Chiefs Coach: SuperRugby favours teams from South Africa.

Chiefs coach Dave Rennie has criticized Super Rugby’s controversial finals format saying that it favours the South African teams.

Rennie has stopped short of calling the current format as unfair on New Zealand teams but has made it clear that South African teams are getting a better deal.(let's not bandy semantics-- he states  the old format where SA teams get a poor travel schedule as fairer) Ask the Jaguars what the travel schedule is like. 
“There’s going to be four quarterfinals, and two of them are going to be in Africa,” Rennie told AAP.  (If the Jaguars had done as well as expected- would a quarterfinal be in Argentina?)
“Considering they’ve got six teams and half those games are going to be there … I guess they put a lot of money into it, so that’s the way it is.”
“In the end, we’ve known about the comp – it is what it is. It means if you don’t win your conference, you’re traveling.”
Super Rugby’s 18 team format has already come in for much criticism and as the playoffs get nearer the criticism grows louder.
The 18 teams are grouped geographically into two regional groups, each consisting of two conferences.
The Australasian Group has five teams in the Australian Conference and five teams in the New Zealand Conference.
The South African Group has six South African teams, one Argentine team and one Japanese team split into a four-team Africa 1 Conference and a four-team Africa 2 Conference.
Each of the Conference leaders will have a home playoff or quarter-final, and the next best three ranked teams in the Australasian Group and next best South African group team qualify for the playoffs as wildcards.
As it currently stands three of the New Zealand teams will occupy wildcard spots even though they have more points than the higher ranked teams.
“It’s difficult this many teams in,” Rennie told AAP.
“I even look at the Jaguares (from Argentina) and obviously they’ve battled but, gee, they’ve had some travel. (Worse than any other team- but still not massively worse than what SA teams have done for years)
“Their pool games are predominantly in Africa. They had a three-week tour of New Zealand and went to Japan and then went home. (Sounds just like a New Zealand tour- where they byes even seem to be scheduled after the tour- or they only have to play two games over two weeks- and then return home)
“We’ve done a bit of travel too, but that’s what happens when you get this many teams involved.” (This has been the case for SA teams for years)
Rennie said that he would prefer a competition with 16 teams in it where every team plays the other team once and then progressed to a four or six-team finals series.
“That’s a fairer system, isn’t it?” he said.(Do you think a South African teams having to tour 4-5 consecutive games was fair? When the shoe is on the other foot- the kettle calls the pot black.)
“There’s been a bit of talk about the fact that maybe the Stormers, Bulls – they play 15 round-robin games and they don’t have to play a Kiwi side.”
“That’s not a bad draw is it?”
(Considering it is probably going to be the Sharks and Lions s hosting quarter-finals- has it really made a difference? Also let us not forget that the Lions beat Dave Rennie's team in New Zealand. The Sharks also had a decent tour as well in New Zealand.)
Super Rugby’s organisers Sanzaar have signalled that they are looking at ways to improve the Super Rugby format in the future although changes or additional teams are unlikely before 2018.

 Fine if your so worried about travel why then 2 saffa teams dont play NZ at all ? And take away the automatic home playoff ."ooh how unfair we have to travel to NZ " are we responsible for geography now ? We know SARU are responsible for this garbage setup and its all their own doing to make saffa teams more viable .

The Sharks and Lions both toured New Zealand- and these are the 2 most likely SA teams to make it to the quarters. 
The bottom line is that South Africa has always been shafted with a much harder travel schedule. This is the first time that SA has a comparative travel schedule to Australia and New Zealand. Now the Jaguars have the worst schedule
The bottom line is that SA fund the tournament- and if anyone should get a crap schedule- it is not us. 

 Agreed SB, they made the format shit for everyone,  not only us. The Jags and Wolves have it worse than everyone, but like WD says, you can't change geography....and it's not the Stormers and Bools not playing the NZ teams, it's them pesky NZders not playing us.

Who blamed NZ for geography? I musta missed that part. Granted the Kings are a walkover. What WD seems to fail to understand is that SA rugby is shafted by politics. And a large part of these politics directly influences the amount of money available for the league IE generating interest among the black community. This translates directly into $ because those paid sports subs on DSTV is where it comes from. Were this not the case, much stronger teams would be fielded but not be able contribute the same amount financially to the tornoument. A perfect catch 22. So, maybe the thinking in the long run is that while SA teams have a small advantage currently in terms of format, they are also hamstrung by politics and this does even the playing field considerably while potentially growing the economy of the game. Let's also not forget how the Boks dominated ABs prior to the ANC and it's quotas. The decline in Bok rugby vs the rise of AB rugby has more ro do with SA and it's politics than NZ and it's rugby talent. No...then do please explain the massive difference in results since the great man was let outta prison? So while it's clear that NZ is the centre of the universe, sometimes, just sometimes it may be wise to take the bigger picture into account. A middle aged South African I was brought up on the idea if the greater good. It's very easy to sit in there in a largely politically homogenous country and throw stones. Ultimately we live in an unfair world and the best we can do is balance "unfairness" because making things 100% fair when teams that live on opposite sides of the planet play each other regularly...well it's a tad impossible. Do I hear you saying that it's our problem and not yours? Yeah, fine. Put in the same amount of money and we can split responsibility down the middle. Failing that...don't bite the proverbial hand. But yeah screw it. We should play CC in winter and then compete during the summer in Northern Hemisphere leagues. S18 teams/players can compete in moderation for the CC and be given decent breaks so as to go full out during the winter up north. Easier to schedule match times, shorter travel, bigger pay cheques for our players and most importantly...more rugby on tele. Would be nice to hear exactly what it is that you would like WD. From where I sit, here in my "politically not so homogenous" country with its large yet struggling economy, it seems like a bit of whining on your part.

