The new Super 15 format is kind of bullshit..

[Kiwiwomble]

ture, and if nz/aussie were replacing RSA with south america then no probs but we are talking about all the travel they currently do, which they already say is hard on them, doubled! not further...just more of it

and even as a highlanders supporter i've said that their spot could be taken from them for a new team (was thinking Hawks Bay at the time) but if you do that then I think you need to allow them to earn them back which would mean some sort of "under competition", its not growing the sport just to take it from one place and give it to another.

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

Getting rid of these ridiculous franchise ideas would be a start. You can replace the Super 15 with a SH Cup (similar to the Heineken Cup).

Problem with that is that from South Africa you will still have the same 5 teams every year because Griquas, Boland, Valke, Pumas and Leopards (to name a few) cannot compete with the Sharks, WP, Bulls, Lions and Cheetahs.

If you go on the same way it is now, they should not make it more teams. They should replace teams.

Distance itself with travelling to Argentina is not the problem, but like you said, the number of matches played overseas is a problem. Including South America in the SupeRugby league is no problem but they should go back to 14 teams (4 from each SANZAR country and 2 from Argentina)

 

[Kiwiwomble]

agree re getting rid of the franchises, let teams earn their spots

would the chance of helping "their" team into the super comp help some of those other teams keep hold of players? even for one or two more seasons?

if they do keep growing it then i think you need to remove the cross pool games until you get to the finals, this would only really work without the franchises so you dont just replace one otago team playing the other nz teams in the ITM Cup with another Otago team playing them again in syuper comp

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

Well, on the other hand, Griquas has a serious chance to win the Currie Cup for the first time this year. LordHope and me discussed it earlier. The Top teams (Sharks, Lions, Bulls, Cheetahs and WP) are using their players in the Super 15 competition till 5 games into the Currie Cup season and the players going to the World Cup are leaving a couple of weeks later. That leaves only 3 or 4 matches for the top players in the Currie Cup. Griquas doesn't have any Springboks in the squad and don't play Super Rugby.

I would love to see them take the trophy this once and to be honest (I always had a weak spot for Griquas) I want to see them earn a place in the Super Rugby. On the other hand, they are part of the Cheetahs-franchise.

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

A Heiniken cup style comp would only work for SA if we abolished not only the franchises but the provincial system as only the Eastern Cpae based from PE would be able to compete from a population point of view. Griquas awesome as they are just doesn't have the growth potential based in Kimberley. The only way they would get in is if some random billionaire decides to fund them irrespective of the money they will generate. Boland has some potential as well but only if the WP allows them to operate from Paarl/Stellenbosch. At a maximum would only probably be able to put out 8 or 9 competative teams.

Too much invested to make a big shake-up viable

 

[Seaton]

Read an article today that made some sense, although it isn't based on any facts, it was just a discussion of sorts

With the 2019 WC going to Japan, we should see Japanese rubgy reach new heights, and coaches over there want to meet with Australian and NZ rugby bosses to set-up a HC style competition, with the current Aus/NZ franchises staying as they are, with Asian teams based in Hong Kong, Seoul, Tokyo and another Japanese city joining.
Japanese rugby right now is one of the best paying markets in the world, and it is not impossible for higher wagers to be on offer there than in France in 5-6 years time.

So, the Japanese/East Asians could provide the capital which SA currently provides.
Would be an awesome competition imo, but would be bad for SA, however with the likes of Oregan Hoskins and his minions in charge of SARU, I can fully understand why people don't like working with SARU

 

[Faatau82]

The problem is though, if a Heineken Cup format was introduced to SupeRugby, the teams would only play 6 games in a pool.. unless they made the knockout.. and it'd have to be club rugby to have a chance of having enough teams. But then Australia has no regional sides, so that's a no go-er.

I still stick by my suggestion that there should be regional conferences and then a 7's type mixed sanzar competition. It's very difficult, as the 3 unions are not really local to each other in the first place.. fixtures is the main worry.. either not having enough, or having too many or not challenging/interesting enough. Maybe there could be a SupeRugby tier system, like the Currie Cup.

I don't think there is any definitive format, apart from regional conferences and then a mix-up knockout comp. It's not fair on the fans in any scenario.

It's very unusual to play teams from other nations in your flagship league in any sport. If anything, you get the odd expansion team, but that's all.

As has been said, the only real future for SupeRugby is to expand into a competition that encompasses the entire pacific and south african region.

The only other thing i can think that'd work, is maybe a how the 7's works. 15/16 teams into a group comp in taking turns in stages or legs around the pacific rim.

 

[ranger]

The problem is though, if a Heineken Cup format was introduced to SupeRugby, the teams would only play 6 games in a pool.. unless they made the knockout.. and it'd have to be club rugby to have a chance of having enough teams. But then Australia has no regional sides, so that's a no go-er.

I still stick by my suggestion that there should be regional conferences and then a 7's type mixed sanzar competition. It's very difficult, as the 3 unions are not really local to each other in the first place.. fixtures is the main worry.. either not having enough, or having too many or not challenging/interesting enough. Maybe there could be a SupeRugby tier system, like the Currie Cup.

I don't think there is any definitive format, apart from regional conferences and then a mix-up knockout comp. It's not fair on the fans in any scenario.

It's very unusual to play teams from other nations in your flagship league in any sport. If anything, you get the odd expansion team, but that's all.
As has been said, the only real future for SupeRugby is to expand into a competition that encompasses the entire pacific and south african region.

