Rugby in 20 years time

Stan27

I was just thinking what do people think rugby will be like in 20 years time, both for te better or for the worse. Discussions like

-player welfare
- will it go down the soccer route (clubs vs international importance)
- interest in Ireland and world (becoming more popular by year)
- power shift (Northern hemisphere vs south)
-will the 6 nations expand
- power of rugby in USA??
-player wages will keep improving and rightly so.

So what do people think?

washman3

People saying that they knew Paul Kimmage was correct 20 years ago but were lambasted at the time when they mentioned it.;)

B0X

Whatever happens I really want to see a Champions Cup winner v Super XV winner playoff trophy.

Stan27

B0X wrote: »

Whatever happens I really want to see a Champions Cup winner v Super XV winner playoff trophy.

I think but would be interesting for many, but for me not as much. We have international matches for north vs south.

bilston

Very hard to say. In 1995 could we have predicted how the game would look in 2015?

Player welfare will be key. Will we see a move towards shorter season like there is in NFL? Less is more might be the way forward.

The other big issue will be the rise and rise of the English and French clubs. Right now I don't see an Irish team winning the Champions Cup anytime soon.

To be honest those two issues will probably come to a head long before 2035! Rugby might have changed significantly in 5-10 years time never mind 20!

The Lost Sheep

Don't see 6 Nations expanding but see something like a proper European championship taking place every few years as a necessary addition.
Hopefully in Ireland the huge increase in underage playing numbers will keep going and we will see more playing at adult level and more clubs being set up...

Stan27

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Don't see 6 Nations expanding but see something like a proper European championship taking place every few years as a necessary addition.
Hopefully in Ireland the huge increase in underage playing numbers will keep going and we will see more playing at adult level and more clubs being set up...

Would you agree that the large drop out rate say after 20ish is due to the high chance of injury. Many if my friends have givin up as they have recently graduated and fed up of going to work Monday morning stiff or sore shoulders ankles etc. a pity as we all loved playing it. Great fun

phog

In 20 years time BOD2 will be playing for Munster after his dad Brian and mom Amy moved to Limerick in 2020 and young Billy started his playing career with Thomond.

thomond2006

phog wrote: »

In 20 years time BOD2 will be playing for Munster after his dad Brian and mom Amy moved to Limerick in 2020 and young Billy started his playing career with Thomond.

Sorry but BOD2 will be sitting on the bench because a 61 year old John Hayes will be starting.

The Lost Sheep

Stan27 wrote: »

Would you agree that the large drop out rate say after 20ish is due to the high chance of injury. Many if my friends have givin up as they have recently graduated and fed up of going to work Monday morning stiff or sore shoulders ankles etc. a pity as we all loved playing it. Great fun

Not at all from my experience of playing, coaching. College/Work/Women/drink much bigger causes than risk of injury. Many clubs not having more than 2 teams doesn't help many of the guys who solely want to play on a very social level

Losty Dublin

thomond2006 wrote: »

Sorry but BOD2 will be sitting on the bench because a 61 year old John Hayes will be starting.

Recalled by the Estate of Declan Kidney, who will then manage Ireland on their deceased clients behalf?

Diabhal Beag

The John Hayes-Ligind joke will still be going, albeit by Thomond Jr.

.ak

Robots.

sydneybound

I predict a lot more professional leagues will be set up around the world. Six nations will be somewhat ring fenced due to the money involved' the league simply won't be able to lose England or France should they finish bottom due to their backers. Note France finished bottom 2 years ago so it can happen.

The game will certainly grow over the next number of years with big world cups in England & Japan (Asia is a growing market along with America, which it's the fastest growing game at the moment). The inclusion in the Olympics is a pretty big deal as it'll open the game to a much wider audience. The vast majority of the Commonwealth Games 7's crowd weren't rugby people but made it a fantastic atmosphere with packed stadiums.

The women's game will continue to grow also, the women's game is growing massively in England after their WC win.

accidentprone1

.ak wrote: »

Robots.

