Seven bids for 5th Aussie team

[QLD]

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

Mystery surrounds one of the seven ventures which on Wednesday formally lodged their expressions of interest at becoming the 15th Super rugby team in SANZAR's expanded tournament in 2011.
In addition to fielding EOI documents by the 5pm deadline from Western Sydney, NSW Country, three from Victoria and one from the Gold Coast, the Australian Rugby Union said it had also received a surprise lodgement from a second interested party in Queensland.

Confidentiality agreements prevented the ARU from announcing the mystery party.

The ARU will assess the respective EOIs over the next fortnight before seeking full applications from selected ventures on August 7.

The formal bids must be submitted to the ARU by September 18, with SANZAR offering the 15th licence by October 31.

Despite the Western Sydney Rams mounting a compelling case for inclusion, it is understood a team from Melbourne remains favoured to get the nod.

Exactly which one, though, is unknown.

In a rather messy situation, the ARU must consider expressions of interest from the Victorian Rugby Union, a breakaway group of former VRU board members and one from the A League-aligned Melbourne Victory venture.

VRU president Gary Gray said having three interested parties from Victoria muddied the waters and hoped just one Melbourne franchise made the next stage of bidding.

“We hope this would create clarity about the endorsed bidder from this territory, Victoria,'' Gray said.

“To do these bids properly is an expensive process and it costs a lot of money to people.''

Gray said having three bidders from Victoria also diluted the strength of each and made it more difficult to attract financial backing.

The cost of running a Super rugby franchise is estimated at $5 million a year.

“Melbourne has got to have the best opportunity but the government told us a month ago that it won't be helpful unless there's one bid out of Melbourne because it's obviously the best chance if we've got a united Victoria behind the bid,'' he said.

Rugby Gold Coast chief executive Tim Rowlands didn't sound overly confident on Wednesday about making a successful bid.

“At the end of the day, I don't know if anyone's got $5 million. We haven't got $5 million at the moment,'' Rowlands said.

“Has anyone got $5 million to invest in a rugby team? Especially in the current financial climate.

“The disappointing thing for us is there's absolutely no communication from the ARU as to whether we're in the mix or just in the bidding process.

“We're still pursuing the idea of having one here but we obviously want more detail from a financial point of view.

“It's all a bit frustrating from our point of view. We just don't know what's going on.''

Samoa backed down last week on making a stand-alone bid but have been talking to Australasian syndicates.

“They're still taking to us and part of that is sponsorship,'' Rowlands said.

“They have a backer in Ireland that we're talking to with Samoa who says that he'll put some money in if there is a Samoan presence in the team.

“We have another potential investor in Japan who wants Japanese players involved in Coast team.''

AAP[/b]

The Melbourne Victory FC bid is promising

 

[RugbyHighlights]

Exciting right? I'm still ****** that Japan didn't get the 2011 World cup, or the 2015 one(it would seem).

 

[esoj]

there are also 2 bids from new zealand for the 15th team from Taranaki and the Hawke's bay


http://tvnz.co.nz/rugby-news/taranaki-join...per-bid-2866223

Taranaki join Hawke's Bay in Super bid

Taranaki has joined Hawke's Bay in a bid to become the sixth New Zealand franchise in an expanded Super 15 rugby competition in 2011.

The New Zealand Rugby Union (NZRU) confirmed on Thursday that it had received two expressions of interest on behalf of Super rugby's governing body Sanzar.

The two applicants are the Hawke's Bay Rugby Football Union and a bid on behalf of the Taranaki region.

The NZRU said it would assess the applications over the coming weeks and decide whether one, both or neither should be forwarded to Sanzar for its consideration next month.

NZRU chief executive Steve Tew said the process invited applicants to apply to their national union in the first instance and the NZRU would give consideration to the two New Zealand bids in the coming weeks.

"We have said publicly that there is a big question mark over New Zealand's capacity to sustain and achieve success with more than the five Super 14 franchises, so that will have a bearing on our considerations," he said.

"We will now be asking Hawke's Bay and Taranaki to provide us with very detailed business cases relating to the long-term sustainability of their bids."

Sanzar will consider next month all expressions of interest passed on by the South Africa, New Zealand and Australian unions.

The Sanzar executive committee will then decide how many of the interested parties should proceed to the next stage of submitting a full bid document.

Those bids will be due in mid to late September with a final decision from Sanzar expected in late October.

