Are ther NZRU not listening or watching ....

[smartcooky]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (William18 @ Sep 21 2009, 05:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

This is about dropping the four worst teams in the competition.[/b]

No it isn't, its about cutting the four teams that the NZRU want to drop, while teams that aren't performing, like North Harbour and Otago will be protected from the drop even if they finish at the bottom of the table. If the final were to be between, say, Tasman and Bay of Plenty, both teams will still be dropped because the NZRU have fudged the criteria, giving additional weight to things that do not matter in order to get what they want; the big five teams dominating and everyone being "asset" stripped to feed them. They have all their eggs in the Super Rugby basket, and don't give a **** about the ANZC. The Super 15 will be crap, its a compromise, because SARU did something that the NZRU are too gutless to do; stand firm to protect their National Championship, the Currie Cup.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>

These measures are not designed to make the competition less even or fairer. Instead, they will keep clubs on their toes and force them to improve year and year out. Promotion/relegation means that it is interesting at the bottom of the table and at the top[/b]

Rubbish! How do you expect teams to hold on to their players when they are playing in some kind of crap, made up consolation competition. You watch what will happen next;

► The four teams that go down, a couple of which are VERY competitive right now, will be "asset" stripped of all their best players by the "Big Five". (Its already happened with Cruden, signed for Manawatu but with an "out" clause if they get chopped.). Some of us are old enough to rememebr that Counties-Manukau played Canterbury in the final of the NPC a few years ago, but a couple of years later, they got relegated and couldn't keep their players. Joeli Vidiri and Jonah Lomu played for them (they were known at the "Bruise Brothers")

► When one of the four go back up, they will no longer be competitive, they will cop a series of thrashings from the teams that have now got all their former players.

► Within a couple of years, Tew, or some other moron in charge from a Big Five union will end promotion/relegation because of the mismatches.

I promise you, if Tasman goes down, the Marlborough Union will go after the NZRU for compensation. They got the Tasman Union to upgrade Lansdowne Park, at huge expense, to meet their criteria. Then they'll be left with a White Elephant that they will no longer be able to afford to use if they aren't playing in the Premier Division, because no-one is going to pay Premier Division ticket prices to watch a bunch of amateurs running around in some noddy competititon.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>

As long as the NZRU makes the right decision and does not drop down teams that deserve to stay up then it is an excellent measure.[/b]

The teams that should go down are the bottom four on the table, but they wont, because the NZRU will protect the Super Franchises.

I hope that a team like BoP, Tasman or Hawkes Bay wins the ANZC. That will really embarrass the dickheads at the NZRU. Better still, I would like to see a chopped team take the Ranfurly Shield down into Noddy Division with them.

I would love to see Tewbacca spin his way out of that.

 

[danger]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (smartcooky @ Sep 25 2009, 08:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (William18 @ Sep 21 2009, 05:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This is about dropping the four worst teams in the competition.[/b]

No it isn't, its about cutting the four teams that the NZRU want to drop, while teams that aren't performing, like North Harbour and Otago will be protected from the drop even if they finish at the bottom of the table. If the final were to be between, say, Tasman and Bay of Plenty, both teams will still be dropped because the NZRU have fudged the criteria, giving additional weight to things that do not matter in order to get what they want; the big five teams dominating and everyone being "asset" stripped to feed them. They have all their eggs in the Super Rugby basket, and don't give a **** about the ANZC. The Super 15 will be crap, its a compromise, because SARU did something that the NZRU are too gutless to do; stand firm to protect their National Championship, the Currie Cup.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>

These measures are not designed to make the competition less even or fairer. Instead, they will keep clubs on their toes and force them to improve year and year out. Promotion/relegation means that it is interesting at the bottom of the table and at the top[/b]

Rubbish! How do you expect teams to hold on to their players when they are playing in some kind of crap, made up consolation competition. You watch what will happen next;

► The four teams that go down, a couple of which are VERY competitive right now, will be "asset" stripped of all their best players by the "Big Five". (Its already happened with Cruden, signed for Manawatu but with an "out" clause if they get chopped.). Some of us are old enough to rememebr that Counties-Manukau played Canterbury in the final of the NPC a few years ago, but a couple of years later, they got relegated and couldn't keep their players. Joeli Vidiri and Jonah Lomu played for them (they were known at the "Bruise Brothers")

► When one of the four go back up, they will no longer be competitive, they will cop a series of thrashings from the teams that have now got all their former players.

► Within a couple of years, Tew, or some other moron in charge from a Big Five union will end promotion/relegation because of the mismatches.

I promise you, if Tasman goes down, the Marlborough Union will go after the NZRU for compensation. They got the Tasman Union to upgrade Lansdowne Park, at huge expense, to meet their criteria. Then they'll be left with a White Elephant that they will no longer be able to afford to use if they aren't playing in the Premier Division, because no-one is going to pay Premier Division ticket prices to watch a bunch of amateurs running around in some noddy competititon.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>

As long as the NZRU makes the right decision and does not drop down teams that deserve to stay up then it is an excellent measure.[/b]

The teams that should go down are the bottom four on the table, but they wont, because the NZRU will protect the Super Franchises.

I hope that a team like BoP, Tasman or Hawkes Bay wins the ANZC. That will really embarrass the dickheads at the NZRU. Better still, I would like to see a chopped team take the Ranfurly Shield down into Noddy Division with them.

