SARU confident over Kings S15 bid

Discussion in 'Super Rugby' started by Steve-o, Sep 26, 2009.

  1. Steve-o

    Steve-o Guest

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>
    http://www.keo.co.za/2009/09/26/sa-rugby-b...bout-kings-bid/

    In connection with...



    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>
    http://www.keo.co.za/2009/09/24/melbourne-take-sponsor-blow/

    Well an eventful week it has been indeed.
    Melbourne was getting much hype these last couple of months, looking to be in front in terms of support. However in-fighting seems to be the downfall of yet another opportunity for Australian rugby union to get a foot hold in the football codes.
    Come guys get your act together! Wasn't O'Neill employed because of his skill to secure deals like this?
     
  2. Forum Ad Advertisement

  3. QLD

    QLD Guest

    I love both articles its all about the Southern Kings franchise vs Melbourne franchise. Not once do either article mention where the Southern Kings will be based. Shows how ridiculous the South African teams names are. Do they represent anything?

    FWIW I think Port Elizabeth should get the franchise, but the Bloemfontein Cheetahs get kicked out. North Harbour or West Sydney should be looked ahead of Melbourne.
     
  4. monkeypigeon

    monkeypigeon Guest

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dale @ Sep 26 2009, 12:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
    What you talking bout Moe? It's very clearly based in Southern.
     
  5. Fushitsusha

    Fushitsusha Guest

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dale @ Sep 26 2009, 11:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
    All the Australian teams are state based...

    It would be daft to have the NSW Waratahs... and the Western Sydney whatevers...

    If they're going to persist in the format they've set out for the Super 15 tournament than Victoria must be awarded the next bid or it's going to be retarded to have a South African team in the Australian conference...
     
  6. Would Sydney be able to support a second team? The Waratahs don't exactly attract fans in their droves.

    I agree, a SA franchise in an "Australian" conference seems daft. A Victorian franchise based in Melbourne seems the best option if they can get the financing together. A question I'd have is whether the Australian playing base is large enough to support another team. Should Victoria win out, there'll be a hell of a lot of non-Australian players brought in to all their franchises in order to fill out the rosters.
     
  7. smartcooky

    smartcooky Guest

    Yep, that would be a marketing coup alright; plonk another Super Rugby franchise in a city where there already is one, thereby splitting the existing fan base between two teams, while leaving another city that has a large potential fan base of its own, with NO team. :rolleyes:

    Daft!


    Any one who thinks Melbourne does not have a rugby fan base....

    New Zealand vs Australia at the MCG, Saturday, 26 July 1997: Attendance 90,119

    New Zealand vs Australia at the MCG, Saturday, 11 July 1998: Attendance 75,127

    New Zealand vs Australia at the MCG, Saturday, 30 June 2007: Attendance 79,322




    Compare that with Football (Soccer), a popular sport in Melbourne. The last few times the Socceroos played at the MCG

    2006 v Greece: Attendacne 95,103 *

    2007 v Argentina: Attendance, 70,150

    2009 v Japan: Attendance 69,238* this will have been boosted by the huge number of Greek descendants and ex-pats living in Melbourne
     
  8. Jethro

    Jethro Guest

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (smartcooky @ Sep 27 2009, 05:40 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
    Quite a few Melbournians went along to the games out of interest rather than support, there's a two flies thing happenng down there. How about less than 40k for Australia v Italy, with a huge Italian population to call on. I can guarantee after initial interest Melbourne crowds will die off fairly quickly once the AFL kicks back in, the MCG sells out for top club clashes as well btw. Just ask the Waratahs how hard it is to sell the game in the face of a major competiting sport, the Eels and Dogs got a crowd the Tahs could only dream of on Friday for example. If the Swans have a good season they'll out sell the Waratahs week in week out, and Sydney isn't noted as an AFL stronghold (only one team here, though the AFL keep insanely talking up a second team in the Western Suburbs).