The only other thing i can think that'd work, is maybe a how the 7's works. 15/16 teams into a group comp in taking turns in stages or legs around the pacific rim.

The ITM cup is New Zealands flagship league. Superrugby is a custom built abomination specificially for the purpose of playing teams from other nations. People seem to forget this

 

[Kiwiwomble]

they CLAIM it is the flagship league and definately use to be (and i wish it still was) but when it gets chopped and changed and jammed into a window when the AB's are always touring I dont think you can still say it is.

if ab's dont play for ITM cup team (much) then how do they get picked for super teams? because they are AB's...how do they become AB's? because the play super rugby....it cuts out the ITM cup which surely disrupts the flow of talent through the grades, you pretty much have to be perfect straight out of school and get spotted or you have an uphill slog to progress

 

[Wally]

?

See below.

With the Super 15 creating a home and away-competition within the conferences itself, this might draw more people to the matches in Australia and New Zealand. I really hope so because it's sad to see the Hurricanes for instance play for 500 people in a stadium that can hold 20.000

 

[Kiwiwomble]

How and why have you changed it to show i said that? I didn't, Ezequiel did, on page 8 or there abouts, bad form.

and I think he was simply exagerating for effect, I assume everyone else realised that hense why no one else really commented

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

True. I was the one saying that...

With the Super 15 creating a home and away-competition within the conferences itself, this might draw more people to the matches in Australia and New Zealand. I really hope so because it's sad to see the Hurricanes for instance play for 500 people in a stadium that can hold 20.000

Of course I was exaggerating a little but it's a fact that the matches in New Zealand (Crusaders aside) are played in front of a very low number of spectators. The regional rivalry is what they are counting on to draw more people to the stadiums

 

[Seaton]

How and why have you changed it to show i said that? I didn't, Ezequiel did, on page 8 or there abouts, bad form.

Meh, he's just a Wally after all.

Really is WUM like though

 

[Dexter Tauvao]

Season could be too long and hit the players that play international
(even this year some of the Bulls that played in the finals were injured on tour?)

Chiefs getting Bulls and Stormers in SA while Saders get Bulls and Sharks at home?
I heard somewhere that depending on the draw, specific teams might not play other teams for over a year?
eg: Saders miss the Rebels and Lions two years in a row? (i dont know if there will be some kind of rotation of schedules) but a while ago I remember hearing somrthing along the lines of this

Nice to see more home games though?

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

There won't be any Spring Tours next year. With the World Cup starting in september there won't be any tests in June.

 

[Cthulhu]

True. I was the one saying that...



Of course I was exaggerating a little but it's a fact that the matches in New Zealand (Crusaders aside) are played in front of a very low number of spectators. The regional rivalry is what they are counting on to draw more people to the stadiums

Yeah its quite sad to see the kiwis low attendance figures especially since they live and breath Rugby I was watching a few ITM cup games this year and its sort of disgraceful I know theres only 4.2 million ppl but cmon you guys should come out in droves to the matches Canterbury and Waikato seemed to have the best support but even the Aussie teams draw more and they have lots of other sports to compete with seems they only care about the All Blacks

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

The problem could be the financial aspect with ticket prices being more than in South Africa. The population-argument is something I don't believe in. It is true that South Africa has over 40 million people but most of them still despise rugby. South Africa also has football and cricket as serious sports. New Zealand has only rugby (as far as I know)

 

[Cthulhu]

The problem could be the financial aspect with ticket prices being more than in South Africa. The population-argument is something I don't believe in. It is true that South Africa has over 40 million people but most of them still despise rugby. South Africa also has football and cricket as serious sports. New Zealand has only rugby (as far as I know)

This is very true my friend and I couldn't agree more, I think South Africa's rugby supporters are less than NZ these days, even if ticket prices are more they should still come out its all they really have there meh who knows

 

[Tomsey]

Yep, pretty much agree with all thats been said if getting the six strongest sides into the finals was the aim, but I think its a case of getting bums on seats.

Australian crowds for example, really like to see one state up against another, and are more likely to attend for that reason ... the rugby public in each country should retain interest for longer as at least one of there teams will make the top 6.

more games also equals more television revenue, so all three countries get a benefit there.

Yes South Africa do get a major benefit from having to travel less, but I see Australia being perhaps the major beneficiary here, as the playing of more super games may make up for the lack of a Currie cup/ITM cup type competition

This is spot on. More television revenue and more Austalia vs. Australia, NZ vs. NZ etc. derbies to sell more tickets (= more money) was the aim of the compitition restructure and it is likely that will be achieved. SANZAR don't give a **** about "the best teams making the final" unfortunately...

 

[Amobokoboko]

The problem could be the financial aspect with ticket prices being more than in South Africa. The population-argument is something I don't believe in. It is true that South Africa has over 40 million people but most of them still despise rugby. South Africa also has football and cricket as serious sports. New Zealand has only rugby (as far as I know)

NZ also has cricket , but distance also plays a role. If you live on the south island I don't see myself drive 3-4 hours to attempt a rugby game if I can watch it in the pub.

On the other hand, besides an Argentina side it would also be really cool if the Pacific islands would be able to throw in one or two teams.
I don't mind paying a bit more to attempt a game or to get a shirt. Best example is Counties Manukau. And as the the Pacific Islands always provides good rugby during RWC 's this could be a winner.