S18 on its way

[Joe King]

I like to go back to old round robin, hell I don't even think you need 6 teams in finals, if you not good enough to make top 4 you shouldn't win comp on a few performances at end of year.

If they ended up with a 17 team round robin, I wouldn't be surprised if they had an 8 team finals format played over 4 weeks, to make more money.

 

[Hawko]

If they ended up with a 17 team round robin, I wouldn't be surprised if they had an 8 team finals format played over 4 weeks, to make more money.

A seventeen team round robin gives you 16 games in the regular season. That's the same number that is played now pre-finals. An eight team finals format adds another week to the competition, which already starts too early and further adds to player burnout.

Any Argentinian team will be at a huge disadvantage. They will have eight games involving long overseas flights - three in SA and either two in Oz and three in NZ or three in Oz and two in NZ. That means one six week away trip to Australasia and one four week away trip to SA, two and a half months on the road. Much as they want in to Super Rugby, they can't want that!

Mr Hoskins hasn't done his homework properly; or more likely this is an ambit claim to get the structure he really wants (less derbies) and a shorter comp.

 

[Joe King]

A seventeen team round robin gives you 16 games in the regular season. That's the same number that is played now pre-finals. An eight team finals format adds another week to the competition, which already starts too early and further adds to player burnout.

Any Argentinian team will be at a huge disadvantage. They will have eight games involving long overseas flights - three in SA and either two in Oz and three in NZ or three in Oz and two in NZ. That means one six week away trip to Australasia and one four week away trip to SA, two and a half months on the road. Much as they want in to Super Rugby, they can't want that!

Mr Hoskins hasn't done his homework properly; or more likely this is an ambit claim to get the structure he really wants (less derbies) and a shorter comp.

All good points

 

[Joe King]

There's probably something really obvious I'm not seeing here, but with the risk of that, what about this outside-the-box suggestion:

If the June inbounds get moved to July as has been suggested at a high level, then could TRC possibly be played in May-June? That would free up Aug-Oct for each country to have their national domestic comp on centre stage, with all the test-stars available, and at the traditional time of year.

Mar-Apr could then be used for Super Rugby which could be conducted in a truncated format - similar amount of weekends the HCup goes for

With a national domestic comp on centre stage in SA, I don’t think they would be so desperate to have 6 teams for Super Rugby.

Super Rugby could still have conferences, but they would act as pools with teams only playing each other once.

In the SA conference would be 5 SA teams + 1 ARG team
In the NZ conference would be 5 NZ teams + 1 combined PI team
In the AUS conference would be 5 AUS teams + 1 JAP team

Play all the teams in your own conference once as a round robin, with top 2 teams from each conference moving thru for a three week finals format. 8 weeks total.

The year would look as follows:

Mar-Apr: Super Rugby - 8 weekends
May-June: TRC - 6 weekends spread over 8 weeks as is currently
July: Inbound tours - 3 weekends
Aug-Oct: National Domestic Comps (ITM, CC, ARC) - 9 weekends for AUS
Oct: Possibles v Probables or 3rd Bledisloe - 1 weekend
Nov: Outbounds - 4 weekends

The key would be a conducting a cost analysis of moving TRC to May-Jun.

 

[PaarlBok]

I like to go back to old round robin, hell I don't even think you need 6 teams in finals, if you not good enough to make top 4 you shouldn't win comp on a few performances at end of year.

Agree. They must get a competition which is fair to all teams. The only way to get this is that every team must play each other. Round robin is the way to go. I wont bodder with semis, the log leader should be the champion.

 

[PaarlBok]

Any Argentinian team will be at a huge disadvantage. They will have eight games involving long overseas flights - three in SA and either two in Oz and three in NZ or three in Oz and two in NZ. That means one six week away trip to Australasia and one four week away trip to SA, two and a half months on the road. Much as they want in to Super Rugby, they can't want that!

Mr Hoskins hasn't done his homework properly; or more likely this is an ambit claim to get the structure he really wants (less derbies) and a shorter comp.

