0
![Not allowed!](images/buttons/down_dis.png)
![Not allowed!](images/buttons/up_dis.png)
It's interesting that Hawaii is still being considered. I thought they looked gone for all money but looks like negotiations will continue coming into 2020 for the start of GRR. Japan not considered due to the timing of the world cup, given all the news about the Sunwolves facing the chop in superrugby with South Africa pushing hard for a return to 14 teams maybe then the Sunwolves can be snatched up for Global Rapid Rugby instead of Panasonic? I wonder what fans would prefer, an ex superrugby franchise in GRR or one of the most successful Japanese clubs?
The Sunwolves draw good crowds in Tokyo despite taking time to find their feet in SR and have been drawing fairly good TV audiences this season as well. And seeing as they have found the right competitive mix this season they will be starting this weekends game against the Reds in Tokyo as deserved favourites. If SANZAAR does bend to SA will and they are dropped they'd be a great pick up for GRR.
Yeah I agree, I think they would be the better pick, and they will have a similar story to the Force if it happens, just a much shorter one, an ex super rugby franchise would definitely appeal to many fans. The Panasonic game last year was a really awesome spectacle though but I think there is just a bit more credibility adding a former scarred super rugby franchise into the mix than a club side that dominates their home competition and may not play their best players due to the timings of the two seasons (comps) Panasonic would be playing in.
Why not both Japanese teams or would that be a problem?
I wonder if the Sunwolves would survive as a franchise if they are dumped. I have a feeling they’ll revert to Japanese league teams and European teams for some foreign players like Hayden Parker etc . 2 Japanese teams in GRR is definitely a possibility.
A little bit left field, but is there a chance that eventually Rapid Rugby could become an international "4th stream" alongside 7's and 10's & 15's?
We've seen the tremendous speed and skills of the Japanese in the past decade or so. But they are still a little disadvantaged in 15's by size.
The size and bodyshape of top tier players has changed dramatically in the pro era. Not for the better IMO. The Mungo's have been downsizing their interchange in order to bring fatigue back into play and advantage the smaller skillful and more aerobically capable players.
GRR could have similar outcomes I reckon.
"The main difference between playing League and Union is that now I get my hangovers on Monday instead of Sunday - Tom David
Last edited by chibi; 13-03-19 at 18:19.
Japan and the Pacific Islands for Aussie Super 9's!
Let's have one of these in WA! Click this link: Saitama Super Arena - New Perth Stadium?
Yeah, I heard about the u-80kg tourneys. A bit too light wright and consequently going nowhere.
Thing is, we are all hoping this GRR thing will take off. If it does, who knows where it goes.
Currently in Super Rugby the ball is in play on average 35-odd mins. Us long time tragics get it. But GRR is hoping to do much better. Players will need to be leaner and improve performance and decision making under fatigue. Currently in the NRL the pill is in play 63- odd mins and they are still trying to increase that. The aim is to attract new audiences. GRR is focussed on that. Newbies won't be attracted to 35-odd minutes of ball in play.
Increasing ball in play is definitely something GRR should be looking to do but there is a limit. We have to remember that comparatively Rugby has a number of fundamental elements that the likes of League does not that make up the fabric of the game. A number of them cut into the ball in play element but also the same number offer different points of interest. Require a great deal of technique and skill and are in themselves part of the overall entertainment package of the game. So while ball in play is a reasonable measure of the tempo of the game I question whether it is one of entertainment thanks to the multi-faceted nature of the game. Facets that a stripped down sport like League doesn't have and who thanks to that needs a much high ball in play figure.
I think GRR should aim for a 50% split between ball in play time and the other parts of the game which is what they are talking about now with 35min of ball in play time over the reduced to 70min game time. Most fans would be really happy with that, it's a much needed improvement over the Rugby product on offer right now.
Then all they need to do is set a target for 60% ball in play time for the future with an aim to work on reducing the diabolical scrum times usually caused from collapses and refs to incompetant to call which team was at fault due to a lack of understanding in this area. When they fix the scrums there is no reason we can't atleast try and get somewhere near the 60% ball in play time range. Penalty kicks and conversions deserve less time too IMHO
It's hilarious seeing the two resident trolls talking to themselves or each other, it appears the ignore button is on full Force![]()
The long sobs of autumn's violins wound my heart with a monotonous languor