New Super Rugby format unveiled: 2016 with an 18-team format

New Super Rugby format unveiled: 2016 with an 18-team format by Gavin Rich 30 April 2014, 13:44

Vodacom Super Rugby will undergo a major revamp in 2016 with an 18-team format and four-conference system set to be unveiled over the next few days.

The Sanzar partners were due to make an announcement this coming Monday, with the tender process for an as yet to be confirmed franchise to be outlined then, but Australian Rugby Union boss Bill Pulver spilled the beans to Australian media on Tuesday.

South Africa will have two of the four conferences under the new format, with the six local franchises being joined by an Argentine side plus the as yet unconfirmed franchise that could be based anywhere in the world. It would be preferred if the additional franchise was based somewhere roughly on a similar time zone to South Africa, but the main criteria will be money, playing strength/potential and logistics, in that order.

The South African conferences will be made up of four teams each, with the sides playing home and away against each other initially before moving into a five-team cross conference phase of the tournament against teams in the Australasian conferences. The Australasian conferences will be divided in a New Zealand and Australian section made up of five teams each.

After that the teams will play across conference against the other teams in their conference system. In other words, if the Bulls start off in the same conference as the Cheetahs, Kings and the team from Argentina, they will play those teams on a home and away basis at the start of the season and will then play either the five teams in the Australian conference or the New Zealand conference, with two matches away and three at home or vice-versa.

They will then conclude by playing the teams in the other South African conference, eg Stormers, Sharks, Lions and the tto-be-announced team in one off games, with two of those matches being played at home and two away. Who the teams play away and who they play at home will alternate on an annual basis, as will the number of away games when the teams play against Australasian franchises.

There are integrity problems related to the new tournament in that not all teams will play each other and some sides will end up with more difficult schedules than others. For instance, a side will play only against teams in one Australasian conference in a specific year, meaning that the Bulls will face either all the New Zealand teams or all the Australian teams, but there won’t be a mix.

The following year, the team will face the franchises that they didn’t play in the 2016 season. The drawback of this is that in a year where the Australian conference is weaker than the New Zealand one it will mean the sides playing the Australian ones will be advantaged. The New Zealand and Australian teams will also not play home and away against all the other teams in their respective conferences.

However that disadvantage is outweighed by the positives of having fewer games – 15 as against the previous 16 – in the league phase of the competition, and also the significantly diminished travel schedule for the South African teams. Playing two games in Australasia, which means they could be away for as little as one and a half weeks, is a significant step forward in comparison to the current system which sees local sides spending up to five weeks on the road.

South African players are said to be eager to embrace matches in Argentina, which would happen just once a season. It is a relatively short flight from Johannesburg to Buenos Aires, and teams can leave South Africa on a Tuesday and be back home by the following Sunday or Monday.

There will be more games – 44 – in South Africa under the new format, but that is explained by the addition of the sixth franchise. New Zealand and Australia will be hosting slightly fewer games than before.

In the new format eight teams will advance to the finals stage, with four sides playing each other in the quarterfinals, followed by a semifinal and a final.

The new format has been extensively worked through with the player associations in the Sanzar countries and will be welcomed because of the significantly smaller travel component for all players.

NEW SUPER RUGBY FORMAT EXPLAINED

SOUTH AFRICAN CONFERENCES

CONFERENCE 1 (teams as examples, conferences not finalised)
Sharks
Lions
Cheetahs
Argentina team

CONFERENCE 2 
Bulls
Stormers
Southern Kings
Team to be confirmed (possibly Asian)

The teams in these conferences will start the season playing within their conference, in other words against the other three teams on a home and away basis. They will then proceed to the next phase of the season, which will see them play either the five teams in the New Zealand conference or the Australian conference.

AUSTRALASIAN CONFERENCES

NEW ZEALAND CONFERENCE
Highlanders
Blues
Crusaders
Chiefs
Hurricanes

AUSTRALIAN CONFERENCE
Rebels
Reds
Waratahs
Western Force
Brumbies

After this phase the teams in SA conference 1 will play against the teams in SA conference 2, meaning another four games, with two of them being played at home and two away.

Eight teams go into Finals phase.

The top four teams will proceed straight to the semifinals, with the other four sides (the means of arriving at those still to be determined) playing in the quarterfinals.

So South Africa will have 2 conferences instead of one. 
The extra conference is surely to accommodate the Watson Queens, even though we do not have the backline depth to field 4 let alone 5 teams.

It sounds like a glorified Curry Cup to start off with, with the worst team getting cut.
In the 2nd phase, Each conference will only play Australia or New Zealand teams each year. Much shorter tours as a result.  More games will be played in South Africa. 
It sounds like a glorified Curry Cup. 
The only positive is that South African teams will not have 5 week tours which have allways been harder than Australia or New Zealand teams. 
The teams will play one team less. 
Some Argentinian team will be added to to the mix, and some European team to bring in the viewship and money of Europe(This is may be the best part)
Maybe South Africa should have a merit conference and a quota conference. 
The Kings & Lions can go into the quota conference. 

