• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

The Global Season is it really achievable.

We could always just play all our games away during the summer period. I think matches in PE and Cape Town will be feasable in December, but if we take December, the humidity is around 80% everyday, plus temperatures reaching over 35 degrees celsius.

Joburg, Pretoria and Bloemfontein has lightning storms during December and January. Plus concrete like pitches. The chance is there that games could be called off.

But yeah, I think we'll be open for change if there has to be a change. Our biggest concern is our players leaving our shores, make more money on short term contracts in the NH and then come back injured and unavailable when contracted to an SA team and go as quickly as they come (4 seasons in one day type of thing)?

At the moment, we are losing all the way.

Simple economics sadly. The question becomes would moving our calender bring in more money for SA Rugby (Cricket be damned the sport has been ruined from the top down for me)?

Yeah, Cape Town at least has a pretty mellow climate. I read somewhere that Mosselbaai has the least fluxuating microclimate of any reasonably populated city on the globe. Not sure where I got that from. At least those lightning storms up there are generally short lived.
 
New Zealand held to a tour schedule that force the omission of players for the first test in 2014. It does not seem reasonable that it is held up as an example of NH teams sending weakened teams when England sent as strong a squad as possible and did not wish to play on that due to the schedule clash.

I'm intrigued as to all of these players Ireland rested in the 2012 tour. I'm looking at the squad now and that seems to be the strongest squad Ireland had available at the time considering injuries. Wales 2010 looks fairly full strength too considering injuries.

Is it possible that Smartcooky's telling lies about the NH again?
 
All of the following touring teams had many key players missing because they were "resting".

England to NZ in 2004 & 2008 and in 2014 missing finals players in the first test
Ireland to NZ in 2012
France to Australia in 2008
Wales to NZ in 2010
Wales to South Africa 2008
France to South Africa in 2010

Thank you for actually answering a question about the weakened tours. I think you have may have a different version of the word "resting" though - generally we're talking about players undergoing surgery / rehab; or simply being dropped for a different player. It'd be nice if you told me who you think stayed at home to rest, but hey.

England to NZ&Aus 2004: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/international/3719495.stm
3 rested; 10 injured/retired 1 dropped compared to the RWC squad.
None missing due to club commitments.

England to NZ 2008: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/english/7396322.stm
Vickery, Shaw, Geraghty, Wilkionson, Moody, Deacon - injured; Balshaw, Vainikolo - dropped (rightly, for Mike Brown and Yopsy Ojo)
None rested; none missing due to club commitments.

England to NZ 2014 - already covered - that's what happens if you insist on playing the 1st test a week before it's due.

Ireland to NZ 2012: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/18241131
O'Connell, Court, Boss, Ferris - injured
None rested; none missing due to club commitments

Wales to RSA 2008: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/welsh/7398974.stm
Fair play - IIRC there was a pretty major dust up between the WRU and the regions - so not necessarily rested or club commitments directly, mroe dropped to prove a point by Gatland

Wales to NZ 2010: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/18308050
Can't see anyone being rested or missing due to club commitments - 2 missing with weddings to attend (1 his own, 1 his sister's); and a couple of retirements though.

France - test rugby a distant 3rd behind Top14 and HC rugby; not relevant to the conversation.



Doing your home-work for you, I make that 1 from 6 (discounting France). If you think I've missed some; please point them out; it's decidedly possible that I have. It seems more likely though that the NZ press, not knowing much about NH rugby, labelled them as "weakened touring squad" without realising that player A is banned, player B is injured, players C is retired etc etc.
 
Last edited:
Claiming Ireland rested players definitely is. There was a bit of rotation of course, three different 12's for example but iirc D'Arcy got injured in the second test. Players who it could be argued weren't first choice are McFadden who was in the form of his life, Kidney's golden boys Earls (who was in desperate form and not the player he is today) and Zebo (His tour to NZ still gives me nightmares) and the second row due to O'Connell and Toner not being available.
 
Yeah just had a look at our teams for that tour they're pretty strong for the time although dreaded be the day when Loughney could make an Irish cap. A few guys made first caps for each side, but on the whole our team was as strong as possible.
 
Of course a frenchy would say this. To you guys, club rugby is the most important of all and there is very little regard for international rugby. That's not new to us.
yes but over here there wouldn't be any pro test players without the clubs.

But you see here is the issue, if it's driven by the national rugby unions such as NZRU, SARU, ARU etc. then they can dictate to their clubs/franchises as to how the structure will work to be more beneficial for all involved.

