S18 on its way

[RoffsChoice]

If it is expanded to 18 teams, surely the conference system will be abolished and it will go back to the round robin format.

 

[KevinO]

If it is expanded to 18 teams, surely the conference system will be abolished and it will go back to the round robin format.

They want to keep the local derby's, so playing round robin against everyone just won't work.

 

[en_force_er]

To change tangent, does anybody find this talk from the media about "players being so tired at the end of the season because they're playing more rugby" extremely BS. It often comes up in talks of expansion.

I mean seriously, Aussie Super Rugby teams have run 40 players in a season in the past. If you rotate properly there's no reason a fair workload can't be reached regardless to more run being played, they do it in Europe.

Thoughts?

 

[TOCC]

SH teams travel a lot more then there European counterpart, this plays a massive factor in fatigue as well..

 

[Braveheart81]

Playing and travelling more seems to be part and parcel of professionalism.

The players aren't going to earn the lucrative salaries that they do if they aren't willing to play 30+ games per year.

If the players demand bigger squads to ease the workload then they will also be forced to accept a smaller piece of the financial pie in return.

The Southern Hemisphere teams do travel more, but that is the result of the tyranny of distance. Australia, New Zealand and South Africa can't unlock the financial rewards available if they only want to participate domestically for most of the year.

 

[en_force_er]

SH teams travel a lot more then there European counterpart, this plays a massive factor in fatigue as well..

Then leave then at home for the weekend when you go to NZ or send them home halfway into a SA tour.

 

[TOCC]

Then leave then at home for the weekend when you go to NZ or send them home halfway into a SA tour.

You might be able to do that with a players who aren't core to the team, but try telling the Rebels that they have to rest Higgers, or the Reds that Genia and QC (Quade Cooper) wont be travelling to NZ, or that the Tahs cant have Foley and Folau for trip to South Africa, ACT with Mowen & Lealifano etc etc.

Resting players and rotation is a nice notion, but most Aussie teams can ill afford to rest their key players, at best they sub them off once the game is locked up.

Ironically then the same key players at Super Rugby level are then the same who are pivotal at Wallaby level as well, i don't think that player burnout is a bullshit notion at all, i don't think its necessarily a physical burnout though, given the enormous amount of travelling they do and time away from home i tend to think it may be more of a mental burnout, having downtime with you own family is quite rare for a Wallaby.

 

[en_force_er]

You might be able to do that with a players who aren't core to the team, but try telling the Rebels that they have to rest Higgers, or the Reds that Genia and QC (Quade Cooper) wont be travelling to NZ, or that the Tahs cant have Foley and Folau for trip to South Africa, ACT with Mowen & Lealifano etc etc.

Resting players and rotation is a nice notion, but most Aussie teams can ill afford to rest their key players, at best they sub them off once the game is locked up.

Ironically then the same key players at Super Rugby level are then the same who are pivotal at Wallaby level as well, i don't think that player burnout is a bullshit notion at all, i don't think its necessarily a physical burnout though, given the enormous amount of travelling they do and time away from home i tend to think it may be more of a mental burnout, having downtime with you own family is quite rare for a Wallaby.

I'm not saying player burnout is BS I'm just saying it could be managed and it isn't.

The Pro12 is a league that is reasonably structurally similar to Super rugby. Unless the coach has identified the game as key (a Heineken Cup game or a game against a similarly placed team in the Pro12) you play a side that's say only got 70-90% of your best players.

Sure, you lose a bit of qualioty but the fringe players get better faster and the better players play better when you need them (and get injured less frequently). The reality is there ARE proven management models to deal with big volumes of rugby that Aus coaches are choosing not to use.

Do you really think that the Rebels would lose much if they played L.Timani at 8 once every 3 games? Sure they might lose the game, but what if it's a game they'd of more than likely lost anyway? Maybe they'd find of Lopeti is better then they thought?

They do it in Europe, we can too.

 

[p.Tah]

If the ARU does this I will give up on Super Rugby. How would having a South African side in the Australian conference be of benefit to either country. Imagine the travel.

Axing the Melbourne Rebels a painful solution

After the failure of the Rebels' private ownership model, the team is now being run by the Victorian Rugby Union with financial support from the ARU. It is understood the ARU borrowed money to provide the Rebels with a $6 million loan, which must be repaid in three years.

There is no suggestion the Rebels will fail to repay their loan, but what happens if they are unable to do so? Would the ARU continue to support them financially?

Or would South Africa's old proposal for its sixth team to play in the Australian conference start to look like not such a bad idea after all?

As long as the ARU maintained its share of the Super Rugby pie, the fifth team in the Australian conference could be based anywhere.

Replacing the Rebels with a South African team is an option the ARU may not be able to afford to ignore.

- See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...y-e6frg7vo-1226756136557#sthash.yJeiI3Rn.dpuf

 

[Dan54]

On the player burn out thing, I remember Grant Fox saying that they reckon playing a rugby test is roughly equivilent to running a marathon in stamina etc. As he said it possible for players to play 12 tests a year , but noone is going to perform at 100% for all 12 tests.