Obvious he did his homework well. Argentina have a team playing in SA Vodacom Competition in SA now for three seasons. Anything better then that for them is an improvement.

The money chasing factor coming from ONeils days has killed the goose that lay the golden eggs.

Time he make a stand and get this competition back on track.

 

[Mank]

IMO Hoskins has the Argentina team as his throw away card. Nice if it happens, but perhaps it's something he would 'compromise' on in order to get the other requirements.

I'm at a bit of a loss on how SANZAR can proceed actually. SARU look to be adamant for the 6th team this time round and we saffers have to admit this does pose a problem with the structure. Going back to round robin can work, but it still means a long competition and a long overseas leg again.

The Heineken Cup format of pools, like the world cup, actually seems to work quite well for Europe. I would not be opposed to such a format, except it makes planning much more difficult for the unions, leads to less revenue due to fewer games and gate takings and requires an even number of teams. So I doubt we'll see that, money talks. Also, a lot of fans seem to have a nostalgic fondness for the round robin format.

The other option is, as has been suggested many times here, two larger pools with home and away games, and a subsequent knock-out tournament consisting of top 8. This is viable but again requires an even number of teams. Could work if we add three more teams, SA, Arg and possibly a PI team if neither NZ or Oz want an extra.

My preference is for the format that leads to the shortest competition, but I understand revenue is the constraint. I very much dislike the current regional pool format.
- It's too long, and is ridiculous that we have to break for the June tours then start again.
- Our SA sides just play each other far too often. I think the Sharks played the Stormers *six* times this year.

Interesting times ahead and I hope SARU are much more savvy this time round.

 

[Brumby Runner]

The other option is, as has been suggested many times here, two larger pools with home and away games, and a subsequent knock-out tournament consisting of top 8. This is viable but again requires an even number of teams. Could work if we add three more teams, SA, Arg and possibly a PI team if neither NZ or Oz want an extra.

Interesting times ahead and I hope SARU are much more savvy this time round.

How would you structure the two pools? I presume you'd be looking for two pools of equal size? If you're suggesting 18 teams total. there are already 10 in the potential NZ/Aus pool. Doubt that any of these teams or the two Unions would be conducive to suggestions to axe one of their teams. Would you see two pools each containing teams from SA, NZ and Aus supplemented by the additional teams as necessary, being viable?

 

[PaarlBok]

How would you structure the two pools? I presume you'd be looking for two pools of equal size? If you're suggesting 18 teams total. there are already 10 in the potential NZ/Aus pool. Doubt that any of these teams or the two Unions would be conducive to suggestions to axe one of their teams. Would you see two pools each containing teams from SA, NZ and Aus supplemented by the additional teams as necessary, being viable?

Agree about Aus , NZ however have plenty of ITM provinces. Taranaki applied for SupeRugby for whats it worth.

Personally I want less teams not more where everyone is playing everyone to get a fair competition OR the CC/ITM have to be part of the competition where the top teams end up in the business end.

Fact is Sanzar have already approved the Kings as en extra teams and now have to get to a product where everyone is satisfied.

 

[Mank]

How would you structure the two pools? I presume you'd be looking for two pools of equal size? If you're suggesting 18 teams total. there are already 10 in the potential NZ/Aus pool. Doubt that any of these teams or the two Unions would be conducive to suggestions to axe one of their teams. Would you see two pools each containing teams from SA, NZ and Aus supplemented by the additional teams as necessary, being viable?

I wouldn't want the pools to be regional but a mix of all nations. They would play like the old style super comp. For me, ideally only once against each other team, but that's unlikely due to money, so more likely a home and away game.

It's not a perfect system, I'm not completely sold on the idea, I'm just discussing options. For me, the ideal size was the S12 but with four teams from each, but unfortunately there are other pressures besides my enjoyment involved.

 

[ChargerWA]

The only solution I can see is it becomes S16 and everyone plays everyone else once. That would actually be my preferred model. I think super rugbys point of difference is the international flavour and the number of derbys in the current format dilute that.

