New Zealand Rugby set to ditch SANZAAR, Super Rugby - report

[Kiap]

Guys, I say we can develop our own comp. But I still think there should be Trans-Tasman competition on top of that.

This can be flexible, perhaps with Champions and Challenge Cups, with zero to three Australian teams involved in each.

(a) Kiwi teams have only a few Aus teams playing each year so as to minimally dilute the strength of NZ v NZ matchups.

(b) Oz teams continue to grow domestically, without an existential dependence on TT competition, which is critically important for the union code in Aus.

This way gets the best of both worlds.

[towny]

Dilute the strength..... that is such a nonsense argument.

AFL has 18 teams
NRL has 16 teams

NZ can’t have more than 5 rugby teams? Sounds legit.

And what is the strength of a team? It’s relative to other teams and nothing more. This is the first bit of idiocy that must be kicked into touch. But this isn’t the real issue - NZRU’s main and only priority is the strength of the ABs. This is all that matters, because this sliver props up the entire sport, which btw, is losing junior players hand over fist. NZRU wants 5 strong teams to keep the ABs strong. But this thinking is strategic incompetence. Less juniors means a smaller talent pipeline and the latest schoolboy and u20 teams aren’t as good as previous years because of this drain. AB success apparently does not correlate with kids wanting to play and the cable tv model is on its last legs, so the NZRU are betting the farm on a bad hand. How’d that ‘genius’ equity deal go with Sky? It’s gone from $20m to 20 cents. Sky knew the score and locked them in at any price, knowing that they were dead otherwise and that they could issue more shares at any time to keep the party going a year or two more. Soon Sky in NZ will be gone - that’s a fact.

But, if they want to have 5 teams paying each other over and over, I say let them - not much money in that, even while Sky still has the lights on. If they want to work with a partner to build a stronger sport then they need only look to their closest neighbour. I get the feeling that some kiwis would rather be proud and homeless than equal partners with Australia. There is some sanity in the NZRU - whoever leaked that info is obviously trying to force the hand of the old muppets. Let’s hope they prevail. But if not, I look forward to a new Oz comp. Force looked great today.

[Guy Smiley]

Losing junior players hand over fist?

You’ve got your hand on it mate.

[stemoc]

NRL and definitely AFL are not "international sports" so they can have upwards of 16 teams or more.. having more teams in rugby union will dilute the competition thus why they have the Mitre10 here so that the very best players of that competition (bar fijians) can make a top nz super rugby franchise ... Oz have NRC but even then, the best young players are rarely selected forcing most of them to go to france or worse... ... loig...

[Wild Beef]

NRL and definitely AFL are not "international sports" so they can have upwards of 16 teams or more.. having more teams in rugby union will dilute the competition thus why they have the Mitre10 here so that the very best players of that competition (bar fijians) can make a top nz super rugby franchise ... Oz have NRC but even then, the best young players are rarely selected forcing most of them to go to france or worse... ... loig...

This doesn’t make sense. Football is international?

[Ellafan]

NRL and definitely AFL are not "international sports" so they can have upwards of 16 teams or more.. having more teams in rugby union will dilute the competition thus why they have the Mitre10 here so that the very best players of that competition (bar fijians) can make a top nz super rugby franchise ... Oz have NRC but even then, the best young players are rarely selected forcing most of them to go to france or worse... ... loig...

This doesn’t make sense. Football is international?

Comets is talking about the lite code, and australian football. The latter is not international; the former is only played seriously in 3 countries.

Edit: 4 if you include PNG.

[Ellafan]

Nobody going to point out that Fijians are mostly Melanesian?

Brumbies don't get a guernsey and I have watched my last rugby game.

The Serbian approach...

Better still the brumbies become the "southern team" and you can negotiate a weekend in Melbourne with the missus.

[-RB-]

Nobody going to point out that Fijians are mostly Melanesian?

So what does this have to do with the price me fish in Russia???

[Ellafan]

Bump.

