Future of Super Rugby

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Scotland

TheBrownDog
May 5, 2006
50,447
52,455
AFL Club
West Coast
Forrest just sounds like Clive Palmer with his talk of a new comp. People won't get behind Force vs Fiji vs Samoa in parallel with Super Rugby and the ARU would probably just sanction players who opt to play in it with non-availability for Wallaby selection.

I hope Super Rugby dies a slow, painful death.
 

robbieando

Moderator
Oct 9, 2001
16,084
8,601
Spitting Bars
AFL Club
Sydney
Forrest just sounds like Clive Palmer with his talk of a new comp. People won't get behind Force vs Fiji vs Samoa in parallel with Super Rugby and the ARU would probably just sanction players who opt to play in it with non-availability for Wallaby selection.

I hope Super Rugby dies a slow, painful death.
Also the ARU own the "Western Force" name so this new comp would mean a change of name if the ARU don't support it. ARU also hold the player contracts for those Force players that have resigned for next year.
 

Scotland

TheBrownDog
May 5, 2006
50,447
52,455
AFL Club
West Coast
Also the ARU own the "Western Force" name so this new comp would mean a change of name if the ARU don't support it. ARU also hold the player contracts for those Force players that have resigned for next year.
I know, it's bluff and bluster from Twiggy the used car salesman.

I also want to see what happens to the Perth Spirit now.
 

Scotland

TheBrownDog
May 5, 2006
50,447
52,455
AFL Club
West Coast
I would like to think they are kept as a pathway for WA juniors while allowing current and former Force players at other Super Rugby sides being eligible to play for them to enable them to field a strong side.
I would like to think the ARU would take 11 years of work in WA seriously, but they don't.
I would like to think that with a forced reduction to 4 Super Rugby teams the ARU would be transparent and objective, but they weren't.

I don't hold much hope for a good outcome.
 

Scotland

TheBrownDog
May 5, 2006
50,447
52,455
AFL Club
West Coast
http://www.news.com.au/sport/rugby/super-rugby/western-force/western-force-appeal-aru-win-case-to-axe-club/news-story/f7bb046e97e3a86713778befbad58dfc

The ARU owns the Western Force having bought them from the WARU in 2016.
A condition of the sale was the 'Alliance Agreement' - an agreement which required the parties to, amongst other things, 'co-operatively work in an alliance to grow and develop rugby in Western Australia'.
The Alliance Agreement expired: 'on the expiry date of the last of the SANZAR Broadcast Agreements (being 31 December 2020) or, subject to clause 2.4, if the last of the SANZAR Broadcast Agreements is terminated or renegotiated earlier as a result of the renegotiation of the commercial terms of a broadcast arrangement, such earlier date.'
THE ARGUMENTS
The WARU argued that dropping the Western Force from the Super Rugby competition breached the Alliance Agreement.
The ARU argued that the 'Alliance Agreement' had expired as a result of the broadcast agreement renegotiation that ended in July 2017.
THE JUDGMENT
The case was a simple matter of contractual interpretation and the court applied the words as written in the agreement not with the implied meaning the WARU assigned those words.
The judge opined that 'hopefully they (ARU AND WARU) both had the interests of furthering the game of rugby union in mind. It is to be remembered that ARU owns the Force. If the alliance comes to an end, it owns the Force unconditionally without any potential obligation to sell it back in the future, and can do with it what it likes, even destroy it.
"As the facts of this case demonstrate, they were supposed to be allies, but they were not friends."
THE RESULT
The court held that the Alliance Agreement was terminated when the broadcast agreements were renegotiated. The ARU is free to cut the Force from Super Rugby.
 

The_Reaper

Hall of Famer
Jan 26, 2006
40,132
30,941
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
East Fremantle
Forrest just sounds like Clive Palmer with his talk of a new comp. People won't get behind Force vs Fiji vs Samoa in parallel with Super Rugby and the ARU would probably just sanction players who opt to play in it with non-availability for Wallaby selection.

