FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / RUGBY /  SA to exit Super Rugby in 2016?

SA to exit Super Rugby in 2016?

Started by sharkbok4 REPLIES417 VIEWS· 28 Jul 2013, 17:32
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
sharkbok
sharkbokCaptain23,297 posts
28 Jul 2013, 17:32
#1
28 Jul 2013, 17:32#1

 

SA to exit Super Rugby in 2016?

 

 

28th July 2013 08:56

Consider options: SANZAR Chief Executive Greg Peters

Related links Teams Also see

SANZAR are currently considering a number of proposals regarding the future format of Super Rugby, one of which could see South Africa leave the competition.

 

 

According to reports in all three SANZAR member nations, Australia and New Zealand may form a trans-Tasman rugby tournament to replace Super Rugby from 2016 with South Africa being joined by Argentinean or possibly European teams in a separate competition. The Australasian tournament would likely also include Asian teams.

 

SARU's insistence on having six teams involved future in Super Rugby competitions is at the source of the need for change as such an expansion will render the current conference system unworkable.

 

SANZAR Chief Executive Greg Peters has confirmed that negotiations are underway with regards to the structure of southern hemisphere competitions beyond the next broadcasting deal, which will come into effect in 2016.

 

Peters has however moved to calm speculation, saying SANZAR are still "some way off" making a decision but that the possibility of a split remains a reality.

 

"The challenge is with a limited number of weeks in the year, how do you create a competition that has integrity in its structure, keeps everyone involved and satisfies the needs of the three main countries," Peters told Fairfax.

 

Peters confirmed that SANZAR are working on "a number of future scenarios".

 

"The end result will as always involve working together to achieve a result that strikes a balance between the various imperatives of the three [SANZAR] unions," he told Rugby 365.

 

"This is against a range of principles agreed by all three SANZAR Unions, including a fundamental one of South Africa having six teams in the future structure.

 

"Player welfare is also a significant consideration."

 

The Australian and New Zealand unions are reportedly in favour of the South African proposal of a split as they believe a trans-Tasman competition will produce more derbies that develop increased gate-takings, more fan engagement in the domestic markets, easier broadcast timezone considerations, and less travel for players.

 

SANZAR are believed to be eager to have agreement by the end of this year to give all parties enough time to plan under the new framework.

 

The proposal, which will not affect The Rugby Championship, is one of three options on the table: the alternatives feature retention of the three-conference system, and expanding the competition further to Asia and the United States and Canada. All parties are believed to favour a solution that includes South Africa, New Zealand, Australia and Argentina.

sharkbok
sharkbokCaptain23,297 posts
28 Jul 2013, 17:39
#2
28 Jul 2013, 17:39#2

 Maybe the tournament should start with an Australian/New Zealand Conference and a South Africa/Argentina conference.

This would be round one.

 

This will knock the worst teams out of the tournament from each country, but also provide the local derbies that each country wants. (This could replace the Curry Cup and ITM etc)

 

It would remove some of the travel because teams would not have to bother playing the worst teams in each others conference. 

 

Round 2 would be the Super10.

The losers of Round 1 would be knocked out and not entitled to carry the Supertag

 

Round 2 could be the top international teams from each country to make a total of 10 teams

It would involve the top 5 teams from NZ/AUS and top 5 teams from SA/Argentina.

It would likely be 3 SA teams, 3 NewZealand Teams, 2 Australian and 2 Arentinian teams. (at least initially).

This would be the top finishing teams of round one to create a strength versus strenght format where all teams in round2 would play each other.

 

 

Why should international teams bother playing the likes of Kings/Lions, Force and Highlanders. (each year will change because the worst performers can improve, and best performers decrease.)- so it will be like a qualification tournament for all countries in their own conference.

Round One can clear out all the easy beats with local derbies and just travelling to one continent. This will remove some of the travel.

 

Round One could also allow the top international players to rest and be managed in the early stages of the tournament without much risk of getting into Round 2. 

 

South America is much closer to SA than OZ/NewZealand, and vice versa.

 

 

 

 

sharkbok
sharkbokCaptain23,297 posts
29 Jul 2013, 05:04
#3
29 Jul 2013, 05:04#3

 More teams could also be included in round one for each country, even with less depth as this would mean they would be knocked out before round 2

BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
29 Jul 2013, 10:15
#4
29 Jul 2013, 10:15#4

Many possibilties Sharbok.From a negoitiating aspect we need an altenative. If it were possible to earn poiunds we would stop losing players.

See thread re killing off super 15.

BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
29 Jul 2013, 10:17
#5
29 Jul 2013, 10:17#5

Many possibilties Sharbok.From a negoitiating aspect we need an altenative. If it were possible to earn poiunds we would stop losing players.

See thread re killing off super 15.

— END OF THREAD —

More from Rugby

More news