I would love to see Tewbacca spin his way out of that.
[/b][/quote]

Exactly what he said. Right on the money.

 

[jawmalawm24]

I know it'll never happen but I couldn't imagine how I'd feel if my team got told they were suddenly being pushed out of the top divison to the 2nd division I'd be shattered. I really don't know wtf Steve Tew and Co are thinking the competition is pumping at the moment why not leave it the hell alone.

I'm backing Northland up against Canterbury it sounds stupid but anything can happen this season and wouldn't it be a slap in the face to the Nzrfu if Northland kept it til the end of season and got relegated to the 2nd division. The possibilites of this happening aren't that crazy when you consider all the upsets in the competition this season.

 

[Jethro]

The math is simple

5 S14 franchises + North Harbour = 6 guaranteed regardless if they meet the standards or not.

Leaves 8 Provinces to fill 4 spots, the G9 should tell Tew and co to **** off and stand firm.

As stated before, whoever is nominated for the chop is going to begin legal action, this is going to end up in the courts and I know who the vast majority of kiwis will back in that circumstance. Tew and co must go as far as I'm concerned.

 

[danger]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jethro @ Sep 25 2009, 11:50 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

The math is simple

5 S14 franchises + North Harbour = 6 guaranteed regardless if they meet the standards or not.

Leaves 8 Provinces to fill 4 spots, the G9 should tell Tew and co to **** off and stand firm.

As stated before, whoever is nominated for the chop is going to begin legal action, this is going to end up in the courts and I know who the vast majority of kiwis will back in that circumstance. Tew and co must go as far as I'm concerned.[/b]

Yeah, but i think the unions such as Taranaki and Hawkes Bay who are an outside chance to get the chop will sell out because they know if they side with the big guns then they will stay in it. Sad really.

Tew and the whole board should be thrown out.
-Reinstating Henry,
-Culling the Maori,
-Allowing the super rugby to be watered down with substandard saffa and australian teams for profit,
-Selling out our own national competition for the super 15,
-Making cuts in funding all over the place because of lack of money, yet they are all on ridiculous salaries themselves (Steve Hansen 500,000 p/a) and predict to run the RWC at a loss.

They are so out of touch its not funny. They all seem to hold super rugby as the 1st and only priority. And that may be the case in the big centres, but in places like Taranaki and Manawatu, super rugby means nothing. In Manawatu we got one super 14 game this year, from the Highlanders. We are so far removed from the main centre of operations that there is little to no identity to the big teams.

I feel just as much connection to the Chiefs and Blues as to the Hurricanes. They all play the same amount of games in my town.

 

[Jethro]

Open letter to the NZRU from the Chairman of the NZ Rugby Museum and editor of the Rugby Almanack

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>

Please, members of the NZRU board, allow the 14-team Air New Zealand Cup format to continue. For the first time in many years we have a competition which has excited the nation simply because of the unpredictability of the results.

Each of you board members will have noticed the revival of interest, particularly by fans in the smaller, less fancied, Air NZ Cup regions.

The 14-team concept provides almost a nation-wide competition in which the fan can feel part of a team.

Your proposal to demote four teams (commonly believed to be Manawatu, Counties Manukau, Northland, and Tasman) will remove 30 percent of the present fans from attending fixtures.

No matter how hard you try to promote a meaningful middle division to accommodate the demoted unions, we know from past experience it will have little public appeal.

Even if you have promotion-relegation, we know that once down, you remain down.

The quality players and coaches will have flown and the fans will have gone golfing. We need a broad base on which to build strong Super 14 teams, not a narrow base of fewer players and coaches.

There are claims that the present Air NZ Cup competition is too long and too hard on the players.

Such calls are coming from the large unions who say their players are getting too tired after a lengthy Super 14 campaign.

We in the smaller unions don't really care about the problems of the big five unions. We simply ask that we are provided with a meaningful championship in which we can place our strength and pride against the so-called big guns. Ironically, the only union to consistently dominate us is Tasman, which is also in your firing line.

Is Manawatu being victimised because the Hurricanes have four Air NZ Cup unions when all other franchises have only two or three? Because provincial rugby is so healthy in the lower North Island, why should Manawatu be executed just to restore a national balance?

I wish to remind you, Mr Hobbs, and fellow members, that your NZRU Constitution clearly states, under Objects And Powers, that the union is to "promote, foster and develop rugby throughout New Zealand".

When Manawatu met the NZRU criteria to enter the Air NZ Cup competition in 2006, your board was promoting our game by accepting our application. Now you are saying you cannot afford to maintain a 14-team championship. Are Manawatu, and three other unions, about to become the scapegoat for the declining interest in Super rugby?

Furthermore, Mr Hobbs, you will have noticed the vast numbers of excited children at FMG Stadium. Your board spends millions annually on rugby development in schools. It's our Turbos here in the Manawatu who do more to promote the game locally than anything planned by your staff.

In their four home games, Manawatu has attracted an average crowd of 7800. In the three years, 2003 to 2005, previous to our promotion, our average attendance was 2200 for division two fixtures. Is the union acting in the best interests of rugby by consigning Manawatu back to those poor crowds?

FMG Stadium is attracting larger crowds than venues of higher populations. This year, no venue north of the Bombay Hill has equalled the attendances at Palmerston North. Turbos fans are obviously more passionate about our rugby than the millions of residents of the greater Auckland region.