I hope Super Rugby dies a slow, painful death.
Its not Fiji or Samoa. Expect Hong Kong, Singapore, Sri Lanka etc.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Hap Hapablap

I'm off to Nepal to become a mountain goat.
Jun 27, 2006
11,661
2,600
Where the cows go bong.
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Lakers,Inter,Man U
cameron clyne is a campaigner.

the audacity of this fu**en campaigner.

i really hope after 2020 the super league burns to the grave. and if it has to take the sport with it. western australia has been treated like absolute s**t
 

Scotland

TheBrownDog
May 5, 2006
50,447
52,455
AFL Club
West Coast
The Force IP are belong to ARU. The Force players are contracted to the ARU.

First stop in setting up some Indian Champion's League version of Super Rugby is buying back what RugbyWA sold to the ARU - which they apparently still own even though the Alliance Agreement was complete bulls**t.

FWIW John Eales is speaking at a rugby function in Perth this week. Could be interesting as he is an ARU board member and not firmly in the old boys club.
 

Bomberboyokay

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 27, 2014
27,467
23,839
Live from Here
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Roosters, Mets, West Ham
I'm picturing a bunch of fat hasbeens looking for one last payday and a stack of hitherto amatuer locals who'll be spun as the next big thing. Not that I can see it getting off the ground. What TV network would bother to buy it?

Mr Forrest met with Mr Clyne and ARU officials in Adelaide in late August and made the $50 million offer, though ARU CEO Bill Pulver later clarified the offer was "in the range of $10 million to $50 million" over several years and via the Australian Rugby Foundation, making the sum tax deductible.

http://www.afr.com/news/andrew-forrest-and-jack-ma-could-start-rebel-rugby-competition-20170905-gyb8je
So the government really would've been paying for it. What a generous billionaire.
 

Scotland

TheBrownDog
May 5, 2006
50,447
52,455
AFL Club
West Coast
Twiggy is talking s**t but you not being in his corner surprises no one. I am surprised you don't just call rugby a 'liberal voter' sport, though.
 

Scotland

TheBrownDog
May 5, 2006
50,447
52,455
AFL Club
West Coast
Some background reading...

http://www.aru.com.au/portals/1/SUPPORTING-DOCUMENTATION-THE-FUTURE-OF-SUPER-RUGBY.pdf

ARU-Western Force Relationship

While it has historically consumed the second-highest amount of additional support funding from the ARU among Super Rugby clubs behind the Melbourne Rebels ($7.7m v $19.3m, 2013-17), it was assumed that both teams would be self-sufficient from the 2018 season onwards and historical funding was not used as a key determinant in the ARU’s decision.
 

redglare

Team Captain
Sep 24, 2003
407
43
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
West Coast
Interesting reading, my take is:
a) Decision was made SOLELY on the basis that the Force license was the only one the ARU could terminate. The document admits as much, so why go into all the other analysis?
b) The financial modeling shows negligible difference between retaining the Force or retaining the Rebels. They seem to become insolvent about 3 months apart in 2020 timeframe in both cases - hardly a differentiating factor and subject to a lot of uncertainty.
c) I'm surprised by the Court's interpretation that the Alliance Agreement was no longer valid - the reason given is that it ceased to valid once the competition was reduced to 15 teams by SANZAAR - but this decision was made by Sanzaar - it seems a bit unusual that a party can lose its rights under one contract (Alliance Agreement) through the actions of other non contracting parties (Sanzaar) unless the Alliance agreement contained a specific termination clause relating to a team reduction. But in that case, wouldn't there be some kind of good faith obligation, or at least an expectation for the ARU to take steps to be able to fulfill its obligations under the Alliance Agreement?
d) The resolutions put to the Rugby Union Members on May 29 seem contrived to me. They were unusual in that they were resolutions to "Keep 5 teams alive" and to "reconsider the decision to reduce the number of Australian Super Rugby Teams", rather than a vote to "Reduce to 4 teams" The important distinction being that if the vote did not get the required approval threshold, then the it did not pass - which is apparently what happened. Does anyone know what the voting procedures are? Do they require unanimity? And why did they have the vote anyway, since SANZAAR had already resolved to reduce to 15 teams, a commitment that the ARU claims they cannot get out of?
e) They should have merged the Force and the Rebels - split home games between the two cities and tried to avoid the scorched earth they have created in WA

I have long been a fan of Australian Rugby, but I am bitter and resentful now. I want to see the ARU suffer and hope they get successfully sued by the WA State Government.
 