 Ahh I see,you have to rely on supposedly being the owners of the comp to justify gerrymandering it ? How sad that some saffas think they need to rely on off field bullshIt to win something.Probably wont help ya'll anyway .The only reason you had a slight winning margin vs the ABs when you had that grubby apartheid thing going was refs too frightened to allow a bok team to lose ,to quote the great Danie Craven ' we didnt need to win this way " The rest of your argument is just farking sad .You either need to smoke more or less dope .As I said just delete the automatic home playoffs .And yeah that would be fun eh ,trying to get into the NH comp ,why would they need your teams ? Sure as hell wouldnt improve the Boks play NH rugby .I notice you whining more and more each time we say something positive about our guys eh plum ? Tell you what bet I dont bother talking down other peoples teams the way you and your new buddy beendik do.And we arent responsible for your countries woes thats all yours thanks ,from a country that has quite a few races of our own .

 WD, wrong. SANZAR is not even closely dominated by SA and prior 92, both sides were favoured by home refs. Fact is that since 94, the playing field was ever increasingly stacked against  SA...ya, our own doing, but other than recent mumbles by Hansen, the rest of the world were silent on the issue.

 According to plum it is ,he wants SARU to take their marbles and head "oop north "Dunno who runs SAANZAR then cos we certainly didnt want 18 teams and the stupid conference system .If travel is really a concern then why include Argentina and Japan ?????14 teams and a round robin format at most .

I wouldn't mind if SA played in NH leagues. It won't happen because the market is a big as it will be up there. In the south there is greater business potential. Because you do know that is what rugby is now right WD...a business. A business that seeks to make.profit for its bosses and hopefully pay it's employees more. This is why the format is what it is and why schedules are what they are. They are trying to expand the market. To date SA have been very fair in our involvement. And like it or not, in terms of Rugby and in terms of business it's best to keep the SuperX growing. Granted that at the beginning it will seem a very watered down affair. The Rugby organisation's involved with the SuperX have all benefited and will continue to do so. So yes, while as I said above I DONT THINK THAT IT IS FAIR but you have to consider that for SA the travelling schedule until recently was a long way from fair. I'd love to see one Kiwi poster on here ever commenting on that. And here's the problem I have, personally. We have just reach the international break in the very first year of this new format and boom...there you go running your mouth about how SA are using political/economic clout to win. Nobody has even won yet. You'll quickly say how refs were afraid to let SA lose during apartheid etc etc and talk about how dominant you are as a rugby nation. You'll throw insults around and and and...but Fk anyone who ever says a negative thing about an AB. Becsuse, as I said before, you guys can't stand to be disagreed with. And never dare anyone here on a South African board ever say anything negative about an AB...Fk me it'll be the end of the world. SA suffers from an isolationist arrogance due to it's past but it seems NZ has a similar if not bigger problem as far as that is concerned.

 We do nt have a problem with your past ,its not us that brings it up .And we cop plenty of garbage from 1 or 2 posters about the ABs but we rarely put down your guys .Like most of the Kiwis on here I'm all about enjoying our guys success I dont need to revel in your guys losses I prefer to enjoy it when our guys win ,I certainly dont need to make snarky posts especially when its not even my own team involved  .see if you can find any insults directed at your country people and team the way people like your mate beeno does ..You seem to think that NZ teams dont have to travel ?Or that we have an easier time of it ? Thats what I mean by geography not being our fault.You seem like a decent feller but have your nose out of joint over Us Kiwis enjoying our success maybe you need to look to your own .As for me supposedly running my mouth off about you guys using economic clout to win that actually comes as a response to another poster and you too saying as how you have the lions share of the market so you should set the rules ,check it out before making even more snarky comments yourself eh ? 

@Wardad- we own the tournament and all the New Zealand fans. We should have making the rules from day one. 

 Its most unbecoming to see ou warped DUD crying a river because the travel arrangements have been squared off.Unless these kbbs have every advantage handed to them they wail like babies.
A guy like Justin Marshall would be so embarra sed by warped DUD's behaviour! If its not wild rants is blubbering about how unfair things are.
Yes Sharkbok we should be putting these kbbs in their place rather than bending over backwards to accomodate them.

 Guys please, some perspective....well mine anyway.