    The question no one is asking is will the Southerners support a team jam packed with foreigners and inter state players? There's not a lot of home grown talent to be perfectly frank. This is simply JON getting a national league up by stealth and using NZ and SA to help finance it. A second question for the existing franchises, and in particular the Force, will inter state games attract the large ex pat contingets that S14 gained. The answer there is a solid no, crowd averages are going to fall off for S15 from S14. Besides the clash with the Reds I have zero interest in getting along to the Tahs v Melbourne Handbags or Brumbies or anyone else.

    IF the NZRU want to see what happens when rugby is centered in the major centers, they need to simply look across the Tasman JON has pretty much alientated the regions over here. We're in the midst of our rugby season here on the Coasts and local clubs are having to advertise for players in the face of falling numbers. Thanks JON, if wondering where the Coast rugby suporter has gone, then check out Blue Tongue stadium for Mariner and hopefully next season Bear games. Heartland pretty much cut off at the knees thanks to the ARU and their grandoise plans. Speaking to people out in Balthurst and up on the Sunshine coast the feeling isn't restricted to my own area.
     
  9. Steve-o

    Steve-o Guest

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dale @ Sep 26 2009, 01:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
    Southern Kings, on the south coast, the province of the Eastern Cape.
    SA franchises are setup up differently from Aussie or NZ franchises. We use our pre-existing geographical provinces to make teams. Just like it's always been in the Currie Cup. The Eastern Cape provincial team competing in the CC is actually known as the Elephants but there you go.

    KwaZulu-Natal = Sharks
    Western Cape = Stormers
    Free State = Cheetahs
    Southern Gauteng = Lions
    Northern Gauteng = Bulls
    Eastern Cape = Kings

    [​IMG]

    As you can see we not only keep to the governmental borders but to the history of provincial unions as well unlike NZ do. So calling the Cheetahs the Bloemfontein Cheetahs is not accurate.

    The city where the Kings is based is not as relevant as it would be in Melbourne's case as well although it is in fact based in Port Elizabeth (recently changed to the 'Nelson Mandela Metropolitan'). Where the Kings played the Lions in the new FIFA 2010 stadium.
     
  10. feicarsinn

    feicarsinn Guest

    Speaking of Mandela, I just learned he's not allowed in the US without permission from the Secretary of State as he was classed as a terrorist in the 60's. Crazy or what?

    Sorry to get off topic there . Anyways it's got to go to Melbourne, a South African franchise in the Oz Conference would make zero sense. I for one wouldn't mind seeing 6 teams in the SA conference and 4 in Australia but that would unbalance the fixtures would it not?
     
  11. Woldog

    Woldog Guest

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>
    Because obviously Queenlsand Reds, New South Wales Waratahs, Australian Capital Territory Brumbies and Western Australia Western Force aren't in our pre-existing geographical provinces..
     
  12. QLD

    QLD Guest

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (snoopy snoopy dog dog @ Sep 27 2009, 01:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
    Yes it can. I think Australia's problem is ignoring rugbys heartlands. Sydney's population is 4million. Sydney has nine rugby league teams, AFL wants to plonk a 2nd team there.. a second team in Sydney would generate more interest than a Melbourne team. West Sydney is a mission to get to the SFS in the Eastern Suburbs and this team can represent the the entire west and north sydney. A team for all the bored polynesians out there lost to rugby league.

    Who says Melbourne would work? AFL heartland with a presence of league.
     
  13. QLD

    QLD Guest

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Steve-o @ Sep 27 2009, 08:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
    Southern Kings, on the south coast, the province of the Eastern Cape.
    SA franchises are setup up differently from Aussie or NZ franchises. We use our pre-existing geographical provinces to make teams. Just like it's always been in the Currie Cup. The Eastern Cape provincial team competing in the CC is actually known as the Elephants but there you go.

