Tier 2 & 3 Rugby Forum

South American rugby

Posts: 7467
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: South American rugby

Postby victorsra » Thu, 02 Jul 2020, 05:41

What I questioning is what would make the Latin Cup a better choice in a "one or the other" dilemma? There isn't a reason to switch investment from one to the other. Specialy with third parties (ESPN, WR, even MLR) in the equation.

And remember, ARC ending doesn't mean cutting the national teams costs! They would need to recreate the less-appealing South American Championship to complete the calendar with a Latin Cup. Who would broadcast the old South American Championship? With which money and expecting which profit? Who would pay for those travels? Now those travels inside South America have WR money. The end of the ARC basicaly means not playing 1 match in North America (payed by WR, broadcasted by NA's ESPN) and hosting one North American side. It doesn't solve the finances to get away from North America. It is a false solution.

Anyway, you can defend they should cut everything because we are broken. Fair enough! ...... But that's not what they are saying. They are talking about expanding SLAR (with ESPN involved) or defending Spain/Portugal are solutions. If they are looking at money to save, well, they should replan what they want with SLAR, that won't be lucrative either and costs more.. If they are searching for more profitable matches, well, the salvation is not in REC countries that struggle to become professional.

It is full of contradiction that basicaly points to the end of ARC being a political decision, not economic.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 1720
Joined: Thu, 06 Apr 2017, 17:09
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: South American rugby

Postby Tobar » Thu, 02 Jul 2020, 15:26

carbonero wrote:As opposed to the US that peaks in… :D


...the ARC? Lol, what kind of question is that? We’re not world beaters but we are hands down better than Portugal, a team that has only made the World Cup once 13 years ago. And we have won the ARC 2x coming in a narrow 2nd place the other.

Posts: 705
Joined: Wed, 11 Jun 2014, 07:45
National Flag:
ArgentinaArgentina

Re: South American rugby

Postby carbonero » Thu, 02 Jul 2020, 20:33

ESPN is not switching investments in this scenario. They would be axing the whole thing because their long-term bet didn’t pay off. The standard of the ARC in terms of production, stadiums, hotels, etc. could get prohibitive without their investment. Thus, you have to look for the option that bleeds less money. They already organize the Sudamericano for pennies on the dollar. I don’t think the Latin Cup is the answer for August-September but don’t tell me the ARC is a no-brainer when the cost structure could get overhauled. They have US$ 1 M hole in their budget.

Tobar wrote:[...the ARC? Lol, what kind of question is that? We’re not world beaters but we are hands down better than Portugal, a team that has only made the World Cup once 13 years ago. And we have won the ARC 2x coming in a narrow 2nd place the other.

No need to shit on other teams. Portugal is much better in youth rugby, starting to tap into their French diaspora and finally setting up some sort of pro pathway for their local core. They are coming...

Posts: 7467
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: South American rugby

Postby victorsra » Thu, 02 Jul 2020, 21:19

ESPN is not switching investments in this scenario. They would be axing the whole thing because their long-term bet didn’t pay off.

Who said this? 4 years is not "long-term". And Sudamerica Rugby is relying on them to have SLAR.

ARC has 3 ESPNs together, dilutes investment. SLAR is regional and totaly uncertain.

The standard of the ARC in terms of production, stadiums, hotels, etc. could get prohibitive without their investment. Thus, you have to look for the option that bleeds less money.

Not true (many stadiums that aren't even proper stadiums were used) and not an argument, because if this is a problem, just renegociate. There are only two NA teams. The four are South Americans that would play the South American Championship anyway. Plus ARC has WR money.

They already organize the Sudamericano for pennies on the dollar.


It was cancelled for 2020 because it became redundant, it isn't in the original 2020 calendar. The ARC is the Sudamericano + 2.

There's simply nothing economical about the future of ARC. This is so true that they weren't considering this before the election and we already had the pandemics going on. Plus the first comments about ARC's end weren't about economic concerns or about ESPN. Never were. It is 100% political.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 705
Joined: Wed, 11 Jun 2014, 07:45
National Flag:
ArgentinaArgentina

Re: South American rugby

Postby carbonero » Thu, 02 Jul 2020, 22:35

victorsra wrote: 4 years is not "long-term". And Sudamerica Rugby is relying on them to have SLAR.

ARC has 3 ESPNs together, dilutes investment. SLAR is regional and totaly uncertain.

