SA to leave Super Rugby? SANZAR are considering changing the format of Super Rugby

[nickdnz]

Agree 100%. Foreign player spots are severely restricted in Scotland, Wales, Ireland, Italy, New Zealand, South Africa and Australia. France's proposed new rule will further limit opportunities for players from developing nations. The IRB must do something to combat this. Last season for example Leinster played 33 games. If the NIQ quota was increased to a max of 7 (stipulated to be 3 from tier 1 and 4 from tier 2 nations with no more than 4 starters in each team), there'd still be at least 11 starters and 16 Irish players in each match day squad. That doesn't restrict Irish player development, improves tier 2 players development and increases the competitiveness of each squad. The club gets stronger, tier 2 countries become stronger and increased competitiveness at international level boosts commercial revenue for all. Win win.

Because the four professional teams Ireland has can afford even less depth in eligible players...

I think the limitations of foreign players is a necessary evil considering rugby countries just doesn't have the infrastructure to have a global club game and successful national team. It's up to the IRB to develop those countries domestic leagues, with the odd foreign player.

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

The foreigner-limitation rule is one of the things that help the SANZAR countries develop new talent. In South Africa, teams can only have 3 foreign players, resulting in a team like the Sharks only having a handful of foreigners in the last 10 years.

 

[Canadian_Rugger]

Because the four professional teams Ireland has can afford even less depth in eligible players...

I think the limitations of foreign players is a necessary evil considering rugby countries just doesn't have the infrastructure to have a global club game and successful national team. It's up to the IRB to develop those countries domestic leagues, with the odd foreign player.

You aren't understanding what I am getting at, what I am saying is national unions should have no part in running professional rugby teams. This is why I called pro rugby the equivalent of a communist planned economy because the unions are placing their own small interests ahead of the growth of the game globally. The whole of the Pro12 is a terrible example of how to run a professional league because teams are designed with the sole intention of feeding the national team at the expense of the competitions they actually play in and it is completely unsustainable financially. Picture what the Pro12 is going to look like in 20 years and private English and French clubs continue to grow and can offer bigger and bigger salaries, it is going to be a farce of a league.

Rugby needs to invest more in their club game if they want to game to grow and it's not going to be the IRB that does the investing it is going to have to be through private means. Super Rugby is a great product but with the unions continuing to exert massive control over it, it is a shadow of what it could. I personally think the way forward for pro rugby is through franchising and a privatized European club game and southern hemisphere league. This will only benefit the players and further raise the calibre of rugby being played worldwide due to increased revenue and capital being spent on the game which in turn will lead to increased salaries for the players. Not only that it will also help tier 2 and 3 countries develop by giving their players a place to play which will benefit the international game immensely.

 

[Canadian_Rugger]

The foreigner-limitation rule is one of the things that help the SANZAR countries develop new talent. In South Africa, teams can only have 3 foreign players, resulting in a team like the Sharks only having a handful of foreigners in the last 10 years.

You guys aren't going to be hurting if you open up a couple of more spots on your team for foreign players. We had the same problem with Ice Hockey 30 years ago. The NHL used to only have 16 teams in the 70s and no Europeans played in the league. When the league opened up to European imports the European countries started producing a lot more hockey talent. Simultaneously, Ice Hockey started to become a lot more popular as a sport worldwide because these players that now played in the NHL from countries such as Sweden, Finland, Switzerland, Germany, Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Poland, Latvia, Norway, Denmark, etc... helped grow the brand in their respective countries and the value of the NHL rose exponentially, the Toronto Maple Leafs for instance, are valued at $1 billion American dollars, you could probably trade the entire english and french rugby league's for that team. The NHL now has 30 teams and a rival league in Europe called the KHL has emerged which is seriously challenging the NHL for the hockey market and the top players.