Average home crowds this season: Wellington 13,700; Canterbury 11,000; Hawke's Bay 10,400; Waikato 9000; Manawatu 7800; Bay of Plenty 7700; Southland 7600; Auckland 7200; Taranaki 6800; Otago 6000; North Harbour 5400; Northland 4300; Tasman 4300; Counties-Manukau 4000 (Rugby News).

Manawatu is trying to recover from its heavy financial loss of 2008. So are other unions. But if sent back to a lower division, reduced sponsorship, and crowds of 2000 or fewer, Manawatu may have little hope of restoring its financial position.

If Manawatu is to be thrown out of the Air NZ Cup, I'm sure it will be extremely hard for the local community to accept your cost-cutting methods. We feel we are victims of drastic measures being taken because of cost savings to be made in retaining your Super rugby. The glut of rugby in the major centres shouldn't mean the provincial regions have to suffer.

The best rugby of the Turbos is yet to come if you allow them the opportunity[/b]

The crowd figures make for interesting reading.

If Tew is reading, resign now before the heartland calls for your head!

 

[William18]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (smartcooky @ Sep 25 2009, 08:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (William18 @ Sep 21 2009, 05:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This is about dropping the four worst teams in the competition.[/b]

No it isn't, its about cutting the four teams that the NZRU want to drop, while teams that aren't performing, like North Harbour and Otago will be protected from the drop even if they finish at the bottom of the table. If the final were to be between, say, Tasman and Bay of Plenty, both teams will still be dropped because the NZRU have fudged the criteria, giving additional weight to things that do not matter in order to get what they want; the big five teams dominating and everyone being "asset" stripped to feed them. They have all their eggs in the Super Rugby basket, and don't give a **** about the ANZC. The Super 15 will be crap, its a compromise, because SARU did something that the NZRU are too gutless to do; stand firm to protect their National Championship, the Currie Cup.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>

These measures are not designed to make the competition less even or fairer. Instead, they will keep clubs on their toes and force them to improve year and year out. Promotion/relegation means that it is interesting at the bottom of the table and at the top[/b]

Rubbish! How do you expect teams to hold on to their players when they are playing in some kind of crap, made up consolation competition. You watch what will happen next;

► The four teams that go down, a couple of which are VERY competitive right now, will be "asset" stripped of all their best players by the "Big Five". (Its already happened with Cruden, signed for Manawatu but with an "out" clause if they get chopped.). Some of us are old enough to rememebr that Counties-Manukau played Canterbury in the final of the NPC a few years ago, but a couple of years later, they got relegated and couldn't keep their players. Joeli Vidiri and Jonah Lomu played for them (they were known at the "Bruise Brothers")

► When one of the four go back up, they will no longer be competitive, they will cop a series of thrashings from the teams that have now got all their former players.

► Within a couple of years, Tew, or some other moron in charge from a Big Five union will end promotion/relegation because of the mismatches.

I promise you, if Tasman goes down, the Marlborough Union will go after the NZRU for compensation. They got the Tasman Union to upgrade Lansdowne Park, at huge expense, to meet their criteria. Then they'll be left with a White Elephant that they will no longer be able to afford to use if they aren't playing in the Premier Division, because no-one is going to pay Premier Division ticket prices to watch a bunch of amateurs running around in some noddy competititon.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>

As long as the NZRU makes the right decision and does not drop down teams that deserve to stay up then it is an excellent measure.[/b]

The teams that should go down are the bottom four on the table, but they wont, because the NZRU will protect the Super Franchises.

I hope that a team like BoP, Tasman or Hawkes Bay wins the ANZC. That will really embarrass the dickheads at the NZRU. Better still, I would like to see a chopped team take the Ranfurly Shield down into Noddy Division with them.

I would love to see Tewbacca spin his way out of that.
[/b][/quote]

I am going to give the NZRU the benefit of the doubt on this one. If they are to get rid of teams like Manawatu then they can't really be defended. However, if they look at all the information and actually get rid of the teams which deserve it then that is a good job. I agree that Otago and North Harbour should probably go down. Certainly, they do not deserve to stay up by the two visible measures of crowds and on field performance.

I think more protection should be given to smaller provinces. I would like to see some sort of compensation for the teams that are relegated so that they can recoup some of their losses. The salary cap rules should be tightened and I think it should cost more to buy players from outside your province. I think the NZRU can think up alternate plans to protect the minor provinces.

Me too would like to see someone like Hawkes Bay win the competition (providing Wellington can not).

 

[William18]

I would also like to say that the review which led to the culling of four teams was province orientated . The unions themselves said it was not sustainable and was too long. They only want an 11 or 12 week competition, they also want to play each other once. From those two principles which were agreed upon, it would be impossible to continue with the current structure.

These are the principles agreed upon (as far as I understand) by all the unions:

Include Super Rugby players;

Have a stand-alone window (which also recognises the windows for club rugby and Super Rugby);

Feature a full round-robin and playoffs;

The further principles, announced today, are that the competitions must also:

Have promotion-relegation (whether this will be automatic or by way of a play-off match is yet to be determined);

Guarantee four or five home games per team;

Be completed within a 10-12 week window; and

Be concluded by the end of October.

If the unions then turn around and say we do not like what has happened then it is their fault for agreeing to make these things happen in the first place. I must once again stress that these ideas were done with the support of the unions, not a solely NZRU directive.

