Spectators lose interest in Super Rugby

[smartcooky]

The Jaguares v Highlanders result finally shuts the door on a second Aussie team reaching the playoffs.

At one time, Super Rugby was about the absolute best teams making the play-offs, but sadly, this is no longer the case. When a competition format allows the possibility that a team with 39 pts can be seeded ahead of teams with 50 and 48 points, particularly when they have had an easier ride, and then benefit from that seeding by being at home for their quarter-final, then that competition format is very badly broken.

Next weekend, the Waratahs and the Brumbies will be competing in two different matches for the 4th spot, but frankly, neither of them even deserve to be there. I have no problem with reserving a spot for the conference winner, but it should not be a home playoff spot. They should simply be seeded by their table points. In this case, whichever it is, the Brumbies or the Waratahs, they should be in 8th position (not 4th) and forced to travel to Ellis Park to face the Lions (it they do in fact, top the log)

If anyone is in any doubt as to just how strong the NZ conference has been, look no further that the overall points differentials and the win-loss ratios. They make worrying reading for the Aussies

South Africa 1 ... -173
South Africa 2 ... -159
Australia ........... -258
New Zealand ..... +590

NZL teams v AUS Teams - 20 wins, 3 losses 1 draw
NZL teams v SAF Teams - 11 wins 4 losses
SAF teams v AUS Teams - 8 wins 7 losses

 

[nickdnz]

The thing is though Cookie, the conference is broken for more reasons than the obvious.

The Lions dominante South Africa at the moment with only the Sharks as a competitive team in their pool. Otherwise they have multiple ganes against the Jagures and the Kings...

Not trying to take away from them but...come on.

The competition is terrible not only because the rules put an undeserved team in a position for the play off, but also that the route to the playoffs is so uneven. In NZ we're calling BS becase at least four of our teams are top 6 at the moment. But hypothetically we could be just as screwed if each conference was stacked with 1 winnable team - who benefitted from all easy conference matches, and this would almost certainly have an easier playoff spot.

For me the only fair way is a round robin..

 

[squirrel]

Overall though i think its a good thing for NZ rugby to have more high intensity games week in week out, rather than play in a weak conference and only play a tough game every month or so. Still think the winner will come from the NZ conference even if the Lions finish top of the table.

 

[squid]

From an Aussie point of view, I feel ashamed that we have a team in the finals. We certainly don't deserve one. Which ever team it is will be lucky to make it past the first round and if they do would likely only be due to home ground advantage as pointed out.
I think the problem is deeper than the conference system. The format would be awesome if our conference was as strong as the nz one. The issue is that Australian rugby is on the decline and we rely on our best handful of players to always be at their peak. Other than Israel folau, DHP and maybe Michael hooper, not many other players are in form and as a result our top teams are as bad as our bottom teams.
Having said that, I think the current system with the nz teams playing each other twice a season is only making nz rugby stronger and widening the gap.

 

[smartcooky]

From an Aussie point of view, I feel ashamed that we have a team in the finals. We certainly don't deserve one. Which ever team it is will be lucky to make it past the first round and if they do would likely only be due to home ground advantage as pointed out.
I think the problem is deeper than the conference system. The format would be awesome if our conference was as strong as the nz one. The issue is that Australian rugby is on the decline and we rely on our best handful of players to always be at their peak. Other than Israel folau, DHP and maybe Michael hooper, not many other players are in form and as a result our top teams are as bad as our bottom teams.
Having said that, I think the current system with the nz teams playing each other twice a season is only making nz rugby stronger and widening the gap.

But it takes a severe toll in injuries and player fatigue. The NZ players themselves have said they don't want the home-away derbies in their conference

I think they need to forget this conference system and return to a single round-robin as nickdnz suggests. The current system is just a joke. It's heavily weighted in favour of South African and Australian team with all the weak teams in their conferences.

I find myself fast losing interest in Super Rugby... can't wait for the NPC to start.

 

[SomeOke]

At one time, Super Rugby was about the absolute best teams making the play-offs, but sadly, this is no longer the case. When a competition format allows the possibility that a team with 39 pts can be seeded ahead of teams with 50 and 48 points, particularly when they have had an easier ride, and then benefit from that seeding by being at home for their quarter-final, then that competition format is very badly broken.

