1
![Not allowed!](images/buttons/down_dis.png)
![Not allowed!](images/buttons/up_dis.png)
Maybe he and the Sydney press are trying to pump up NSW rugby as they could be the ones on the chopping block. Can someone ask Georgina if she has any news on this.. Would laugh if this was true.. They have had 20 yrs to prove they have the support in NSW rugby community to be the best Super rugby team in Australia .. The Membership is low the following is fickle crowds. And at the end of it all they still need hand outs and never shown any for thought like Rugby WA .. We have to work to keep our team they just thinks its a right to have one..
I don't think that's the case Tonkar, if anybody LOOKS vulnerable at the moment it's the Brumbies.
Has anybody heard anything about a coach? I've been a little out of the loop, but I haven't
Has anybody heard about the ACCC?
Have they bought any talent to replace the droves of experienced players leaving?
Their crowds aren't known for being large, even in successful times, they tend to be more passionate than numerous.
I haven't heard a peep about own the Brumbies or own the Tahs, I would suggest they're both hoping to retain their comfortable position on the ARU's teat.
C'mon the![]()
![]()
The Brumbies have been bailed out this year but are well supported by the Canberra Government who is bending over backwards to help keep them afloat. The sponsorship deal with AQUIIS, or however its spelt, is worth $8million over the next 6 years, subject to Government approval for AQUIIS to take over the casino liscences in Canberra. No word on a coach yet but a new CEO could be named by next week. And yes they are struggling to replace the talent they have lost. Assistant coach Dan McKeller has expressed interest in the coaching gig. ASIC are looking into their land deals with a $7.5 million tax writeoff the subject of investigation.
The Waratahs have been bailed out twice since 2007 and are almost broke a third time. Mainly they are still mired by infighting and bullshit like the Papworth group of douchebags. I also believe they do not have a major sponsor currently but that doesn't matter as NSW will always be bailed out by the ARU as the majority on the ARU board are from Sydney.
The ARU do a far better job of burying the worst of the NSW bullshit, they used to be similarly effective with the brums, but it seems as though they just don't care anymore!
C'mon the![]()
![]()
Wasn't keen to continue to derail the own the Force thread.
So the meeting was yesterday/last night Perth time and yet I haven't been able to find anything to come out of it.
Will we know soon or will SANZAAR/ARU keep it quiet so not to affect attendances/tv ratings of any doomed sides until later in the season?
I don't think it's anything official but I did find this a couple of minutes ago which I think is just more media speculation:
Australian Super Rugby franchises safe in SANZAAR proposals
The Rugby Union Players Association has armed the Australian Rugby Union with two workable competition models that will allow Australia to retain its five Super Rugby franchises whether SANZAAR cuts the competition to 15 teams or stays at 18.
SANZAAR had a working- party meeting in London overnight ahead of the summit of chief executives of the four joint venture parties, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and Argentina later tonight (Australian time) to thrash out what to do with Super Rugby — if indeed they do anything at all.
Increasingly, it looks as though the minimalist approach will be preferred — at least for the duration of the current broadcast deal — which would be great news indeed for the two Australian teams most in jeopardy, the Western Force and the Brumbies.
There are, however, so many moving parts to these negotiations that the ARU has prepared multiple strategies for multiple scenarios, with no one knowing for certain what the sticking points might be. But, seemingly, RUPA has found ways of keeping all five Australian teams in Super Rugby regardless of whether SANZAAR opts for a Super 18 or Super 15.
At present, Super Rugby consists of an Australian conference made up of the Waratahs, Reds, Brumbies, Force and Rebels, a five-team NZ conference and two South Africa conferences of three teams, one supplemented by the Jaguares of Argentina, the other by the Sunwolves of Japan. The problem with this competition is that some of the South African teams do not play NZ teams during the regular season, which clearly gives them an unfair advantage.
Even if the do-nothing approach is adopted, SANZAAR almost certainly would reorganise the 18 teams into three groups of six. South Africa would retain its six teams, the Australian conference of five teams would be boosted by the Sunwolves while the Jaguares would play out of the NZ conference.
Teams from within each conference would play each other on a home-and-away basis and then, to eliminate the advantage South Africa currently enjoys and restore integrity to the competition, play matches against half of the other two conferences.
“While the Jaguares playing in the NZ conference might not seem an elegant solution, the fact is that flying from Auckland to Buenos Aires is one of the few ways of flying direct to BA from anywhere in the world,” said RUPA chief executive Ross Xenos.
If the mood of the meeting is to perform radical surgery on Super Rugby and cut back to 15-teams — which is how Super Rugby was run in its heyday from 2011-15 — then the RUPA model would succeed only if South Africa was prepared to cull two of its teams.
That’s a suggestion South Africa has made in the past but no one knows if they are still prepared to honour. If they do, the Australian and NZ conferences would each remain at five teams while the four remaining SA teams would be supplemented by the Jaguares.
Unfortunately, that would involve the Sunwolves withdrawing from the competition until the next broadcast deal in 2020. But they finished their debut season last year at the bottom of the table, and all indications are that Japan cannot concentrate entirely in Super Rugby until it has successfully hosted the 2019 World Cup.
Whatever is decided in London will have to be run past the Super Rugby broadcasters in each of the joint venture nations. Any of them could effectively veto what SANZAAR proposes.