Scotland

TheBrownDog
May 5, 2006
50,447
52,455
AFL Club
West Coast
Interesting reading, my take is:
a) Decision was made SOLELY on the basis that the Force license was the only one the ARU could terminate. The document admits as much, so why go into all the other analysis?
Yep, has been that way since day one.

I'm not 100% how it works when the VRU/RugbyWA etc. are the license holder.

b) The financial modeling shows negligible difference between retaining the Force or retaining the Rebels. They seem to become insolvent about 3 months apart in 2020 timeframe in both cases - hardly a differentiating factor and subject to a lot of uncertainty.
The 'financial modelling' is complete horses**t, hence my quote above.

"While it has historically consumed the second-highest amount of additional support funding from the ARU among Super Rugby clubs behind the Melbourne Rebels ($7.7m v $19.3m, 2013-17), it was assumed that both teams would be self-sufficient from the 2018 season onwards and historical funding was not used as a key determinant in the ARU’s decision."

In the last 5 years the Rebels have cost the ARU $11.6m more than the Force and there is zero evidence presented to suggest that the Force or the Rebels would magically become self-sufficient from 2018 onwards.

c) I'm surprised by the Court's interpretation that the Alliance Agreement was no longer valid - the reason given is that it ceased to valid once the competition was reduced to 15 teams by SANZAAR - but this decision was made by Sanzaar - it seems a bit unusual that a party can lose its rights under one contract (Alliance Agreement) through the actions of other non contracting parties (Sanzaar) unless the Alliance agreement contained a specific termination clause relating to a team reduction. But in that case, wouldn't there be some kind of good faith obligation, or at least an expectation for the ARU to take steps to be able to fulfill its obligations under the Alliance Agreement?
I'm no lawyer but the Alliance Agreement appears to be worth less than the paper it's written on. The broadcast agreement still runs to 2020 and the only 'renegotiation' is the reduction in teams. The ARU have effectively said 'we'll buy the license and IP and in return guarantee your place in the comp until 2020... unless the comp is reduced to fewer teams in which case we'll use owning the license to punt you out'.

d) The resolutions put to the Rugby Union Members on May 29 seem contrived to me. They were unusual in that they were resolutions to "Keep 5 teams alive" and to "reconsider the decision to reduce the number of Australian Super Rugby Teams", rather than a vote to "Reduce to 4 teams" The important distinction being that if the vote did not get the required approval threshold, then the it did not pass - which is apparently what happened. Does anyone know what the voting procedures are? Do they require unanimity? And why did they have the vote anyway, since SANZAAR had already resolved to reduce to 15 teams, a commitment that the ARU claims they cannot get out of?
Everything coming out of the ARU is contrived.

e) They should have merged the Force and the Rebels - split home games between the two cities and tried to avoid the scorched earth they have created in WA
I'm not sure this would have worked with the distance, but I think a merged Brumbies/Rebels could've been more workable. The Brumbies rugby program is excellent, the Canberra market is not.

I have long been a fan of Australian Rugby, but I am bitter and resentful now. I want to see the ARU suffer and hope they get successfully sued by the WA State Government.
You are not alone, and the ARU seems to have zero concept of this.

If you go back to pre-Force days when tests started being played in Perth, Subiaco Oval would sell out. Those crowds have dropped off in recent years as crowds across the board have declined for rugby in Australia.

The ARU give the impression they can just axe the Force without meaningful consultation and due process and that the WA rugby community will just keep paying their ARU fees, keep attending tests in huge numbers and everything will hum along fine. It's staggeringly arrogant/naive. They have seriously pi**ed off the third biggest rugby community in the country.

