FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / RUGBY /  Super Rugby format gives South African sides unfair advantage; by Spiro Zavos, The Roar

Super Rugby format gives South African sides unfair advantage; by Spiro Zavos, The Roar

Started by Just_win17 REPLIES333 VIEWS· 28 Feb 2014, 16:06
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
JW
Just_winCaptain18,570 posts
28 Feb 2014, 16:06
#1
28 Feb 2014, 16:06#1

Among the problems with the Super Rugby system is the way each of the territories has five teams. A 15-team tournament, an uneven number, means that there can never be a full round with all of the teams playing.

 

The fact, too, that the South African teams have been granted a dispensation to start the tournament a week earlier than teams in the other two conferences means that at least four South African teams have played a tournament match before teams in Australia and New Zealand.

 

This advantage was used over the last weekend when the Sharks, with a match and a win already under their belts, played the Hurricanes. The result was a convincing and inevitable 27 -9 victory to the Sharks.

 

This advantage to the Sharks and disadvantage to the Hurricanes has been accentuated for the Melbourne Rebels, who are playing their first match of the 2014 tournament against the Cheetahs, who are playing their third match.

 

At least the Rebels are playing at home!

The next Super Rugby tournament will, presumably, include an early start for the South African sides which is a requirement, apparently, to allow an early start to the iconic Currie Cup tournament. And six South African sides will be included.

It is generally asking SANZAR for more than they usually deliver to ask for even numbers for all the conferences, so that non-South African teams are not disadvantaged by the South African-only opening round of the new Super Rugby format.

This pessimistic note is based on reports that SANZAR is contemplating a complicated format that involves two three-team conferences in South Africa, with a team from Argentina and possibly Japan somewhere in the mix.

This all sounds too complicated to me.

It makes sense for Argentina’s national side, the Pumas, to be in The Rugby Championship. And I would include one of Tonga, Samoa and Fiji (in this order) in the annual tournament as well, except for Rugby World Cup years.

But I think an Argentinian team in Super Rugby makes no sense at all.

Where would the team be based? Which province in Argentina would provide the team? Or would it be a composite team, Pumas-lite? And if this is the case who would want to follow it, even in Argentina?

There are four countries in the Americas that have had teams at the Rugby World Cup tournaments: USA, Canada, Argentina and Uruguay. These countries should establish a sort of modified Super Rugby tournament built around the most dominant clubs or provinces for the Americas.

With six South African sides, without the Argentinian side to worry about, the Australian Conference could keep its present five sides and host a Japanese side playing out of North Queensland, where they were extremely popular in the Rugby World Cup 2003 tournament.

In turn, Auckland could host a Pasifika side, including Maori players not picked up by the present five Super Rugby teams, that would play out of Auckland. Auckland is the capital of Polynesia and such a team would be a hit in New Zealand, the other conferences and around the world where Super Rugby gets good coverage and ratings.

Under this plan, the internal home-and-away fixtures would be retained, even though the New Zealand Rugby Union and some of the New Zealand players don’t like them. The fact is, though, the statistics will show that supporters like this feature.

Each team would play a home-and-away against their own conference teams, and then play all the other teams once. They would play three of these matches away and three at home.

This format would provide eight home matches in the round-robin a year for each side.

My guess is that this is all to obvious and straight-forward for the SANZAR planners, who can’t even get the away jerseys of teams right. Apparently the Western Force’s blueish jersey they wore against the Waratahs, which caused confusion for players and spectators, is the sanctioned away jersey for the team.

This away strip clashed with the Waratahs jersey, and if the Force play the Auckland Blues at Eden Park it will clash there as well.

This sort of carelessness indicates a certain indifference to the interests of spectators, and to the players.

I will congratulate SANZAR on what seems to be a worthwhile and overdue change to the rostering of the referees. The refereeing of the first two rounds has been of a high standard, although the Australian referees, rather like the Australian scrums, have not been as good as those from other countries.

The higher standard is due in part in a willingness to run the best referees early in the tournament, especially for inter-conference matches. For the coming round this pattern has been maintained, to a certain extent.