What's a Robod, grandpa?

RedemptionZ

Rise of Russia and Canada. Georgian players to be poached by Russia too, you heard it here first. I'm still unconvinced about Japan. Possibility they could become a force too.

Shorter season as players become closer physically to the NFL standard.

A North American professional league.

Australia to drop out of the top 5.

Non rugby playing Europe still remaining relatively impenetrated.

OldRio

I can see within the next four years a big split between the English clubs and the RFU. Akin to what happened in English soccer.

One of the broadcasters will throw huge money at a new league. A mixture of English, Irish Welsh and Scottish clubs. Perhaps two divisions. The fall out will impact on all the Unions but money talks.

bilston

OldRio wrote: »

I can see within the next four years a big split between the English clubs and the RFU. Akin to what happened in English soccer.

One of the broadcasters will throw huge money at a new league. A mixture of English, Irish Welsh and Scottish clubs. Perhaps two divisions. The fall out will impact on all the Unions but money talks.

A British and Irish league is the only way I see us competing with the English and French financially, domestically anyway. It would open up a TV market of almost 70m to us as opposed to about 12m now (not including Italy as rugby isn't a big sport there in any sense). In saying that it woild require the PRL.to work with the Celtic Unions so it is prbably a pipe dream at the minute.

phog

To compete with the big French & English clubs the IRFU divides the country into two regions.
The counties south of Dublin across to Galway would be known as The Dalcassians, the counties north of Wicklow across to Clare would be known as Tuatha Dé Danann.

The Lost Sheep

OldRio wrote: »

I can see within the next four years a big split between the English clubs and the RFU. Akin to what happened in English soccer.

One of the broadcasters will throw huge money at a new league. A mixture of English, Irish Welsh and Scottish clubs. Perhaps two divisions. The fall out will impact on all the Unions but money talks.

I don't. Too many of the English clubs wouldn't survive a big change like that. We perhaps should look at a B&I league with all Irish, English, Welsh and Scottish sides but what then would you do with the Italian sides?

bilston wrote: »

A British and Irish league is the only way I see us competing with the English and French financially, domestically anyway. It would open up a TV market of almost 70m to us as opposed to about 12m now (not including Italy as rugby isn't a big sport there in any sense). In saying that it woild require the PRL.to work with the Celtic Unions so it is prbably a pipe dream at the minute.

What would Italians do if such a competition went ahead?

sydneybound wrote: »

I predict a lot more professional leagues will be set up around the world. Six nations will be somewhat ring fenced due to the money involved' the league simply won't be able to lose England or France should they finish bottom due to their backers. Note France finished bottom 2 years ago so it can happen.

The game will certainly grow over the next number of years with big world cups in England & Japan (Asia is a growing market along with America, which it's the fastest growing game at the moment). The inclusion in the Olympics is a pretty big deal as it'll open the game to a much wider audience. The vast majority of the Commonwealth Games 7's crowd weren't rugby people but made it a fantastic atmosphere with packed stadiums.

The women's game will continue to grow also, the women's game is growing massively in England after their WC win.

Where do you see these professional leagues being set up?
Olympics being just 7s is the issue. Lots of countries may simply concentrate on 7s world series and Olympics rather than the 15s game

braddun

helmets,more protection like American footballers

RedemptionZ

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Where do you see these professional leagues being set up?
Olympics being just 7s is the issue. Lots of countries may simply concentrate on 7s world series and Olympics rather than the 15s game

The only new one I can see being formed is a North American one between Canada and USA.

RedemptionZ

braddun wrote: »

helmets,more protection like American footballers

There's no need for helmets in rugby because of tackling rules. In American Football there are virtually no laws in comparison to rugby so players tend to use momentum to knock down their opposite number, which involves a lot more clash of heads and getting your head slammed into the ground.

