34 replies to this topic

[BartMan]

http://www.stuff.co....gby-to-16-teams

Bloody Boers want more teams after saying that one of their regional teams can join next year, so they have to either drop one of their current teams, or expand the competition.

I think SANZAR should, in 3 words say, "Go get fucked", sort your own internal politics out, don't fuck up an already fucked up competition even more.

[Nepia]

BartMan said:

http://www.stuff.co....gby-to-16-teams

Bloody Boers want more teams after saying that one of their regional teams can join next year, so they have to either drop one of their current teams, or expand the competition.

I think SANZAR should, in 3 words say, "Go get fucked", sort your own internal politics out, don't fuck up an already fucked up competition even more.

If they couldn't say it to O'Neil when he invented his direct competition with the NRL are they going to be any stronger with the Saffas? What we should have done was formed a roving team with Hammetts discards who could tour the provinces as the 'peoples' team and then it would be the Super 17.

[Allstar]

BartMan said:

I think SANZAR should, in 3 words say, "Go get fucked", sort your own internal politics out, don't fuck up an already fucked up competition even more.

exactly this, too many teams already.

[Blue]

Allstar said:

exactly this, too many teams already.

One can only hope that sanity prevails but....this is SANZAR we're talking about,

The Kings are going to be hopeless next year, with or without the relegated team's players.

[Kirwan]

Or we could take it as an opportunity to all add one team to our pools and get it closer to an NPC model. We don't have to play the new bunny teams and let that be an inter-pool thing.

[taniwharugby]

fark expanding it...if they have to expand it, ditch the franchising system in NZ.

If we made it 2 extra sides per comp, it would mean the top 7 in the NZ Provincial scene would compete, and then bottom 7 fight for the chance in the big league, which would see a big injection of cash, but that brings with it another set of problems...

Super 10, CANZ type comp?

[Kirwan]

taniwharugby said:

fark expanding it...if they have to expand it, ditch the franchising system in NZ.

If we made it 2 extra sides per comp, it would mean the top 7 in the NZ Provincial scene would compete, and then bottom 7 fight for the chance in the big league, which would see a big injection of cash, but that brings with it another set of problems...

Super 10, CANZ type comp?

It's what I prefer.

[Hooroo]

If they did away with the franchises, I would be all for that. Play it similar to a champions league scenario. Top ten teams of NZ play the NPC, and 1 gets relegated while two go onto the reward of "super rugby" Finals.

[dogmeat]

That will never fly Hooroo because it makes sense. Plus NZRU want every AB candidate to play Super Rugby and under your scenario that wouldn't happen.

Boric and Woodcock would have to leave Harbour :knuppel:

[Emjayo]

taniwharugby said:

fark expanding it...if they have to expand it, ditch the franchising system in NZ.

If we made it 2 extra sides per comp, it would mean the top 7 in the NZ Provincial scene would compete, and then bottom 7 fight for the chance in the big league, which would see a big injection of cash, but that brings with it another set of problems...

Super 10, CANZ type comp?

This would make the conference set up make a little more sense too.

[hydro11]

taniwharugby said:

fark expanding it...if they have to expand it, ditch the franchising system in NZ.

If we made it 2 extra sides per comp, it would mean the top 7 in the NZ Provincial scene would compete, and then bottom 7 fight for the chance in the big league, which would see a big injection of cash, but that brings with it another set of problems...

Super 10, CANZ type comp?

So All Blacks come into the international season having played only NPC? South Africa and Australia would have far superior teams as their best players play for the best teams. We have All Blacks from Manawatu or Otago who would not be given fair opportunity to push their claims. Some one like Aaron Cruden would leave Manawatu to further his All Black claims and the difference between the haves and the have nots would be huge.

There is a big difference between having the NPC as the primary competition with a Heineken Cup style competition. However, a super rugby first division and an NPC 2nd division would not work.

[taniwharugby]

Quote

but that brings with it another set of problems..

you may have missed this bit Hydro??

[pukunui]

First of all SA can get farked if they think we need to expand. If they want another team they can drop one of their others or rotate them based on results.