June test need to be moved and if length of season is a real issue then go to a 4 team finals format. Also they could do away with the bye weeks and make a rule that each player can only play a maximum of 13 games in a regular season, forcing coaches to rest and rotate their players.

With the cuts I have mentioned it is already shorter than the current season. But South Africa is going to have to be flexible on the length of season, because they are also the country who want the 6th team. If they get their team, no whinging about the length of season diluting the CC.

 

[Eyes and Ears]

The June test window is not controlled by SANZAR. I think it is safe to assume that this will not be moved.

 

[oztimmay]

Looks like they want a 2 conference system, but just can agree on the makeup of it. An interesting read...

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...-of-super-rugby/story-e6frg7o6-1226758509232#

 

[oztimmay]

And this still drags on. Back to 17 team (including one from argieland) and a round-robin format.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...ay-be-abandoned/story-e6frg7o6-1226774570237#

 

[PaarlBok]

And this still drags on. Back to 17 team (including one from argieland) and a round-robin format.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...ay-be-abandoned/story-e6frg7o6-1226774570237#

Thats a good move in the right direction.

 

[oztimmay]

Thats a good move in the right direction.

Sorry, don't agree with you on this. I'm personally fan of the local derby's. I know that doesn't suit the SA teams as they play a number of them every year. Perhaps that may change with the national 3rd tier comp we're going to establish, but for now I love a bit of state vs state battles. Not just in Rugby, but accross a range of sports.

 

[gel]

Thats a good move in the right direction.

Thank you, I agree with you on this. I personally prefer the international match ups. I know that does suit the AU teams as they don't get to play each other often. I think that will change with the national 3rd tier comp we hopefully establish, but for now I am happy with seeing a bit less state vs state battles. It isn't only Rugby, but I see quite a lot across a range of sports as well.

 

[RugbyFuture]

we're getting to the point the super rugby championship needs to level down to a heinekin cup style champions tour with local competitions encompassing the pools that feed it.

Once SA have 6 teams its the same amount of teams they have in the top tier of the currie cup minus the promotion/relegation system. The NPC is split into two etc so things are getting very over run. I suppose this is coming from an aussie perspective where we have a provincial comp and yearn for that third tier, but it still logically makes more sense to start looking at the very least at integration with these long lived competitions.

 

[p.Tah]

As each day goes by you get the feeling that they will get rid of the conferences and reduce the local derbies. The NRC takes on greater importance because it will provide the local derby content that the Australian broadcasters want and the timing of games can be tailored to the local market, Thursday nights and no 3am kick offs. They need 2014's NRC to show promise in 2014 so that its value in the next SANZAR negotiations for 2016 is high. Hence Pulvers desire to get the NRC up and running ASAP.

 

[p.Tah]

It appears Super Rugby will expand to 18 teams with 4 conference.

SANZAR could commit as early as next week to an 18-team Super Rugby competition beginning in 2016 in which 17 teams would be locked in but allowing Japan, Hong Kong and Singapore to fight it out for the one remaining spot.

The bloc of southern hemisphere rugby superpowers has all but determined that the competition will expand to 17 teams in the first year of the new broadcast agreement, with an Argentinian side being added along with a sixth South African franchise, the Southern Kings, who will be rejoining the competition after giving way to the Lions this year.

But an uneven 17-team competition is viewed as unwieldy and would mean the death of the conference system that currently operates in Super Rugby, in which South Africa, New Zealand and Australia each form separate five-team conferences.

Australian Rugby Union chief executive Bill Pulver told The Weekend Australian yesterday that under the proposed expansion model, New Zealand and Australia each would continue in separate conferences of five teams but South Africa would be broken into two conferences. Each of these would consist of three South African teams, with one conference supplemented by the Argentinian side and the other by an as-yet undetermined Asian team. Cross-conference matches as part of the regular season would continue as a key feature of the enlarged competition.

The rest is behind the pay wall

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...e-in-super-rugby/story-e6frg7o6-1226827683062