledge that the South Africans are having equally fraught conversations currently, the conversations about their contribution tend to centre around who deserves to be at the top table, and not ‘can they support five teams?’

    So, can we please not accept at face value this idea we can only support five teams? Maybe it is correct, but maybe its not. But the speed at which we have conceded this point is what we can’t understand over here. We didn’t even try to fight the narrative that we can definitely produce 60 top players, but producing 75? Forget it, totally beyond us.

    Ireland has 4 top teams. Wales has 4 top teams. We think we only have the depth for the same and that’s what’s holding us back?

    YOU CAN IGNORE REALITY – YOU CAN’T IGNORE THE CONSEQUENCES OF IGNORING REALITY
    It is not difficult to understand why we accepted this line of thinking.

    We wanted it to be true.

    The Kiwi’s are clearly in first with daylight taking the rest of the medals. We want to believe that the only thing separating our teams and Super Rugby glory is four starters from another franchise and a few of their academy players. Deep down you want to believe we are not that far off the pace.

    But we are off the pace. And adding players who are off the pace to another group of players who are themselves off the pace, is not the solution. Skill levels, coaching and player developmental pathways and improved governance. We know this is how Australian rugby grows. It’s why the NRC fills you with such hope. It’s why the thought of losing an Australian rugby team fills you with unease that you can’t quiet name. It’s why we all won’t believe the lie. These other solutions will not come easily, they will not come cheap. There will be many false starts. Wouldn’t it be simpler if cutting a Super Rugby team was the pruning we needed? That brings us to our next item that Sandgropers can’t wrap their heads around.

    LESSONS FROM IRELAND
    For all the reasons outlined above, we don’t think the main issue is being spread too thin. Believe it or not, trying to get rugby to put down roots in an inhospitable West Coast environment with limited financial resources is an issue which has been wrangled with before.

    In 2000 (one year after Ulster won the Heineken Cup, as it was then), the IRFU was within a stones through of folding up Connacht. They were too expensive, and they were underperforming. Then, much like now, future of all professional rugby in the west of the country was at stake. In 2003, Connacht supporters march to the IRFU offices in Dublin and delivered a petition to save their team. It was the drive of the fans to keep four teams in Ireland that led to the team being retained. Robbie Henshaw would have been 10 – 13 at the time and living in Connacht. Ask him if pathways matter.

    Where is the march from Australian fans? It is in all of Australian rugby’s interest to advocate to retain 5 Super Rugby teams. The loss of any Australian rugby assets diminishes us all.

    It is common ground that success for Australian rugby requires growing the game, engaging grass roots with the excitement generated by the professional game. But we also seem to think the best way to do this is to withdrawn from a major city in the country? That seems strikingly defeatist. For as long as we think that’s all Australian rugby is capable of is being a force in Sydney and Brisbane, then, that is all we will be capable of.

    IT IS EASY TO PROMISE WHAT IS NOT IN YOUR POWER TO GIVE
    There will be some of you screaming at your screens at this point. Enraged that I can’t see the obvious. It’s probably something to the effect of:

    Rugby is a business. We cannot wish financial security out of thin air. No matter how unpalatable the alternative is.
    The product that is ‘Super Rugby’ and the Australian involvement in it requires improvement.
    Finally, Australia will not and can not move unilaterally in this. We are but a lonely A in SANZAR.
    We accept all this. What we will not accept, and what no Australian rugby support should have to accept, is Australian rugby going quietly – standing there just hoping that it’s our mates that get the chop, not us.

    ROLL OVER
    The decision about which teams stay and which teams go will not be made by Australia alone. But the costs and benefits of this 5th team will be carried by Australia alone (except to the extent it impacts on the quality of the wider competition.)

    But do you remember how hard we had to fight to get a 5th team? Getting the Rebels in instead of the Kings almost broke SANZAR. The South African’s fought tooth and nail to get their team. The whole thing went to arbitration.

    As far as solvency goes, the Force looked to offer itself for sale to the public this year. By all accounts ‘Own the Force’ was a rousing success. The appetite was there. There are many people who think the competition can be amended without loss of a team.

    The Sea of Blue will not lay this at the feet of the players. We’ll get annoyed when they lack technical skills, or let a game go in the last 15 minutes, but we have never felt like they have done anything but run their guts out. From Hodgson, to the Honey Badger, the team showed up for us. And we for them.

    What is making us seethe with white hot rage is, well, do you get the sense that the ARU is showing up for us? Do you get the sense they are fighting our corner? Cause we don’t. We wanted them to fight for us like the South African’s fought.

    It feels like the ARU, like the Australian rugby public, have accepted the narrative. That Australian rugby isn’t up to this. This was conceded before the first shot was fired. They lost the match in their heads long before they stepped into the board room.

    If the ARU fought tooth and nail for us, and still lost. We’d take it. It’s the capitulation by the powers-that-be which makes us see red.

    And then our anger returns back to disbelief. How is it not doing the same to you? The fact is our ARU has all but conceded that only 4 of the 5 teams (barring an absolute bolt from the blue) will survive the restructure. When the time comes, do not ask ‘for whom does the final whistle blow?’ It blows for thee.

    When you recover from the relief that it wasn’t your team, ask yourself – ‘what happens next time we have to stand up for Australian rugby?’

    Will we push back against the pre-conceptions and say ‘No, we can do this’? Based on what we’ve seen of the negotiations, are you confident that the Australian rugby public and by extension our governing bodies will fight your corner when the time comes?

    If so, we have a team in Perth to sell you.

    MARCH 17, 2017 PATRICK SPILLANE

    2 Not allowed! Not allowed!


    Japan and the Pacific Islands for Aussie Super 9's!

    Let's have one of these in WA! Click this link: Saitama Super Arena - New Perth Stadium?

Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. The Dogs they Had Another Meeting....
    By fulvio sammut in forum Western Australian Metro Rugby
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 28-03-12, 19:05
  2. The Dogs they Had A Meeting.
    By fulvio sammut in forum Western Australian Metro Rugby
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-03-12, 07:36
  3. Super 14's meeting
    By no.8 in forum Super Rugby
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 17-07-07, 19:19
  4. Urgent SANZAR meeting called
    By Darren in forum International Rugby
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 28-06-07, 05:44

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •