> >> Oh dear oh dear, what a shame, what a pity...
> > Leaving aside the funding problems, the 'we could have Rocky Elsom lined
> > up' bit is part of the reason Australia should never have been given a
> > fifth team in the first place. ?Players moving to the most recent new team
> > in Perth caused other teams to become weaker - there aren't enough players
> > of sufficient quality.
> > The Super rugby model is bollocks.
> > Andrew
> Meanwhile in the UK the game goes from strength to strength. Grounds are
> expanding almost everywhere and record crowds are getting boring. The
> Heineken cup gives us all the international rivalry we need, and it seems
> that domestic comps throughout the NH are in rude health. It's a shame about
> the international game, but I increasingly care less and less about that,
> and will continue to do so until England do something that shows some sort
> of thought has gone into things.
going in the right direction we do not share the same view as our
The 15th side in Melbourne added a lot of money to the pot and thats
what the administrators want to see.
SANZAR make an absolute fortune out of Super Rugby. So they would
consider that to be healthy,
The Melbourne finances don't stack up though.
SA had their finances sorted but it added less money to the pot so
they got gonged.
Of course the solution was not to add the 15th side at all. 14 is too
* Our travel distances are a bit of a ***. This issue should not be
* The countries don't have enough players to support extra teams.
Maybe the addition of the Argies to 3N will help player pools in the
* But most important the Super 15 compromises the rugby we love the
most. NZs NPC and SA Currie Cup has been compromised. Imagine the HC
causing your Premiership to never field its stars. SA fought this
battle but lost.
In SA anyway our crowds have been good. Remember we have always had
decent size crowds so growing the crowds is a lot harder. Growing from
20 or 30 k per game is tougher than growing from 5k per game