Rugby's plans for going global (Tony Johnson)

I wrote a couple of weeks ago about the possibility of some fairly significant changes coming up to the shape of Sanzar rugby.

We discussed some of these on ReUnion last week, but in case you missed it, here is a summary of the initiative being driven by the International Rugby Players Association (IRPA), as first reported by the New Zealand Herald on Sunday:

• A later start to both Super Rugby and northern hemisphere club competition, by about a month, to allow players 14-16 weeks' break between seasons.
• No break for Super Rugby in June; the competition to be played start to finish without a break, and to take no more than 22 weeks in total.
• Southern hemisphere test window currently played in June to be moved to July after completion of Super Rugby, possibly as part of a “World Series”.
• Northern hemisphere tests in November, possibly as part of a “World Series”.

Clearly some of these plans would not meet with the agreement of club owners, nor some national unions, but the IRPA has a lot of muscle, and if players around the world are in strong agreement, then club and country alike will have little choice but to make changes.

The later start will meet with some approval from fans who don’t like cricket and rugby being played at the same time, but it might not be favoured in Australia, where the ARU looks to Super Rugby to start as early as possible and gain a foothold of public attention ahead of its rival codes such as rugby league and Aussie Rules football. Australia has constantly pushed for a longer Super Rugby programme to fill the gaps in their domestic schedule, but there is no way it will get any longer than it is now.

I can’t imagine some of the European clubs will be happy about changing the June window to July, although the actions of the French in not playing their final until July, when the national side are in New Zealand on tour inadvertently adds weight to the proposal. I say inadvertently because the French tend to do what they want, regardless.

And I’m sure in South Africa there will be great determination to protect the Currie Cup, a large portion of which is already being played concurrent with the Rugby Championship. In New Zealand the ITM Cup provincial championship remains an important part of the structure, but falls into a fairly marked third priority now behind the All Blacks and Super Rugby. I’m sure South Africans will guard against that happening in the Currie Cup.

But the push by the IRPA carries real weight, and I suspect rugby is in for its first real test of player power, certainly since the WRC-led “Rugby War” of 1995.

A crisis was eventually averted back then, when Louis Luyt stepped in and separated enough twigs from the bunch to snap them, but there is ample evidence in other sports where the players have flexed their muscle to force change.

The cricket revolution in the late 70s was largely player driven (even if Kerry Packer was paying for it), the players started taking over tennis in the early 90s, American baseball and basketball have both had seasons destroyed by player strikes, and rugby league in Australia split in half in the mid 90s.

I’m sure the IRPA don’t want it to go anywhere near that sort of drastic measure. They say a strike is a last resort, but clearly it is one course of action they could pursue, and they appear to have support right around the major nations.

I’m fairly confident that rugby will do all it can to avoid such a conflict, so I think it’s fair to say that while we are never going to see an integrated global season, there’s a chance we might end up with the next best thing within a couple of years.

The other major issue confronting Sanzar is the issue of further expansion.

I understand that the South African union regard a sixth team as a non negotiable which will force a change of structure again, because you can’t have six teams in one conference and five in the others.

As I mentioned in a previous column, there is interest in bringing in some new territories. Argentina is a logical step, given their arrival in the Rugby Championship, and if they were able to bring back some of their European-based talent they could put a strong team or two in.

New Zealand and Australia are keen on moving into Asia, especially Japan.

The obvious reason for this, even if they won’t admit it, is money. Japanese rugby is rich, because the industrial giants own the teams. At the moment they are sparing no expense trying to outdo each other in signing foreign rock stars, and there is an element of “if we can’t beat them, then perhaps we can get them to join us” about them being asked to join Sanzar..

Besides, it would surely help Japanese rugby, because there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest their big spending on foreign players under the existing structure has done a thing to improve the fortunes of the national team.

But because the Japanese game is so introspective there are doubts that they want Sanzar as much as elements within Sanzar want them, but if they can be persuaded then eventually the Super Rugby competition is going to start blowing out towards 20 teams - there is also a lot of emotional support among New Zealand fans for a Pacific Islands team.

The conundrum is if the competition is only going to get bigger, but the players won’t allow it to be any longer, then the only solution might be to make the conference system more distinct.

One possibility – and I hasten to add it is just a possibility I have heard from a good source – is that South Africa and South America, and possibly North America as well, could go into one conference, New Zealand Australia and Japan into another, and that there would not by any inter-conference play until the playoffs. In other words something akin to the Heineken Cup in Europe, where there is pool play, and then the top qualifiers meet in the playoffs. That would mean no SA v NZ matches in the “regular” season, which a lot of people might not like.