 The ANC Watson Kings once again will be able to demonstrate the young black talent that they promised would be selected last time around.
Yes, you are correct...I was all B.S. as only three or four guys actually made the selection.
The SA teams are struggling to field 5 full strength winning Super 15 teams as it is....so where are all these other local STARS coming from to fill the quotas?

AJ with the player exodus gathering pace one has to wonder.
As indicated the integrity of the comp has been compromised. Travel is much less. But SA sides will bash eachother up.
We shall see how it goes. 

What a pathetic new format......the attraction of Super rugby is the SA sides playing against the Oz and NZ sides.......its not the SA sides playing eachother.......we have the CC for that.

The powers that be have lost the plot and NZ and Oz are idiots for agreeing to this................there are few bums on seats now, there will be none when this format kicks off

It was all proving a bit too much snapster with all the travel etc. I too though have my doubts but lets see how it goes.

"The only positive is that South African teams will not have 5 week tours which have always been harder than Australia or New Zealand teams."
someone help sharkbok do the math, two teams in OZ and two teams in NZ = 5 week tours??? o_O

the travel is an issue, but seeing as how saffa teams havent won one game on tour, its clear that the touring isnt the problem, its that south african teams are weak, easily the weakest conference.
the blues, crusaders, chiefs and reds all won their first game after returning from SA, something that no SA team has done to date.

but the republic boys have had it tougher, so its good to see the travel concerns taken care of, those with special needs must always be accommodated for. so heres the SA conference suepr rugby pass for the proposed expanded format

how can an asian team be even considered to as one of the other teams in the SA conference??? isnt their time zone closer to OZ and NZ??? o_O
they would have to travel to play in SA for 6 weeks under the proposed play each other twice in the conference format.

if they go down this route, then they should just scrap the idea of an asian team, and just add a 7th SA team.
the way i see it, SA dont have depth to make up 5 teams let alone 6, so one more team isnt going to chan ge anything cos SA is already the weakest of the three SANZAR conferences, but at least logistic nightmares will be addresed.

i see no value in an aregtinian club too, but something needs to be done to help the sport grow in puma land.

will miss the SA tours though, they have always been good for us, but as long as NZ teams can still play each other twice, our fine edge over the rugby world will still be maintained.

i hear the aussies are really unhappy with this proposed format, and word around the campfire is they want cut ties with SA and let NZ and OZ go at it by themsleves with a pacific and asian clup in a sp12 of sorts.
this makes more sense, but it would leave SA right out in the cold, and with the NH not an option at the moment it just wouldnt be right.
IMO SANZAR should strive to make the three countires the storngest rugby nations in the world, and this wont be [possible in the long runb if SA dont have NZ and OZ around to keep them on their toes and vice ve rsa.

@Sazuka/Palooka,

"someone help sharkbok do the math, two teams in OZ and two teams in NZ = 5 week tours??? o_O"
I thought South African teams sometimes play 5 matches on tour, and sometimes 4 matches?
Regardless going on tour to Australia, then having to travel to New Zealand and then back again to South Africa is much tougher than going to South Africa for 1.5 weeks, then back home for a bye. 
You are only using this year. What about last year when the Kings, Cheetas, Bulls, Sharks and Stormers all won games last year on tour. 
Australia got totally snapped last year by South Africa. Last year Australia won more games against New Zealand teams, and South Africa won more games against Australian teams.
You are also removing context in that so far this year the general trend has been for home games to be wins for the local team than for many years. 

 If we just had SA sides in the two SA conferences would we need a Currie Cup. Or maybe The Vodacom sides contest Currie Cup? 

 I say bring back the super 12, the season was shorter and the competition was better and far more entertaining than the the crap the guys dish up. 
Why not just the 4 teams from each country and each country have to decide which for teams should enter. Each team that finishes 4th among their own countries gets automatically relegated where by the other union get automatically promoted. 
They can have a second tier competition between those that did not qualify.
I don't like this and its going to be the end of Super rugby as we know it. Will only be looking forward to the test matches now.
By the way, 1 game less a season, how generous they are to the players.  

 I share the viepoints of Sharkbok and Saffex on this one - this is unadulterated rubbish.  It will destroy the concept of the Super series since it will mean that all the SA sides will automatically be eliminated in the Quarterfinal stage - of that we can be bloody sure.   
This is like a CC season with an Argentinian and Asian side thrown in.  What does that do to enhance rugby in SA - it will only reduce the competitiveness of SA teams.   I cannot see how that will enhance rugby in SA.
As I understand it - the SA teams will each play four Australasian teams out of ten teams from those two conferences - so the international flavour is gone out of the window.   
Whomsoever thought up this rubbish should be facing a firing squad -  it really is madness gone beserk.     

