Victims of a flawed structure

MARK KEOHANE, in his weekly Business Day column, says Saturday’s Super Rugby final will be a farce instead of a real contest the tournament deserves.

Can the Sharks win in Hamilton and claim a first Super Rugby title?

Of course they can.

Are they good enough, individually and as a unit, to beat the home team?

Of course they are.

Will they win it?

Never.

The competition structure in Super Rugby finals has always been flawed because of the need to cram as much as possible into the year calendar, make the various administrations as much money as possible and give the broadcaster as much product as is possible.

A final should be about a contest and the definition of a contest is that the winner should not be predetermined.

Finals in which one team travels more than 19,300km and is given one training run before the season climax are finals only in name.

You play at home, you win. You play away, you lose. Occasionally a very good side wins away from home in another country in Super Rugby. In the history of the tournament, this was the exclusive right of a very talented and special Crusaders squad.

Officials argue that this is to reward consistency and the team placing top of the league gets all the play-off advantages. Cool, then why have a final? Win the league and you should be the champions.(Puts the  Stormers perforamnce into perspective!)

The moment a play-off structure was introduced, which guaranteed each of the three Sanzar countries a play-off spot, it nullified any justification of rewarding league form.(Cant argue against that!)

Australia is the weakest conference. The Reds would have placed sixth on league strength. They won the Australian conference and got third on the overall league.

It is all a lie. From the outset, league form is not rewarded.

There should be three titles: a trophy and cash for the respective conference winner. It is a reward. It is an achievement. You, for example the Stormers, are the best South African team in the conference.(Hoor Hoor Hoor!!!!!)

Then there’s the overall league winner and a very huge cash incentive and a big trophy. You are consistently the best team of the season, for example, the Stormers this year. (Hoor, Hoor, Hoor to the power of 100!!)

Now, your winners get a heads-up in the six-team play-offs, which is another tournament within a tournament. The heads-up is you get to host a play-off match which puts you in a position to play in the final, which is at a neutral venue and whose only purpose is revenue for the two respective teams and the competition organisers.

And there is a fortnight break between the play-off and the final. Then you have a tournament, in which there is merit, there is reward and there is logic.

Why have a climax to a tournament in which the format determines the winner? We play at home, we win. We play away, we lose. Why bother?

I have heard all the crazy arguments that if a team is that good they win anywhere. Crap.

The Crusaders’ campaign a year ago had a Hollywood script but a real ending, not that which sells to a dummy audience. (hahahahahaha plenty of dummies around of ocurse)

The same applies this coming Saturday. The Chiefs have to win because they are rested, at home and well prepared. The Sharks, in Brisbane a fortnight ago, in Cape Town last week and in Hamilton this weekend, have spent more time travelling than on the field.

Greed is the only motivator of the current system. There is no reward to any player, team or supporter.

Invariably the losing team in the final is lambasted by a disappointed supporter, and before there is time for proper analysis it all gets repeated in a league format at a national level.

Why no final here? The draw again influences the final standings.

The Sharks have confirmed their class in beating the Stormers. They were good enough. And they got the result. The Stormers, given the class of player, overachieved in winning the league and hosting a semi-final through consistently winning and they did not choke. A choke is when there is no way a team should lose. There was always a chance that they could lose because of the limitations within the available match 22 and the lack of try-scoring potency in the game plan. (Those talking about  achoke need t oget real!)

The Chiefs, in New Zealand, were deserving winners and a Crusaders’ victory would merely have added to the illusion of the brilliance of a Crusaders team that relies on the extraordinary talents of Richie McCaw and Dan Carter and a historical dominance that has long not been a reflection of their rugby in the tournament.

The seven-times tournament champions have now lost five successive semi-finals and that is more relevant than the seven titles won by another generation.

We play at home, we win. You play at home, you win.

If it works for you, cool, but then add a bit of perspective to the illusion and see the tournament as a money spinner and not a representation of a team’s ability.

Both semi-finals were great value for New Zealand and SA respectively. Both national squads will be strong. Both will teams be extremely difficult to beat at home.

Don’t confuse national with regional and provincial. No bloke in Canterbury wants the Chiefs to beat the Sharks because the latter are South African. On the contrary. The same applies here. Unite behind the Sharks? Tell that to the Bulls and Lions supporters, as just two examples. Unite behind the Boks yes, but the Sharks are not a representation of Cape Town or Johannesburg.

National is national. Provincial is provincial. League is league. Knockout is knockout. Cash is all that motivates the administration. If it was about the contest, they wouldn’t force one team to spend 48 hours travelling across the world and then make them play 48 hours after touchdown.