Angus Gardiner, a good young referee who is likely to end up as the top Australian referee, officiates at the Rebels – Cheetahs match at AAMI Park in Melbourne. I think it would have been better to have given him the Force – Brumbies match and a New Zealand referee officiate at Melbourne.

Steve Walsh is doing the honours for the Stormers – Hurricanes. Good.

The Chiefs – Highlanders matches is being refereed by the Australian Rohan Hoffman who had a checkered match, I thought, in the Waratahs – Force encounter.

Glenn Jackson is refereeing the Waratahs – Reds at ANZ Stadium. A New Zealand referee, once a thoughtful and lively player, and now growing into one of the world’s best referees, Jackson should ensure that the ‘slow’ game the Reds are predicting will be quickened up.

Chris Pollock, one of the top New Zealand referees, is officiating, the Bulls – Lions match, a veldt derby.

I hope SANZAR tries to ensure that inter-conference matches, as far as possible, will be refereed by referees from the third conference. This is crucial, obviously, for the finals, although in the past SANZAR has reneged on its promise to have third-conference referees for these encounters.

What we need from SANZAR is the recognition that the Super Rugby tournament is not just a sporting occasion, it is an entertainment occasion as well. More consideration for the interests of the supporters is needed in their deliberations and decision-making.

This means far more openness about why decisions are made and how they are made than in the past.

My predictions on Brett McKay’s forum last week should display why there is a lot of wisdom in my long-time decision to be one of the few non-gambling Greeks living in Bondi Junction.

For what it is worth, though, my picks for the weekend are: Crusaders to beat the Blues at Eden Park; Cheetahs to beat the Rebels at AAMI Park; Stormers to beat the Hurricanes at Newlands; Chiefs to beat the Highlanders at Waikato Stadium: Waratahs to beat the Reds (gulp!) at ANZ Stadium; Brumbies to beat the Western Force at nib Stadium; and the Bulls to beat the Lions at Loftus Versfeld.

Spiro Zavos, The Roar

 

JW
Just_winCaptain18,570 posts
28 Feb 2014, 16:11
#2
28 Feb 2014, 16:11#2

This article will put the cat amongst the pigeons.  He didn't do so well on his initial picks, he picked Saders and Cheetahs to win - a small credibility problem, lol

KI
kingcornPro3,695 posts
28 Feb 2014, 16:16
#3
28 Feb 2014, 16:16#3
 This guy is a complete idiot, what about when the Australians started early last year for the lions. Forgot to mention that. Or that NZ and Aus teams only have to fly 3 hours to play each other where the SA teams have to spend 24 hours traveling just to get to a game. 
He forgot to mention that SA teams has to play 4 - 5 games away from home where they most they have ever player were 3. It would be good to have some more teams in the tournament. I would really like to see how that would do if they have to spend 4 - 5 weeks on the road. 
ST
Sun-TzuClub Pro713 posts
28 Feb 2014, 16:42
#4
28 Feb 2014, 16:42#4
 Spiro is a racist, that's the problem. He toned it down for a few years after a backlash from all quarters but he always returns to what he knows best: racist jibes.
sharkbok
sharkbokCaptain23,297 posts
28 Feb 2014, 17:19
#5
28 Feb 2014, 17:19#5
 no mention of Australia starting the season first last year, or South Africa for years having to tour 5 consecutive games on the road. The away tours for South Africa are still much longer
OI
oimateyPro1,870 posts
28 Feb 2014, 21:06
#6
28 Feb 2014, 21:06#6
 "This advantage to the Sharks and disadvantage to the Hurricanes has been accentuated for the Melbourne Rebels, who are playing their first match of the 2014 tournament against the Cheetahs, who are playing their third match."

How'd that work out for you Spiro? Hopefully didn't believe in your theory so much that you put money on it.

Biggest disadvantage in the schedule (if there is one) still appears to be travel, eh?