South Africa 1 ... -173
South Africa 2 ... -159
Australia ........... -258
New Zealand ..... +590

NZL teams v AUS Teams - 20 wins, 3 losses 1 draw
NZL teams v SAF Teams - 11 wins 4 losses
SAF teams v AUS Teams - 8 wins 7 losses

To be fair the points differences in the 2 South African conferences are disproportionately affected by the Sunwolves on -323, and the Kings on -374 they are the new teams and basically get smashed by everyone.

Also in the end, 4 NZ teams will still go through, I know the order of the log isn't fair at all but unfortunately this competition isn't just about fairness, it's about entertaining the maximum amount of fans as possible and making money.

I still have no doubt that the semi-finals will probably contain 3 NZ teams and the Lions, which is probably a pretty good reflection.

 

[squid]

But it takes a severe toll in injuries and player fatigue. The NZ players themselves have said they don't want the home-away derbies in their conference

I think they need to forget this conference system and return to a single round-robin as nickdnz suggests. The current system is just a joke. It's heavily weighted in favour of South African and Australian team with all the weak teams in their conferences.

I find myself fast losing interest in Super Rugby... can't wait for the NPC to start.

Yeah I suppose that's the down side of it. I agree with the round robin. We may not have a team in the finals every year but at least when we do we deserve to be there. I've found myself also losing interest, mostly due to the rubbish our teams dish up every week. Like a lot of Aussie supporters I've found myself tuning into the league or afl more and more.
Our only hope is if we can hang on to some of the young talent with our new under 20s comp and the nrc. It's the gap between school and super rugby that's killed us in the past.

 

[Jaguares]

The Jaguares v Highlanders result finally shuts the door on a second Aussie team reaching the playoffs.

At one time, Super Rugby was about the absolute best teams making the play-offs, but sadly, this is no longer the case. When a competition format allows the possibility that a team with 39 pts can be seeded ahead of teams with 50 and 48 points, particularly when they have had an easier ride, and then benefit from that seeding by being at home for their quarter-final, then that competition format is very badly broken.

Next weekend, the Waratahs and the Brumbies will be competing in two different matches for the 4th spot, but frankly, neither of them even deserve to be there. I have no problem with reserving a spot for the conference winner, but it should not be a home playoff spot. They should simply be seeded by their table points. In this case, whichever it is, the Brumbies or the Waratahs, they should be in 8th position (not 4th) and forced to travel to Ellis Park to face the Lions (it they do in fact, top the log)

If anyone is in any doubt as to just how strong the NZ conference has been, look no further that the overall points differentials and the win-loss ratios. They make worrying reading for the Aussies

South Africa 1 ... -173
South Africa 2 ... -159
Australia ........... -258
New Zealand ..... +590

NZL teams v AUS Teams - 20 wins, 3 losses 1 draw
NZL teams v SAF Teams - 11 wins 4 losses
SAF teams v AUS Teams - 8 wins 7 losses

Well, the South African teams play less games vs Kiwis teams than the Aussies. For example, Stormers didn't face a NZ team yet in this season. With the same schedule, the SA would have the same results IMO

 

[Larksea]

that #1 spot, as predicted early in the season its about to happen.

you could tell at the start of the season that the system and draw was pretty much setup for a south African team to get the coveted #1 spot.

The only surprise is that its the lions and not the stormers who grab that #1 spot, despite the stormers having maybe the easiest draw in super rugby history? I mean how do they not have a single game against NZ teams and not finish #1 on the table??? They could not have hoped for an easier draw...

The lions easy run to close the regular season has pretty much guaranteed they will finish #1 baring the Jaguares pulling off a huge upset as the NZ contenders all play each other in the final round. The stormers and kings get easy games against the Kings and Jaguares who have a combined record of just 5 wins from 28 games so far...

Well done to the lions, they are a good team and its nice to see a SA side that plays with some flair do well.

But its ridiculous to call them the #1 team in a season they get 2 games against the jaguares, 2 games against the Kings and a game against both the Cheetahs and Sunwolves.