The Sharks and Chiefs are bloody good sides. There is little between the two. It should be the dream final.

Instead it is a farce. It was when the Chiefs travelled to Pretoria a few years ago.

Can the Sharks win?

Of course they can.

Will they win?

They’ve won already if you are judging their rugby.

Love the idea of cash for Stormers re their SA Conference trophy and toppoing the Log. Two major achievemnts currently being trashed.

Sharkies can have knockout stages!  But the dice is loaded against them.

oh my gosh....this biggest piece of whinging writing that i have ever read in my life from the coke snorting stipper womanizer namly mark keohane. the same plonker that was responsible for getting PDV the job and now he is running his mouth once again.

as a rugby journo one is meant toe be neutral and only to comment on the facts now due to one eyed cocaine enraged reporting it seems now that his fanboy team lost due to choke....and yes it is a choke if you lose when your meant to win...(home semi, week rested, team visiting has jet lag missing a few key players ext ext ext)....Now suddently that his team is not in die finals now the whole comp is being questioned. wow how wonderfull is that not hmmmm. the structure was fine before saterday now suddenly its a farce ????....do i detected a small sense of sore loser there ???? be a good sportsman and take it on the chin mate. if you lost then you lost. if if was a once off lost then fine fair enough but 11 years between drinks is n long time so dont throw your toys out the of the crip if you dont get your own way. Mark keohane's overinflated ego knows no bounds. the structure is not great the conference idea needs to be scrapped in view. but at the end of the day its the same for everyone. i reckoned i saw mark on the tryline try to snort it over the weekend.

the sharks are up against it yes but that is the cards they have been delt with. you dont see sharks fans sitting and crying about how the comp is not well structured ext ext. because we are mature enough.

I agree with most of the article, but I must say, as a loyal Bulls man, I am now 100% behind the Sharks now, as are all my friends be they Stormers, Lions, Cheetahs or Stormers supporters. The structure of the tournament is stupid, and I don't know of anyone that approves of it.

 Well said Bluebok.

Muncher would you mind playing the ball and not the man. I think the  format is not right and the points he makes are valid. All this is driven by money, fair enough in one sense, but is not right in providing a fair contest. Prove Keo wrong.

I note Walsh is reffing the final. He was fine in the semi but will he revert to type in the finals when he gets home to nz.

the structure is stupid yes....that has been overstated along time ago but i cant help but wonder mark suddenly wants to question it now after his team lost on saterday. its the same for everyone. i really hope saru can man up and not signoff on this structure come 2013 or 2014....i am not sure when the structure being relooked at but the conferrence system needs to go and i would like the finals being played in a home and way scenario or maybe there should be a week resting period between the playoffs and semi's and finals. then again. i do like the idea that the top 6 can qualify that has get the intensity up for the final weeks but the travelling is a issue.

from what i heard the likes of japan, argentina ext want super teams as welll so if they are included then the comp structure must change.....the conference system allows for tokenism just for being part of the comp and is not build for performance awarding system

heres an interesting piece of info for u boys.
when SANZAR was hammering out the details for the format of the spXV, it was SARU who insisted that the leader of every conference be automatically given a top 3 spot, with the usual allocation given via points etc.
NZRU and ARU disagreed, but eventually ARU saw the pros to that idea and agreed. NZRU never wanted it.
if it wasnt for SARU, sharks would have only travelled to loftus to play the bulls, instead of brisbane and most likely would have beaten the bulls and then the stormers and then travel to NZ.
round of applause for SARU aye???
 

saSUE nothing surprises me about SARU so sorry to disappoint you. These twits are still trying to make 6 go into 5 having only lately realised the problem!!!  Sorry I have little confidence in SARFU

Come to think of it saSUE where did you get this is info.  Logic would lead one to suspect Oz was behind this?

the system is flawed yes....why does a team get 4 points for a bye ????? why dont they sit a round our and play for there points like all the other systems. i am thinking of champion league soccer at the moment. but this all was known prior to the season starting so i just find it funny that old mark cocaine head keohane is crying fowl now only. what about the rest of the season ????. when his team was at the top then the whole system was fine and he could not care less.

I agree with Carpet Muncher.

KEO logic does not seem to apply to the Stormers.

The Stormers have lost every home semi final, except the time they made the final.  I think they lost against the highlanders in 1999, and also 2 of the other 3 home semi finals they have played

The Travel factor is a disadvantage. However finishing the higher on the table means that the advantage goes to the higher placed team. The only flaw is the Reds getting a home quarter final although the Sharks were ranked higher. 