 I share the viepoints of Sharkbok and Saffex on this one - this is unadulterated rubbish.  It will destroy the concept of the Super series since it will mean that all the SA sides will automatically be eliminated in the Quarterfinal stage - of that we can be bloody sure.   
This is like a CC season with an Argentinian and Asian side thrown in.  What does that do to enhance rugby in SA - it will only reduce the competitiveness of SA teams.   I cannot see how that will enhance rugby in SA.
As I understand it - the SA teams will each play four Australasian teams out of ten teams from those two conferences - so the international flavour is gone out of the window.   
Whomsoever thought up this rubbish should be facing a firing squad -  it really is madness gone beserk.     

Just go back to the history of super rugby
Wasn't the super 12 original the super 10 and it was based on the top teams from each counties provincial competition. I think it all started with WP and the Waratahs playing a tour game that got some television coverage which then expanded a bit more. South Africa created the super 10 which had 2 pools with 4 teams from each country. Australia only had 2 provincial teams back then. Namely NSW and Queensland. Even the pacific nations were included back then. 
Super 12 came along and NZ managed to get 5 teams, where SA only got 4 and Aus had 3. South Africa still operated under the provincial model where only the top currie cup teams qualified. EP got promoted ahead of WP even though WP was the better team. WP had a bunch of players on Springbok duty which meant that they couldn't compete at curry cup level. 
NZ did away with their provincial teams and went for franchises. Thats where I think the whole thing started to go pear shape. Geographically it made sense us but not SA.NZ got the jump on both SA and Aus because all of a sudden they had a stronger player pool to choose from. If NZ competed on a provincial basis I think that they would have far less success than they did in the early years. 
SA are better off just going to Europe and leaving these guys on their own. 
Why the bloody hell have the super 200 now, wouldn't it be better going back to the super 10 with a league phase instead of pools. 
The more I think about it the more it has become about money. Aus and NZ would get no broadcast money if they had their own competition but SA still get good money for the curry cup as its on the same time zone as Europe and it also makes the game available in America on a decent time zone. Try watching game in NZ from America. You have to be awake at 3 in the morning. 

 

The expansion of the comp is based around two things.

1.The administrators (mainly in SA) wanting to make more money which is in my opinion doomed to fail. The format is watered down. Like any commodity the fewer there are the more valuable they are.

 

2.The continued political interference by the SA politicians to get a colour balance on the field, based on head count not merit. The ambition is a noble one but for the sake of window dressing it is an epic fail. Heck even the Queens were struggling last year.

 

Bring back the cream that was Super 12.

Bring back the format where every side play every other side once - end of - stuff the conference shit.
The concept that the conference leader could play in a semi ahead of a better points performing side is flawed

The expansion is pretty much inevitable, so having a round to knock out the bottom local teams at the start of the tournament will still allow the strength vs strength that made the Super12 so amazing.
It would be better to start of with each local conference team plays each other once, and the bottom 2 teams are knocked out. This would end round one where 15 teams start, and 6 are knocked out before round 2. 
This would leave the top 9 teams (the top 3 teams in each conference) to have a round 2 where each team plays each other. 
If the Kings have to be in the tournament, then South Africa can have 6 teams in our local conference, and the bottom 3 are knocked out. 
Local teams should have to earn the right to play international teams.
Their is little point in the worst teams of each conference touring internationally because typically they are going to lose all their games. These mismatches are not going to draw an audience in the stadiums or on TV. Who wants to wake up in the morning to watch the Cats get killed by the Crusaders in Christchurch, or a basement OZ/NewZealand team playing a good Bulls team at Loftus.
Having a top9 round2 where all of these teams play each other would make shorter tours but also make the business end of the tournament (round2) onwards more competitive.
The expansion is pretty much inevitable, so having a round to knock out the bottom local teams at the start of the tournament will still allow the strength vs strength that made the Super12 so amazing.

I have no problem with a qualifying round but this current format is just bollocks. 
really struggling to grasp what they are offering. 
League stage with the best teams from SA, NZ and Aus and maybe some other country if they are good. 
Semi and finals.

 http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/aru-boss-bill-pulver-to-be-grilled-by-states-over-super-18-plan-20140430-zr1zf.html
Reading this article, it looks like the Aussies are dead set on getting derbies, why not have it outside the super rugby window. 
Play your qualification / Derbies during the before and after the tri-nations window. 
That way it almost act as a trials for the Aussies. 
There are 3 test blocks during the year
--Super rugby wildcard qualifiers (Bottom teams from each qualifier)---Super 12 (Top 3 teams)June incoming Tours----Aussie Derby Games - Super rugby qualifierAug - Sept - Tri-Nations----Aussie Derby Games - Super rugby qualifier (Currie Cup / NPC etc )
Nov - Out going Tours