This growth in professional hockey has fuelled a better international game as well. Where before only 3 or 4 teams seriously challenging for a medal at World championships or the Olympics now you have 8 or 10 teams that are serious contenders and a bunch of other countries that can push the big guns close and pull off the occasional upset such as Belarus vs Sweden in 2002 where Belarus finished 4th at the Olympics. With privatisation of your leagues, players would also be able to make more money which would promote player welfare, which I am sorry but rugby has a pretty low standard for player welfare. The average salary of an NHL hockey player is around $2.5 Million American, what is the average salary in the Aviva Premiership? Like $100,000?

I am using the NHL as an example of why it is important for rugby to place more emphasis on developing a strong club game because this will only compliment the international game as was the case with Ice Hockey.

 

[profitius]

I can't agree with you there Canadian_Rugger. The IRFU have done a fantastic job. When the game turned professional most of the top Irish players were playing in England. The IRFU put a plan in place to bring them all home and were instrumental in starting up the heineken cup. At the time there was no money in Irish rugby and each province had about 6 professionals, 3 backroom staff and the rest of the playing squad were amateurs.


If they decided to take no part in running professional rugby like you suggest, all the top Irish players would be in England and France and there would be no HEC or a watered down version.

 

[nickdnz]

You aren't understanding what I am getting at, what I am saying is national unions should have no part in running professional rugby teams. This is why I called pro rugby the equivalent of a communist planned economy because the unions are placing their own small interests ahead of the growth of the game globally. The whole of the Pro12 is a terrible example of how to run a professional league because teams are designed with the sole intention of feeding the national team at the expense of the competitions they actually play in and it is completely unsustainable financially. Picture what the Pro12 is going to look like in 20 years and private English and French clubs continue to grow and can offer bigger and bigger salaries, it is going to be a farce of a league.

Rugby needs to invest more in their club game if they want to game to grow and it's not going to be the IRB that does the investing it is going to have to be through private means. Super Rugby is a great product but with the unions continuing to exert massive control over it, it is a shadow of what it could. I personally think the way forward for pro rugby is through franchising and a privatized European club game and southern hemisphere league. This will only benefit the players and further raise the calibre of rugby being played worldwide due to increased revenue and capital being spent on the game which in turn will lead to increased salaries for the players. Not only that it will also help tier 2 and 3 countries develop by giving their players a place to play which will benefit the international game immensely.

I simply disagree. Central contracting is hugely important to managing and retaining talent. It may be a 'communist' way of looking at it, however the alternative is you get France's situation in which you get too many imported players and too much influence on the national team. I'm not fully against privatising clubs, however the NZRU needs to have main control.

 

[sifplay]

Centralized contracts will work in NZ cause rugby is the only thing they have on that puny Island. So they all work together nicely and its all in the interest of the AB. In SA such a thing would be against the labor laws and there is no working together from the unions in any case to make such a thing work.

 

[nickdnz]

Centralized contracts will work in NZ cause rugby is the only thing they have on that puny Island. So they all work together nicely and its all in the interest of the AB. In SA such a thing would be against the labor laws and there is no working together from the unions in any case to make such a thing work.

Didn't you have a hole to crawl under?

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

Centralized contracts will work in NZ cause rugby is the only thing they have on that puny Island. So they all work together nicely and its all in the interest of the AB. In SA such a thing would be against the labor laws and there is no working together from the unions in any case to make such a thing work.

"Puny Island"?

First of all: New Zealand is a country made up of 2 islands, not 1. And second, New Zealand is bigger than the UK, Romania, Ghana, Greece, Hungary, Portugal, Austria, Ireland and my precious fatherland, the Netherlands.

Nothing puny about New Zealand at all.

 

[sifplay]

Didn't you have a hole to crawl under?

Over what are you pissin your panties now again ffs? Grow some marbles geewiz

"Puny Island"?

First of all: New Zealand is a country made up of 2 islands, not 1. And second, New Zealand is bigger than the UK, Romania, Ghana, Greece, Hungary, Portugal, Austria, Ireland and my precious fatherland, the Netherlands.