The lions 3 losses were all against NZ teams!

if it wasn't hard enough on NZ we wont get the #1 team but even though our teams are currently positioned in spots 2,3,4,5 on a combined table there will only be 1 quarterfinal played in NZ.

Home games isn't everything, the highlanders proved it's possible. But while its no grantee it is a huge advantage. As is having a bunch of easy games against teams like the kings & sunwolves where you can bank points and rest players...

Yes the conference system is designed to even up the playing field and make sure each conference gets a playoff game. But the table is absolutely ridiculous.

IMO SA conference teams don't deserve the #1 qualifier and two home quarter finals.

its obviously not just the conference system that is the problem. Its the lop sided nature of relative team strength in the SA conference in particular, which is also present in the AU conference. While its hoped and expected the Sunwolves and jaguares will improve over time I think its pretty much expected that there will be weak teams.

to be absolutely blunt. The NZ conference is brilliant right now, I dont think the NZ public appreciate just how impressive and close it is. Even the Blues are a good team and if they were in one of the other conferences they would have made the finals. And in comparison the AU & SA conferences are a mess.

Its not really good for super rugby. I can only imagine what its like in the Aussie environment right now. How is this affecting moral and value in of the franchises as well as the wallabies?

How does it get fixed? Less SA & Aussie teams? More NZ teams to dilute the talent on the existing franchises?

scrap the conference system and have more "inter conference games" and less local derby's? Put the onus on the teams to improve and be competitive, more even playing field at the risk of shutting a franchise out of the finals if they are poor?

sorry for the rant...

 

[Kiwiwomble]

could be a quick thread...don't think there much to argue about there...

 

[JohnKA]

you could tell at the start of the season that the system and draw was pretty much setup for a south African team to get the coveted #1 spot.

The only surprise is that its the lions and not the stormers who grab that #1 spot, despite the stormers having maybe the easiest draw in super rugby history? I mean how do they not have a single game against NZ teams and not finish #1 on the table??? They could not have hoped for an easier draw...

The lions easy run to close the regular season has pretty much guaranteed they will finish #1 baring the Jaguares pulling off a huge upset as the NZ contenders all play each other in the final round. The stormers and kings get easy games against the Kings and Jaguares who have a combined record of just 5 wins from 28 games so far...

Well done to the lions, they are a good team and its nice to see a SA side that plays with some flair do well.

But its ridiculous to call them the #1 team in a season they get 2 games against the jaguares, 2 games against the Kings and a game against both the Cheetahs and Sunwolves.

The lions 3 losses were all against NZ teams!

if it wasn't hard enough on NZ we wont get the #1 team but even though our teams are currently positioned in spots 2,3,4,5 on a combined table there will only be 1 quarterfinal played in NZ.

Home games isn't everything, the highlanders proved it's possible. But while its no grantee it is a huge advantage. As is having a bunch of easy games against teams like the kings & sunwolves where you can bank points and rest players...

Yes the conference system is designed to even up the playing field and make sure each conference gets a playoff game. But the table is absolutely ridiculous.

IMO SA conference teams don't deserve the #1 qualifier and two home quarter finals.

its obviously not just the conference system that is the problem. Its the lop sided nature of relative team strength in the SA conference in particular, which is also present in the AU conference. While its hoped and expected the Sunwolves and jaguares will improve over time I think its pretty much expected that there will be weak teams.

to be absolutely blunt. The NZ conference is brilliant right now, I dont think the NZ public appreciate just how impressive and close it is. Even the Blues are a good team and if they were in one of the other conferences they would have made the finals. And in comparison the AU & SA conferences are a mess.

Its not really good for super rugby. I can only imagine what its like in the Aussie environment right now. How is this affecting moral and value in of the franchises as well as the wallabies?

How does it get fixed? Less SA & Aussie teams? More NZ teams to dilute the talent on the existing franchises?

scrap the conference system and have more "inter conference games" and less local derby's? Put the onus on the teams to improve and be competitive, more even playing field at the risk of shutting a franchise out of the finals if they are poor?

sorry for the rant...