Pichot convinced ESPN International to invest in the ARC because he though they could create another SR franchise out of it. Can you acknowledge that point? I posted it four times already. That upside is gone. Jaguares is moribund, USA and Brazil are broke, Canada is regressing and Uruguay is too little. Where is the upside for the company now?

And Sudamerica Rugby is not relying on ESPN for the production of SLAR. They just carry the games. It is different.

victorsra wrote: There's simply nothing economical about the future of ARC. This is so true that they weren't considering this before the election and we already had the pandemics going on. Plus the first comments about ARC's end weren't about economic concerns or about ESPN. Never were. It is 100% political.

My theory is Piñeyrúa knows that the ARC can’t go through in the current economic climate and without the support of ESPN so he is using the corpse of the competition to score petty political points after the election.

Posts: 1720
Joined: Thu, 06 Apr 2017, 17:09
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: South American rugby

Postby Tobar » Fri, 03 Jul 2020, 01:34

carbonero wrote:
Tobar wrote:[...the ARC? Lol, what kind of question is that? We’re not world beaters but we are hands down better than Portugal, a team that has only made the World Cup once 13 years ago. And we have won the ARC 2x coming in a narrow 2nd place the other.

No need to shit on other teams. Portugal is much better in youth rugby, starting to tap into their French diaspora and finally setting up some sort of pro pathway for their local core. They are coming...


Saying that we’re better than Portugal isn’t shitting on them it’s just stating a fact.

I wish Portugal all the best and hope they do the things that you say they are. They have a very good youth setup (which is why I said that they peak at u18) but never retain players and are a fringe REC team. They have always had great potential but never managed to take it to the next level.

I only brought them up because they are not a great replacement for the US or even Canada. Sudamérica Rugby is cutting off its nose to spite its face.

Posts: 2042
Joined: Thu, 23 Feb 2017, 01:37
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: South American rugby

Postby TheStroBro » Fri, 03 Jul 2020, 01:44

carbonero wrote:Pichot convinced ESPN International to invest in the ARC because he though they could create another SR franchise out of it. Can you acknowledge that point? I posted it four times already. That upside is gone. Jaguares is moribund, USA and Brazil are broke, Canada is regressing and Uruguay is too little. Where is the upside for the company now?



Got a source for that? That would make ESPN Parent company extremely gullible. They've never played Super Rugby matches on ESPN or ESPN 2 here. They have played a few Pro14 matches on ESPN2 in the past few years. The ARC throughout its whole life has been on WatchESPN/ESPN3/ESPN+ up here. If they were thinking it would do much more than it is, well, they never put it in a place where anymore than the diehards would watch.

Posts: 705
Joined: Wed, 11 Jun 2014, 07:45
National Flag:
ArgentinaArgentina

Re: South American rugby

Postby carbonero » Fri, 03 Jul 2020, 02:44

https://www.elobservador.com.uy/nota/ag ... -201625500

It was an investment on the teams more than on the markets. Pichot thought the ARC was like the Vodacom Cup that preceded Jaguares. If one of those teams raised to the occasion, then you could share another franchise in this timezone. And ESPN could cash in on their bet. He was probably the gullible one. That interview didn’t age well.

Saying that we’re better than Portugal isn’t shitting on them it’s just stating a fact.

Peaking at u18 is a little bit condescending. And that fringe REC team did pretty good for themselves in this year’s edition. Again, I prefer the ARC hands down, but replacing the US and Canada with Portugal, Spain and Romania is not the end of the world.

Posts: 2042
Joined: Thu, 23 Feb 2017, 01:37
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: South American rugby

Postby TheStroBro » Fri, 03 Jul 2020, 04:29

carbonero wrote:https://www.elobservador.com.uy/nota/agustin-pichot-por-que-uruguay-no-puede-ser-parte-del-super-rugby--201625500

It was an investment on the teams more than on the markets. Pichot thought the ARC was like the Vodacom Cup that preceded Jaguares. If one of those teams raised to the occasion, then you could share another franchise in this timezone. And ESPN could cash in on their bet. He was probably the gullible one. That interview didn’t age well.

Saying that we’re better than Portugal isn’t shitting on them it’s just stating a fact.

Peaking at u18 is a little bit condescending. And that fringe REC team did pretty good for themselves in this year’s edition. Again, I prefer the ARC hands down, but replacing the US and Canada with Portugal, Spain and Romania is not the end of the world.


That was a long term plan I suppose. Think about how much work was required to get Argentina into SANZAAR to form The Rugby Championship. They didn't get a Super Rugby team until four years later.