Nothing puny about New Zealand at all.

270,534 sq km
104,454 sq mi

vs

1,219,090 sq km
470,693 sq mi

Compared to SA its puny. And the Kiwi's always bang on how such a small country achieved so much. Now it isn't small anymore? Geez people take everything so ^personally.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Finally he's banned!!

That took a while...

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

I think it's quite hilarious he thinks a Dutch Springbok fan takes a comment about New Zealand personally. Let's just hope this cool-off period will help.

 

[Black_Magic]

Where before only 3 or 4 teams seriously challenging for a medal at World championships or the Olympics now you have 8 or 10 teams that are serious contenders and a bunch of other countries that can push the big guns close and pull off the occasional upset

Well it has to be noted however that a partial reason for this situation is that two of those top teams (USSR and Czechoslovakia) turned into at least 5 decent teams now: Russia, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Belarus, Latvia, and you can count Ukraine and Kazakhstan here too, so that makes it even 7. Of course that doesn't take anything away from the point you make, it's just to help understand the full picture - for those who may not be very well aware of ice hockey world - and I don't expect to find many ice hockey fans in NZ, SA or Australia.

Cheers,
A Maple Leafs fan

 

[smartcooky]

Finally he's banned!!

That took a while...

Not surpised really

We have a poster at Rugbyrefs who I am sure is him (uses) the same expressions and rants about the same things.

 

[nickdnz]

Finally he's banned!!

That took a while...

Well...I temp banned him. He can come back after a week, but we now have a precedent.

Not surpised really

We have a poster at Rugbyrefs who I am sure is him (uses) the same expressions and rants about the same things.

I wish I had the spare time he seems to have.

 

[Canadian_Rugger]

Well it has to be noted however that a partial reason for this situation is that two of those top teams (USSR and Czechoslovakia) turned into at least 5 decent teams now: Russia, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Belarus, Latvia, and you can count Ukraine and Kazakhstan here too, so that makes it even 7. Of course that doesn't take anything away from the point you make, it's just to help understand the full picture - for those who may not be very well aware of ice hockey world - and I don't expect to find many ice hockey fans in NZ, SA or Australia.

Cheers,
A Maple Leafs fan

I will agree with this; however, it doesn't account for other nations like Switzerland, Germany, Norway, Denmark, Slovenia, Austria, Italy, etc... becoming considerably stronger. I think privatization could help the game of rugby immensely and I will point to the KHL as an example of how this could work. The KHL has only been around since 2008 and it was born out of the Russian Super League. Right now it has 28 teams with 21 in Russia and 7 in 7 other countries but it is continuously expanding and is moving into non-traditional ice hockey markets as well as bringing in teams from traditional hockey markets as well. Next year, one of the biggest clubs in Finland, Jokerit, is going to join the league and I suspect others will start to follow suit. There is also a team from Italy, Hockey Milano Rossoblu, who are planning to join the league in 2014-2015 pending construction of a new bigger arena for them and Italy is by no means a major ice hockey country.

The IIHF, which is ice hockey's equivalent of the IRB, has placed its cards with the KHL as well. It wants a Pan-European league so their is a plan right now in place to replace the current model of European Ice Hockey, which is a promotion-relegation system based on national leagues (sounds a lot like rugby to me) with a Pan-European League broken up into two conferences with four divisions each. What they are looking at is a pro league of 64 teams across Europe that would be able to compete with the NHL and the plan is slowly coming together. Not only would this substantially raise the product of some of the present teams that would be part of the league, it would also bring far more money into the sport.

I am using this example to show you all that I believe this is what should happen in rugby. We need to break-down national leagues and take the power away from the unions. Privatize the leagues and let big business take control of the teams, you will come out in the end with a superior product and the sport of rugby will be better off for it. I believe the increased amount of capital will strengthen the sport and this will translate to a more competitive international game.