Im not really a fan of the NPC teams being used for super rugby. I think they should stay as a domestic league teams only.
You would get all the best players shifting from the "smaller" provinces more than they do now and that would be the end of the NPC.

If SA does add a 16th team i think its time to split super rugby into divisions with the top 2 or 3 teams from SA, Aust and NZ playing in the top division in the old style of round robin. (even home and away if you wanted it longer)
the rest can play in 2nd division with the top team from 2nd div from each country replacing the lowest 1st div team from each country the next season.
Both divisions would still be strong and it could all be televised equally to avoid players shifting away from 2nd division teams.

[Razbra]

It's just another step closer to SARU walking out the door IMO. Demand,demand,demand and then when you get nothing take your ball and go home.

[bbarcs]

2 brands = more money. They're not going to play NPC sides in SR... makes no darn sense.

As for us bloody boers... we've got larger playing numbers, a city with the right infrastructure and so forth... and the derbies don't work - a stupid way of qualifying for the play-offs, playing in a weak conference is a BIG advantage.

Rather Port Elizabeth then Hawkes Bay... yet you lot were still considering a bid for it. I bet there wasn't much opposition at the time, huh?

[hydro11]

bbarcs said:

2 brands = more money. They're not going to play NPC sides in SR... makes no darn sense.

As for us bloody boers... we've got larger playing numbers, a city with the right infrastructure and so forth... and the derbies don't work - a stupid way of qualifying for the play-offs, playing in a weak conference is a BIG advantage.

Rather Port Elizabeth then Hawkes Bay... yet you lot were still considering a bid for it. I bet there wasn't much opposition at the time, huh?

Completely different. Hawkes Bay made an application to join the competition; they realized they would not get in so they withdrew. Here you have the SARU believing they have the right to have more teams than Australia or New Zealand and thus plan to change a format which they agreed to only two years ago.

The Cheetahs have never finished in the top 10 and the Lions have not done it since 2001. So why would Port Elizabeth be competitive?

[rotated]

hydro11 said:

The Cheetahs have never finished in the top 10 and the Lions have not done it since 2001. So why would Port Elizabeth be competitive?

Since when has on field performance dictated new franchises?

If it did we'd still have the original Super 12 or at most a Super 13.

[cat meat]

Maybe the Japies want an extra team in the 'tri nations' as well....

I liked S12, I liked it a lot more than S15 which seems to benefit countries with weak franchises. If I could wish for a season format it would be S12 followed by inbound and outbound tours that include playing provencial games. Id also have a strong NPC with promotion and relegation (so that we could enjoy watching Harbour go up and down every year) Every 4 years Id wish a Southern Hemisphere Cup competition where SA, OZ, NZ, Samoa, Tonga, Fiji, and Argentina play in rotated locations. What I wouldnt want is an expanded Super competition, an expanded Tri Nations with an awful name, and meaningless tours to Europe every november.

Unfortunatley my wish is never going to come true:(

[bbarcs]

If there was to be 16 teams, it would mean going back to the old format of only playing each other once (everybody once). At the moment the derbies don't really add much value anyway, and it is a very unfair way of qualifying for the play-off stages.

Dare I say it... if the Reds hadn't had an easy group to play in (with the Rebels, Brumbies & Force being utterly hopeless last year), they would not have won the competition. Home advantage won it for them... which they got through an unfair draw.

If the Kings joined, it would mean 1 less round-robin game for each team, as well as only 4 teams going through to the play-offs (cutting another week). It's not making it longer... it's making it shorter.

Anyway, continuing on...

So tell Port Elizabeth, which has been preparing, and have a large stadium readily built, as well as being a large CITY that can maintain such a team, that they can not have a team because the Cheetahs & Lions suck balls? Heck, in that case why did the Western Force come about? For a long time the Waratahs (if I remember correctly) were the only team not to reach the semi-finals of the Super 12... yet they still got an expansion team. Cheetahs will finish in the top-10 this year anyway... finally built up some depth and weren't robbed by bigger franchises with most of their stars deciding to stay (excluding Wilhelm Steenkamp, Sarel Pretorius & Riaan Viljoen).

It is in SA's interests to get a team in Port Elizabeth, and they're within their rights to ask for it. Believe it or not, NZ & OZ need South Africa just as much as they need them, if not more.