The problem is that the countries are just very far apart. Until a time portal is invented this is allways going to be the problem. 

Does anyone really want to wait one extra week during the tournament for each final- from quarters, semis and final. It is also about what the specators want as supporters, not just money. 

Also having some finals, is better than none. The Bottom line is the Sharks have got into very good form- and I think probably a better team than the Chiefs, and all other teams on current form. However the Chiefs have played well all season- and have a higher winning ratio than the Sharks. As loyal a Sharks supporter as I am- for much of the season just getting into the top 6 was tough.

Another option to consider- is to have the finals in a neutral zone. Then both teams would have to travel. For example hold the finals in one location- like London so all 6 teams in the finals would be in one location for the whole duration. This could potentially make even more money due to the high price of tickets- but is it what the fans want?

fair point sharkbok.....then maybe the profits can go the the higher placed team before the final and the marketing boys at sanzar can milk the cashcow even more by spreading the fansbase to europe or even asia...i just a tough call. the travelling will always be there so we need to make it just fair in terms of specticale but your right in the sense that the fans might want to wait. i just think waiting another week will just add to the intensity for the clash seeing that both sets of fans need to wait longer for it. i dont know to be honest. the sharks fans got the bad end of the stick in regards to the format but we dont sit and cry about it. our team just pitches up and play. leason maybe to old coke head keohane and his mindless horde of fanboys.

the soccer system really works nicly i think with the time in between the finals ext so i think we need to take a leaf from there book and maybe follow similiar lines. the 2 sports are way different but if they really want to maximise the finals they should really create more games at the backend and give the teams more resting time. the knockon effect is a better spectacle and bigger brand marketing ext ext. the spin offs can be massive. they relevant countries should be a allowed the commercial rights accourding to the amount of viewers each country attracts as well. the aussies and nz are riding on our money seeing that sa alone gets in around 2/3's of the amount of viewership

@beeno1,

tony johnson talks about it on supersport in one of his weekly columns.

If they really wanted to include the conference winners, come hell or high-water, it could have been done very easily. They keep there positions on the logs and the top four play in the semi's. If one of the conferences do not have a team in the top four, then the fourth team makes way for the conference winner.

and tony johnston is very much a straight shooter so i dont think he will make such a statment without evidence to back it up. the only reason why i think that SARU went that route was that they thought that SA would not be able to compete...wow how wrong they were proven hmmmm

Sadly we really shouldnt be agrieved, disgruntled or even angered about this format. Afterall as we all know SA were the drivers of this being integrated and when the Crusaders had to do what the Sharks are doing now....I didn't happen to hear any SA's complaining?

Funny when the shoes on the other foot as you start to look at it differently? I stated more than once on here the Sharks are where they are becuase they were consistent at the end of the tournament but not consistently through the tournament. They knew exactely what the permutations would be for them week to week/

They have determined their destiny and are now major contenders for the title. To the Sharks credit you dont here them complaining about the fact that they need to travel...they are here to win and thats the sign of a champion team!!!!!

Go the Sharks!!!!

Current structure is the best you can do with the current number of teams. Unless every team played every other team there is no way to say that you should re-seed the top 6 teams to determine playoff berth. To be fair you would have to consider strength of schedule, travel and all kinds of other factors. Winner of the conference deserves a home game - that is the reward for having the best season. Cannot discriminate against the Aussies even though they are easily the weakest conference.

Every team knows what is required before the season starts to prevent playoff travel. Sharks were the last seed because they only found form at the end of the season.

This article is nothing but a bunch of whinging - doesn't even propose a solution, just criticizes - easy enough to do.

@beeno mark cokehead keohane's warped logic does imply to the stormers. i dont find the timing of this piece of one eyed reporting at all funny seeing that this is the first time the super rugby comp is beaing analised in such a way by mark. all the biased stormers pieces validating the playing style ext ext ext all proves my point of his biased mentallity. wonderfull journo ethics hmmmm

@radtab ou nailed it on the head buddy could not have said it better myself.

the conf system need to go and there is major cheaking needed. i feel they should also have more teams on byes to shorten the comp and then employ rest weeks in the finals stage. that i think will even up the playing field a lot more. plus every team needs to play at least all the other teams once before the finals. cant believe that some teams dont play each other. how can you be the champs if you dodge other teams.

a lot needs to be looked at just hope SARU can man the &*&*& up and get the ball rolling.