Some of the passages in their press release are just insulting:

Western Australian representative teams will also continue to compete in the following tournaments and National Championships:
• National Women’s XVs Championships
• National Men’s Sevens Championships
• National Women’s Sevens Championships
• National Youth Men’s (U17) Sevens Championships
• National Youth Women’s (U17) Sevens Championships
• Australian U19 Championships (replacing the Super U20s competition)
• Australian Schoolboys (U18) Championships
• Australian U16 Championships
• U15 Junior Gold Cup
Errrrr, yes? We're talking about removing a team from Super Rugby, and they try and sell not kicking WA out of the sport altogether (reforming any of these comps has nothing to do with SANZAAR or Super Rugby) as some kind of act of benevolence.

campaigners.
 

Scotland

TheBrownDog
May 5, 2006
50,447
52,455
AFL Club
West Coast
https://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/andrew-twiggy-forrest-reveals-details-of-new-rugby-competition/news-story/123a67fa7fb93bd0df05b82eb8fbc85c

Twiggy 'in negotiations' with the ARU for his IPRC to not clash with Super Rugby, reciprocal eligibility for IPRC/Super Rugby players etc.

I'm not really sure how this would all work. Super Rugby runs Feb to August. NRC runs September to November. Southern hemisphere tests usually follow Super Rugby with Northern hemisphere tests after that.

Would the IPRC run over our Summer/Autumn? Alongside the NRC?

The only way it would get off the ground would be if he threw a fu** ton of money at it to entice players from other comps to play in it.
 

Seedsfan

Norm Smith Medallist
Oct 10, 2013
9,975
5,703
AFL Club
Collingwood
https://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/andrew-twiggy-forrest-reveals-details-of-new-rugby-competition/news-story/123a67fa7fb93bd0df05b82eb8fbc85c

Twiggy 'in negotiations' with the ARU for his IPRC to not clash with Super Rugby, reciprocal eligibility for IPRC/Super Rugby players etc.

I'm not really sure how this would all work. Super Rugby runs Feb to August. NRC runs September to November. Southern hemisphere tests usually follow Super Rugby with Northern hemisphere tests after that.

Would the IPRC run over our Summer/Autumn? Alongside the NRC?

The only way it would get off the ground would be if he threw a **** ton of money at it to entice players from other comps to play in it.
Yeah well that is the point he is talking about bringing the 150 Aussie home from overseas
 

Seedsfan

Norm Smith Medallist
Oct 10, 2013
9,975
5,703
AFL Club
Collingwood
I think it is good for Australian rugby as it gives us something to revert to when super rugby folds. He also says the players will be paid as much as they are in Europe or Japan so the talent drain will stop and we will also stop losing players to league. He is pushing hard for FTA coverage that would be a massive win.

When South Africa leaves Super Rugby falls apart that lets us have this comp as our top tier.

Also in the short term watch out Super sides improve if he can get the best players to come home they will be available to play Super Rugby.

What is the best news was he said he wants to make substantial investments to grassroots rugby through out Australia. Something we have been crying out for.

No doubt we have the talent in Australia to match it with the world but we need to change the culture from the Wallabies down.
 

Scotland

TheBrownDog
May 5, 2006
50,447
52,455
AFL Club
West Coast
When South Africa fu**s off we'll have 4 x Aus teams, 5 x NZ, the Sunwolves and possibly the Jaguares.

Assuming Twiggy's plan gets off the ground the IPRC will have the Force and 5 others. That's a total of 16/17 teams spread out over half the world which is really what we have now that isn't working.

What I really want to see is grass roots investment in WA rugby. fu** the East, the ARU made that bed. Why would anyone in WA want to invest in the private school-Shute Shield-Waratahs-Wallabies model that the ARU think is the way forward while the Force are playing Hong Kong out of season?

The future is Scotland's Asia Pacific Rugby Championship.

5 x Aust
5 x NZ
1 x Japan
1 x Fiji, Tonga, Samoa

Argentina too far away, they can play with the Northerners.
 

Top Bottom