So it looks like SR is gone for good, because NZR cannot now backdown from their attempt to try and get direct claws into the much larger Au TV market.

It also looks like RC will be canned, because the Saffers & Pumas will not be in a position to travel (to NZ or anywhere) in match fit condition in October/November (so as to do quarantine plus training weeks pre window, or at all.

I guess the NZR bluff failed. Australia is organising its own expanded super rugby for next year, that much is now certain.

[Ymx]

Bump.

So it looks like SR is gone for good, because NZR cannot now backdown from their attempt to try and get direct claws into the much larger Au TV market.

It also looks like RC will be canned, because the Saffers & Pumas will not be in a position to travel (to NZ or anywhere) in match fit condition in October/November (so as to do quarantine plus training weeks pre window, or at all.

I guess the NZR bluff failed. Australia is organising its own expanded super rugby for next year, that much is now certain.

Toy throwing aside. Can the the ARU financially survive?

Couldn’t afford 5 teams under the old arrangement, and struggling with tv deals to fund as it was? But now? Can they fund more teams, and cope with less tv money? Or does it not work that way. As they get much more due to not sharing with NZ??

Apologies, I’m sure I’ve massively overlooked the obvious.

You have your other thread of course.

[Enzedder]

So each country has it's own comp and can make extra money by selling it's product to local and overseas TV markets.

When the world settles down, they will be able to look at a merger or a championship comp.

Looks to be the only option at present anyway

[Ymx]

So each country has it's own comp and can make extra money by selling it's product to local and overseas TV markets.

When the world settles down, they will be able to look at a merger or a championship comp.

Looks to be the only option at present anyway

That’s a good point. So NZ are already directly making TV money from many other countries. Including Aus and over here in the UK.

[Biffer]

So each country has it's own comp and can make extra money by selling it's product to local and overseas TV markets.

When the world settles down, they will be able to look at a merger or a championship comp.

Looks to be the only option at present anyway

That’s a good point. So NZ are already directly making TV money from many other countries. Including Aus and over here in the UK.

Judging by the quality on show, it’ll be worth more than the Aussie version. If the Saffers put everyone into the Currie Cup, they’d get decent money / viewing figures as well I reckon.

[Enzedder]

Live rugby is bloody awesome but I do record anything after my "early" bedtime and watch first thing in the morning. I am enjoying the Aussie stuff but agree that NZ seems to have it for game quality at present. That could well be that that is because I have an emotional interest in the NZ comp.

[OomStruisbaai]

So each country has it's own comp and can make extra money by selling it's product to local and overseas TV markets.

When the world settles down, they will be able to look at a merger or a championship comp.

Looks to be the only option at present anyway

This. Tours for internationals. Rugby restored.

[Biffer]

So each country has it's own comp and can make extra money by selling it's product to local and overseas TV markets.

When the world settles down, they will be able to look at a merger or a championship comp.

Looks to be the only option at present anyway

This. Tours for internationals. Rugby restored.

Domestic comps Mar - Jun
Internationals (tours and RC) Jun - Aug
SH Heineken equivalent Aug - Oct
November Internationals.

[clydecloggie]

Super Rugby Aotearoa is the best domestic competition to happen in the Southern Hemisphere for years. You guys have great teams and shit competitions. I think you should stick to domestic comps and then have an international club / region competition afterwards. Same as in Europe - where the competitions are successful with fans, sponsors and broadcasters. If Crusaders v Reds happens twice every year there’s nothing to get excited about and it ends up being a shit competition. Twice a year domestically works because of internal rivalries, national team mates playing each other etc.

I agree. SR Aotearoa is brilliant. The regular utterly mad offloads to nowhere in your own 22 aside, the pace and skills on show are fantastic. Normally I only see the ABs play once or twice a year, so really good to see some of the top NZ players in action on a weekly basis.

Compared to that, the normal SR is a pretty dull and pedestrian affair with endless games between mismatched teams playing to an inaccessible conference system.

Keep Aotearoa and have a SANZAAR Champions Cup woven into the season.