Fox Sports chief executive Patrick Delany declined to comment on the broadcasters’ position in relation to a possible reduction of the five Australian franchises.
However, observers believe Fox Sports would have a significant issue if any of the Australian teams were jettisoned during the remaining three-year term of the current broadcast deal. However, it is understood the pay-TV sports network would view a reduction as a permanent diminution in the long-term value of the media right. Fewer Australian teams would mean fewer local derbies, which are a major driver of ratings.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spor...b5b33f7bdc0095
"SUPER FUTURE DECIDED IN LONDON
News about the future of Super Rugby won’t be known until early Saturday morning in Australian time.
SANZAAR meetings will stretch across two days in London — following World Rugby meetings — and only on Saturday morning will the EXCO (all the bosses) meeting occur where all nations will put their closely held cards on the table."
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/spo...30fa65cf059426
"12 Years aSupporter" starring the #SeaOfBlue
This might have some info too (although its mostly about 6N): http://www.punditarena.com/rugby/adr...n-takes-shape/
"12 Years aSupporter" starring the #SeaOfBlue
A couple of other news feeds have speculated that no announcements about any final decisions taken by the SANZAAR EXCO will be made until the national unions have returned home next week and briefed their stakeholders (e.g. the state unions).
The delay in getting to the Own the Force sharp end (i.e. where we are asked to show the colour of our money) concerns me a little. Is RugbyWA waiting to hear the outcome of the SANZAAR meeting before taking that step - that is, not wanting to take money from us for shares in the new entity while there is a risk that there may be nothing to take shares in?
where all it would have taken is a line in the prospectus - which is still MIA - that said we'd get the money back if the decision was made to close us down.
I'd have already been in for multiple shares, because while not a money making investment; having the opportunity to have my shares bought back at cost price (based on what we have been told so far) means it's a good place to stash some money for a rainly day (if shit hit the fan for me), as well as support something i'm passionate about.
I have heard that the Prospectus is currently in the hands of ASIC - a very necessary requirement.
Once ASIC have signed off - it will be dispatched.
Exile
Sydney
"Pain heels. Chicks dig scars and Glory lasts forever." Shane Falco
AUSTRALIA’S under-threat franchises will stay in limbo for another week after SANZAAR resolved to change Super Rugby next year but now need approval from broadcasters to push the button.
Two days of meetings in London involving bosses from all member unions ended with a resolution to change the unpopular structure of Super Rugby but with no concrete information about what the competition will look like in 2018 and beyond.
With the cone of silence descended, there was no detail for nervous clubs as to whether Australia would cut one of five teams as part of a contracted competition or the 18 team model would simply be reworked.
A SANZAAR statement said further information would be provided in “coming days” after national unions take the proposed changes back to their boards and broadcasters to get a final tick.
The final say with rest largely with major broadcasters, including FoxSports in Australia, SkySports in New Zealand and SuperSport in South Africa. The ARU receive $285m for their share the current broadcast rights deal to Super Rugby and Rugby Championship, which expires in 2020.
Aussie franchises will have to wait another week before a decision
If broadcasters aren’t prepared to pay as much, SANZAAR would likely cycle through their proposed options until they got a thumbs up from the TV fraternity.
“Following two days of robust discussion there are a number of tournament considerations that now require further discussion and consultation. This includes final consultation within the National Unions and discussion with key stakeholders that would allow the adoption of changes proposed by the strategic plan,” SANZAAR CEO Andy Marinos said in a statement.
“SANZAAR will make a formal statement on the future of the organisation, Super Rugby and the tournament format in the coming days once these further meetings have been concluded.”
The wording of SANZAAR’s statement, no doubt carefully constructed, may give some clues away and potentially even ease the nerves of the Force, Rebels and Brumbies; the clubs under threat if an Aussie team is cut.
The expectation of a resolution in “coming days” points to no agreement was reached to cut teams, which would have required three franchises to be cut for the ARU to get on board. Along with one Aussie casualty, that would have required South Africa to drop two teams, or an expansion franchise like Japan be ditched.
A recent report in the Australian newspaper indicated FoxSports would not be prepared to pay the same amount of money for broadcast rights if there were fewer Australian teams.
Even if such a position about a future model with fewer teams could be shifted, it seems unlikely that meetings and negotiations involving Marinos, the national unions and up to five major broadcast partners could be “concluded” in a matter of days.
That time frame indicates a move towards a less complex re-structure of Super Rugby involving 18 teams, potentially by re-ordering the competition from four conferences into three conferences of six teams each.
Marinos’ statement also included the intriguing news that further statements would be made on the “on the future of the organisation”, pointing towards a shake-up of SANZAAR.
It is highly unlikely that SANZAAR — which began as a joint venture between Australia, New Zealand and South Africa in 1995 and added Argentina in 2015 — will be blown up.
What may be more likely is that after years of Super Rugby clubs calling for more say in the running of the competition, as opposed to just the national unions, a Super Rugby commission could be formed.
This would allow for the franchises to have a direct say in the competition, around the same table. Currently the clubs have to voice their concerns and issues through the national unions, who then speak on their behalf at the SANZAAR board table.
http://www.news.com.au/sport/rugby/w...c0608938a1c107