S18 on its way

[kiap]

How many teams do you think SARU want to have, OomPB?

Seven?

 

[kiap]

You never know, they might do something like ...

East:
AUS 5
JPN 1
NZL 5

West:
ARG 2
RSA 6
USA 1

20 teams

 

[PaarlBok]

How many teams do you think SARU want to have, OomPB?

Seven?

Very good question.

SA have 14 provinces and have add Namibia to its CC to make it 15 teams.

The way I see things from a SA viewpoint is that our CC will have to form part into the S100 in the end.

We desperately need one season, maybe starting with CC, part of SupeRugby ending with RC.

Saru made some changes to the CC
WP Rugby

Currie Cup gets makeover


December 12, 2015

The Currie Cup - the world's oldest domestic rugby championship - will have a new look in 2016 with more matches and a new entrant, following a decision by the General Council of the South African Rugby Union (SARU) in Cape Town on Friday.

Rugby World Cup competitors, Namibia, will join the 14 South African provincial unions in a competition which was first contested in 1889. In those days the tournament was played in one centre over the course of a week. The 2016 version will now run in an expanded format from April until October.

The change means that more Currie Cup rugby will be played – 166 matches compared to 76 in 2015 – with every team facing every other team in the first stage of the competition between April 9 and July 23.

The Vodacom Super Rugby unions will move on to the Premier Division with the three non-franchise teams with the greatest number of log points. The remaining six will contest the First Division title.

The second stage competitions will also be played over a single round. Points will not be carried over from the first stage. Both the Premier and First Division will have semifinals while the final in both divisions will take place at the home venue of whichever team was highest placed at the end of the second phase.

“The enthusiasm for the Currie Cup remains intense among our members and the new format was driven by their desire to see all teams playing each other once again,” said Jurie Roux, CEO of the South African Rugby Union.

“That stage will run in parallel to Vodacom Super Rugby with the second stage of the Currie Cup only kicking off at the conclusion of the Super Rugby log stage. The Vodacom Cup competition has been discontinued to create the space in the calendar.”
Roux said that new formats had also been agreed for Under-19 and Under-21 competitions for the six Super Rugby teams and the Leopards – in recognition of the strength of the Pukke Rugby Institute – while the non-Super Rugby teams would contest only an Under-20 competition.

Roux said: “The Currie Cup will kick off earlier than for many years and will feature more matches than ever and we hope that the heritage of the trophy will fire the passion of supporters once more.

“We have also retained the intensity of the contest for the trophy with the Premier Division and First Division competitions in the second stage and I am sure the battle for places in the top division will be feverish.”

The General Council also approved the SARU budget for 2016 and the model for distribution of broadcast revenues. The provinces will receive 56% of broadcast income with the balance attributed to the Springboks, competition expenses as well as rugby administration

 

[kiap]

Very good question.

SA have 14 provinces and have add Namibia to its CC to make it 15 teams.

The way I see things from a SA viewpoint is that our CC will have to form part into the S100 in the end.

We desperately need one season, maybe starting with CC, part of SupeRugby ending with RC.

Saru made some changes to the CC
WP Rugby

OK, so there will be 15 teams that then split into a top 9 and bottom 6. Fair enough.

Interesting that the Vodacom Cup has been dropped. Probaby a good idea. Too many comps, too many players getting small money. Assume then that top pro players in Supe and maybe CC will be paid more (needed for SA rugby IMO) and the also-rans will be amateur or semi-pro at most?

In terms of integrating CC into Supe: yeah I assume it can be done.

But from the p.o.v of Australia (dunno about NZ but is possibly the same) I would guess that they don't care how many teams you have ... so long as our teams only play 4-5 maximum per year of the strongest. How SARU gets those top 4 or 5 is up to them.

If teams are diluted and weakened then interest will drop, but I assume that won't be allowed to happen.

 

[PaarlBok]

OK, so there will be 15 teams that then split into a top 9 and bottom 6. Fair enough.

Interesting that the Vodacom Cup has been dropped. Probaby a good idea. Too many comps, too many players getting small money. Assume then that top pro players in Supe and maybe CC will be paid more (needed for SA rugby IMO) and the also-rans will be amateur or semi-pro at most?

In terms of integrating CC into Supe: yeah I assume it can be done.

But from the p.o.v of Australia (dunno about NZ but is possibly the same) I would guess that they don't care how many teams you have ... so long as our teams only play 4-5 maximum per year of the strongest. How SARU gets those top 4 or 5 is up to them.