The rules might be changed to make the sport more concussion free but that's all I can see.

bilston

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

I don't. Too many of the English clubs wouldn't survive a big change like that. We perhaps should look at a B&I league with all Irish, English, Welsh and Scottish sides but what then would you do with the Italian sides?
What would Italians do if such a competition went ahead?
Where do you see these professional leagues being set up?
Olympics being just 7s is the issue. Lots of countries may simply concentrate on 7s world series and Olympics rather than the 15s game

Either the French take them or else they join the new league. But look we are going to be left behind if the current set up remains.

I certainly wouldn't be in favour of abandoning the Italians, joining such a league would help them finanacially and might allow them to keep the best Italian players in Italy.

I hoped the Pro 12 would step up this season but the team selections for the Munster v Leinster game (and I know Munster won) shows exactly where it stands in the list of Munster (one of the two biggest sides in the league) priorities.

Braken

RedemptionZ wrote: »

The only new one I can see being formed is a North American one between Canada and USA.

Yea I think North America will have a pro set up going forward possible California which already has a good tradition of rugby union and a lot of Pacific Islanders living in the area,they were pitching recently for a place in the Super15

desertcircus

Barring a significant change to concussion protocol, and a parallel drastic decrease in incidents of concussion, I could see the sport dying on its feet in twenty years. Sports die, not at the top, but from the bottom up: parents make decisions about the games they're willing to let their children play, and that heavily influences both playing and spectating numbers in the next generation. The increase in concussion incidents, the poor responses even at the very top level, and the horror stories that periodically appear about teenagers playing through brain injuries and causing horrific damage: each of those chips away at the number of parents who'll happily drive their kids to the local club for U14 games. Without those numbers coming through at underage level, the overall quality of the game drops and the level of public interest wanes. It's beginning to happen at high-school football level in the States, and it's already happened to boxing - a sport that was top of the pile thirty to forty years ago, but barely on the radar of even keen sports fans now.

Unfortunately, I can't see a way around this: concussions are a part of the game now thanks to increased player size and speed, and as long as we see players leaving the field barely able to figure out which way they should be going, a lot of parents will make the decision to bring their kid to the local GAA or football club. The most high-profile player in the Ireland team has suffered four concussions in the last year - that makes him vastly more likely than a non-rugby player to suffer permanent brain damage. How many parents will let their kids take up a sport that could see them suffering irreversible brain damage, with the risk increasing the higher they rise in the sport?

The Lost Sheep

desertcircus wrote: »

Barring a significant change to concussion protocol, and a parallel drastic decrease in incidents of concussion, I could see the sport dying on its feet in twenty years. Sports die, not at the top, but from the bottom up: parents make decisions about the games they're willing to let their children play, and that heavily influences both playing and spectating numbers in the next generation. The increase in concussion incidents, the poor responses even at the very top level, and the horror stories that periodically appear about teenagers playing through brain injuries and causing horrific damage: each of those chips away at the number of parents who'll happily drive their kids to the local club for U14 games. Without those numbers coming through at underage level, the overall quality of the game drops and the level of public interest wanes. It's beginning to happen at high-school football level in the States, and it's already happened to boxing - a sport that was top of the pile thirty to forty years ago, but barely on the radar of even keen sports fans now.

Unfortunately, I can't see a way around this: concussions are a part of the game now thanks to increased player size and speed, and as long as we see players leaving the field barely able to figure out which way they should be going, a lot of parents will make the decision to bring their kid to the local GAA or football club.

Speaking as a coach and referee I don't see that happening at all. Their is a lot of work being done on concussion awareness and I don't see numbers dropping out of the sport in huge numbers because of fears like you allude to in your post. As most games don't have qualified medical professionals in attendance its up to referees and coaches to protect players and referees can over rule any coach/medical official if they fear a player is concussed and have the backing of the laws of the sport on their side.

The numbers in the sport are expanding in a big way at underage(IRFU are saying some clubs are at full capacity yet haven't set up many more new clubs:rolleyes:) and I don't see major decreases in numbers over fears of concussion etc

desertcircus

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Speaking as a coach and referee I don't see that happening at all. Their is a lot of work being done on concussion awareness and I don't see numbers dropping out of the sport in huge numbers because of fears like you allude to in your post. As most games don't have qualified medical professionals in attendance its up to referees and coaches to protect players and referees can over rule any coach/medical official if they fear a player is concussed and have the backing of the laws of the sport on their side.