 

[danger]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (William18 @ Sep 25 2009, 07:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

I am going to give the NZRU the benefit of the doubt on this one. If they are to get rid of teams like Manawatu then they can't really be defended. However, if they look at all the information and actually get rid of the teams which deserve it then that is a good job. I agree that Otago and North Harbour should probably go down. Certainly, they do not deserve to stay up by the two visible measures of crowds and on field performance.

I think more protection should be given to smaller provinces. I would like to see some sort of compensation for the teams that are relegated so that they can recoup some of their losses. The salary cap rules should be tightened and I think it should cost more to buy players from outside your province. I think the NZRU can think up alternate plans to protect the minor provinces.

Me too would like to see someone like Hawkes Bay win the competition (providing Wellington can not).[/b]

Thats the thing though, Otago has so much history, a new stadium a super franchise and a large population, North Harbour has a massive population, quality players coming through and alot of money.

Every team can stake a claim and give credible reasons why they should be allowed to stay. The teams at the bottom arent being outclassed, its not like Otago are out of their league, they're playing good rugby, they're just getting edged out on game day. Thats what you want out of a competition. Why do we HAVE to cut 4 teams.

The only union that has a real case to answer is Counties, in that they are struggling on the field, financially, and for sepectators.
Theres no doubt in my mind that they are only a couple of years away from being right though, they just got a new stadium and all they need is a few more years to sign their young talent and the team should come right, with a performing team comes a crowd.

People don't realise what a great nursery counties is. There are 4 current all blacks from the counties region. The real danger is that if we drop South Auckland, we may lose all that PI talent to a growing rugby league community. We demote Counties, we lose the young Jonahs and Sitivenis to the Warriors.

The answer at the end of the day is; Don't cut any team.

 

[smartcooky]

Sometimes, whether or not something makes money shouldn't be the criteria. Where the overall value of something is greater than the money it costs, it should be persisted with. This is a lesson the NZRU needs to learn from our friends in Europe. If every team in their major rugby competitions were to be chopped for losing money, the Guinness Premiership would be a three-team competition, the Top 14 would be a two team competition, and the Heineken Cup would be just those five combined, because the Magners League and the Italian Super 10 wouldn't even exist.

The problem with he NZRU is that they are looking at the Air New Zealand Cup from a blinkered standpoint, in total isolation and saying "thats losing money". What they need to do is to treat New Zealand Rugby holistically, i.e. treat International, Super-Rugby, ANZ Cup and Heartland Championship as a single entity, where some parts of it will make money and support other important parts that don't and the whole thing works together to discover and nurture new talent and bring it up through the levels to the ultimate aim of having the best All Black side we can put on the field.

If you want to see an example of what happens when a Union goes down the path that the NZRU are heading now, look no further than Scotland and the SRU. They took from their grass roots, and gave to their elite. No financial support for junior rugby, or rugby in schools. In fact the SRU treated junior rugby in a manner akin to disdain. Effectively, kids wanting to play rugby were considered to be a bloody nuisance. That worked fine for a year or two, then the whole thing came crashing down, and now Scotland, once one of the best sides in Europe, is a sad shadow of its former self, always hovering at 9 to 12 in the world. The SRU utterly screwed the game at all levels below the elite, and now they are paying the price for it.

A poster on the old iRB forum once said something about Scottish rugby that has always stuck with me.

"Scottish rugby is like a condemned prisoner standing on the gallows with a rope around his neck. The trapdoor is opening and he hasn't fallen through yet"

I think of that, and I think the old cliche "There, but for the grace of God, go us.....". The lesson is plain for all to see;

Ignore and/or alienate your grass roots at your peril!!

 

[Woldog]

The Reds have been standing on that platform for a while

 

[danger]

More conformation that the NZRU plan to banish the smaller unions to the doldrums. They have now reduced the number of teams promoted and relegated each year to one instead of two.

Another couple of weeks and automatic promotion will no doubt be thrown out, and now it will be a return of the days where the team at the bottom of premier division (always used to be Northland) gets absolutely thrashed all year, only to grab its only victory for the season in the promotion/relegation match, handing out a 60 point stuffing to the winners of the next division down. Champagne rugby Mr Tew.

Another point of interest, who will be the poor ******** from the Heartland that get pulled up to be the Division 1 whipping boys. Im sure the town of Wanganui would respond better to winning the Heartland than getting raped by all comers in Div 1.

Heres a wild thought though, It isnt far from Oamaru to Timaru. or Timaru and Ashburton. Any possibility of Noth Otago and South Canterbury joining forces? or Mid and South Canty? Or even all three in a Hanan all stars team?

Its the only way i could see them keeping up. I always get excited at the prospect of expansion/amalgamated teams.

 

[Jethro]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (smartcooky @ Sep 25 2009, 07:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

Sometimes, whether or not something makes money shouldn't be the criteria. Where the overall value of something is greater than the money it costs, it should be persisted with. This is a lesson the NZRU needs to learn from our friends in Europe. If every team in their major rugby competitions were to be chopped for losing money, the Guinness Premiership would be a three-team competition, the Top 14 would be a two team competition, and the Heineken Cup would be just those five combined, because the Magners League and the Italian Super 10 wouldn't even exist.

The problem with he NZRU is that they are looking at the Air New Zealand Cup from a blinkered standpoint, in total isolation and saying "thats losing money". What they need to do is to treat New Zealand Rugby holistically, i.e. treat International, Super-Rugby, ANZ Cup and Heartland Championship as a single entity, where some parts of it will make money and support other important parts that don't and the whole thing works together to discover and nurture new talent and bring it up through the levels to the ultimate aim of having the best All Black side we can put on the field.