1. SANZAR is managed and negotiated by all 3 countries equally.
2. It stands to reason that NZ and Ozz will have much closer agenda's than SA.
3. SA insisted on the inclusion of a 6th SA side in the Kings.
4. The current setup is the best collective agreement SANZAR came up with.
5. Most rugby supporters is in agreement that this particular setup sucks.
6. If there has to be a positive, it is that the uneven travelling schedule of the past has been improved for SA sides.
7. The cost for 6 above comes at too high a price...we want to see more matches between the top SA and NZ sides.
8. To blame SA alone for this is stupid.
9. This is not a SAcan rugby site, but an international one, dominated by Saffas and Kiwi's, which makes it one of the more interesting ones around.

 No you you cant bleame SA alone Draadie but you can balme NZ. Haha hahahahaha

 @plum,

it seemed impossible but you are achieving it, man,........ you are surpassing beeno's delusional ravings, whinning, crying and nonsenses,....... congratulations

"while SA teams have a small advantage currently in terms of format, they are also hamstrung by politics and this does even the playing field considerably"

this is plain stupid,...... the politics of each country is each country's problem,...... you can justify even the most stupid measure with it,........ you can justify that the saffa sides and the boks play against teams of 14 players,........ as SA temas are hamstrung by politics that would also even the playing field, uh?

by the way, the advantage of the SA teams is not small,...... is a huge one,..... one of the Roar's writters quantify this advantage compared to the old formats:

5. SA teams unduly favored by the new format

and he found that the advantage of playing with this year's system compared with a system where each team plays each other once (no conferences) for teams like Stormers and Bulls was of about 20 points. That's huge,.... 4 winnings,.... huge

and the advantages for the SA teams don't stop here,..... they have also the advantage of playing the QF at home even if they have less points than other teams,...... that's also a huge advantage,...... last year the saders couldn't classify for the finals having more points than the Stormers,...... if this is not a huge advanhtage, you tell me what it is

"The decline in Bok rugby vs the rise of AB rugby has more ro do with SA and it's politics than NZ and it's rugby talent"

WTF are you talking about? untill now there has been no quota system applied in the saffa teams nor in the bok squad,...... it's going to be applied from now on,.... but untill the moment the quotas have nothing to do with the boks'performances,..... nothing

from the last 23 bok squad against the AB in the last WC:

South Africa XV:

W Le Roux, JP Pietersen, J Kriel, D de Allende, B Habana, H Pollard, F du Preez (capt), T Mtawarira, B du Plessis, F Malherbe, E Etzebeth, L d Jager, F Louw, S Burger, D Vermeulen.

Replacements: A Strauss, T Nyankane, J du Plessis, V Matfield, W Alberts, R Pienaar, P Lambie, J Serfontein.

there were 3 black players from the starting 15 and 4 from the 23,...... but no "quota players",..... all of them deserving their spot


"This is why the format is what it is and why schedules are what they are. They are trying to expand the market... And like it or not, in terms of Rugby and in terms of business it's best to keep the SuperX growing."

but not in any way,....... and precisely because its unfairness btwin other reasons (like the inclusion of some very weak teams and others), the SANZAAR hired a consultation firm to make a study to see what changes should be applied in 2018,...... and they said that they will consider any change, even to reduce the number of teams,...... they know this year they got it wrong and don't want to repeat the failure

"you have to consider that for SA the travelling schedule until recently was a long way from fair. I'd love to see one Kiwi poster on here ever commenting on that."

I'm not kiwi but I'll coment on that,....... this is just a f*cking excuse,...... what affect to the players is the travelling itself and mainly the travelling btwin diferent time zones,..... and the saffa teams had even less travelling than the kiwis or saffas,...... they spent more time in a row overseas, 4-5 weeks,....... but this barely affects the performances,....... waht really affects is the travelling and as I said both kiwis and saffas travelled more,........ just an excuse for crying

"but Fk anyone who ever says a negative thing about an AB. Becsuse, as I said before, you guys can't stand to be disagreed with. And never dare anyone here on a South African board ever say anything negative about an AB...Fk me it'll be the end of the world."

enough is enough with this stupidity,....... you've been repeating it for a while,.... the kiwi fans defend their teams the same way saffas do about theirs,...... the only one who has a problem is you yourself if you cannot stand that a kiwi fan defends their teams

 I've got a solution that will solve all this bitching about unfair travelling arrangements etc. We have a round robin comp. 1st year, 5 NZ teams plays 5 SA teams home and away. 2 simmies and a final, while the Ozies play against 5 other sellexted world sides. Next year, OZ and SA have a go while NZ takes on 5 provincial world sides that have the balls to try....etc.

Senseless wrangling about negatives...yes there are problems...geographics, economics and politics...things nobody here can change but don't blame our problems on NZ...we just have our bit to overcome in this terribly imperfect world.

If we cannot solve our problems don't blame others...if we were honest in heart we'd understand our fellow man's point of view.

NZ has a justified  gripe too but senseless excuses and blaming is the wrong way to go...lets just enjoy the competition.

If you think the world is fair then you live in cloud cuckooland...lets just get on with the game...and take your medication some of you guys and chill out.