The numbers in the sport are expanding in a big way at underage(IRFU are saying some clubs are at full capacity yet haven't set up many more new clubs:rolleyes:) and I don't see major decreases in numbers over fears of concussion etc

I don't think we'll see it immediately - the growth in the sport over the past ten or so years has been huge, and interest follows on from success so this year would logically be a big one. Long-term, though, without a significant drop in concussions, I don't see the current success lasting. We won't see the pattern for a long time - it'll take years for it to happen - but if things don't change, it will happen.

The Lost Sheep

desertcircus wrote: »

I don't think we'll see it immediately - the growth in the sport over the past ten or so years has been huge, and interest follows on from success so this year would logically be a big one. Long-term, though, without a significant drop in concussions, I don't see the current success lasting. We won't see the pattern for a long time - it'll take years for it to happen - but if things don't change, it will happen.

I don't see it happening. The IRFU are working on how to deal with concussions quite well. The concussion workshop is going to be a mandatory part of all coaching/refereeing courses very soon if it isn't already and knowledge about concussion etc has increased unfortunately due some terrible incidents like Ben Robinson.
Things are changing for the better and the IRFU are doing a lot to change people's attitudes around head injuries

OldRio

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

I don't. Too many of the English clubs wouldn't survive a big change like that. We perhaps should look at a B&I league with all Irish, English, Welsh and Scottish sides but what then would you do with the Italian sides?
What would Italians do if such a competition went ahead?

Unfortunately the money men will not give a flying feck about the Italian or the smaller English sides.
I do see a massive change happening and it will be all money driven.

LeinsterDub

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

The numbers in the sport are expanding in a big way at underage(IRFU are saying some clubs are at full capacity yet haven't set up many more new clubs:rolleyes:) and I don't see major decreases in numbers over fears of concussion etc

IRFU loan fund has be full for years. Are plenty of junior clubs crying out for support before you go around setting up artificial new clubs

The Lost Sheep

LeinsterDub wrote: »

IRFU loan fund has be full for years. Are plenty of junior clubs crying out for support before you go around setting up artificial new clubs

How would they be "artificial clubs" and what exactly are "artificial new clubs"?
All clubs need support but that doesn't mean you don't need new clubs set up in places.
Take the city of Waterford. Waterpark are thriving at underage and Waterford City are going strong especially at underage which wasn't the case for years but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't be looking at creating new mini rugby clubs etc in the city. The IRFU have said that some clubs are at full capacity so how do you deal with that LD? Most clubs cant for many reasons expand their facilities so how do you deal with the increase in players.... you create new clubs

LeinsterDub

I meant clubs formed from the top down by some sort of committee, sort of like the Welsh regions . If a local community decide to set up a club then the irfu should fully support them. I have a feeling that Dublin has unique problems to the rest of the country are plenty of clubs with room to expand up here

The Lost Sheep

LeinsterDub wrote: »

I meant clubs formed from the top down by some sort of committee, sort of like the Welsh regions. If a local community decide to set up a club then the irfu should fully support them. I have a feeling that Dublin has unique problems to the rest of the country are plenty of clubs with room to expand up here

How is Dublin unique to rest of the country? Last bit of final sentence of your post doesn't really make sense?
If any area/club/group decide to create a new club of course they will be supported
A significant number of clubs don't bother field at underage level because so many mini rugby players go off and are playing with schools full time but those clubs are essentially lazy and should be doing more to attract new kids to the sport and be entering youths competitions. There is no reason Blackrock, Old Belvedere, Lansdowne, Wanderers etc etc all cant field youths teams with the huge numbers living close to their pitches.

