David Pocock of the Western Force faces his opponent, Gerhard Mostert of the Lions in their Super 14s match at Subiaco Oval, Perth, Australia, Friday April 24, 2009. (AP Photo)
The South African threat to set up their own alternative Super Rugby tournament to replace the Super 14 is a big bluff. There are no provincial teams available in the rest of the rugby world to replace the Australian and New Zealand provinces.
Any tournament put together by South African rugby would not be worth a fraction of what Super Rugby is to South Africa.
The problem with this bluff, though, is that the South Africans might believe their own bullishness on their ‘go it alone’ policy and the best provincial tournament in world rugby, the Super 14, could go under.
On 15 March, the Afrikaans Sunday newspaper ‘Sondag’ reported that a special meeting of the five SA Super 14 franchises, SA Rugby, the SA Rugby Players Association and the broadcaster Supersport (which has signed lucrative rights from 2011 to 2015 for the Currie Cup tournament) had agreed not to accept any Super Rugby proposal that waters down the Currie Cup in any manner.
Also agreed was that South Africa would ‘aggressively’ try to ensure that the East Cape franchise is the 15th Super Rugby team, if the Super 14 is expanded to a Super 15 in 2011.
The response of South African Rugby to the ARU’s and NZRU’s fall-back Pacific Competition involving Australia, New Zealand, Japan and the Pacific Islands, Sondag reported, would be a South African sponsored tournament involving teams from South African, Argentina, the USA, Scotland and Ireland.
The newspaper also claimed that 65 per cent of the broadcasting fees for Super Rugby were generated in South Africa and that any withdrawal by South Africa would be ‘catastrophic’ for Australia and New Zealand.
On May 1, the ARU and the NZRU issued a joint statement saying that it wanted the new Super 15 Rugby tournament to continue through June with Tests between the SANZAR nations and European teams to be played mid-week, an approach that is used in European rugby.
The ARU and the NZRU stated that they opposed the South African preference to start the new, enlarged Super 15 in mid-February. The two unions wanted a March kick-off.
They rejected a SA Rugby proposal to put the two preferred versions of the Super 15 before the broadcasters to decide.
They reaffirmed that ‘talks would continue’ on their alternative plan if Australia and New Zealand separated from South Africa. This alternative might be described as the Asia-Pacific solution.
It was emphasised that the Tri-Nations, with the possible inclusion of Argentina, would not be affected by the impasse.
The CEO of the NZRU Steve Tew acknowledged to journalists that South African rugby, at this time, won’t budge. That replacing South Africa’s economic advantage was ‘massive’, but replacing those dollars was ‘possibly not as scary as initially thought.’
The CEO of the ARU John O’Neill confirmed that the Pacific-Asia solution was a ‘functional option’ that broadcasters ‘find quite attractive.’
It is clear from all of this that the NZRU and ARU are confronting South Africa Rugby’s bluff . And they are undoubtedly correct to do this.
Why do I call the proposals put forward by South Africa Rugby a bluff? Let me count the ways.
First, the money issue is furphy. The South African portion of the broadcasting payments from Super Rugby are already significantly higher than the payments made to Australia or New Zealand. This is right because the market is bigger in South Africa.
But, with no Australian and New Zealand teams there is no world class tournament to generate the television interest and sponsorship interest in Super Rugby that fills the coffers of South African rugby.
If you generate a 65 per cent profit of nothing, you actually generate no profit. This simple arithmetical equation must surely be obvious even to the South African rugby administrators.
Similarly, the drive to have the East Cape franchise as the sixth South African Super Rugby side is ludicrous. This franchise is essentially a black and coloured franchise. The team is extremely weak. It is being promoted on PC ‘rainbow nation’ grounds. It has been given the first match of the tour against the British and Irish Lions which promises to be the only easy match of the tour for the visitors. It will be years, if ever, before this franchise is ready for Super Rugby.
Anyway, the way to get the team into Super Rugby is for it to win its way up through a promotion and relegation system applied to the South African provinces.
There is the additional fact, too, about the claim for a sixth South African side that South Africa hardly warrants having five Super Rugby sides, let alone six. One South African side has won only one Super Rugby tournament. Every year some South African sides clog up the bottom of the table. This season, for instance, three of the five bottom teams are certain to be South African sides.
But the most important ingredient of the bluff is that unlike Australia and New Zealand, there is no alternative set of provinces across several countries to form a tournament that broadcasters would want to pay money for and spectators would want to watch.
Provincial rugby in the USA (with virtually no professional players) and Argentina (which has about 30 part-professional players in Argentina) is so weak that the East Cape team would easily win matches against sides from Argentina and the USA.
What about a tournament with Scottish and Irish teams, then? The time zone is fine, with South Africa being just two hours ahead of Greenwich Mean Time. What is not fine is the availability of teams from Scotland and Ireland to play in a South Africa-Celtic (without Wales apparently) tournament.
To understand all of this, we need to look at the structure of the South African rugby year.
At present, the SA rugby year starts in late February going through to late May with the Super 14 tournament.
On 10 July through to 31 October there is the Currie Cup, with 55 matches in all.
There are the June-July Tests against mainly European nations.
