S18 on its way

[Rebel rouser]

I much prefer the 3 x 6 conference model and we will take Japan. But that just doesn't seem to be on the cards.

I'm not certain why there's still all this talk of a 3x6 format here. It was a two stage decision process. First - decide on the model, Second - decide on the team.

The First part of the process is already done and decided. I agree that it's not a great model, but that's what's been decided. And, ironically, I think the country who was not happy with a 3x6 model was us. We wanted to keep as many intraconference derbies as possible and 3x6 would not allow that.

 

[Blue]

Unfortunately you'd be wrong.

Teams make do, and, for the SARU, it's the price of admission for the Kings.

SARU is not paying a price for anything. They will be compensated if things don't go their way.

 

[Braveheart81]

I don't understand why so many Aussie fans are outraged by what SARU wants when the ARU has pretty much got everything they've ever wanted in previous negotiations.

 

[Hawko]

The 3 X 6 team format was ruled out in the beginning in favour of the 4 X 5. But, as an option, I think it is still alive because the Singapore/Tokyo fight is going to get messy and I predict the Singapore option will bleed so much money that you'd have to be an oil sheik to fund it. The Singapore team playing in front of 1000 spectators will never work. All that Pulver needs to do to get the 3 X 6 option back on the table is to refuse Singapore outright and then compromise offer the 3 X 6. Japan comes to Australia, Argentina goes to NZ and SA have their six. It just requires some very tough negotiating. But it is definitely in the best interests of Rugby overall.

22hrs on a plane is the equivalent of Sydney to Europe. Lots of Aussies do that on their ear; for top class athletes it just means that you can't train the next day. Its less of an impost than the Saffer's think; by the time the poor Highlanders get from Durban to Dunedin it must be close to that; they have four legs, I believe. Durban to Joh'burg, Joh'burg to Sydney or Melbourne, Sydney or Melbourne to Christchurch then Christchurch to Dunedin. I'll bet the connections are not seamless either.

 

[Mank]

I have to admit, I've been trying to keep an open mind about expansion, but things are starting to get ridiculous. South Africa are forcing S18 on Aus and NZ because they need to get the Spears in.

That is correct. But do you quickly forget that Australia were the one who were granted the last additional side and were the primary drivers behind the previous expansions?

I hope that our negotiators learn something from this: Do not make concessions in expectation of future reciprocation, it will not be forthcoming.

 

[Mank]

I don't understand why so many Aussie fans are outraged by what SARU wants when the ARU has pretty much got everything they've ever wanted in previous negotiations.

Oops, didn't see this post until after I posted. What he said.

 

[Omar Comin']

The First part of the process is already done and decided. I agree that it's not a great model, but that's what's been decided. And, ironically, I think the country who was not happy with a 3x6 model was us. We wanted to keep as many intraconference derbies as possible and 3x6 would not allow that.

Yes, and this is where they went wrong in my opinion. They should have invited bids for new teams and then when they had all the options looked at how the competition could be structured.

Nevertheless I don't think the format is set in stone. Japan is the logical choice but it really doesn't fit into the proposed structure. Singapore does a little better but it's not a good fit for the competition as a whole and it's unlikely the Singapore team would be successful.

If they're set on 4 uneven pools/conferences they could also look at a 6 team South African conference and three 4 team conferences made up of the other 12 sides.

Teams could play 5 or 6 games in their conference, 4 against all the teams from 1 conference and 3 against teams from the other 2.

Australia and NZ could be compensated for the extra travel by simply having the top 2 from every pool qualify for quarter finals.

Or if 3 x 6 team conferences doesn't work, what about 6 x 3? Play home and away against the 2 teams in your pool, 3 matches against teams from 1 other pool and 2 against teams from every other pool. Pool winners plus 2 wildcards make it through.

 

[Blue]

The 3 X 6 team format was ruled out in the beginning in favour of the 4 X 5. But, as an option, I think it is still alive because the Singapore/Tokyo fight is going to get messy and I predict the Singapore option will bleed so much money that you'd have to be an oil sheik to fund it. The Singapore team playing in front of 1000 spectators will never work. All that Pulver needs to do to get the 3 X 6 option back on the table is to refuse Singapore outright and then compromise offer the 3 X 6. Japan comes to Australia, Argentina goes to NZ and SA have their six. It just requires some very tough negotiating. But it is definitely in the best interests of Rugby overall.

22hrs on a plane is the equivalent of Sydney to Europe. Lots of Aussies do that on their ear; for top class athletes it just means that you can't train the next day. Its less of an impost than the Saffer's think; by the time the poor Highlanders get from Durban to Dunedin it must be close to that; they have four legs, I believe. Durban to Joh'burg, Joh'burg to Sydney or Melbourne, Sydney or Melbourne to Christchurch then Christchurch to Dunedin. I'll bet the connections are not seamless either.

"Its less of an impost than the Saffer's think"

They will disagree with you:
http://www.sarugbymag.co.za/blog/details/sa-supports-singapore-bid

"Lot's of Aussie do that on their ear." I do it often. Going that way is a piece of piss. Coming this way I find a total bitch. I can barely get through my normal exercise routine on the first week and by day 5 I suffer from serious sleep deprivation. I have tried every remedy in the book but for me West to East travel is just a disaster and I know that I am not alone.