Dravokivich

braddun wrote: »

helmets,more protection like American footballers

Helmets aren't any good for preventing concussions. Players do currently have the option of using various padding equipment, but anything like the gear used in the NFL is just too much. It leads to players throwing themselves into tackles harder increasing the risk of injury. Which really is considered careless by officials as it is already and can be penalised against.

Swiwi.

Crouch, bind, set...collapse
Crouch, bind, set...collapse
Crouch, bind, set...collapse

But I reckon in 20 years they stop the clock until the ball goes in.

dtpc191991

Due to advances in human cloning Irealand will be fielding a team of 21 BODs with John Hayes at 3 and 18. :P

Coburger

I don't know if there is an increase in concussion or in the number of times it is now reported / highlighted, I would not be surprised if protective skull caps are worn.

It will be interesting to see what happens to the Pro 12 league. I wonder if the Welsh clubs will ever try to join the top English league. This would probably mean the collapse of the Pro 12 with the Scottish, Irish, and Italian teams being left in limbo (unless the Scots and Irish too could join the English league (which would not be to the benefit of the English clubs as many of them would end up playing in a lower division)).

I think New Zealand, South Africa, and Australia will continue to dominate the game for a while to come until England and France can rise to greatness. If either England or France could have a world class manager, then it might get a little scarier for the southern hemisphere (can you imagine France having a decent manager a la Schmidt).

I can't see another country really becoming a pretty good rugby nation. Professional sports are so engrained in society today that I see it hard for rugby to really take off. Possibly Georgia will grow but look at the case of Italy. Their world ranking is quite poor. I wonder has it really changed since the formation of the 6 Nations.

The Lost Sheep

Coburger wrote: »

I don't know if there is an increase in concussion or in the number of times it is now reported / highlighted, I would not be surprised if protective skull caps are worn.

It will be interesting to see what happens to the Pro 12 league. I wonder if the Welsh clubs will ever try to join the top English league. This would probably mean the collapse of the Pro 12 with the Scottish, Irish, and Italian teams being left in limbo (unless the Scots and Irish too could join the English league (which would not be to the benefit of the English clubs as many of them would end up playing in a lower division)).

I think New Zealand, South Africa, and Australia will continue to dominate the game for a while to come until England and France can rise to greatness. If either England or France could have a world class manager, then it might get a little scarier for the southern hemisphere (can you imagine France having a decent manager a la Schmidt).

I can't see another country really becoming a pretty good rugby nation. Professional sports are so engrained in society today that I see it hard for rugby to really take off. Possibly Georgia will grow but look at the case of Italy. Their world ranking is quite poor. I wonder has it really changed since the formation of the 6 Nations.

I don't see protective skull caps being used/introduced.
Can see a British and Irish League happening before an Anglo Welsh league

I wouldn't be so sure on the big Southern Hemisphere 3 continuing to dominate. 6 Nations sides will trouble them and more.
I definitely see more countries becoming pretty good nations. BTW what do you define as pretty good nation?
Italy have peaked and troughed through their time in 6N. Right now theyre not great and near future isn't great as while in past they had some ok underage sides right now their sides are ok to poor.

spillit67

OldRio wrote: »

I can see within the next four years a big split between the English clubs and the RFU. Akin to what happened in English soccer.

One of the broadcasters will throw huge money at a new league. A mixture of English, Irish Welsh and Scottish clubs. Perhaps two divisions. The fall out will impact on all the Unions but money talks.

The RFU and Premier Rugby have never been closer. 6 or 7 years ago the RFU would have hung PR out to dry during the European fiasco. There is no financial benefit to PR to do it.

spillit67

desertcircus wrote: »

Barring a significant change to concussion protocol, and a parallel drastic decrease in incidents of concussion, I could see the sport dying on its feet in twenty years. Sports die, not at the top, but from the bottom up: parents make decisions about the games they're willing to let their children play, and that heavily influences both playing and spectating numbers in the next generation. The increase in concussion incidents, the poor responses even at the very top level, and the horror stories that periodically appear about teenagers playing through brain injuries and causing horrific damage: each of those chips away at the number of parents who'll happily drive their kids to the local club for U14 games. Without those numbers coming through at underage level, the overall quality of the game drops and the level of public interest wanes. It's beginning to happen at high-school football level in the States, and it's already happened to boxing - a sport that was top of the pile thirty to forty years ago, but barely on the radar of even keen sports fans now.