    KwaZulu-Natal = Sharks
    Western Cape = Stormers
    Free State = Cheetahs
    Southern Gauteng = Lions
    Northern Gauteng = Bulls
    Eastern Cape = Kings

    [​IMG]

    As you can see we not only keep to the governmental borders but to the history of provincial unions as well unlike NZ do. So calling the Cheetahs the Bloemfontein Cheetahs is not accurate.

    The city where the Kings is based is not as relevant as it would be in Melbourne's case as well although it is in fact based in Port Elizabeth (recently changed to the 'Nelson Mandela Metropolitan'). Where the Kings played the Lions in the new FIFA 2010 stadium.
    [/b][/quote]

    Cape Town Stormers or the Durban Sharks sounds better anyway for the super rugby. Naming them by the city would still represent their provinces.
     
  14. Jethro

    Jethro Guest

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dale @ Sep 27 2009, 10:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
    Yes it can. I think Australia's problem is ignoring rugbys heartlands. Sydney's population is 4million. Sydney has nine rugby league teams, AFL wants to plonk a 2nd team there.. a second team in Sydney would generate more interest than a Melbourne team. West Sydney is a mission to get to the SFS in the Eastern Suburbs and this team can represent the the entire west and north sydney. A team for all the bored polynesians out there lost to rugby league.

    Who says Melbourne would work? AFL heartland with a presence of league.
    [/b][/quote]

    And with the league team apparently losing a couple of million each season :bravo:
     
  15. Fushitsusha

    Fushitsusha Guest

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dale @ Sep 27 2009, 12:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
    Yes it can. I think Australia's problem is ignoring rugbys heartlands. Sydney's population is 4million. Sydney has nine rugby league teams, AFL wants to plonk a 2nd team there.. a second team in Sydney would generate more interest than a Melbourne team. West Sydney is a mission to get to the SFS in the Eastern Suburbs and this team can represent the the entire west and north sydney. A team for all the bored polynesians out there lost to rugby league.

    Who says Melbourne would work? AFL heartland with a presence of league.
    [/b][/quote]

    East Sydney, West Sydney and North Sydney are already represented by a team - they're called the NSW Waratahs...

    We can't have the NSW Waratahs, and the Western Sydney Rams or whatever... you can't have the state go up against a team that only represents a group of suburbs within a city within that state... it's stupid, really really stupid... and it will further disrupt the Tahs already dwindling fanbase...

    The NSWRU just need to put more effort into making rugby attractive in Western Sydney...

    And why would North Sydney rugby fans give a f*** about a Western Sydney team?
     
  16. Steve-o

    Steve-o Guest

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Woldog @ Sep 27 2009, 01:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
    Because obviously Queenlsand Reds, New South Wales Waratahs, Australian Capital Territory Brumbies and Western Australia Western Force aren't in our pre-existing geographical provinces..
    [/b][/quote]

    My bad, got that wrong.

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Fushitsusha @ Sep 26 2009, 05:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
    I completely agree, I would much rather have another Australian team in the... wait for it... AUSTRALIAN CONFERENCE. Even if it's just for national prides sake. I'm not sure how the rugby passionate crowd down in PE are gonna react to that, but they'll probably be stoked just to have a team from that region. EP used to be a very strong union, guys like Danie Gerber came from there.

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (feicarsinn @ Sep 27 2009, 12:52 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
    I'm pretty sure he got an official permanent pardon a couple of years ago and got taken off the terrorist list. I actually only found out he was ever on there because of the news of him being taken off.

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dale @ Sep 27 2009, 02:36 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
    Dude what are you on about?

    You said, "Shows how ridiculous the South African teams names are. Do they represent anything?"

    I've just told you who they represent. They represent what/who they've always represented, provinces.

    Back in Super 12 days the Sharks were called the 'Natal Sharks'. Don't know why the name simply got cut down to the 'Sharks' because nothing has changed.
     
  17. William18

    William18 Guest

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (smartcooky @ Sep 27 2009, 08:41 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
    I am supportive of a Melbourne team but your argument does not make that much sense. Just because Melbourne has got very good crowds at three rugby games over a 10 year period does not mean they should have a team. It is very different getting a big crowd to watch NZ vs Australia every once and a while to getting good crowds week in, week out over the whole season.