If teams are diluted and weakened then interest will drop, but I assume that won't be allowed to happen.

If you look at the way things are going I am sure the teams are weakened every year. Sad the Walabies start selecting chicken runners like SA. It hurt the local competitions. SA have a massive mountain to climb with Saru's Strategic Transformation Plan of 50% targetting 2019.

 

[kiap]

Maybe. Still 60 test caps is a fair number to be eligible for Giteau's Law.

If SARU pay Super players more money and do not split the cash among too many players from low level comps then it's an improvement, IMO.

 

[PaarlBok]

Maybe. Still 60 test caps is a fair number to be eligible for Giteau's Law.

If SARU pay Super players more money and do not split the cash among too many players from low level comps then it's an improvement, IMO.

Development is the keyword in SA sport. This is the targets Saru set for the new coach
http://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/Springboks/critieria-for-new-bok-coach-20160112

- a win percentage of at least 60% at Currie Cup level and higher.
- must also have an impeccable record of working with the media and
- must understand SARU’s transformation goals with regards to the 2019 Rugby World Cup. SARU’s goal is to have 50% black representation in the Springbok team by 2019

Nothing about winning %.

 

[kiap]

How many current SA coaches have a 60% win rate in CC?

But that number doesn't necessarily make you a good coach. Teams can buy in better players to get a winning record.

And the affirmative action thing? ... well, if that colour ratio is the SARU's goal then I suppose they will achieve it.

 

[PaarlBok]

How many current SA coaches have a 60% win rate in CC?

Probably all the top ones.

And the affirmative action thing? ... well, if that colour ratio is the SARU's goal then I suppose they will achieve it.

Dont think that will be easy at all levels.

 

[CleanCut]

I suppose it’s all about the mighty dollar in the end for most … but as a rugby fan I’m more interested to see my team (LIONS) tested by a wider variety of tougher international opposition.

This format limits us to a large extent.

Bering exposed to a higher standard of play rubs off eventually and makes for a better national side.

That in the end is what it’s all about … isn’t it??

With a competent coach and an assortment of internationally exposed players to select from we may even stand a chance of beating the Japanese the next time round.

 

[dru]

Bering exposed to a higher standard of play rubs off eventually and makes for a better national side.

That in the end is what it’s all about … isn’t it??

Higher quality rugby across the board definitely helps raise the bar across the board. But if the quality is lop-sided I dont think it helps that much for the lower teams.

Overall quality is improved via representational systems. By this I mean, in a South African context, CC team players who are good enough feeding into Super Rugby teams.

If you rely on a Champions League style arrangement, one that is unskewed, most of the top line talent in the local vomp is not exposed to the higher quality on any year as their team didnt make it.

The alternative is a skewed league where a few teams manage to dominate the local comp by pulling in the best talent. It leads to skewed performances in the local comp.

I dont think taking the best CC teams into Super Rugby will work well for RSA. But due to the size of the playing population and the inherent depth, I could be wrong.

I think NZ can go either way. But would still be better at international level if they stick to representational Super Rugby.

Australia would be truly dire if we went to a Champions League style system. Even if that local National comp was well mature.

SARU has a problen in how to handle the politics of the CC clubs into Super Rugby. But I dont think two divisions and top teams going through will end well.

Just my 2c worth.

 

[kiap]

I dont think taking the best CC teams into Super Rugby will work well for RSA. But due to the size of the playing population and the inherent depth, I could be wrong.

I reckon I'm thinking of a different model to what you might be envisioning.

There's not going to be 15 South African teams given a shot at Super Rugby each season. No way that the rest of SANZAR are going to vote for that.

But if SARU want to award the Currie Cup for matches played within the Super Rugby season, then fine. They can even add extra non-Super teams playing non-Super games to have 8-10 teams in the top division of the competition for their trophy. That's up them, but only the 6 agreed teams would be eligible to play the rest of SANZAR.

If one of the minnow provinces finishes in the top 6 of this new CC when averaged over 4 or 5 years, then SARU can either apply to have another Super Rugby licence or shuffle their existing teams for the next Super Rugby deal.

 

[kiap]

If you rely on a Champions League style arrangement, one that is unskewed, most of the top line talent in the local vomp is not exposed to the higher quality on any year as their team didnt make it.

In Europe they have a Champions Cup for the top handful of rugby clubs from all the big five countries. But they also have the Challenge Cup which allows more clubs from those countries to compete transnationally.

Super Rugby could be setup with two conferences being played, the Pacific (5 AUS, 5 NZ, and 1 JPN) and Atlantic (x RSA + y ARG).