Unfortunately, I can't see a way around this: concussions are a part of the game now thanks to increased player size and speed, and as long as we see players leaving the field barely able to figure out which way they should be going, a lot of parents will make the decision to bring their kid to the local GAA or football club. The most high-profile player in the Ireland team has suffered four concussions in the last year - that makes him vastly more likely than a non-rugby player to suffer permanent brain damage. How many parents will let their kids take up a sport that could see them suffering irreversible brain damage, with the risk increasing the higher they rise in the sport?

Rugby is not american football. The problems in american football are a multiple of those in rugby. Not downplaying concussions in rugby but AF is a complete cluster****, they are having to teach tackling technique to coaches who grew up with little idea of how to do it properly, that is the scale of the issue there. Rugby tackling is still far safer though there are other issues in terms of head trauma at scrum time and rucks. It will certainly be an ongoing issue but it is not AF.

As for boxing, concussions has absolutely nothing to do with the fall in popularity of the sport. It is because the sport removed itself from the mainstream in America for pay days in the form of HBO and Showtime pay per view events. The primary mover of interest in sports in the United States has been television, the aforementioned impact on boxing as technology allowed for PPV and the rise of the NFL at the expense of baseball nationally. NFL being the perfect tv sport and baseball losing its national dominance.

Even if you take the example of baseball; it's rode a lot of curves during its history from the Depression, losing its stars to WWII, movement of whites to the suburbs, 1994 strikes and steroids and it is still popular albeit on a less nationally conscience level. Concussions will not sink rugby.

spillit67

The biggest issue rugby faces in the next 20 years is the neglect in organisation of the level below international rugby and how this is going to damage international rugby.

Australian rugby is in deep trouble from the top down to the grassroots. Australian rugby going down the tubes will damage the All Blacks severely. The NZRU's approach to rugby is all top down, they have destroyed the NPC and Super Rugby in order to keep the All Blacks as a 90% winning side. The NZ economy is not big enough to support professional rugby so they have leveraged their brand worldwide. This is a big risk and even riskier if Australia goes down the tubes. Other sports have a balance in a country, they do not rely on one team's fortunes, as we have seen with the Wallabies a decline in their fortunes has scuttled rugby there. A non competitive Wallabies would be a total disaster for the ABs.

I cannot understand how the ridiculous new Super 18 competition came about. This is the only sport in the world to adopt such a bread and butter competition. It, imo, is the most disastrous step for rugby since professionalism began.

Sadly for all the IRB's (or whatever they are called now) great work at grassroots worldwide they have failed completely to show the wau with the step below international rugby.

Georgia making the step upto the Six Nations is the best hope for the sport in the next 20 years.

sydneybound

spillit67 wrote: »

I cannot understand how the ridiculous new Super 18 competition came about. This is the only sport in the world to adopt such a bread and butter competition. It, imo, is the most disastrous step for rugby since professionalism began.

What the team that brings the most to the table in terms of viewers, crowds and tv audience, South Africa, gets another team can't see anything wrong with that.
The argentinan side is also needed to help their domestic game and they also deserve to be there. So really that's two teams that deserve to be there, no issue with them most will say.

There's only one team people have an issue with which is the Japanese team. We all know they'll bring money to the table which is one of the reasons they got in in the first place, the issue is with home crowds, tv audience and how competitive they will be. I think they'll find it tough at the beginning but eventually find there feet and be a bit like the rebels picking up the odd win here and there but finishing near the bottom of the table. On another note it would have been great to see an Pacific islander team too, I presume how much backing they would have got is the issue. Pity they couldn't all come together on this.