If you want to see an example of what happens when a Union goes down the path that the NZRU are heading now, look no further than Scotland and the SRU. They took from their grass roots, and gave to their elite. No financial support for junior rugby, or rugby in schools. In fact the SRU treated junior rugby in a manner akin to disdain. Effectively, kids wanting to play rugby were considered to be a bloody nuisance. That worked fine for a year or two, then the whole thing came crashing down, and now Scotland, once one of the best sides in Europe, is a sad shadow of its former self, always hovering at 9 to 12 in the world. The SRU utterly screwed the game at all levels below the elite, and now they are paying the price for it.

A poster on the old iRB forum once said something about Scottish rugby that has always stuck with me.

"Scottish rugby is like a condemned prisoner standing on the gallows with a rope around his neck. The trapdoor is opening and he hasn't fallen through yet"

I think of that, and I think the old cliche "There, but for the grace of God, go us.....". The lesson is plain for all to see;

Ignore and/or alienate your grass roots at your peril!![/b]

Well said Sir!!!!! The only issue I'm currently seeing is lack of depth in some teams, Manawatu comes to mind with four top class players unavailable. That will change over time. Right at the moment pretty much the whole of NZ is behind the competition, it's generating interest. The heartland may support the Kiwi teams in S14 but there's not the same Iwi feeling to things, the big five simply aren't our teams, the S15 is going to really bring that home. As stated before I'm going to be following the NRL, with hopefully the Bears included, from 2011 onwards rather than the mickey mouse competition SANZAR have come up with.

The four teams that get dropped will have their salary cap halved, with lose players (regardless of what Tew claims), and are basically immediatly second class citizens with no hope of matching the top ten sides. Once again a NZRU decision will lead to a huge drop in spectator numbers and the loss of interest in the game in parts of New Zealand. I would be sharpening up my legal teams in Hamilton and at the top of the South Island, millions of dollars spent only to have Tew move the goal posts year in year out.

As to the Provinces agreeing to a ten team competition, fine make it a level playing field rather than the arbitary decision that six teams will remain in the top division regardless if that meet NZRU requirements or not. Thats a grossly unfair way to go about things, and is about what I would expect from the Tewbacca lead NZRU. Both Otago and North Harbour should fall somewhere below teams like Manawatu on the guidelines the NZRU are claiming they will use. Anyone else not trusting the national body at the moment?


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Woldog @ Sep 25 2009, 08:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

The Reds have been standing on that platform for a while [/b]

Dude the only problems the Reds have, besides being the Tahs biatychs, is poaching from the West and no doubt from down South if Melbourne can get it's act together.

 

[William18]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (danger @ Sep 26 2009, 12:06 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

More conformation that the NZRU plan to banish the smaller unions to the doldrums. They have now reduced the number of teams promoted and relegated each year to one instead of two.

Another couple of weeks and automatic promotion will no doubt be thrown out, and now it will be a return of the days where the team at the bottom of premier division (always used to be Northland) gets absolutely thrashed all year, only to grab its only victory for the season in the promotion/relegation match, handing out a 60 point stuffing to the winners of the next division down. Champagne rugby Mr Tew.

Another point of interest, who will be the poor ******** from the Heartland that get pulled up to be the Division 1 whipping boys. Im sure the town of Wanganui would respond better to winning the Heartland than getting raped by all comers in Div 1.

Heres a wild thought though, It isnt far from Oamaru to Timaru. or Timaru and Ashburton. Any possibility of Noth Otago and South Canterbury joining forces? or Mid and South Canty? Or even all three in a Hanan all stars team?

Its the only way i could see them keeping up. I always get excited at the prospect of expansion/amalgamated teams.[/b]

Man some people are negative. An extract from the article says as follows: NZRU chief executive Steve Tew said feedback from unions indicated there was a fair amount of anxiety around commercial planning for teams in the relegation zone with the stakes being so high. Once again you pin it all on the NZRU when, in fact, this was a province orientated move. As was the NZRU's decision to change the competition's structure. I would certainly not support no automatic promotion/relegation as that is one of the main reasons I support the restructuring in the first place. I think automatic promotion will happen and I think you are just being cynical but, hey, maybe I am just naive.

If people in Waunganui do not want to see their team in Division 1 then they should communicate that to Waunganui Rugby Union. It is not like the NZRU are forcing teams to move up, they are giving them the option. Waunganui may get raped at the beginning but after a few years they could have made the step up and rugby there may be going in leaps and bounds. It is the long term view.

I do not agree with you on the mergers. It is not far between the city of Manchester Stadium and Old Trafford either. That does not mean they should merge. Rivalries are good and should be developed.

 

[danger]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (William18 @ Sep 26 2009, 10:40 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (danger @ Sep 26 2009, 12:06 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

More conformation that the NZRU plan to banish the smaller unions to the doldrums. They have now reduced the number of teams promoted and relegated each year to one instead of two.

Another couple of weeks and automatic promotion will no doubt be thrown out, and now it will be a return of the days where the team at the bottom of premier division (always used to be Northland) gets absolutely thrashed all year, only to grab its only victory for the season in the promotion/relegation match, handing out a 60 point stuffing to the winners of the next division down. Champagne rugby Mr Tew.