Then there could be a Champions Cup for the top teams in each conference. Plus a Challenge Cup for the rest.

So every Super franchise gets to play transnational games every season.

 

[TOCC]

So for those in the AEST time zone, Sunwolves matches in Japan will be broadcast at 3:15pm(AEST), Sunwolves matches in Singapore will be 9:50pm(AEST) and Jaguares matches in Argentina will be 8:00am(AEST).

Overall a bonus for Aussie based Super Rugby fans, means up to an additional 2 games a weekend in a friendly time zone. I do look forward to watching Jaguares matches on a Sunday morning.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[dru]

In Europe they have a Champions Cup for the top handful of rugby clubs from all the big five countries. But they also have the Challenge Cup which allows more clubs from those countries to compete transnationally.

Super Rugby could be setup with two conferences being played, the Pacific (5 AUS, 5 NZ, and 1 JPN) and Atlantic (x RSA + y ARG).

Then there could be a Champions Cup for the top teams in each conference. Plus a Challenge Cup for the rest.

So every Super franchise gets to play transnational games every season.

I suspect we are talking both sides of the same coin. Still...

Lets say in any major Nation there are 15 No 1 players and another 15 no 2 players for a comp like the RWC. And another 15 no 3 players knocking on the door of the squad. Im calling these blokes the quality players in the competition.

Using a representational model for 5 clubs (Like Aus in Super Rugby) IF the talent is well spread - you end up with 9 quality players in each team. (3 WB run on, 3 squad, 3 knocking on the door).

Using a local club model with say 12 clubs (think Im right, like England and the Aviva) you end up with just over 1 player (1 1/4) from the run on, 1 from the squad, 1 knocking at the door. IF the talent is well spread.

At the Euro Champions Cup each English team (I'm right aren't I, 5 England teams go through?) you have on average 3 or 4 quality English players in each team. Remember in the Representational model, like Aus, it's 9 players.

All things being equal, the quality is clearly higher in the representational model. OK Ok things arent equal, but in terms of which system will be better blessed with higher quality you have to start somewhere.

Of course the spread of quality talent is NOT equal, and in the champions league system you will end up with a skew of talent in the clubs with a history of going through to Champions league. And the quality across the rest of the local comp drops further.

Or worse, the cheque books are opened to non-nationals and the local comp gets better but the quality abailable to the National team becomes underdone. In 10 years living in the UK, its how I viewed football (soccer). My local team Royals made Premier a couple of times but never a chance of being better than also rans. Certainly no hope of Champions League.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Umm...I know people have been trying to devise systems to facilitate a Champions League set up for a while on the likes of G&GR etc. but here's a somewhat interesting take. Isn't Super Rugby essentially already a form of Champions League? It involves the concentration of the best talent (well, supposedly) from 4/5 nations playing off to determine essentially the best team in the Southern Hemisphere and now Asia-Pacific? Isn't that goal of the European set ups?

It even had a reasonably good set up with the three conference model. The new two group/four conference we're going to makes little sense competition wise. Instead of what we now have we should have kept the three conference set up. Added the Jaguares to the NZ conference (you can get direct flights from NZ to BA) and the Sunwolves to the Australian conference. The SA comference would see the Kings make a return to round out the numberso each conference had 6 teams.

Start the season with derbies. The middle half playing interconference games and finish with derbies. That's 16 rounds. Easy.

 

[Omar Comin']

I agree that format would make more sense WCR. If this year's format doesn't work out too well it's the most obvious one to switch to. Though Jaguares games in New Zealand would have to kick off at lunch time to give fans in Argentina a chance to watch them play at a reasonable time.

 

[Lindommer]

Midday matches in NZ on Sundays do have some appeal. With a bit of smart promotion I reckon they'd be a goer. The Jaguares would have to travel to play three matches one year and two the next, the longest they'd be away from home would be 2.5 weeks.

This three conference model sounds a lot more sensible than the 2 x 4 + 2 x 5 one we've been landed with, and travel'd be considerably less and not so complicated.

Anyone got enough time to put up a theoretical draw?

 

[dru]

I'd prefer the 3x 6 draw too. But SARU insisted on two home quarter finals. So either Aus or NZ would have to forgo a home QF to let this happen.

Which would be weird.

SARU also would not contain travel issues with 2/3 of away games being long distance travel compared to 1/3 for Aus and NZ (ignores Perth travel I know).

Otoh SARU would get (I think) more games against NZ which their fans want.

 

[TOCC]

It's so simple

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk