A better Super 15 format

Ex Supersport - by Gavin Rich

They say there is no peace for the wicked, and obviously there isn’t any peace for rugby coaches who guide their teams to relative success in the Super Rugby Finals Series either.

The Sharks’ John Plumtree won’t be resting up at home this weekend after all his international travelling of recent weeks. He will be in Cape Town trying to get his players up for their first Currie Cup game against Western Province.

Phew, that is a tough ask, and the way the different competitions and phases of the season just seem to blend into one another is among the myriad problem areas faced by southern hemisphere rugby in this second year of the expanded Super Rugby format. To my mind part of the blame for the Bulls’ 'pap' finish to the season, as well as Morne Steyn’s poor form, can be laid on the schedule that saw Super Rugby go straight into the international season and then back again without a break.

At least the Sharks had a bye the week after the international window ended, and they have spoken about how beneficial it was to them.

Of course they had no chance in the Hamilton final after all the travelling they had to do, and while some clung to blind patriotism and tried to drum up interest by pretending there was going to be a contest when there wasn’t going to be one, the wise and considered view was always that it would be a bridge too far for them.

The Sharks know they dug their own hole, and after finishing only sixth on the overall standings, they had no right to expect anything other than the disadvantage they were under going into the Finals Series.

But while it may be fair that the wild cards have to travel, I couldn’t help thinking during the final that the fans were being short changed, and indeed that the competition may be short-changing itself by making it possible for the decider to be such an obvious anti-climax. (Beeno and Gavin Rich on the same page)

Given the misgivings I expressed in my previous column about the fairness of having a four and a half month league season and then staging a knockout fixture where the team that finishes first can be knocked over by the team that finishes sixth, isn’t it time for a rethink and a complete revamp?

The international window in June is never going to go away. The southern hemisphere nations stand to lose out financially if they stop hosting teams like England, and as long as there is no global season, there isn’t any other time when you can fit series against northern hemisphere nations in.

But it’s not ideal for Super Rugby, with potential for the better performing teams to have their seasons completely derailed by injuries sustained by their players when on international duty. It’s also not ideal, in my view, for the consistent team that finishes top after an extended league season to end up with nothing on the basis of a one-off game, which might have happened to Manchester City if after the Premier League season was over they had been asked to play against sixth-ranked Chelsea for the right to be champion.(To make matters worse some of the deluded think topping the log means sqaut!!!!!!)

So in the interests of being constructive, here is how I would reformat Super Rugby. Firstly, to make it fairer, all teams should play each other, unlike is the case now. So I would do away with the double round derby element and the conference system and have all the teams play each other just once.

That gives you 14 games in the league season, which if you started it one week earlier in February would then come to an end the week before the international window starts and you would still be able to fit in two bye weekends for each team.

Your Super Rugby champion would be the side that finishes top of the log, and they receive a trophy for their effort and go into the break chuffed with their achievement. (Fair call)

Then after the break you start a knockout competition, which for want of a better name could be called the Super Six. The top six teams qualify for this marquee tournament, and as you have extra time to play with, it can be done in such a way to ensure there is enough break between games for it not to impact too much on quality.

The top-ranked team will still have an advantage over the sixth-ranked team as they will play at home, but at least that sixth-ranked team will be given a fair chance to travel there and acclimatise. And with the abolition of the conference system, the top six can be a genuine top six playing in the right order, rather than this year’s farce that saw the Reds finish third when they had fewer log points than the fifth- and sixth-placed Bulls and Sharks. (All excellent stuff Gavin you are on a roll!)

With less of a jam in the schedule after the international window, a proper break between Super Rugby and the start of The Rugby Championship can also be introduced which will have the effect of helping players re-energise both mentally and physically. They would gain from this format, and so would the fans, who can be better assured of seeing proper contests and top quality rugby.

Gavin I think you have cracked it! Only thing is each side will not play home and away but given the number of teams that cant be helped unless number were reduced  -which would lead to many tears. I am happy with your proposal which addresses most of the issues.

first off i just would like to add my 2 cents worth. the system needs a major revamp. conf system needs to go. every team needs to play against every other team in the comp. not like now that some teams skipped the other teams. the bye system needs to be change were by a team must at least earn some points not just get points for having a bye. i feel that there needs to be more teams on a bye basis. this will give the teams the rest that is required and will shorten the normal season. i dont agree with getting some sort of thropy for finishing on top. getting a home semi and final should be reward enough, we dont want another noddy badge cup being sold as major cup. the super 15 is the only cup that teams should aim for. i think after the top 6 are in the kockouts we can keep the same structure that we have no where the top 2 qualify but there should be at least some sort of rest in between the games in the knockout phase. or even a home and away game scenario where points for and against will come into play. there are a lot of things that the administrators can use to spin it to promote the tournament. the biggest issue is leveling the playing field for teams so that the finals are evenly contested. i suggest shortening the normale season with more rest for teams and less local games and playing more knockout games. the semis and final can be played once off but there must be at least some form of rest in between. due to geograghical locations the nations involved need more time for there teams to at least get use to the jet lag.

less games, no points for byes, no conferrence system, longer knockout phase of games, once off semis or once off finals. when the super comp expands to allow other teams into it the format will change but i feel the teams cant play each other the amount of times they do. unless they change the rules in regards to squad sizes and registration of players before a certain cutoff time and maybe extend if futher into the season.

no noddy cups please....the only silverware should be the super 15 cup nothing else

the knockout phase has been the only positive aspect to the new format so i think i think in order for the adminstrators to maximise all aspects of it if think to extend only that part of the comp will generate a lot of following. the main aspect should be rest in between the overseas travel part in the knockout phase part and even the when teams travel overseas on there overseas leg of the regular season. that will on come into effect when teams travel from the republic to and from aus and nz and the other way around. travelling will always be there so i think trying to work the rest into that will go along way into creating a even contest

I have not read the second post. It is just too bloody tiresome if there is no or little punctuation.

Bakgat to the wise Mr Rich. He has just lost sight of a two little flaws in his system.

1. You cannot have play-offs amongst six teams. Play-offs is between 8 (with a four quarter-finals, two semis and a final), 4 (with two semis and a final), but not with the top six. So, you would either have to go with the top four or the top eight in the play-offs. 

2. What about the teams who are not involved in the play-offs? Do they lie low for a month? The problem is that even in this bright system, you would have all the top players involved in the play-offs and final, and you will once again not have a proper break before the start of the international season. In other words, your top players will have come of a hard fought series of play-offs, where your other players have not had any practice at all.