Another point of interest, who will be the poor ******** from the Heartland that get pulled up to be the Division 1 whipping boys. Im sure the town of Wanganui would respond better to winning the Heartland than getting raped by all comers in Div 1.

Heres a wild thought though, It isnt far from Oamaru to Timaru. or Timaru and Ashburton. Any possibility of Noth Otago and South Canterbury joining forces? or Mid and South Canty? Or even all three in a Hanan all stars team?

Its the only way i could see them keeping up. I always get excited at the prospect of expansion/amalgamated teams.[/b]

Man some people are negative. An extract from the article says as follows: NZRU chief executive Steve Tew said feedback from unions indicated there was a fair amount of anxiety around commercial planning for teams in the relegation zone with the stakes being so high. Once again you pin it all on the NZRU when, in fact, this was a province orientated move. As was the NZRU's decision to change the competition's structure. I would certainly not support no automatic promotion/relegation as that is one of the main reasons I support the restructuring in the first place. I think automatic promotion will happen and I think you are just being cynical but, hey, maybe I am just naive.

If people in Waunganui do not want to see their team in Division 1 then they should communicate that to Waunganui Rugby Union. It is not like the NZRU are forcing teams to move up, they are giving them the option. Waunganui may get raped at the beginning but after a few years they could have made the step up and rugby there may be going in leaps and bounds. It is the long term view.

I do not agree with you on the mergers. It is not far between the city of Manchester Stadium and Old Trafford either. That does not mean they should merge. Rivalries are good and should be developed.

[/b][/quote]

Okay, for one "the once again" comment seems to hint that this was a province orientated move akin to the previous one, where Steve Tew said that all the provinces wanted a 10 team competition. I have spoken to John Knowles, the Manawatu CEO and he says they never asked for a 10 team competition and always were completely against it, as were all the other teams facing demotion that he knew of.

Manawatu, Tasman, Northland, Counties and BOP are all pleading for the competition to stay at 14 teams, but you dont see the NZRU releasing statements saying that the competition is staying as it because of a province orientated move do you?

The way i see it, the NZRU holds Super Rugby as top priority, thats pretty much undisputed. At the moment, Otago, Auckland and Waikato are in serious danger of coming last in the ten team competition. What will they do then? that messes Super Rugby right up. Thats why i think theyre going to bring in a promotion relegation match. Its very difficult for the lower division sides to beat the higher ones, and its not a fair portrayal of how the lower team will fare as it doesnt take into account the signings it would make should and reach the top division, extra staff, salaries leading to more training. etc..

Whos to say the "province lead initiative" wasn't soley Auckland and Otago saying they dont want two teams demoted as that puts super rugby in trouble?

The Wanganui Rugby union sees increased revenue, but i dont really think there will be much on offer, people dont like seeing their team losing. And just how do you think they are going to improve?

And the difference between Man U and Man City is that they are both pretty good. Mid, South Canty and North Otago would get gaped by the likes of Manawatu, and its not like they have the potential to get any better. Oamaru High isnt exactly churning out players.

And how would you keep the rivalry going if they arent playing each other any way. Only one out of the three can get promoted.

 

[William18]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (danger @ Sep 26 2009, 11:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (William18 @ Sep 26 2009, 10:40 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (danger @ Sep 26 2009, 12:06 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

More conformation that the NZRU plan to banish the smaller unions to the doldrums. They have now reduced the number of teams promoted and relegated each year to one instead of two.

Another couple of weeks and automatic promotion will no doubt be thrown out, and now it will be a return of the days where the team at the bottom of premier division (always used to be Northland) gets absolutely thrashed all year, only to grab its only victory for the season in the promotion/relegation match, handing out a 60 point stuffing to the winners of the next division down. Champagne rugby Mr Tew.

Another point of interest, who will be the poor ******** from the Heartland that get pulled up to be the Division 1 whipping boys. Im sure the town of Wanganui would respond better to winning the Heartland than getting raped by all comers in Div 1.

Heres a wild thought though, It isnt far from Oamaru to Timaru. or Timaru and Ashburton. Any possibility of Noth Otago and South Canterbury joining forces? or Mid and South Canty? Or even all three in a Hanan all stars team?

Its the only way i could see them keeping up. I always get excited at the prospect of expansion/amalgamated teams.[/b]

Man some people are negative. An extract from the article says as follows: NZRU chief executive Steve Tew said feedback from unions indicated there was a fair amount of anxiety around commercial planning for teams in the relegation zone with the stakes being so high. Once again you pin it all on the NZRU when, in fact, this was a province orientated move. As was the NZRU's decision to change the competition's structure. I would certainly not support no automatic promotion/relegation as that is one of the main reasons I support the restructuring in the first place. I think automatic promotion will happen and I think you are just being cynical but, hey, maybe I am just naive.

If people in Waunganui do not want to see their team in Division 1 then they should communicate that to Waunganui Rugby Union. It is not like the NZRU are forcing teams to move up, they are giving them the option. Waunganui may get raped at the beginning but after a few years they could have made the step up and rugby there may be going in leaps and bounds. It is the long term view.

I do not agree with you on the mergers. It is not far between the city of Manchester Stadium and Old Trafford either. That does not mean they should merge. Rivalries are good and should be developed.