 

[snoopy snoopy dog dog]

I will agree with this; however, it doesn't account for other nations like Switzerland, Germany, Norway, Denmark, Slovenia, Austria, Italy, etc... becoming considerably stronger. I think privatization could help the game of rugby immensely and I will point to the KHL as an example of how this could work. The KHL has only been around since 2008 and it was born out of the Russian Super League. Right now it has 28 teams with 21 in Russia and 7 in 7 other countries but it is continuously expanding and is moving into non-traditional ice hockey markets as well as bringing in teams from traditional hockey markets as well. Next year, one of the biggest clubs in Finland, Jokerit, is going to join the league and I suspect others will start to follow suit. There is also a team from Italy, Hockey Milano Rossoblu, who are planning to join the league in 2014-2015 pending construction of a new bigger arena for them and Italy is by no means a major ice hockey country.

The IIHF, which is ice hockey's equivalent of the IRB, has placed its cards with the KHL as well. It wants a Pan-European league so their is a plan right now in place to replace the current model of European Ice Hockey, which is a promotion-relegation system based on national leagues (sounds a lot like rugby to me) with a Pan-European League broken up into two conferences with four divisions each. What they are looking at is a pro league of 64 teams across Europe that would be able to compete with the NHL and the plan is slowly coming together. Not only would this substantially raise the product of some of the present teams that would be part of the league, it would also bring far more money into the sport.

I am using this example to show you all that I believe this is what should happen in rugby. We need to break-down national leagues and take the power away from the unions. Privatize the leagues and let big business take control of the teams, you will come out in the end with a superior product and the sport of rugby will be better off for it. I believe the increased amount of capital will strengthen the sport and this will translate to a more competitive international game.

Pretty much exactly what I think. There are 12 teams in both the Premiership and Pro 12. Add that to 14 teams in France's top flight. Bring in two extra franchises from developing nations - say one team in Romania and one in Spain. That gives 40 teams. No promotion or relegation like the major North American leagues. Run it akin to the NFL (or like an expanded Heineken Cup) with say 22 regular season games and meaningful end of season playoffs.

Before long we'd see franchises relocate to non traditional markets like northern Spain and Madrid, Geneva, western Germany and the sport will grow far faster than under the present flawed model.

 

[Jaguares]

Over what are you pissin your panties now again ffs? Grow some marbles geewiz


270,534 sq km
104,454 sq mi

vs

1,219,090 sq km
470,693 sq mi

Compared to SA its puny. And the Kiwi's always bang on how such a small country achieved so much. Now it isn't small anymore? Geez people take everything so ^personally.

List of countries by GDP (nominal) per capita. Lists of countries of the world sorted by their gross domestic product per capita at nominal values.


International Monetary Fund (2012)

New Zealand USD 38,222
South Africa USD 7,507

World Bank:

New Zealand USD 32,000
South Africa USD 7,508

CIA World Factbook:

New Zealand USD 39,200
South Africa USD 7,800

So what is more important? Having a larger territory or have a better economy? India is bigger than Denmark, but Denmark has a better economy, I'd rather live in Denmark.

Regards

 

[Amiga500]

Right now rugby is run like some sort of communist planned economy and it is holding the game back IMO.

When I look at what soccer has become - I'm pretty happy with the way rugby is run right now to be honest.

You'd happily invite most top-level rugby players into your home. Could you say the same about most top-level soccer players?

 

[Amiga500]

Privatize the leagues and let big business take control of the teams, you will come out in the end with a superior product and the sport of rugby will be better off for it.

Pardon my French-Canadian but B0ll0cks to that!


English Premier league winners in last 20 years:
Manchester Utd
Manchester City
Chelsea
Arsenal
Blackburn

20 years, 5 teams.

When money starts to centralise, then the competition becomes stunted.

If you want to run it like the NFL, then OK, thats different, but that is something akin to how the unions run it now. [NFL - 12 winners in 20 years if I have it right]