With the 2019 WC coming up I think it's a great time to grow the game there and I hope they advertise the crap out of their super rugby team to drum up support for the game in general. Both new country's will increase the audience to the competition which will increase interest from sponsors.

If we keep on going down the route of not letting new teams or country's into competitions how are we ever going to grow the game and make a pool of competitive teams? Teams like Georgia would never get a chance so what's the point in waiting every four years to get a few games in a WC... From what I gather the three new teams will play in the South African conference so shouldn't have too much of an impact Aus & NZ. I just think it's time to start letting new teams into the World Rugby Union game.

chupacabra

20 years? Sevens will be the dominant code.

Tim Robbins

Stan27 wrote: »

I was just thinking what do people think rugby will be like in 20 years time, both for te better or for the worse. Discussions like

-player welfare
- will it go down the soccer route (clubs vs international importance)
- interest in Ireland and world (becoming more popular by year)
- power shift (Northern hemisphere vs south)
-will the 6 nations expand
- power of rugby in USA??
-player wages will keep improving and rightly so.

So what do people think?

1. Soccer route: Already has. Toulon and Clermont are Man City and Chelsea.
2. Spectator sport will be high if the product is good. However, as a participant sport it won't grow. Why? Because despite Rugby being on a high for almost 15 years there have been only 2 - 3 new clubs in each province.

Most Rugby clubs / schools were set up by Priests 100 years ago. They are not going to set up anymore.

3. Perhaps. They technically way ahead. We are ahead in the gym and eating 20 chickens a week.
4. Might be two tier. With Georgia. Romania, a few others in other.
5. See number 2.
6. Yes but only in France and England.

bilston

A few of us have mentioned concerns about the effect of concussion on the game over the next 20 years, well here is an interesting development. With Saracens it is normal to be wary of gimmicks but on the face of it this could be positive, if the concussion device provides more data then it can't be a bad thing.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/30671380

Stan27

Tim Robbins wrote: »

1. Soccer route: Already has. Toulon and Clermont are Man City and Chelsea.
2. Spectator sport will be high if the product is good. However, as a participant sport it won't grow. Why? Because despite Rugby being on a high for almost 15 years there have been only 2 - 3 new clubs in each province.

Most Rugby clubs / schools were set up by Priests 100 years ago. They are not going to set up anymore.

3. Perhaps. They technically way ahead. We are ahead in the gym and eating 20 chickens a week.
4. Might be two tier. With Georgia. Romania, a few others in other.
5. See number 2.
6. Yes but only in France and England.

What do you think about the ail. Future potential?

OldRio

spillit67 wrote: »

The RFU and Premier Rugby have never been closer. 6 or 7 years ago the RFU would have hung PR out to dry during the European fiasco. There is no financial benefit to PR to do it.

IMHO not for the reason you give.
If a broadcaster comes in with a bucket of money things will change. We will see.

spillit67

sydneybound wrote: »

What the team that brings the most to the table in terms of viewers, crowds and tv audience, South Africa, gets another team can't see anything wrong with that.
The argentinan side is also needed to help their domestic game and they also deserve to be there. So really that's two teams that deserve to be there, no issue with them most will say.

There's only one team people have an issue with which is the Japanese team. We all know they'll bring money to the table which is one of the reasons they got in in the first place, the issue is with home crowds, tv audience and how competitive they will be. I think they'll find it tough at the beginning but eventually find there feet and be a bit like the rebels picking up the odd win here and there but finishing near the bottom of the table. On another note it would have been great to see an Pacific islander team too, I presume how much backing they would have got is the issue. Pity they couldn't all come together on this.

With the 2019 WC coming up I think it's a great time to grow the game there and I hope they advertise the crap out of their super rugby team to drum up support for the game in general. Both new country's will increase the audience to the competition which will increase interest from sponsors.