[/b][/quote]

Okay, for one "the once again" comment seems to hint that this was a province orientated move akin to the previous one, where Steve Tew said that all the provinces wanted a 10 team competition. I have spoken to John Knowles, the Manawatu CEO and he says they never asked for a 10 team competition and always were completely against it, as were all the other teams facing demotion that he knew of.

Manawatu, Tasman, Northland, Counties and BOP are all pleading for the competition to stay at 14 teams, but you dont see the NZRU releasing statements saying that the competition is staying as it because of a province orientated move do you?

The way i see it, the NZRU holds Super Rugby as top priority, thats pretty much undisputed. At the moment, Otago, Auckland and Waikato are in serious danger of coming last in the ten team competition. What will they do then? that messes Super Rugby right up. Thats why i think theyre going to bring in a promotion relegation match. Its very difficult for the lower division sides to beat the higher ones, and its not a fair portrayal of how the lower team will fare as it doesnt take into account the signings it would make should and reach the top division, extra staff, salaries leading to more training. etc..

Whos to say the "province lead initiative" wasn't soley Auckland and Otago saying they dont want two teams demoted as that puts super rugby in trouble?

The Wanganui Rugby union sees increased revenue, but i dont really think there will be much on offer, people dont like seeing their team losing. And just how do you think they are going to improve?

And the difference between Man U and Man City is that they are both pretty good. Mid, South Canty and North Otago would get gaped by the likes of Manawatu, and its not like they have the potential to get any better. Oamaru High isnt exactly churning out players.

And how would you keep the rivalry going if they arent playing each other any way. Only one out of the three can get promoted.
[/b][/quote]
I don't know who approved or who did not approve of the decision. I do know that all provinces were give the chance to have their say at a workshop. Then the decision was made. The truth is the majority of provinces came up with key principles and then the NZRU has come up with a competition best designed to fit them. Everyone had their say and we have come up with a result.

Of course Super rugby is the top priority. It is the highest level of domestic rugby in New Zealand. Super rugby is a bit of a snag. If I was in charge I would relegate Otago, I would also get rid of the Highlanders as well. Not that I expect the NZRU to make that sort of a decision. I think that if Otago was automatically relegated Southland should take over as the centre for the Highlanders. If they were both relegated then the area does not deserve the franchise.

If you have spoken to the residents of Omaru, Timaru and Asburton, if you have spoken to the rugby unions of Mid Canterbury, South Canterbury and North Otago and they all want the merger to happen then let it be. If they want to merge then someone in Wellington should not tell them that they have to. If they do not want to merge then someone in Taranaki should not tell them that they should. It is up to them.

 

[smartcooky]

Originally posted by William18
Man some people are negative. An extract from the article says as follows: NZRU chief executive Steve Tew said feedback from unions indicated there was a fair amount of anxiety around commercial planning for teams in the relegation zone with the stakes being so high. Once again you pin it all on the NZRU when, in fact, this was a province orientated move. As was the NZRU's decision to change the competition's structure.

And you believe Tewbacca do you? If so, you are very naive, because this guy is a proven bullshit artist with a greater capacity for spin that Alistair Campbell.

The feedback he would have got would be from the Big Five Unions and North Harbour, who would all be scared shitless of getting relegated. By reducing the Promotion relegation from two to one, they have halves that chances of a Big 5 union going down.

This whole thing smacks of protectionism for the Super 14 bases

Steve Tew somehow managed to survive the clean out after the 2003 RWC hosting debacle; he's a Teflon Don, nothing sticks to him no matter how many ****-ups he and his cronies make.

The NZRU has lost touch with the people that are most important; the stakeholders in the game.

 

[danger]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (William18 @ Sep 26 2009, 12:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

I don't know who approved or who did not approve of the decision. I do know that all provinces were give the chance to have their say at a workshop. Then the decision was made. The truth is the majority of provinces came up with key principles and then the NZRU has come up with a competition best designed to fit them. Everyone had their say and we have come up with a result.

Of course Super rugby is the top priority. It is the highest level of domestic rugby in New Zealand. Super rugby is a bit of a snag. If I was in charge I would relegate Otago, I would also get rid of the Highlanders as well. Not that I expect the NZRU to make that sort of a decision. I think that if Otago was automatically relegated Southland should take over as the centre for the Highlanders. If they were both relegated then the area does not deserve the franchise.

If you have spoken to the residents of Omaru, Timaru and Asburton, if you have spoken to the rugby unions of Mid Canterbury, South Canterbury and North Otago and they all want the merger to happen then let it be. If they want to merge then someone in Wellington should not tell them that they have to. If they do not want to merge then someone in Taranaki should not tell them that they should. It is up to them.[/b]

Just because everyone had their say doesnt mean they were listened to. All the smaller unions were deadset against getting cut. This isnt the best fit for the provinces at all. This is the best fit for the Super 15.

And Super Rugby has no god given right to be top priority! Maybe you enjoy it in the big centres, but if you come down to Manawatu and ask what team they support, they arent going to say the Hurricanes. Hell you you specified they choose a Super 14 team they would probably say the Highlanders.

Im not a fan of Super Rugby myself. A big reason ANZC appeals to me is because of how local things are. You would struggle to find a single person in New Zealand that doesnt have some sort of a connection with an ANZC player. I used to go to school with a couple of the tasman guys, i go to uni with a bunch of the Turbos and their practice field is 20 metres from my room, i played rugby with alot of the Taranaki guys and i have a cousin in the Waikato team. You dont get that kind of grassroots feeling from Super 14. Its over-done and too profit orientated.

