What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Yarpies Bluffing - O'Neill

Timbo

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
20,281
SA bluffing on Euro threat: O'Neill
May 11, 2009
Australian Rugby Union chief executive John O'Neill says South Africa's threat to defect to northern hemisphere competitions remains a bluff.
O'Neill and his Sanzar counterparts are trying to thrash out an agreement on a new-look Super rugby competition but have been stonewalled by South African demands in recent months.

The Sanzar board meet in Dublin this week and need to come up with a 2011 competition proposal for a new broadcasting deal to News Ltd and SuperSport by June 30.

O'Neill says he can't see how South Africa could "escape" to the north and it was more likely Australia and New Zealand would form their own trans-Tasman competition if the impasse continues.
"That's been a long-held bluff, in my view. From all the enquiries we've made, we believe there isn't an exit for them in the north," O'Neill said.

"What has happened is Australia and New Zealand, out of pure frustration, have worked on a trans-Tasman competition which does work, with five or six teams from Australia and five or six from New Zealand.

"It's a Super 10 or Super 12, played over two rounds, and bringing in Japan in a couple of years time. It's a pretty elegant solution.

"The roles have changed in that we have a plan B and I'm not sure South Africa do."

O'Neill said the future of the southern hemisphere's premier rugby competition remains up in the air.

"On a couple of occasions we thought we'd had an agreement but the South Africans have changed their minds. They're very unpredictable," O'Neill said.

"We don't want South Africa to drop out of Super rugby, we want them to stay in, but the conditions they're attaching to their participation are, in our view, unreasonable."
AAP


http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/print/0,22451,25460225-23217,00.html



----------------------------------


You know, I really don't care anymore. Yarpies, if you're going to go - GO.


It'd make for a better competition in my mind anyway, I rarely see the games from South Africa so effectively there'd be more games at better times for me, and a longer season which would be great.



The expansion to Super 15 is also a sh*tstorm apparently. The ARU want Melbourne, a conference based 18 week system where you play your own countries teams twice and the others once, whilst the South African Rugby Union want Port Elizabeth and for everyone else to get f**ked.


Serious failure to strike while the iron is hot here....
 

KHunt

Juniors
Messages
843
Kick them out. So all the games are on at a reasonable time and more people will be interested in an ANZ comp. No more ridiculous flying.
 

Twizzle

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
155,376
I think we are better for having them, they have raised the bar in the last few years.

But at what cost.
 

Timbo

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
20,281
I just think the telling thing is that, the Yarpies going would mean less games, but more games that we could watch.

That makes it a more appealing offer to me. Especially if we could make it home-away and with a top 6 finals.
 

shiznit

Coach
Messages
14,860
to be honest i think most regular RU people in NZ are backing SA. its only the NZRFU board that are with the ARU... and even thats fading fast with the new appointments to the board after the AGA.

personally i hope this sh*tstorm causes the super rugby agreement to collapse... im over it.. the sooner we have 3 separate domestic competitions the better.
 

Timbo

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
20,281
Except we would have no domestic Rugby without Super Rugby...

And of course the Currie Cup and Air NZ Cup could not possibly sustain themselves without the SANZAR media money.
 

Parra

Referee
Messages
24,900
Australia would have no comp since O'Neill killed off the ARC in it's infancy.

Super rugby is the only level of professional rugby in Australia - hence the need to extend the season.

Aussies need it, and need SA involved to ensure the quality. This season has been great - it would be typical of rugby administration to stuff it up now. We are in for an amazing test season as well.
 

shiznit

Coach
Messages
14,860
Except we would have no domestic Rugby without Super Rugby...

And of course the Currie Cup and Air NZ Cup could not possibly sustain themselves without the SANZAR media money.
i think youl find the currie cup and ANZ cup's will do just fine without the expense of super rugby. the fact is NZ & SA are supporting 5 super rugby sides and 12 or so fully professional provinces in our domestic leagues where the ARU support 4 super sides only... if we scrap the super comp and make a champions league type system similar to European rugby & football we would get a far better product.

the problem is the ARU need to create there own domestic competition.. and who knows when that will happen.
 

Timbo

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
20,281
Australia gets its expanded season

Greg Growden Chief Rugby Correspondent | May 16, 2009

THE fine print has yet to be revealed, but the SANZAR peace talks in Dublin this week have achieved Australia's main aim - more Super matches and a longer provincial season from 2011.
Australia, South Africa and New Zealand will not announce what was agreed at their executive committee meeting until next week, but all parties were offering enough backslaps yesterday to indicate the SANZAR alliance is alive and well. After serious threats from Australia and New Zealand to break away from South Africa and stage an alternative trans-Tasman tournament because of a dispute over expansion plans, the nations have pledged their commitment to Super rugby expanding to 15 teams from 2011.
Past tendencies for one SANZAR partner to reveal details before the others led to a pact at the Dublin meeting not to reveal full details of the Super 15 competition model they will take to broadcasters by the June 30 deadline until all reported back to their respective unions next week.
Many questions remain to be answered, such as where the 15th team will hail from, when the tournament will start, whether it will involve midweek Test matches in Australia, and what compromises each country made to come to an agreement.
It is anticipated that Super rugby will now be expanded to a 22-week competition, at least, with more Australian derbies and a six-team finals series. On this at least the Australian Rugby Union can proclaim it has won a major victory, because a longer Super season has been its chief objective for the past year.
ARU officials have been demanding that to properly compete against rugby league and Australia football they needed the Super season to stretch well past late May and dominate the winter months. They had been concerned that the Super 14 began and finished far too early and that rugby was virtually dormant when the league and Australian football seasons were reaching a crescendo. More product will also entice greater broadcaster interest.
ARU chief executive John O'Neill said from Dublin that although he could not go into the fine details, "It is fair to say that Super rugby will have a significantly bigger footprint from 2011, compared to the past 13 years..
"The Super rugby competition will run deeper into the season," O'Neill said. "We will have a massive entertainment presence that will enable us to compete with the other codes from a stronger and more compelling position in the Australian marketplace.
"This is further evolution for our game and a necessary expansion that will benefit Australian rugby as well as SANZAR. It is the outcome we have sought since recognising early last year that a dramatic transformation of Super rugby was required.
"In April 2008, the ARU announced a list of strategic imperatives. Expanding Super rugby was a key plank in those initiatives designed to ensuring the game's long-term sustainability and success."
New Zealand Rugby Union chief executive Steve Tew said that each country had been forced "to make some compromises".
"It's fair to say we're all satisfied," Tew said. "No one is overly joyed, and no one is bitterly disappointed, which when you try to get three parties to agree to something as complex as this is probably the right result."
Tew added that it was probably the South Africans who had to compromise the most.
"All three parties were pretty keen to get home and give our shareholders a little bit of insight into what's been agreed before we went public," Tew said. "That's particularly important for the South Africans, so we've agreed to that."

http://www.rugbyheaven.com.au/news/...-on-the-brinkba/2009/05/15/1242335880717.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Latest posts

Top