    Then of course we get onto the fact that Melbourne has hardly any rugby presence . It has taken league ten years to get average crowds of just 12,000. I expect a Melbourne rugby team to beat that but not beat it by so much. Victoria has only a current amount of about 5,000 registered players. That is not very many at all.

    I only support the Melbourne franchise because all countries should have the same amount of franchises and no where else in Australia deserve one more. I don't think the franchise will work and I can't see it lasting. It should be up the ARU and the VRU to do the best job with this team as they can.
     
  18. Wally

    Wally Guest

    Got to be in Melbourne, that much is obvious. It's just up to the VRU and the ARU to make it work. I think a Melbourne franchise can be just as successful as the Western Force.
     
  19. Jethro

    Jethro Guest

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Wally @ Sep 28 2009, 02:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
    So it would be facing bankruptcy too within four years ;) You seem to be down a major sponsor at the moment btw.
     
  20. QLD

    QLD Guest

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Wally @ Sep 28 2009, 02:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
    I thought Melbourne would have been the best option originally but West Sydney to me just seems better. We need to strengthen our heartlands and Sydney can easily cater for two teams. Play at ANZ and it doesn't matter what the crowds will be like originally because teams playing there make a profit no matter what the crowd is. This new stadium, tickets will be even more expensive and being successful from the start would be unlikely. How are they going to attract fans from the successful Melbourne Storm RL team, with the likes of Greg Inglis, Billy Slater etc?
     
  21. QLD

    QLD Guest

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Fushitsusha @ Sep 27 2009, 02:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
    Yes it can. I think Australia's problem is ignoring rugbys heartlands. Sydney's population is 4million. Sydney has nine rugby league teams, AFL wants to plonk a 2nd team there.. a second team in Sydney would generate more interest than a Melbourne team. West Sydney is a mission to get to the SFS in the Eastern Suburbs and this team can represent the the entire west and north sydney. A team for all the bored polynesians out there lost to rugby league.

    Who says Melbourne would work? AFL heartland with a presence of league.
    [/b][/quote]

    East Sydney, West Sydney and North Sydney are already represented by a team - they're called the NSW Waratahs...

    We can't have the NSW Waratahs, and the Western Sydney Rams or whatever... you can't have the state go up against a team that only represents a group of suburbs within a city within that state... it's stupid, really really stupid... and it will further disrupt the Tahs already dwindling fanbase...

    The NSWRU just need to put more effort into making rugby attractive in Western Sydney...

    And why would North Sydney rugby fans give a f*** about a Western Sydney team?
    [/b][/quote]

    According to your theory Tasmania and South Australia would be better options than a West Sydney team because we already have a NSW team.

    Technically they don't represent the whole of NSW when they are based in Sydney.. most of their fans are from the Eastern Suburbs. Do you think it's easy for rugby fans in Penrith, Parramatta, Campbelltown, parts of North Sydney etc to make it to the SFS? and Southern NSW is Brumbies territory.

    The one crowd at ANZ in Western Sydney got the highest Waratahs crowd all year of 32k. Your team abandoned what it represents a couple of years ago and are now just The Brumbies.. no reason why the NSW Waratahs can't do the same.

    I think West Sydney Rams and Sydney Waratahs would be better for the game imo. Possibly a Fibros vs Silvertails rivalry, and the people of NSW can choose a team they want to support. Melbourne is AFL mad, the Storm have needed assistance (5-10 million) from news ltd since 1998 just to stay alive.. imo rigged too so they have the best players playing for them under a salary cap.. no surprise the two news ltd (Broncos and Storm) teams have done well every year? Heck I reckon a second Brisbane rugby team would be better than a Melbourne side given the amount of juniors we are producing.
     
Enjoyed this thread? Register to post your reply - click here!

Share This Page