There are plenty of other ideas being floated, and reaching agreement on any changes is going to be tricky. Sanzar has always been a coalition driven by the self interest of the three individual members, and who knows, we could end up with exactly what we have now.

But I somehow doubt it will remain the same. Saru's position on a sixth team alone guarantees a change.

I’d be interested in what South African fans think.

In the meantime I have the upcoming weekend off. It's probably the last of those I’ll get until November, and I am taking the family off to the sunshine (hopefully) of Fiji for a week.

I’m sure I’ll find a TV set somewhere to watch what should be a couple of massively important games this weekend.

some real interesting reading here from TJ.

" is that South Africa and South America, and possibly North America as well, could go into one conference, New Zealand Australia and Japan into another, and that there would not by any inter-conference play until the playoffs."
i think this a fantastic idea, but the main problem would be where would the finals be played???
in the hienken cup, the location of the finals is known before the teams, hence the all french final being played in dublin.
this just wouldnt work for us, as who in SA would want to watch a finals match between the crusaders and waratahs (well apart from the folks in newlands, -_o) and who IN NZ would want to watch a finals match between the bulls and the brumbies??? IMO it would depend on how many fans would be willing to travel, as SH fans are not quite as passionate about getting up and going to the games as the NH fans.
if there was a fair way of determing the finals, i would be all for it 100%, especially the part where south american and japanese clubs are introduced.

some of these pointers though,,,
• A later start to both Super Rugby and northern hemisphere club competition, by about a month, to allow players 14-16 weeks' break between seasons.
• No break for Super Rugby in June; the competition to be played start to finish without a break, and to take no more than 22 weeks in total.
• Southern hemisphere test window currently played in June to be moved to July after completion of Super Rugby, possibly as part of a “World Series”.
• Northern hemisphere tests in November, possibly as part of a “World Series”.
i like the idea of all of those mentioned, but if by a world series they mean something where theres a ladder of sorts between the two hemispheres, then theres no way the NH are going to want to be a part of that, i dont need to run any numbers for everyone to know that theres a reason why SANZAR dominate the top 3 IRB rugby rankings.

reminds me of when the RFU pushed heavily for their to be an IRB ranking when england were at the peak of their rugby powers and the media circus surrouding it was huge, but ever since the All Blacks have just monstered the crap out of No1 spot for over 85% of the time, theres barely a squeak from them and their local media, LMAO, :oD

It's a fantastic idea that South Africa would play the Bargies and the States? Hell I'd rather watch a good CC game. Most of this stuff is non economic and loony.

Some of the thoughts are brilliant and player rest periods are probably the most important. The SA teams not playing the Kiwis and Aussies in S15 is a joke but bringing in an Islander team before chasing the Yen, is a moral debt that needs to be paid.

In reality you have more chance of falling pregnant than getting consensus on these matters though, as the above clearly demonstrates. Everyone will have their opinion and they are entitled to it. The money men will prevail with total disregard to the IRPA. This could possibly be a 'strike' in the making and possibly one i would support.

You can't make rugby global if you tweak the laws to disadvantage the rest and be in favor of two teams.  

yeah the econmics in those ideas make it a fairytale, but i do love the idea of players getting especially from SA getting a rest as they do have travel issues and SARU dosnet protect them as well as the NZRU protects its top players.

but the rest factor and bringing in japan, the argies and the states is what rugby needs in order to progress.

funny story, but i had a chat with a sri lankan fellow today who said rugby is one of the most played sports in sri lanka amongst the youth??? o_O
mainly the schools and what u. they were familiar with the main anmes of rugby, McCaw, carter, habana, cooper and especially SBW etc, but names the average fans would know was a little lost on them like horwill and mealamu were a little unknown

this made me quite happy from rugby fan point of view as i didnt expect that at all.

USA has the second largest population of polynesians after NZ outside of their respective islands of course and there are about 45,000 saffas in USA, so im sure they could rummage up some good rugy teams.

then theres japan and the money theyre throwing around makes toulons spending nothing special at all.
if we were to take players who are sigened in japan now or will be, just look at some of the names there, jacque fourie, jerome kaino, anthony borric, george smith, andreis bekker, richard kahui, tamati ellison, du preez, matt gerrad, i have no doubts they could feild a competitive team.

but again, its justa  pipe dream and nothing will come of it. the immeiate problem is the players playing too many games, so why not just cut out the playing everyone in their conference twice??? that would mean four games less for the teams to play in a season, almost a months worth of games.

Rugby in the 15 man game will never take off in the USA. They are crap at it so they do not givew a feck about it