And back off mate i merely raised it as a suggestion. It makes sense due to the relative popultions and player numbers of the other teams in div 1.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (smartcooky @ Sep 26 2009, 01:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

And you believe Tewbacca do you? If so, you are very naive, because this guy is a proven bullshit artist with a greater capacity for spin that Alistair Campbell.

The feedback he would have got would be from the Big Five Unions and North Harbour, who would all be scared shitless of getting relegated. By reducing the Promotion relegation from two to one, they have halves that chances of a Big 5 union going down.

This whole thing smacks of protectionism for the Super 14 bases

Steve Tew somehow managed to survive the clean out after the 2003 RWC hosting debacle; he's a Teflon Don, nothing sticks to him no matter how many ****-ups he and his cronies make.

The NZRU has lost touch with the people that are most important; the stakeholders in the game.[/b]

Exactly.

 

[William18]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (danger @ Sep 26 2009, 04:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (William18 @ Sep 26 2009, 12:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't know who approved or who did not approve of the decision. I do know that all provinces were give the chance to have their say at a workshop. Then the decision was made. The truth is the majority of provinces came up with key principles and then the NZRU has come up with a competition best designed to fit them. Everyone had their say and we have come up with a result.

Of course Super rugby is the top priority. It is the highest level of domestic rugby in New Zealand. Super rugby is a bit of a snag. If I was in charge I would relegate Otago, I would also get rid of the Highlanders as well. Not that I expect the NZRU to make that sort of a decision. I think that if Otago was automatically relegated Southland should take over as the centre for the Highlanders. If they were both relegated then the area does not deserve the franchise.

If you have spoken to the residents of Omaru, Timaru and Asburton, if you have spoken to the rugby unions of Mid Canterbury, South Canterbury and North Otago and they all want the merger to happen then let it be. If they want to merge then someone in Wellington should not tell them that they have to. If they do not want to merge then someone in Taranaki should not tell them that they should. It is up to them.[/b]

Just because everyone had their say doesnt mean they were listened to. All the smaller unions were deadset against getting cut. This isnt the best fit for the provinces at all. This is the best fit for the Super 15.

And Super Rugby has no god given right to be top priority! Maybe you enjoy it in the big centres, but if you come down to Manawatu and ask what team they support, they arent going to say the Hurricanes. Hell you you specified they choose a Super 14 team they would probably say the Highlanders.

Im not a fan of Super Rugby myself. A big reason ANZC appeals to me is because of how local things are. You would struggle to find a single person in New Zealand that doesnt have some sort of a connection with an ANZC player. I used to go to school with a couple of the tasman guys, i go to uni with a bunch of the Turbos and their practice field is 20 metres from my room, i played rugby with alot of the Taranaki guys and i have a cousin in the Waikato team. You dont get that kind of grassroots feeling from Super 14. Its over-done and too profit orientated.

And back off mate i merely raised it as a suggestion. It makes sense due to the relative popultions and player numbers of the other teams in div 1.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (smartcooky @ Sep 26 2009, 01:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

And you believe Tewbacca do you? If so, you are very naive, because this guy is a proven bullshit artist with a greater capacity for spin that Alistair Campbell.

The feedback he would have got would be from the Big Five Unions and North Harbour, who would all be scared shitless of getting relegated. By reducing the Promotion relegation from two to one, they have halves that chances of a Big 5 union going down.

This whole thing smacks of protectionism for the Super 14 bases

Steve Tew somehow managed to survive the clean out after the 2003 RWC hosting debacle; he's a Teflon Don, nothing sticks to him no matter how many ****-ups he and his cronies make.

The NZRU has lost touch with the people that are most important; the stakeholders in the game.[/b]

Exactly.
[/b][/quote]
The Super 14 brings in more money and is important to SANZAR relations. It is naturally going to be more important.

I know you and people in Manawatu don't give a **** about the Hurricanes. Nor should you. I don't see why you would have any affiliation to them. I too think it is great you perfer the Air New Zealand Cup. You know what? So do I. I would much rather support Wellington then the Hurricanes, the tradition and history is much more strong then with a province then a mangled assortment of unions. Don't think I don't like the grassroots. I went to the majority of my school's 1XV games and went to a few local club games as well. I have missed about one Wellington home game in the past 4 years and if they were relegated I would still be there.

Sorry, if I seemed to over the top on my last point. I am just saying let them make the decision. If you think it is a good idea, you should email them. It will at least get them thinking about it as a possibility.

I reckon making the Super 14 in to a Champions League thing would be good. That way it could have provinces in it and they would all have the chance to play in it.

 

[Jethro]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>

Automatic promotion relegation between the premier grade and division one is planned, provided the promoted union meets certain "gateway criteria".[/b]

More moving of the goalposts by the NZRU. Anyone not believe that if say Otago are last and in line for the drop the Div 2 team suddenly wont meet the arbitary "gateway" requirement. With S15 likely to lose even more support out in the Heartland this sort of stuff could effectively wreck the game in parts of New Zealand. Tewbacca must go, the guy has lost sight of the NZRU's fundamental requirement to promote the game through out New Zealand.

BTW JON's planned expansion to Melbourne has hit a major roadblock with their core sponsor pulling the pin. The ARU couldn't organise a **** up in a brewery and will take the NZRU down with them, wake up Tew this expansion is not in the best interest of New Zealand Rugby or for that matter Australian Rugby.