Posts: 3572
Joined: Wed, 14 Oct 2015, 13:30
National Flag:
GermanyGermany

Re: South American rugby

Postby RugbyLiebe » Fri, 03 Jul 2020, 07:11

victorsra wrote:Well, Latin Cup is a bad idea. North America is a much better market for the future....

Anyway, I guess Belgium and Switzerland could apply for the Latin Cup as well.


Same as Germany. Bavaria actually was a Roman province Raetia since 7BC, many other of Germany joined later (Noricum, Germania inferior, Germania superior). Augsburg and Cologne were founded by Romans. Hell, I even had 5 years of Latin in school and it is still the third biggest foreign language after English and French in Germany with 600k kids being taught it this school year.
How to grow rugby worldwide?
Look at the world ranking in July. Teams ranked 1-10 have to play one team from 11-20 (they don't play in a regular competition) away the next year. 11-20 play 21-30 away and so on. Yes, it really is that simple.

Posts: 7467
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: South American rugby

Postby victorsra » Fri, 03 Jul 2020, 13:00

carbonero wrote:https://www.elobservador.com.uy/nota/agustin-pichot-por-que-uruguay-no-puede-ser-parte-del-super-rugby--201625500

It was an investment on the teams more than on the markets. Pichot thought the ARC was like the Vodacom Cup that preceded Jaguares. If one of those teams raised to the occasion, then you could share another franchise in this timezone. And ESPN could cash in on their bet. He was probably the gullible one. That interview didn’t age well.

Saying that we’re better than Portugal isn’t shitting on them it’s just stating a fact.

Peaking at u18 is a little bit condescending. And that fringe REC team did pretty good for themselves in this year’s edition. Again, I prefer the ARC hands down, but replacing the US and Canada with Portugal, Spain and Romania is not the end of the world.

2016, when USA had no MLR and people in Brazil were saying we were able to have Super Rugby because 10k people watched Brazil vs Germany... A lot changed during these years and ARC's project matured. They were talking until early 2020 how great 2020 is and how it should be the RWC Qualy (which never clashed with the idea of South American with a direct RWC spot, as one thing doesn't exclude the other).

Show me one 2020 quote that suggests the reason ARC is not viable anymore is ESPN or any economic reason rather than political. But without contradiction, because if we are broken why are we expanding SLAR?
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 7467
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: South American rugby

Postby victorsra » Fri, 03 Jul 2020, 13:12

carbonero wrote:
victorsra wrote: 4 years is not "long-term". And Sudamerica Rugby is relying on them to have SLAR.

ARC has 3 ESPNs together, dilutes investment. SLAR is regional and totaly uncertain.

Pichot convinced ESPN International to invest in the ARC because he though they could create another SR franchise out of it. Can you acknowledge that point? I posted it four times already. That upside is gone. Jaguares is moribund, USA and Brazil are broke, Canada is regressing and Uruguay is too little. Where is the upside for the company now?

And Sudamerica Rugby is not relying on ESPN for the production of SLAR. They just carry the games. It is different.

victorsra wrote: There's simply nothing economical about the future of ARC. This is so true that they weren't considering this before the election and we already had the pandemics going on. Plus the first comments about ARC's end weren't about economic concerns or about ESPN. Never were. It is 100% political.

My theory is Piñeyrúa knows that the ARC can’t go through in the current economic climate and without the support of ESPN so he is using the corpse of the competition to score petty political points after the election.

No, sorry, ESPN was never naive at this point. They invested in the competition itself thinking about the growth of the wholr market, no matter if it would create Super Rugby. USA was planing a new professional league as well and that was also ab interesting project.

And who said ESPN doesn't want ARC anymore? Man, where is this info???

Your theory doesn't make any sense because even if they suffer any blow in broadcasting in South America, ARC has no higher pattern of event. Argentina improvised Ushuaia, Chile used the amateurish CARR La Reina and U Catolica side field, and so on. The only difference between ARC and South American Championship for us is who pays the trip to North America and the answer is WR. Stadia, hotels or who pays broadcast can be renegociated if there is less money. It is only dead if WR give up or North America switches for a better project (like a Pacific competition or even TRC for USA). And we are not seeing North America complaining about ARC - or WR. In fact for them it is a nice tournament to complete MLR as the end if the season.