The 15th team will be included in a new Australian Conference from 2011.

The revamp will see five teams each assigned to South African, New Zealand and Australian conferences. The five teams will play the other four sides within their conference on a home and away basis, and will also play (home or away) four of the five teams in each of the other two conferences before an expanded six-team final series.

Seven groups from three Australian states have also tendered bids to join the expanded competition.

Three bids from Victoria, two from New South Wales and two from Queensland, including an unexpected seventh bidder, have lodged expressions of interest with the Australian Rugby Union.

Bids came from the Victorian Rugby Union, from a breakaway group of former VRU board members and from a group allied to the Melbourne Victory A-League football franchise. There were expressions of interest from West Sydney and New South Wales country, from Queensland's Gold Coast and from another unexpected Queensland source.

An ARU spokesman said confidentiality agreements prevented their identification, including the surprise Queensland bid.

The ARU will assess the bids over the next two weeks before inviting formal applications from approved bidders on August 7.

 

[Wally]

Well New Zealand have no chance. Melbourne really need to stream line and unite under one bid or they risk losing out to Western Sydney, which looks to be a solid alternative.

 

[William18]

I think it's looking like being Melbourne or else maybe Western Sydney. The two New Zealand bids aren't going to be admitted and nor should one from South Africa.

 

[jawmalawm24]

It only seems fair that Australia get another team because Saf and Nz both have 5 teams already so if Oz get another it'll even things up.

Don't know what Hawkes Bay and Taranaki are on the Hurricanes should drop the ******** for wanting to do that. Nah just kidding but what the hell thou.

 

[feicarsinn]

Can Oz really support a 5th team though? I always thought that Australia, despite achieving parity with their SANZAR colleagues on an international scale, lacked the depth of the other two. Sure there wasn't an Aussie team in the top 4 this year. I'd think another team would just dilute the top level talent further making the Australian teams less competitive.

 

[Ripper]

Should cut the Highlanders for an Hawkes Bay team... only reason they are dying now instead of 15 years ago was because they were propped up from the snatched talent from the Hawkes Bay and the elsewhere in the country. Taine Randell and Josh Kronfield for example were both from the Hawkes Bay.

 

[William18]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ripper @ Jul 27 2009, 03:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

Should cut the Highlanders for an Hawkes Bay team... only reason they are dying now instead of 15 years ago was because they were propped up from the snatched talent from the Hawkes Bay and the elsewhere in the country. Taine Randell and Josh Kronfield for example were both from the Hawkes Bay.[/b]

I think that would work for a bit but people from the Hawkes Bay would probably get over having a super 14 team eventually and stop going to games etc.

 

[Ripper]

There's nothing else to do in those two shithole cities on a Friday or Saturday night, and the NPC team has been getting decent crowd numbers ever since they were able to start keeping all their players and win again - we were 6th in attendance last year behind 4 Super 14 bases and BOP - Otago were 13th (second to last).

 

[William18]

Who else was in the top 5 teams? Highlanders crowds should go up once the new stadium is built.

 

[Maccaweeny]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (feicarsinn @ Jul 25 2009, 09:44 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

Can Oz really support a 5th team though? I always thought that Australia, despite achieving parity with their SANZAR colleagues on an international scale, lacked the depth of the other two. Sure there wasn't an Aussie team in the top 4 this year. I'd think another team would just dilute the top level talent further making the Australian teams less competitive.[/b]

Yeah player depth is certainly a worry, but the same argument was made with concern to the Western Force, I remember Eddie Jones saying they were like a Queensland A. Since then the Force have developed into one of Australia's stronger teams while the Reds (and to a lesser extent the Waratahs), who from looking at their player roster should thrive, have continually floundered.

Melbourne did well in the ARC and they have an alright club comp, I think they should get the nod over Western Sydney.

 

[William18]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Maccaweeny @ Jul 28 2009, 07:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (feicarsinn @ Jul 25 2009, 09:44 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Can Oz really support a 5th team though? I always thought that Australia, despite achieving parity with their SANZAR colleagues on an international scale, lacked the depth of the other two. Sure there wasn't an Aussie team in the top 4 this year. I'd think another team would just dilute the top level talent further making the Australian teams less competitive.[/b]

Yeah player depth is certainly a worry, but the same argument was made with concern to the Western Force, I remember Eddie Jones saying they were like a Queensland A. Since then the Force have developed into one of Australia's stronger teams while the Reds (and to a lesser extent the Waratahs), who from looking at their player roster should thrive, have continually floundered.