BO
bobbok...Captain10,129 posts
28 Feb 2014, 21:55
#7
28 Feb 2014, 21:55#7
 Long time Bok hater, our mate Spiro ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, what downunder team goes on tour for 4/5 weeks ? Compared to coming to SA for 2 or 3 weeks.
FO
ForeverArizonaClub Pro580 posts
28 Feb 2014, 22:27
#8
28 Feb 2014, 22:27#8

 Ooooh I smell fear in the NZL camp.But my question is this?Where money is involved...why should one team dominate the world?Why should one team have it all?Why should one team have a "perfect season"?While the others look on...Then go about it bragging to every one rubbing it in their faces at every nick and turn.

 

I think it is unfair for one team to be this dominant.It is a monopoly and it doesnt really attract fans...accpet for that little nationNo no no...I think Souith Africa should push for eight teams in this tournanment.Let money decide who wins and looses...I mean that in the sense of advertisement revenue.

 

Nobodly likes a monopoly Nzl.You cant keep winning for ever.Goodluck.

BO
bobbok...Captain10,129 posts
01 Mar 2014, 00:11
#9
01 Mar 2014, 00:11#9
 Yep, lets get like the Indian Cricket Crooks & bully our way through negotiations ?
HA
hakwaPro4,146 posts
01 Mar 2014, 01:22
#10
01 Mar 2014, 01:22#10
 Arizona "I smell fear in the NZL camp" are you sure it's not your unchanged underwear you're talking about?
FO
ForeverArizonaClub Pro580 posts
01 Mar 2014, 07:02
#11
01 Mar 2014, 07:02#11

Twatkwa

 

W hen you have something important to tell me then hit me up.Other wise go and tend to grandad Mcnugget.HE needs all you Nzl nail bar attendees to pamper him for the RWC.

 

Peace bro!!!! 

HA
hakwaPro4,146 posts
01 Mar 2014, 07:05
#12
01 Mar 2014, 07:05#12
 
FO
ForeverArizonaClub Pro580 posts
01 Mar 2014, 07:07
#13
01 Mar 2014, 07:07#13
 Ag shampies.He looks so lonely.
MD
Monkey D LuffyPro6,277 posts
01 Mar 2014, 08:23
#14
01 Mar 2014, 08:23#14
IMO the four teams who played in the first rnd do have a advantage over those who havent played a game yet, but how much of an advantage is another question???

hurricanes and stormers both faced teams who had a chance to polish of some rough edges and fine tune some of their inner plans, while they (canes and storm) were forced to hit the ground running.

this is not to say that the rsults would not have turned out the way they did, hurricanes were always  the underdog, but the stormers demise in small part could be attributed to the lions one game advantage???

rebels before the cheetahs match had it tough as well, as did the crusaders last year when the aussies started first.
facing a team like the cheetahs who had two games under their belt??? pretty BS IMO, regardless of the ass whipping the gave the cheetahs.

the thing i dont understand is, fair enough the saffas wanted an early start for their CC, but why couldnt all the teams just start at the same time??? o_O

this situation is similar regarding the Boks getting to play the pumas in the first rnd of every RC/4nats to date.
pumas play F all games and the bulk of their players play up north, and the NH tournaments heinken cup, top etc, finish months before their first test with the Boks.

this means the pumas already the underdog team are ripe for the picking against the No2 team in the world.
fast forward a week later and what happens??? Boks struggle to gain parity with the pumas. we saw this last year when the pumas scored more trys to narrowly lose and the year before when the Boks were humiliated into a pathetic draw.
FO
ForeverArizonaClub Pro580 posts
01 Mar 2014, 23:22
#15
01 Mar 2014, 23:22#15
 Why do stupid people feel they have to share their thoughts...seriously!?!?
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
02 Mar 2014, 01:08
#16
02 Mar 2014, 01:08#16
Spiro Zavos?  Shouldn't this fella be playing soccer...or dining on copious helpings of spanakopita.
FO
ForeverArizonaClub Pro580 posts
02 Mar 2014, 03:34
#17
02 Mar 2014, 03:34#17
My post has been deleted and my account has been suspended.
HA
hakwaPro4,146 posts
02 Mar 2014, 04:17
#18
02 Mar 2014, 04:17#18
 very manly there Arizona
— END OF THREAD —

More from Rugby

More news