What we are not discussing is USA Rugby's bankruptcy. We are only focusing on South American false excuses while we plan uncertain short-termist changes and more waste of money in the middle of an economic crisis.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

User avatar
Posts: 89
Joined: Wed, 11 Dec 2019, 20:14
National Flag:
ChileChile

Re: South American rugby

Postby Pichulonko » Sun, 05 Jul 2020, 00:01

The Latin Cup sounds like a great idea and I really hope it materializes as Chile will in fact highly benefit from playing against the likes of Spain and Portugal. The announcement also comes with great timing just as ESPN cuts their losses and pulls away from the ARC altogether.

Posts: 7467
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: South American rugby

Postby victorsra » Sun, 05 Jul 2020, 00:30

The idea that cutting ARC = saving money is an incredible nonsense.

The only difference between the South American Championship and the ARC is the trip to North America payed by WR.

ARC has no better pattern of stadiums. In a crisis situation, USA will use Glendale, Canada Langford, which means any Argentine club, Charrua and even La Reina are fine. Hotels can be adapted. Broadcast too. You can even do cuts in July/November costs.

The only thing that would make ARC not viable is if WR cuts the travel money. All other excuses are only bad excuses.

In a global economic the dumbest thing possible to do is destroy something certain to basicaly bet. You only bet during a crisis if you can deal with the risk.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

User avatar
Posts: 89
Joined: Wed, 11 Dec 2019, 20:14
National Flag:
ChileChile

Re: South American rugby

Postby Pichulonko » Sun, 05 Jul 2020, 06:44

Chile has not played in La Reina since 2016 and I don't know why you keep bringing that up. They have since moved their ARC home fixtures to Estadio Municipal de La Pintana, where the pitch is in impeccable condition and the stadium has everything needed to host test rugby test matches.

Image



Chile has also faced Argentina XV in other venues during the ARC like Estadio CAP, which again, has everything needed for a fine tv broadcast.

Image



Chile has no shortage of quality venues that can host rugby matches as most of the country stadiums are government owned ran by the municipalities.

Chile faced Spain in Curicó and Romania in Valparaíso. The Sevens Challenger Series was hosted in Viña del Mar and Selknam played its only home game in Estadio Nacional in Santiago in front to 7500 fans. All in all Chile has no problem in hosting rugby matches in excellent modern venues, should the occasion require it.

Estadio La Granja - Curicó
Image
Image

Estadio Elias Figueroa - Valparaíso
Image
Image

Estadio Sausalito - Viña del Mar
Image
Image

Estadio Nacional - Selknam vs Ceibos
Image
Image
Image

Posts: 7467
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: South American rugby

Postby victorsra » Sun, 05 Jul 2020, 13:58

You did because you wanted, like all other countries wanted to make the tournament in better places. In a crisis situation the ARC can go on in more modest places. Cut stadium costs is not an excuse to cancel ARC, that's what I mean.

PS: we published about all Condores matches in the last 10 years, we even had a journalist in Temuco and in Santiago for Brazil-Chile matches....
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 1720
Joined: Thu, 06 Apr 2017, 17:09
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: South American rugby

Postby Tobar » Sun, 05 Jul 2020, 16:56

Pichulonko wrote:The Latin Cup sounds like a great idea and I really hope it materializes as Chile will in fact highly benefit from playing against the likes of Spain and Portugal. The announcement also comes with great timing just as ESPN cuts their losses and pulls away from the ARC altogether.


Yes because Spain and Portugal are so much better than the US and Canada. Why do you have such a problem with the US and Canada?

Posts: 7467
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: South American rugby

Postby victorsra » Sun, 05 Jul 2020, 17:27

Because some people forget North American rugby is just a bunch of outsiders with similar problems to ours. They believe it is all an evil US empire. "Yankees go home! We prefer our old masters" :lol:

So they buy any bad excuse.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

User avatar
Posts: 89
Joined: Wed, 11 Dec 2019, 20:14
National Flag:
ChileChile

Re: South American rugby

Postby Pichulonko » Sun, 05 Jul 2020, 20:11

Since you answered that well I won't bother to explain why the ARC is a raw deal for Sudamerica Rugby.

Very classy of you Victor, I must say.

Posts: 7467
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: South American rugby

Postby victorsra » Sun, 05 Jul 2020, 20:58

There are many posts for you to comment and refute, not just the last one. But without any real data you can't "prove" anything. Try to refute what I said about ARC and Sudamericano using solid information. Or to argue that "Latin Cup vs ARC" is a real dilemma. You have no real information about ESPN's wishes or ARC's finances or agreements, unless you show it.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 1720
Joined: Thu, 06 Apr 2017, 17:09
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: South American rugby

Postby Tobar » Sun, 05 Jul 2020, 21:43

Pichulonko wrote:Since you answered that well I won't bother to explain why the ARC is a raw deal for Sudamerica Rugby.