If we keep on going down the route of not letting new teams or country's into competitions how are we ever going to grow the game and make a pool of competitive teams? Teams like Georgia would never get a chance so what's the point in waiting every four years to get a few games in a WC... From what I gather the three new teams will play in the South African conference so shouldn't have too much of an impact Aus & NZ. I just think it's time to start letting new teams into the World Rugby Union game.

This has nothing to do with "deserving to be there". This is all to do with the configuration of worldwide club competitions.

Super Rugby is a joke. Go to Green & Gold Rugby or Planet Rugby and listen to the die hard rugby fans. They still watch it, but the issues with are glaring and obvious.

The IRB's policy to the tier below internationals is to use it as a means to improve the national sides of countries. That's why Italy were brought into the Pro12 and that's why Argentina/Japan are being backed to come into Super Rugby. This is laudable but misguided.

Super Rugby is a cross hemisphere bread and butter competition. Imagine in order to watch European club rugby you had to get up in the middle of the night weekly to watch not just your team but others. The casual fan of a team is turned off and the diehard fans will only watch their team. If I am a fan of a Kiwi or Australian franchise, I might get up at 3am to watch my side in Cape Town, but a casual fan no chance. This damages the bread and butter. Club competitions which are successful are ones which attract fans of the sport into any game at any time. People aren't just fans of a team, they are fans of competitions. There is no lounging around the sofa watching a Saturday of European rugby, it is a chore to watch it.

When Super Rugby started it was brilliant. An incredibly high standard of play. Rugby audiences were enthused - the famous provinces like Canterbury and Natal facing off. However, naturally fatigue sets in on a cross hemisphere competition. It needed to be kept short and sharp to keep audiences. Now it has become unwieldy and the talent has been diluted. The original brands who were there, the likes of Canterbury, have been molded into "franchises". The NZRU kept players from half the season in 2007.

You had the natural problem of different unions needing different things (such as the South Africans now needing a 6th side, despite there being no depth to support it). The Australians "needed" more franchises to boost their player pool and to take on other football codes.

Bringing in the Argentinians and Japanese is a lovely idea and the hope is the national sides improve and that's great. The IRB and individual unions like the NZRU might get away with second tier competitions being like they are if it improved national sides, and there's no doubt those policies have brought Irish rugby upto a standard, kept the Tri Nations at the top of the game and with NZ in particular made them an even greater sporting phenom than before professionalism.

The issue, however, is the French and English clubs are not on board with that vision of rugby and never will be. This is driving wage inflation. Ditto in Australia you have the NRL who also drive up recruitment costs. In order to keep up more international games have been bolted on, ie the Wallabies circus tour of Europe annually. This is damaging international rugby.

It's a viscous cycle and instead of going back to the start and rethinking this policy the individual unions and IRB are making the same mistakes.

spillit67

OldRio wrote: »

IMHO not for the reason you give.
If a broadcaster comes in with a bucket of money things will change. We will see.

Except you don't seem to be grasping the financial relationship between them.

The RFU annually up until recently, brought in more money than the 12 Premiership clubs combined. A significant proportion of their income comes from Grants and Elite Squad Player money. Additionally, the RFU's policy of refusing to pick non English based players drives down their costs. Compare it to soccer where there is a premium on talented young English players. By refusing to pick French based players they are suppressing the supply of opportunity for English international players. This is a congruous policy and PR know it.

The idea of a broadcaster coming in and breaking up this relationship does not stand upto any kind of analysis. A broadcaster has already come in the form of BT Sport who disrupted rugby in the Northern Hemisphere hugely. The RFU would not have backed PR years ago but did not go against them this time, despite the RFU being reliant on their relationships with the other members of Six Nations Ltd.

The IRFU would love a B&I league. There would be little opposition to it in Celtic nations if access to the type of tv money English clubs enjoy became available. There is no friction there that would stop it happening, except from English clubs themselves.

OldRio

I do understand the financial relationship between the RFU and the PRL. I also have a passing interest in what BT have done in the northern hemisphere.

Money talks. The richer clubs will want more. This thread is about what could happen in 20 years time. I think it could happen. Sooner rather than later.