[cat meat]

bbarcs makes some good arguments. The Super competition works better with an even number of teams and the round robin is rubish. He is also dead right about the Reds being favoured by having a weak pool to qualify in.

The other positive is that Port Elizabeth is a very nice seaside town, its kind of the hippy state for SA. It's almost possible to imagine that people from PE dont think they are superior to anyone with dark skin. there would be a lot worse places to go watch your team play rugby.

On the negatives though.....there are just too many teams in the competition. NZ could do with dumping a franchise (Chiefs) and the rugby players could hone their skills in the NPC.

[Bar]

It would be awesome if the NPC team thing could work. I would love to see a smaller NPC team have a fairytale run and go all the way to a Super title. Cinderella stories right there.

Of course the little problem of All Blacks missing out kind of fucks everything. Maybe the All Blacks that are in teams that don't make it into Super rugby can go in a draft pool and be selected by the teams that qualified.

[Scorz]

There is absolutely no reason why a draft system wouldn't solve most of the problem with players in non-Super qualifying NPC teams.

Franchises are for cheeseball Americans who have no soul.

[taniwharugby]

bbarcs said:

If there was to be 16 teams, it would mean going back to the old format of only playing each other once (everybody once). At the moment the derbies don't really add much value anyway, and it is a very unfair way of qualifying for the play-off stages.

Dare I say it... if the Reds hadn't had an easy group to play in (with the Rebels, Brumbies & Force being utterly hopeless last year), they would not have won the competition. Home advantage won it for them... which they got through an unfair draw.

If the Kings joined, it would mean 1 less round-robin game for each team, as well as only 4 teams going through to the play-offs (cutting another week). It's not making it longer... it's making it shorter.

Anyway, continuing on...

So tell Port Elizabeth, which has been preparing, and have a large stadium readily built, as well as being a large CITY that can maintain such a team, that they can not have a team because the Cheetahs & Lions suck balls? Heck, in that case why did the Western Force come about? For a long time the Waratahs (if I remember correctly) were the only team not to reach the semi-finals of the Super 12... yet they still got an expansion team. Cheetahs will finish in the top-10 this year anyway... finally built up some depth and weren't robbed by bigger franchises with most of their stars deciding to stay (excluding Wilhelm Steenkamp, Sarel Pretorius & Riaan Viljoen).

It is in SA's interests to get a team in Port Elizabeth, and they're within their rights to ask for it. Believe it or not, NZ & OZ need South Africa just as much as they need them, if not more.

so on one hand you claim the Reds had an easy ride with a weak pool, but advocate introducing another Saffa side which is likely to sit in the bottom quarter of the table with the Lions and possibly the Cheetahs? No bias there at all huh?

Maybe they should deal with these internal issues which we are told plague SARFU rather than forcing another team on the rest of SANZAR just because they cant sort out the internal issues?

If SA rugby is so strong with such great numbers, then it shouldnt be an issue creating 5 competitive sides in the S15 and then the next level of players in SA can step up when they win the right?

[hydro11]

rotated said:

Since when has on field performance dictated new franchises?

If it did we'd still have the original Super 12 or at most a Super 13.

Well if you want to base it on commercial considerations then there is no way the Highlanders deserve to have a team.

[hydro11]

bbarcs said:

If there was to be 16 teams, it would mean going back to the old format of only playing each other once (everybody once). At the moment the derbies don't really add much value anyway, and it is a very unfair way of qualifying for the play-off stages.

Dare I say it... if the Reds hadn't had an easy group to play in (with the Rebels, Brumbies & Force being utterly hopeless last year), they would not have won the competition. Home advantage won it for them... which they got through an unfair draw.

If the Kings joined, it would mean 1 less round-robin game for each team, as well as only 4 teams going through to the play-offs (cutting another week). It's not making it longer... it's making it shorter.

Anyway, continuing on...