Very classy of you Victor, I must say.


The only reasoning you have provided is that we send our B teams, which is false. The fact of the matter is that Brazil, Chile and (until recently) Uruguay got to play against better teams in the region. I’d like to re-emphasize that especially Chile benefitted from the greater challenge. Argentina XV also got to challenge against the US which has been a relatively even back and forth over the course of the tournament’s history.

But somehow playing against Spain and Portugal is a super awesome deal for Sudamérica Rugby for whatever reason.

Posts: 48
Joined: Fri, 29 Nov 2019, 13:20
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: South American rugby

Postby Pedro1 » Mon, 06 Jul 2020, 17:10

Even if USA and Canada did send B sides, it is still no justification for scrapping ARC for this bizarre "Latin Cup".
It's not even a good marketing move, we go from a competion with 4 regular WC participants to one with 2.

Posts: 1720
Joined: Thu, 06 Apr 2017, 17:09
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: South American rugby

Postby Tobar » Mon, 06 Jul 2020, 21:56

Pedro1 wrote:Even if USA and Canada did send B sides, it is still no justification for scrapping ARC for this bizarre "Latin Cup".
It's not even a good marketing move, we go from a competion with 4 regular WC participants to one with 2.


And it’s not like these teams were even bad. You could make the argument that Canada wasn’t good, I get that. But do you really think that after finishing 3rd, 5th, 4th and 5th that they would continue to send a supposed B team? With these being full test matches and rankings points on the table that is unlikely.

The US finished 2nd, 1st, 1st and 3rd. So even if they were B teams they were consistently better than every other team except Argentina XV and Uruguay.

I know I sound like I’m bragging about the US’s success, I’m not. We’ve had plenty of failures and our union is bankrupt. But anyone to suggest that South America drew the short stick for playing against us and that playing against 2 other countries is much better isn’t living in reality.

Posts: 7467
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: South American rugby

Postby victorsra » Mon, 06 Jul 2020, 22:02

USA took the title from Argentina twice. Chile never beat Canada. Uruguay was never champions. What the hell are they complaining about?
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 7467
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: South American rugby

Postby victorsra » Mon, 06 Jul 2020, 22:44

Let's do a sort of reality check to see how much North American are devaluing ARC.

A list of all ARC matches that ended with a 20+ points difference.

:oops: = North Americans beating South Americans by 20+
:roll: = South Americans beating South Americans by 20+
8-) = South Americans beating North Americans by 20+
:? North Americans beating North Americans by 20+

Let's remember in the 2016-2019 period we had 60 matches in the ARC (15 each year):
32 South America vs North America matches
24 South America vs South America matches
4 North America vs North America matches

2016
ARG 52-15 CHL :roll:
USA 64-00 CHL :oops:
CAN 52-25 BRA :oops:
ARG 54-21 CAN 8-)
BRA 07-42 ARG :roll:
CHL 13-64 CAN :oops:


2017
ARG 57-12 URU :roll:
CAN 36-15 CHL :oops:
USA 51-03 BRA :oops:
CHL 10-45 ARG :roll:
ARG 79 -07 BRA :roll:
CHL 09-57 USA :oops:
URU 45-14 CHL :roll:


2018
ARG 57-12 CHL :roll:
CAN 45-05 BRA :oops:
ARG 40-15 CAN 8-)
BRA 16-45 USA :oops:
CHL 15-67 URU :roll:
BRA 08 - 28 ARG :roll:
URU 19-61 USA :oops:

2019
ARG 57-03 BRA :roll:
CHL 08-71 USA :oops:
ARG 45-14 USA 8-)
CAN 56-00 CHL :oops:
ARG 35-10 URU :roll:
CHL 10-85 ARG :roll:
URU 42-20 BRA :roll:

Total
:roll: = 13 (Chile suffered 6, Brazil suffered 5, URU suffered 1) in 24 matches (54%)
:oops: =11 (Chile suffered 6, Brazil suffered 4, URU suffered 2) in 32 matches played (34%)
8-) = 3 (all won by ARG) in 32 matches played (9%)
:? = 0 in 4 matches

This means :roll: (South Americans demolishing South Americans) was a more frequent result than :oops: (North Americans demolishing South Americans), whith a realy higher rate (54% vs 34%). I THINK the South American Championship wouldn't be a terrific product.... and looks like ARC problem isn't North Americans' level....
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

PreviousNext

Return to Rugby Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 7 guests