People who make light of the travel issue either have not travelled across these time zones much or are extremely lucky that jet lag does not affect them.

The difference between one flight and two flights in my opinion is significant.

Anyway we can dabate this until the cows come home but the bottom line is that SA will not budge on this which is a real shame for Japan.

 

[Wilson]

Sanzar are conducting a fan survey asking Japan or Singapore if anyone is interested:

http://www.sanzarrugby.com/superrugby/news/survey-japan-or-singapore/

 

[RugbyFuture]

singapore made up of pro pacific islanders anyone? Could really help lift both singapore rugby and fji/samoa/tonga rugby

 

[Wilson]

singapore made up of pro pacific islanders anyone? Could really help lift both singapore rugby and fji/samoa/tonga rugby

That's the only way Singapore could work. Whoever they end up going with I hope the ARU relax Australian eligibility to allows players to play for the Singapore/Japan side and still qualify for the wallabies.

 

[p.Tah]

singapore made up of pro pacific islanders anyone? Could really help lift both singapore rugby and fji/samoa/tonga rugby

I think it's ridiculous. It may have corporate support via ex-pat companies but it won't have a strong following. They have a brilliant stadium but as we saw in the recent Singapore 10s tournament, it will be empty. The average Singaporean (outside of European soccer) has little interest in sport, especially rugby.

Imagine if Europe wanted to expands its European handball tournament so they set up a franchise in Australia. We don't have the player quality so they filled the team with Eastern European players. I don't think that team would survive long even if it was bankrolled by a wealthy benefactor who loved handball. Likewise I don't think a Singapore team would survive.

On a personal note, I have no interest in a team based in Singspore, but I'd eagerly tune in to see a team based in Japan that contains a proportion of Japanese players.

If we really want to support the Islands, let's help the develp the infrastructure (stadiums etc) and bring them into Super Rugby with their own team.

 

[p.Tah]

"Its less of an impost than the Saffer's think"

They will disagree with you:
http://www.sarugbymag.co.za/blog/details/sa-supports-singapore-bid

"Lot's of Aussie do that on their ear." I do it often. Going that way is a piece of piss. Coming this way I find a total bitch. I can barely get through my normal exercise routine on the first week and by day 5 I suffer from serious sleep deprivation. I have tried every remedy in the book but for me West to East travel is just a disaster and I know that I am not alone.

People who make light of the travel issue either have not travelled across these time zones much or are extremely lucky that jet lag does not affect them.

The difference between one flight and two flights in my opinion is significant.

Anyway we can dabate this until the cows come home but the bottom line is that SA will not budge on this which is a real shame for Japan.

I don't understand the West to East travel issue. South African teams already travel East to play in Australia and NZ. Question: Do they ever fly direct to NZ from SA? If not, its 17hrs and two flights at least because they need to land in Oz first. There isn't that much difference between travelling from J'burg to NZ than it is from J'burg to Tokyo. The only difference is that SA players usually 'tour' for three weeks in NZ/OZ

 

[Braveheart81]

If they made it Japan they should change the format to three pools of six with Argentina joining NZ, Japan joining Australia and the six SA teams.

 

[en_force_er]

I don't mind Singapore existing TBH, as long as we call a spade a spade and realise it'll basically be a place for a developing Pacific Islander to go before he gets his first big French contract.

Run it cheap, run it exciting, and sign all those ITM Cup players who are flashy but miss Super Rugby squads, have a coach like Umaga or Pat Lam to get them in a good head space, and then when they deliver ship them on.

See them as the Asian Pacific Dragons but in Super Rugby. It can't be a bad thing.

Before you say it'll cheapen the comp, Connacht didn't ruin the Pro12 and SA's promo/relegation BS didn't ruin Super Rugby, so this won't ruin us.

 

[Braveheart81]

The biggest problem I see with the Singapore bid is if it's one consortium, what happens if after a couple of years they pull the pin and walk away?

 

[en_force_er]

The biggest problem I see with the Singapore bid is if it's one consortium, what happens if after a couple of years they pull the pin and walk away?

Lock them down contractually I guess. Though it seems those contracts are easier to break than they should be.

 

[Braveheart81]

Lock them down contractually I guess. Though it seems those contracts are easier to break than they should be.

Obviously this bid must have wealthy backers behind it but like anything, it will be some sort of corporate entity and there's no way the backers would give personal guarantees.

There's no way you can stop them cutting their losses and walking away if they decide to after a few years.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

The biggest problem I see with the Singapore bid is if it's one consortium, what happens if after a couple of years they pull the pin and walk away?

Buried somewhere in one of the forums is the sad tale of the Slingers ANBL team that lasted 2-3 seasons until the guy bankrolling it couldn't or wouldn't keep it going any longer. Same will happen with this silly Asia-Pacific Dragons idea IMO.

IF you're gonna go 18 teams (& I don't believe we should but whatever) AND 1 of them has to be from Asia then at least Japan makes sense from an existing infrastructure/ player- & supporter base pov if not logistics-wise.

 

[en_force_er]

Maybe the best option is a Japanese based team that plays 2 or 3 home games a year in Singapore to ease travel for the Saffas and expand the market?