Napier: Super mediocrity shouldn't be rewarded LIAM NAPIER

The only certainty when expansion is, finally, confirmed for 2016 is New Zealand and Australia will bend over to appease the all-powerful South African broadcasters.

Don't believe the public relations spin. This competition will be worse off with another second-rate side. In 13 of Super Rugby's 18 seasons, a South African team has collected the wooden spoon. That's disastrous in anyone's book. How can Sanzar, the governing body, justify compromising the competition's integrity by adding a sixth team from the republic?

Money, that's how. South African broadcasters bring in the lion's share of revenue. And, unfortunately, in the professional age, money talks around the collective bargaining table, even though greed should not be a guiding principle.

The Stormers are the only South African team not to suffer the ignominy of last place. The Lions (formerly the Cats) finished bottom six times, while the Bulls (3), Sharks (2), Cheetahs (1) and Kings (1) all had a taste. Those results alone make a mockery of rewarding mediocrity.

For the record, of New Zealand's teams, only the Highlanders (1997) and seven-time champion Crusaders (1996) have finished last. This is supposed to be one of, if not the, world's toughest cross-country contests. Adding another African team threatens to severely devalue those claims. Politics and sport aren't happy bedfellows. This is shaping up to be another messy example. New Zealand and Australia will be left holding a hospital pass.

Why should the competition suffer, just because South Africa can't sort out a spat between their local unions? Giving the Southern Kings one season to establish their credentials this year was a pure token gesture.

Next year the Lions return based on superior aggregate, despite winning one of two promotion-relegation playoff games against the Kings. Just to refresh, the Lions-Cats shambles combine to boast a 45-139 record since 1996. Their best years came under former All Blacks coach Laurie Mains, who led the team to their only semifinal appearances in 2000 and '01.

The Johannesburg franchise loses 68% of the time. A little more leeway can be granted to the Kings, who won three of 16 games in their first season.

South Africa aren't going to improve their odds of winning the title - the Bulls are their only team to triumph - by spreading talent and depleting the strongest teams. It merely prevents and protects their administrators from making a tough decision each year.

This is anything but South African rugby bashing. The Springboks are widely respected in New Zealand. They are the greatest foe and, at present, the biggest threat to the All Blacks' World Cup defence.

But while genuine arguments around growing the global game can be made for the inclusion of teams from Argentina, Japan and the Pacific Islands, another cellar-dwelling South African team is a joke.

 There is no doubt the article reflects the truth in some respects - the sixth SA side would be a serious anomaly - since it would not be based on rugby performance.   Money talks and that is the end of the story.

However, there is another angle to the story which was ignored totally and a huge amount of rubbish as well.   There is no indication that New Zealand or Australia ever tried  to get teams  from Japan or the Pacific Island involved in the competition.    Matter of fact they recruit players from the Pacific Islands to augment their present franchise teams.

At least SA has campaigned for inclusion of a team from Argentina.  

However, the profits from Super Rugby are shared equally and it effectually funds rugby in New Zealand and Australia - which enable them to keep both the national and franchise teams competitive.   So the answer is that who pays the piper calls the tune.   Whethe r you like it or not - that is the end of the story.     

Hakwa

In the article quoted above reference Is made to the powerful broadcasters of South Africa being the core of the problem - sure they are, but there is more to it than meet the eye. 

Let me give you a lesson in company growth and development.   In 1914 a small group of people saw the opportunity of starting a company to publish a newspaper to cater for the Afrikaans speaking community in the Western and Sou thern Cape - mostly Whites and Coloureds.   The politicians saw a chance to make use of the paper and the National Party of the time saw the gap and one of their top dogs DF Malan - later Prime Minister - became the editor of the resultant paper called Die Burger.   Since the paper catered for both the White and Coloured communities they were quite liberal in their approach.  However, in the Cape the saying was that The Bible could be wrong - the Burger never is.

The Company formed for the purpose was Nasionale Pers.   The started off with Die Burger and branch out to publishing a number of weekly magazines without political content.   They then spread their wings started first a newspaper in the then Transvaal, from there they went on to start an Afrikaans Sunday paper and hence to publish their weekly magazine in English.  

The radio broadcasting scenario in South Africa was Government owned and controlled and when Television was started in SA it was also Government-owned.   Nasionale Pers saw an opening and started their own TV company called M-Net.  basically concentrated on recreational TV - since they were not allowed to broadcast news on their station.   Sport broadcasting became very prominent in their operations and for that purpose they formed the Supersport Comapny.   Over the last two decades the company branched out to offer TV services in Africa, Scandinavia and ultimately China.   Their biggest profits nowadays are from their Chinese operations centred in Hong Kong.

They also branched out into the internet business and at present operates as MWeb and has huge shareholdings in the banking (ABSA) and cell phone companies.   From a single purpose company they became one of the top broadcasting, banking and internet companies operating world wide.

My view is they used business opportunities - much like Murdoch did in Australia - but enterprises in New Zealand did not use opportunities that became available to them worldwide through the last 30 years.   If they did - the present scenario would never have happened.    

ABSA and Supersport are massive funders of sport in SA - not only rugby, but also other codes - so that added to their power in sport direction in the country.   If they crack the whip the sporting bodies run for cover.

And they are cracking the whip in this case - end of story.

hakwa

 I agree about the sixth team issue, but accept there is nothing we can do about it.