[Amethyst]

For SA: No Super Rugby nor PRO14 or whatever. Full length, strong Currie Cup (which could be split over a period as to guarantee participation of Bok players throughout), incoming NH tour, Rugby Championship, extended/expanded tour to NH end of year. Only possible problem with this is that non-Bok players may be idle when Boks are playing international sides but another fill-in domestic competition can cover that period (eg: a cross-over competition between A and B section CC sides / bringing in other teams from Arg, pacific islands OR even arranging an incoming tour from "fringe" unions like Georgia, Fiji, etc.)

[Guy Smiley]

Super Rugby Aotearoa is the best domestic competition to happen in the Southern Hemisphere for years. You guys have great teams and shit competitions. I think you should stick to domestic comps and then have an international club / region competition afterwards. Same as in Europe - where the competitions are successful with fans, sponsors and broadcasters. If Crusaders v Reds happens twice every year there’s nothing to get excited about and it ends up being a shit competition. Twice a year domestically works because of internal rivalries, national team mates playing each other etc.

I agree. SR Aotearoa is brilliant. The regular utterly mad offloads to nowhere in your own 22 aside, the pace and skills on show are fantastic. Normally I only see the ABs play once or twice a year, so really good to see some of the top NZ players in action on a weekly basis.

Compared to that, the normal SR is a pretty dull and pedestrian affair with endless games between mismatched teams playing to an inaccessible conference system.

Keep Aotearoa and have a SANZAAR Champions Cup woven into the season.

The only downside of SR Aotearoa is the physical toll it takes from the players. Essentially test match intensity for two months is too much. That’s not going to be sustainable.

The fun part is the Mitre10 cup will soon. All the fun of the fair without the extreme brutality. NZ has serious rugby product

[Biffer]

Super Rugby Aotearoa is the best domestic competition to happen in the Southern Hemisphere for years. You guys have great teams and shit competitions. I think you should stick to domestic comps and then have an international club / region competition afterwards. Same as in Europe - where the competitions are successful with fans, sponsors and broadcasters. If Crusaders v Reds happens twice every year there’s nothing to get excited about and it ends up being a shit competition. Twice a year domestically works because of internal rivalries, national team mates playing each other etc.

I agree. SR Aotearoa is brilliant. The regular utterly mad offloads to nowhere in your own 22 aside, the pace and skills on show are fantastic. Normally I only see the ABs play once or twice a year, so really good to see some of the top NZ players in action on a weekly basis.

Compared to that, the normal SR is a pretty dull and pedestrian affair with endless games between mismatched teams playing to an inaccessible conference system.

Keep Aotearoa and have a SANZAAR Champions Cup woven into the season.

The only downside of SR Aotearoa is the physical toll it takes from the players. Essentially test match intensity for two months is too much. That’s not going to be sustainable.

The fun part is the Mitre10 cup will soon. All the fun of the fair without the extreme brutality. NZ has serious rugby product

That intensity is what brings in sponsorship and TV money though. You either produce a product to get the money, which you've clearly demonstrated you're capable of, or stop complaining that you don't have enough money.

8 SR Aotearoa games
10 / 11 International games
6/7 SANZAAR Heineken Cup games

So probably a max of 25 games or so for the top players. That's not overplaying.

[OomStruisbaai]

For SA: No Super Rugby nor PRO14 or whatever. Full length, strong Currie Cup (which could be split over a period as to guarantee participation of Bok players throughout), incoming NH tour, Rugby Championship, extended/expanded tour to NH end of year. Only possible problem with this is that non-Bok players may be idle when Boks are playing international sides but another fill-in domestic competition can cover that period (eg: a cross-over competition between A and B section CC sides / bringing in other teams from Arg, pacific islands OR even arranging an incoming tour from "fringe" unions like Georgia, Fiji, etc.)

The Currie Cup will be good enough at this stage.