 

[Dan54]

Well well,the beauty of digital radio. Was listening to a bit of talkback etc from NZ earlier, and funnily enough for NZ, rugby and S15 extension was being discussed, I found it very interesting. There was an interview with SARFU boss Hoskins (I think his name), and he had very very interesting points why SA want 6th team in, and as he said not something new,they have been after it since 2006. And all in all quite a lot was aid, and none that I would argue with. Also talked to Nichols the boss of NZRU players association, he also was very good, says although it has been thrown up about conferences seperating further ie Saffas and Argos etc, the feeling is going back more to have a round robin tournament without the double up local derbies, said players etc felt it was a more legit comp if everyone played each other. He also really squashed ( as did Hoskins) the idea of of a team from Argentina and one from Japan coming in as it just would not work. Mind you Hoskins did mention perhaps for one Aus team could get dropped and perhaps ARU could still keep the same cut of takings to help their financial situation. The feeling also seems to be that although travel etc a factor, NZ would rather play SA teams at times as it is better for the players to play that harder rugby than they tend to get in Aus (I taking slight liberties on how it was aid, but general gist).
Hoskins also said that SA much preferred staying in SANZAR, basically said it certainly regarded as prem comp in world, and until such time as you can get a Worldwide comp it best.

 

[p.Tah]

The feeling also seems to be that although travel etc a factor, NZ would rather play SA teams at times as it is better for the players to play that harder rugby than they tend to get in Aus (I taking slight liberties on how it was aid, but general gist).

So they'd rather play the powerhouses of SA rugby the Lions, Cheetahs and Kings as oppose to the Rebels and the Force?

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

So they'd rather play the powerhouses of SA rugby the Lions, Cheetahs and Kings as oppose to the Rebels and the Force?

Perception is a powerful thing. Someone recently put up a year by year comparison of Aus/NZ in terms of wins and losses and with the exception of 2012 they were effectively even over the past 5 years. Yey, we're seen as easier opponents.

Next season should be interesting as both the Force and Rebels have been recruiting well and even then the Rebels in particular during the back end of their season found the attacking spark they needed and pushed many of the top teams to the wall. We tend to provide competitive matches against them while the likes of the Kings and Lions before them have never and yet they are tougher.

 

[Dan54]

Ok Ok fellas it wasn't said as dig at Aus rugby in anyway, more just that the players get a more of a mix of styles when playing SA as well, probably a slightly tighter style as I think we would all agree that Aus teams tend to play with slightly looser style of play. Probably most people tend to think Aus conference is easier, not in being able to win, but not as brutal?? Think form up top the feeling is it probably helps set players for test rugby. The main thing though is making sure everyone has same crack by all playing each other. As I said there was no way was knocking Aussie teams apart from saying perhaps the idea of dropping one from comp, but even that was so teams here could spend their money on Aus players rather than imports.

 

[Forcefield]

Why not go back to a round robin style tournament with 16 (+ 1 SA) or 17 (+ 1 SA & 1 NZ)? The Kiwis and South Africans get plenty of home derbies in the Currie and ITM Cups.

Pretty much the same number of games. No one whinging about difficult or not difficult conferences. No one complaining that places in the finals aren't earnt.

 

[Eyes and Ears]

The South Africans would not be happy about the 5 or even 6 week roadtrip.

 

[Hawko]

For the South Africans, a round robin tournament would mean either one five week road trip or two trips, neither of which is a great option. Australian and New Zealand teams would have a three week road trip to SA. Its doable, but I think you'd have to guarantee the teams a bye the week after they get back.

Problem is, the conference scheme is very unwieldy with a lot of potential unfairness, unless you go with three conferences of six teams. the sixth Australian team would have to come from Japan IMO, and be a quasi-national team. That would really harden them up ready for 2019, which would be an advantage. Three conferences would then have to feed into a six team round robin with the two top teams for the final.

Given the conference perplexities, I can see the full round robin tournament with semi-finals and finals being chosen as the least worst option.

 

[PaarlBok]

Hoskins finally gets it right
Sport24

SARU wants to cut local derbies

2013-11-13 12:24





Cape Town - South African Rugby Union (SARU) president Oregan Hoskins wants to see a 17-team Super Rugby competition in future with fewer local derbies and an Argentine team in the mix.

The Super Rugby format is set to change from 2016 when a new broadcast deal takes effect and Hoskins would like to see a change from the current 15-team format.

In the current format, teams are placed in three groups based on country. While they play overseas teams across the conferences, they play teams from their own country twice on a home and away basis.

Hoskins, in an interview with the Cape Times, said he’d like to see the 17 teams play each other in a one-off round-robin format. That would see all teams in the competition face each other with fewer local derbies.

SARU will table Hoskins’ proposal at a SANZAR meeting in Dublin next week.

He feels South African teams are facing each other too often in an already gruelling season. He also said the public interest in local derbies has waned with teams also facing each other twice in the Currie Cup later in the year.

Hoskins said the two teams they’d like to be added are the Kings and a team from Argentina.

The conference system is done and dusted.

 

[BabyBlueElephant]

Its getting stage where the structure of using conferences surely has to be abandoned. From both a practical, and from an enjoyment point of view, it seems to be lacking. A seeded group stage format seems like a fairer option much like the Heineken cup or hell the world cup. It'll reward consistent teams, makes the matches played more exciting rather than endless games.

Plus with the pool stage system, only 6 games are played, adding another benefit of players being able to rest more. Kieran Reid was in the papers today going on about how its taking its toll

 

[Dan54]

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.