I'm not so sure 'dictating' is the right approach for the unions. The stock car approach won't work over here. How about collaboration, mediation, negotiation that could lead to ...power sharing. Because that would open up more doors. Just a thought.

Have you tried dictating to bi/millionaires? did it go well? Good luck with 'dictating' to the likes of Altrad Lorenzetti Michelin and Co.

FFR is in no position to dictate to the clubs. They have less money than our 30 pro clubs and LNR combined. They have lost the support of the big clubs. They're not in a position to shove the Global Season agenda down anyone's throat. They've used that approach for decades and it has failed miserably on many issues. Look at the massive club-country divide we have.

Should the clubs not be stakeholders or drivers in this as well?

I know there is a lot of differences between unions and the different cultures, and I'm not expecting a solution overnight, but all I'd like to see is everyone having a joint meeting/Summit and get everything on the table and start working from there.

Is there really a move underway by the unions to get the ball rolling on this or is this just all pie in the sky?

Personally I'm not against the idea of a global season provided we have a clear idea of what it is. It's up to the proponents of that idea to articulate it in a clear and meaningful way. Right now we're not yet sure if we need a global season.
 
Last edited:
Our biggest concern is our players leaving our shores, make more money on short term contracts in the NH and then come back injured and unavailable when contracted to an SA team.

At the moment, we are losing all the way.

This is definitely something World Rugby needs to look at.
 
The Rugby Paper had a couple of interesting articles about it lately. In the last issue, there was one where someone suggested that moving to summer rugby would actually be beneficial to rugby in Australia. While they would clash with the popular cricket, they'd avoid Aussie Rules and league which are more similar and as such a bigger threat to rugby.

What bothers me is this:
- the interruption of Super Rugby because of the June tours
- clubs and countries playing at the same time in the NH
- the poor performance of NH teams at the last World Cup, plus Six Nations that really haven't been too great in the past couple of years. Apart from World Cups, it's the Six Nations that are most likely to be shown in European countries where you usually don't get any rugby, so it matters if you want to develop the game in the rest of the continent.
- the same countries always facing each other in the tours. Maybe more tours against T2 opponents? Just like the Champions League in football becomes less attractive because the same teams are playing against each other so often, I don't think it helps rugby. One of the things that makes the Lions so great is that they don't go on tour all the time.
 
Actually, I think they mentioned that some Aussie paper brought up that idea...
 
How many games on average do England players play more that NZ players then ? I'm undecided on this subject I can see reasons for both sides ...
 
Quite a lot from memory... I'll try and work it out, but I think it's something like 5-10 more games?
 
Quite a lot from memory... I'll try and work it out, but I think it's something like 5-10 more games?

I'm only saying England-NZ players because both are in the same boat with having to play in your own country ie. No foreign based players
 
AP would work pretty well in a conference system. 6 teams in each, home and away in your conf and one game against out of conference. 10 + 6 is 16 games, perfect length for a season. Top 2 in each play a semi final, the winners play the final.

You could have a relegation playoff between the bottom two, or drop 2 and bring up 2 each year.
 
Pointless input from me but I think in SA at least and I am sure in other SH countries (?) summer Rugby could work if managed correctly. Certainly you don't want the players to be playing midday mid summer (oh, man, as if those Bloem fields aren't concrete slabs at the best of times! and 10 drinks breaks will ruin the atmosphere) but its light enough for long enough for late evening games (floodlights ala summer cricket?). In fact this might make games more accessable for those who might have to work till 5 and then have a commute as well (and eat and get kids to bed ETC before they can 'tune in').

I think the NH climate is generally more difficult to work around and its the SH that should adapt (or who might be in a better position to do so)? I say this because its not just climate; the populations, investments etc etc are much less sizable/'limiting'/established and our formats are more easily changed 'down' here.

This is if we really need a global season in the first place.

I think Rugby in the summer can work for SA but SA Cricket won't like it one damned bit!

Yes, the climate also needs a consideration. Summer in the Southern Hemipshere is incredibly hot at times, and the constant wet weather in parts of the Northern Hemisphere in winter make their pitches mud baths.
 
AP would work pretty well in a conference system. 6 teams in each, home and away in your conf and one game against out of conference. 10 + 6 is 16 games, perfect length for a season. Top 2 in each play a semi final, the winners play the final.

You could have a relegation playoff between the bottom two, or drop 2 and bring up 2 each year.

There isn't 2 good teams in the championship that deserve to go up imo .....
 

Latest posts

Top