[Amethyst]

For SA: No Super Rugby nor PRO14 or whatever. Full length, strong Currie Cup (which could be split over a period as to guarantee participation of Bok players throughout), incoming NH tour, Rugby Championship, extended/expanded tour to NH end of year. Only possible problem with this is that non-Bok players may be idle when Boks are playing international sides but another fill-in domestic competition can cover that period (eg: a cross-over competition between A and B section CC sides / bringing in other teams from Arg, pacific islands OR even arranging an incoming tour from "fringe" unions like Georgia, Fiji, etc.)

The Currie Cup will be good enough at this stage.

Longterm suggestion. Yes, only CC for this year.

[Guy Smiley]

I agree. SR Aotearoa is brilliant. The regular utterly mad offloads to nowhere in your own 22 aside, the pace and skills on show are fantastic. Normally I only see the ABs play once or twice a year, so really good to see some of the top NZ players in action on a weekly basis.

Compared to that, the normal SR is a pretty dull and pedestrian affair with endless games between mismatched teams playing to an inaccessible conference system.

Keep Aotearoa and have a SANZAAR Champions Cup woven into the season.

The only downside of SR Aotearoa is the physical toll it takes from the players. Essentially test match intensity for two months is too much. That’s not going to be sustainable.

The fun part is the Mitre10 cup will soon. All the fun of the fair without the extreme brutality. NZ has serious rugby product

That intensity is what brings in sponsorship and TV money though. You either produce a product to get the money, which you've clearly demonstrated you're capable of, or stop complaining that you don't have enough money.

8 SR Aotearoa games
10 / 11 International games
6/7 SANZAAR Heineken Cup games

So probably a max of 25 games or so for the top players. That's not overplaying.

There’s been a couple of leaps made here that I find a tad confusing. Would you care to expand on this post?

[JM2K6]

I think he's confusing "test match intensity for 2 months" with "too many games are being played" which aren't quite the same thing.

SR NZ is fun and high quality but it's not test match intensity IMO so I find it a moot point anyway.

[Amethyst]

I think he's confusing "test match intensity for 2 months" with "too many games are being played" which aren't quite the same thing.

SR NZ is fun and high quality but it's not test match intensity IMO so I find it a moot point anyway.

Not the same intensity (especially defensively) as a hard fought test match. Super Rugby has always been known for attacking/expansive rugby. Spectacular but not test rugby.

[assfly]

So if SR is gone forever, I assume that means that the Sharks will be SR champions* forever

[Chilli]

A sort of solution could be that each of South Africa, New Zealand, Australia and Japan play their domestic competitions at the same time.
The winners of each competition get a home ground advantage to play the runners up from the other nations [ draw out of a hat, but can't play their own nation] in 1/4 finals.
Then 4 teams in the semi's
2 in the finals

[Sinkers]

A sort of solution could be that each of South Africa, New Zealand, Australia and Japan play their domestic competitions at the same time.
The winners of each competition get a home ground advantage to play the runners up from the other nations [ draw out of a hat, but can't play their own nation] in 1/4 finals.
Then 4 teams in the semi's
2 in the finals

I’m shit at maths and stuff, so: with all the emphasis on player welfare and a general acceptance players are playing too many games, what’s the comparative games played between that and the super set up?

[Guy Smiley]

I think he's confusing "test match intensity for 2 months" with "too many games are being played" which aren't quite the same thing.

SR NZ is fun and high quality but it's not test match intensity IMO so I find it a moot point anyway.

Not the same intensity (especially defensively) as a hard fought test match. Super Rugby has always been known for attacking/expansive rugby. Spectacular but not test rugby.

Cliched rubbish. Attacking rugby for sure... but that has to be defended. I think you’re confusing negative rugby with defense.

I reckon it’s a fair bet that the NZ Super Rugby teams would give most test teams a fair run for their money, probably thrash more than a few. It’s not that large a jump from them to the ABs and their attacking expansive style has sort of worked fairly well... You’d almost say spectacularly, for test rugby. Their defensive record is pretty spectacular as well.

[JM2K6]

I think he's confusing "test match intensity for 2 months" with "too many games are being played" which aren't quite the same thing.