I agree with you as a Sharks supporter I am sick of all the boring SA derbies in SR we have enough of it in the Currie Cup , I would make the SR 4 teams from AUS , SA and NZ with play-off for the teams in each country for the team that finished last of all the teams in the same country

Example

log at the end of the season

Sharks
Crusaders
Chiefs
Highlanders
Stormers
Lions
Brumbies
Waratahs
Reds
Hurricanes
Bulls
Western Force


Western Force play the Rebels in playoff to stay in SR
Bulls play the Cheetahs or Kings
Hurricanes play the Blues

so it will be Super 12

 

[TRF_heineken]

How is this not a repeat of all the other threads about this topic with regard to the dreaded conference system?

I get the rant Larksea, and I'm in agreement with you, but is it really necessary to start the same damn thread every 2nd week, give it another ***le and rant about the same problem over and over?

I would rather close this thread or merge it with another one, if anyone have objections? I'll leave it open until for a few hours if anyone wants to object...

 

[JohnKA]

No objections , it has all been said and done before

 

[TRF_heineken]

The thing is though Cookie, the conference is broken for more reasons than the obvious.

The Lions dominante South Africa at the moment with only the Sharks as a competitive team in their pool. Otherwise they have multiple ganes against the Jagures and the Kings...

Not trying to take away from them but...come on.

The competition is terrible not only because the rules put an undeserved team in a position for the play off, but also that the route to the playoffs is so uneven. In NZ we're calling BS becase at least four of our teams are top 6 at the moment. But hypothetically we could be just as screwed if each conference was stacked with 1 winnable team - who benefitted from all easy conference matches, and this would almost certainly have an easier playoff spot.

For me the only fair way is a round robin..

This is true.

But, the Lions didn't play against the Force or the Reds, which would have been also a sure win by all accounts based on performances this year. The Lions IMHO is the only team outside New Zealand that deserves a spot in the playoffs. The Lions and to an extent the Sharks, showed that they aren't that far off from the NZ teams with both of them managing wins in New Zealand.

The Lions might have an easy run at the back end of the season, but they had a terrible start, playing their first 3 games of the season away, facing the Chiefs and Highlanders in NZ. They won against the Chiefs, then lost to the Highlanders. Then smashed the Blues (40-5) at home, and then narrowly lost against the Crusaders (37-43) and to end it off they lost against the Hurricanes, which by all accounts, was their poorest performance of the season.

I also want the round robin back.

 

[WaterboySA]

Please merge it, the topic's old news.

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

At one time, Super Rugby was about the absolute best teams making the play-offs, but sadly, this is no longer the case. When a competition format allows the possibility that a team with 39 pts can be seeded ahead of teams with 50 and 48 points, particularly when they have had an easier ride, and then benefit from that seeding by being at home for their quarter-final, then that competition format is very badly broken.

Looking at the table at the top of the forum, evidence suggest it still does. You've got the best conference and that's why you have 4 out of your 5 teams in the play offs.
Seeding is one of the prices you have to pay for geographical representation. It happens in most sport: Football Euro Cup, Football World cup, Olympic games, even in the rugby qualifiers for the WC.

I do see how the actual setup can give a worse team the advantage of home ground vs a better team, but i don't see how you can "fix" that without cutting corners somewhere else.

Given the teams, distances, time zones and broadcasting schedules you will have to sacrifice something somewhere. A "fairer" setup will probably require either a longer schedule or more travelling or.... less teams.

The system ain't perfect, granted, but any problem you fix will come at the expense of another problem.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Here is the response from SANZAAR:

http://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/SuperRugby/plans-afoot-to-boost-super-rugbys-popularity-20160711

[TEXTAREA]A complicated format and South African teams’ struggles have been given as reasons for declining TV and crowd figures for Super Rugby.

Rapport last week reported that SuperSport’s South African viewership of Super Rugby games dramatically decreased in 2016.

“Obviously the declining figures are worrying. But you have to take into account the amount of rugby that is now being broadcast and the way in which consumers use digital content,†SANZAAR CEO Andy Marinos told the latest edition of Rapport.