Melbourne did well in the ARC and they have an alright club comp, I think they should get the nod over Western Sydney.
[/b][/quote]
I would argue without the force perhaps the Reds would be stronger. The 5th Australian team may be strong in itself but it might say ruin the Brumbies and the Force so it wouldn't have provided much good. Basically, I do not think Australia has the talent or the player pool to provide for 5 times. However, I think in a ll fairness all nations deserve 5 teams. It doesn't make sense to me having a NZ team in an Australian conference. It will be up to all the teams in Australia to increase the countries depth so that all 5 teams can be competitive.

 

[Maccaweeny]

Lack of depth seems to be the watchword of every mediocre coach in this country, The easiest way of exonerating a loss is to blame your players. Australia isn't short of depth, it's an inadequate excuse that does not address how poorly rugby is administered here. We suffer a situation in which promising players are not exposed to competitive rugby. At the moment guys like Halangahu and Beau Robinson are playing club rugby in front of crowds of like 30 people, against guys I drink with. Other guys like Luke Burgess have found it hard to find a contract for this very reason, he was playing 4th grade ffs, it was only through luck that he was spotted, and there are more guys like him. Then you have Brock James who could not get a starting spot with the Waratahs, this is one of the best fly-halves going around.

We have the players, it's not as if a bloke with a professional contract puts his pants on differently each day, is somehow superhuman. The difference is when players are given the ability to focus almost purely on rugby because they're sponsored by a development scheme or possess a lucrative contract, the current situation in the club comps doesn't facilitate this. It's why players would rather head off to France than play rugby for bugger all money in front of a meat raffle, and who could blame them.

 

[tommowins]

Also Australia doesn't have a level below Super 14 which is a big problem. Its from light club rugby straight to an international competition.

What about a combination of Taranaki, Hawkes Bay and Northern Manawatu? So the strip of land south of BOP and Waikato but north of Palmerston and Wellington reigon.

 

[Woldog]

More teams in Australia means more talent can come through, and it will be an even comp for each country.

 

[KZNSharksFan]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Maccaweeny @ Jul 29 2009, 01:42 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

Lack of depth seems to be the watchword of every mediocre coach in this country, The easiest way of exonerating a loss is to blame your players. Australia isn't short of depth, it's an inadequate excuse that does not address how poorly rugby is administered here. We suffer a situation in which promising players are not exposed to competitive rugby. At the moment guys like Halangahu and Beau Robinson are playing club rugby in front of crowds of like 30 people, against guys I drink with. Other guys like Luke Burgess have found it hard to find a contract for this very reason, he was playing 4th grade ffs, it was only through luck that he was spotted, and there are more guys like him. Then you have Brock James who could not get a starting spot with the Waratahs, this is one of the best fly-halves going around.

We have the players, it's not as if a bloke with a professional contract puts his pants on differently each day, is somehow superhuman. The difference is when players are given the ability to focus almost purely on rugby because they're sponsored by a development scheme or possess a lucrative contract, the current situation in the club comps doesn't facilitate this. It's why players would rather head off to France than play rugby for bugger all money in front of a meat raffle, and who could blame them.[/b]

But if there are only 30 odd people watching club games, how can a much larger, more expensive enterprise be undertaken without huge financial risk? Im not saying don't go for it, but with such an (apparent) poor demand for rugby at grass roots level, it will likely be very hard to support another professional rugby side.

 

[Woldog]

It's the same as cricket, who wants to watch some people in 30 deg heat?

 

[Maccaweeny]

Because people would be more interested in a game of Victoria v NSW than say Randwick v Southern Districts. From what I've heard Perth club games get bugger all crowds, yet the Force had one of the most loyal supporter bases in Australia.

 

[danger]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Woldog @ Jul 29 2009, 10:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

More teams in Australia means more talent can come through, and it will be an even comp for each country.[/b]

Who are you kidding, Australia doesnt have the depth for the teams they have now. Giving them another team would just ensure that the talent is spread so thinly that no australian team could be competitive. The game wouldnt grow in australia because all the teams would be too busy getting raped by all comers. no kid wants to join the celler dwellers, look at all the young talent running away from the reds.

The only sensible option is to give the last franchise to hawkes bay or allow the australian teams to select a great amount more overseas players.