SR NZ is fun and high quality but it's not test match intensity IMO so I find it a moot point anyway.

Not the same intensity (especially defensively) as a hard fought test match. Super Rugby has always been known for attacking/expansive rugby. Spectacular but not test rugby.

Cliched rubbish. Attacking rugby for sure... but that has to be defended. I think you’re confusing negative rugby with defense.

I reckon it’s a fair bet that the NZ Super Rugby teams would give most test teams a fair run for their money, probably thrash more than a few. It’s not that large a jump from them to the ABs and their attacking expansive style has sort of worked fairly well... You’d almost say spectacularly, for test rugby. Their defensive record is pretty spectacular as well.

I'm not bashing SR and I'm certainly not buying into Amethyst's line, but the difference between NZ SR and the All Blacks is quite large. The fact that players can make the step up does not mean that SR is All Blacks standard in general - it's more testament to the coaching at AB level and the lack of friction between SR and AB coaching and playing styles, and the amount of time players can get with the AB group.

SR is full of players who are sub-AB standard, and some of the standout players have looked much less sure of themselves at international level. It genuinely is a step up to internationals.

One thing I find is that NZ fans and commentators are very forgiving of mistakes, which can sometimes mean that players with obvious skills in some areas get a pass mark when realistically their weaknesses are going to be magnified at international level - but might not be so important at SR level. On the flip side, up here we often get too focused on what players can't do rather than what they can, and that can lead to conservative selections and conservative play.

[Guy Smiley]

We don’t forgive or forget mistakes

We nurture those memories. For decades. I’m well on the way to carrying a lifelong grudge over Jordie fucking Barrett, for instance.

[JM2K6]

We don’t forgive or forget mistakes

We nurture those memories. For decades. I’m well on the way to carrying a lifelong grudge over Jordie fucking Barrett, for instance.

Haha - I have developed a mental running tally of his fuckups during matches thanks to the hype from Marshall and co.

[Guy Smiley]

We don’t forgive or forget mistakes

We nurture those memories. For decades. I’m well on the way to carrying a lifelong grudge over Jordie fucking Barrett, for instance.

Haha - I have developed a mental running tally of his fuckups during matches thanks to the hype from Marshall and co.

There’s a coordinated campaign within NZ rugby to exalt any and every move any Barrett makes. Their farts will be sealed in jars and kept in the rugby fucking museum, ffs.

[JM2K6]

At least he's talented. We had the same thing except for Luther fucking Burrell

[Amethyst]

I think he's confusing "test match intensity for 2 months" with "too many games are being played" which aren't quite the same thing.

SR NZ is fun and high quality but it's not test match intensity IMO so I find it a moot point anyway.

Not the same intensity (especially defensively) as a hard fought test match. Super Rugby has always been known for attacking/expansive rugby. Spectacular but not test rugby.

Cliched rubbish. Attacking rugby for sure... but that has to be defended. I think you’re confusing negative rugby with defense.

I reckon it’s a fair bet that the NZ Super Rugby teams would give most test teams a fair run for their money, probably thrash more than a few. It’s not that large a jump from them to the ABs and their attacking expansive style has sort of worked fairly well... You’d almost say spectacularly, for test rugby. Their defensive record is pretty spectacular as well.

Mate, all your teams aren't that great. Only the Crusaders have showed over the Super Rugby years that they are a notch above the other teams in the competition. Your other teams are not all that great, bro and the Blues have been milking cows for years.

[OomStruisbaai]

Shanky is an Aussie.

[Guy Smiley]

Shanky is an Aussie.

Yes. He is.

[Ymx]

This comp has been amazing.

I’d like to see it stay as is next year.

Many of these teams would cause many an embarrassment to other Intl teams.

[Sandstorm]

Shanky is an Aussie.

Yes. He is.

He’s a guy who smiles

[Biffer]

This comp has been amazing.

I’d like to see it stay as is next year.

Many of these teams would cause many an embarrassment to other Intl teams.

On this, we most definitely agree.