“The performance of South African teams at the moment plays a role in that. Successful teams and high-quality matches drive attendance and TV audiences.â€

Up until Round 9 of this year’s competition, viewership figures decreased by 3.8 million viewers compared to the same stage four years ago.

Attendance figures at stadiums are also decreasing, with only Newlands - which boasts an average of 26 992 fans per game - able to fill more than a half-full stadium.

Ellis Park, the home venue of the table-topping Lions, only has an average of 19 808 (32%) fans per game, while Nelson Mandela Bay Stadium (15%, 6 914 fans per game), Free State Stadium (17%, 7 780), Loftus Versfeld (35%, 17 921) and Kings Park (45%, 23 591) are all struggling to put bums on seats.

According to the Afrikaans newspaper, SANZAAR has asked consulting firm Accenture to do a strategic review of the two-group, four-conference Super Rugby format and provide a solution to improve matters.

“The Pacific Islands is a region that can be incorporated if SANZAAR wants to expand the tournament,†said Marinos. “The current structure presents challenges. The goal is to have the best possible format that caters for all the expectations of the various role players.â€

Furthermore, SA Rugby is expected to ask for more local derbies and for all of its teams to play against New Zealand sides. Under the current format, the South African teams in the Africa Conference 1 play Australian and not New Zealand sides.[/TEXTAREA]

 

[Nubiwan]

Yeah I suppose that's the down side of it. I agree with the round robin. We may not have a team in the finals every year but at least when we do we deserve to be there. I've found myself also losing interest, mostly due to the rubbish our teams dish up every week. Like a lot of Aussie supporters I've found myself tuning into the league or afl more and more.
Our only hope is if we can hang on to some of the young talent with our new under 20s comp and the nrc. It's the gap between school and super rugby that's killed us in the past.

You can't beat a good state of origin league series in my opinion. League is a great sport, and fair to say oz clubs dominate.

- - - Updated - - -

How is this not a repeat of all the other threads about this topic with regard to the dreaded conference system?

I get the rant Larksea, and I'm in agreement with you, but is it really necessary to start the same damn thread every 2nd week, give it another ***le and rant about the same problem over and over?

I would rather close this thread or merge it with another one, if anyone have objections? I'll leave it open until for a few hours if anyone wants to object...

For a 40 post newbie, I thought this was the only thread on the matter .

How shocking were those those brumbies in Auckland?

 

[Five Meters Out]

The thing with this conference system is that it's based on US sport. We're just not used to it down this way. We need to give it a bit of time. I'm sure that up there in the US they have weak Conferences, where the leading team sneaks through to Finals, when they don't really deserve to be there. But no one complains cause they just go, "Well that's just the way it is.".
Right now the Kiwi conference is very strong. But will it always be that way? Maybe not. One day NZ might be thankful for the Conference system.
At the end of the day in 2016, four Kiwi teams are going through to play finals.

 

[riffraff]

The thing with this conference system is that it's based on US sport. We're just not used to it down this way. We need to give it a bit of time. I'm sure that up there in the US they have weak Conferences, where the leading team sneaks through to Finals, when they don't really deserve to be there. But no one complains cause they just go, "Well that's just the way it is.".
Right now the Kiwi conference is very strong. But will it always be that way? Maybe not. One day NZ might be thankful for the Conference system.
At the end of the day in 2016, four Kiwi teams are going through to play finals.

Good observation.

Being from the USA myself, I find the discussions interesting. To me it comes natural to have a franchise system with conferences that include guaranteed playoff spots, some sharing of costs, joint marketing and TV deals, etc.

Yet then I read posts from people that find these ideas bewildering and insist on models that to me are equally hard to comprehend as logically better.

That's the cool thing about an international discussion forum discussing an internationally appealing sport. It's a good chance to expand our perspectives and grapple with questions of what can work to grow the game on a world stage that is anything but homogenous and subject to the idiosyncrasies, traditions, politics, and economics of a wide range of countries.

My hope is that solutions can be found that borrow from all the options to create something sustainable and wildly popular. If it can be extended to the USA successfully and tap into that market's TV dollars without corrupting the game, that could be the secret.