So tell Port Elizabeth, which has been preparing, and have a large stadium readily built, as well as being a large CITY that can maintain such a team, that they can not have a team because the Cheetahs & Lions suck balls? Heck, in that case why did the Western Force come about? For a long time the Waratahs (if I remember correctly) were the only team not to reach the semi-finals of the Super 12... yet they still got an expansion team. Cheetahs will finish in the top-10 this year anyway... finally built up some depth and weren't robbed by bigger franchises with most of their stars deciding to stay (excluding Wilhelm Steenkamp, Sarel Pretorius & Riaan Viljoen).

It is in SA's interests to get a team in Port Elizabeth, and they're within their rights to ask for it. Believe it or not, NZ & OZ need South Africa just as much as they need them, if not more.

I have got to completely disagree with this. Maybe the Reds did get a bit lucky with their draw but they would not have won it without being a top quality team. The question that we must ask ourselves is why did the SARU sign off on an agreement to have a conference system less than two years ago only to change their minds now? It's hardly a secret that the Australian conference would be a little bit weaker. I don't like the idea that you can agree to something and then try and go back on the deal when it is no longer beneficial to you.

Personally, I like the current length of the super rugby season. As for the playoffs, a 4 team playoff out of 16 sounds far too exclusive for me. A six team playoff using the current format is fair enough. Having only 3 playoff games after a long season doesn't make sense to me form a spectator point of view and it doesn't make sense commercially either.

I think your comments on the Force are very unfair. The Warratahs came 2nd the year before the Force were admitted and it would be unfair if Australia only had 3 teams. There were valid reasons for including the Rebels too.

I have never said Port Elizabeth could not enter the competition. If the SARU determines that they deserve a team more than the Lions or the Cheetahs then they are entitled to admit them at the expense of one of those teams.

It may be in South Africa's interests to get Port Elizabeth in but it is not in our interest and it is not in Australia's interest. So the SARU are within your rights to ask for it and we are well within our rights to refuse.

[Blue]

taniwharugby said:

Maybe they should deal with these internal issues which we are told plague SARFU rather than forcing another team on the rest of SANZAR just because they cant sort out the internal issues?

Uhm, if SARU was able to deal with their own issues we would not have these discussions.

Them bringing this to SANZAR is admitting that they cannot find a solution to a dilemma of their own creation.

The idea was always that one team would be dropped but now that the reality has become imminent, SARU is running scared.

The fallout in SA will be huge, whichever way it goes. The team dropped will take SARU to court because they will argue that they never agreed commercially to such terms. SARU is in real deep shit here. They are looking for a band aid.

[darreninusa]

I don't think I would even notice if SA added an extra team, as long as it didn't mess up the schedule too much.

[taniwharugby]

Blue said:

Uhm, if SARU was able to deal with their own issues we would not have these discussions.

Them bringing this to SANZAR is admitting that they cannot find a solution to a dilemma of their own creation.

The idea was always that one team would be dropped but now that the reality has become imminent, SARU is running scared.

The fallout in SA will be huge, whichever way it goes. The team dropped will take SARU to court because they will argue that they never agreed commercially to such terms. SARU is in real deep shit here. They are looking for a band aid.

haha I guess it depends how you look at it, same issue, different POV...

If they have to fuck around with it any further, reduce teams, not increase, unless they intend to involve a team (or teams) not from NZ, Sa or Aus.

[NH Fan]

I presume people have been reading reports of SARU politicking for the inclusion of the Southern Kings franchise in the 2013 Super rugby comp next year.

It's not clear whether their potential inclusion would come at the expense of one of the existing South African SR teams, or whether they would be added into the comp schedule. SARU have said that they want to talk to their SANZAR partners about changing the comp structure for next year and have drawn up a possible reformed match schedule to show how a 6th team could be accommodated in the conference stages. The existing 5 teams have said they support the inclusion of a 6th team in 2013, and have threatened to boycott the comp, if one of their existing number is replaced instead.

What's people views on this? Is it a good piece of positive discrimination to help develop growth of the game amongst the black population in SA? Is it unfair that SA would have an extra team in the comp? SARU have made mutinous noises in the past about staying with the Super Rugby comp, but when push comes to shove have always backed down. Are they likely to succeed this time around?

[MajorRage]

Don't mind if the Southern Kings join. Just means the lions or the cheetahs have to drop out. They have both sucked shit for so long, whats the point in having them?