This is followed by the July-August-September Tri-Nations
And the season ends with the November – December European tour by the Springboks.
It will be obvious from this that the Currie Cup is already significantly ‘watered down’ with the home Tests schedule.
It is equally obvious that the present Super Rugby slot can’t be filled with a tournament involving South African, Irish and Scottish sides. Why?
Because the major Celtic rugby tournament, the Magners League, which consists of four Irish provinces (Leinster, Munster, Connacht and Ulster): four Welsh regions (Cardiff Blues, Newport Gwent Dragons, Ospreys and Scarlets: and two Scottish sides (Glasgow and Edinburgh) has a season that starts in September and ends at the end of May.
The Magners League season, therefore, starts when the Currie Cup is reaching its finals crescendo and ends around about the same time as the present Super 14 season when the South African replacement of Super Rugby should end.
Another problem is that recently the Magners League announced that it was considering expanding to include two Italian sides.
Where would five South African provincial sides fit into all of this? Or perhaps an even better question: Where are the Scottish and Irish sides that would be prepared to go into a tournament with the South African provinces?
One final point: the Magners League is used by Ireland to confirm their two teams to take part in the lucrative Heineken Cup tournament. Would teams like Leinster (a finalist this year after their splendid win over Ulster over the weekend) give up their chance to compete in the Heineken Cup for what is likely to be an inferior tournament with six South African sides?
The plain fact is that there are no spare provincial sides in Europe that would want to play in a South African tournament in the Super Rugby space.
My guess is that if the ARU and the NZRU present a Super 15 schedule (with Melbourne as the fifth Australian province) that ends before the Currie Cup tournament begins, South Africa Rugby really has no option but to accept that its bluff has been called, and beaten.
This presumes, of course, that the administrators running South African rugby are competent officials.
Some would say, including a number of South African journalists, that this is – unfortunately – an heroic presumption.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (201)
- Will South African rugby force a Super 21 by 2018? (173)
- The real story of how John O’Neill turned Manchester City down (70)
- Dan Parks and the unsolved questions of expat rugby (65)
- Australian teams at Super disadvantage (58)
- Pocock set to be named new Force skipper (56)
- Can the ‘Tahs win the battle after losing the Waugh? (51)
- France turns to Parra and Trinh-Duc
- Rebels look to lift for formidable Blues in rugby trial
- Mr Fix-It Lucas wants to nail down No.10
- Force roost loses ‘Mother Hen’ Sharpe
- Waratahs romp to 83-5 trial win over Samoa A (2)
- Quade Cooper’s return to the Reds goes up a gear
- Chiefs continue to wait for SBW (7)
- Wales show Southern Hemisphere how to play running rugby (29)
- What opening matches of Six Nations taught us (19)
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (202)
- Clinical Chiefs cost rusty Rebels in Corio (9)
- Six Nations shows rugby is a parochial game at heart (5)
- Goose’s Super Rugby up-and-comer XV for 2012 (29)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
Vincent said | May 4th 2009 @ 8:31am | Report comment
excellent catch up on this issue Spiro! It brings alot of the issues hitherto unknown into the light.
Lindommer said | May 4th 2009 @ 8:35am | Report comment
The chance of any European teams playing in warm South Africa over Christmas before returning to a cold home ground are about nil. Yes, the times on the clock work for a north/south competition, but the readings on the temperature guage preclude it. The Magners League have indicated their future direction: more teams from continental Europe. They’ll get teams from Georgia and Romania before South Africa.
stillmissit said | May 4th 2009 @ 8:40am | Report comment
Correct analysis Spiro. It is all bull but the south africans can be bull headed enough or stupid enough to act on this and find themselves in another wilderness.
This is the kind of brinkmanship that brings about radical shifts in thinking and this could be an ‘ill wind that blows nobody any good’.
It may be time to move on, although I really enjoy the SA S14 rugby.
sheek said | May 4th 2009 @ 9:12am | Report comment
You talk sense Spiro. At first I thought you were drawing a long bow to suggest the Saffies were bluffing.
If I agree with the Saffies on anything, I agree with their determination to protect the Currie Cup. It’s a sporting tragedy, despite more than 100 years of existence, Australian rugby never bothered to develop something similar.
On the other hand, starting the S15 in February is ludicrous. As is having an Eastern Cape team playing in the Australian conference.
In the past, I have been a critic of the S12/14, but I love the S15 proposal. So it would be a shame to see this exciting, new concept scrapped before it even kicks off.
Hopefully, sense will prevail on all sides. Do the Saffies really need such a long Currie Cup season? Especially since the top 5 sides will have already played each other once in the S15.
If there is an upside from all this earnest debate, some of it quite pathetic, might yet lead to some groundbreaking, thoughtfully advantageous, new innovations.
However, may I also naively suggest money isn’t everything (famous last words)!
Hayden said | May 4th 2009 @ 9:31am | Report comment
Let the Saffers go their own way. Develop a great trans Tasman comp with the PI’s thrown in, make room for a meaningful ANZ Cup and get O’Neill to focus on building an Oz domestic comp. No more SA whinging about their unfair travel schedules, bring back the mystique of playing SA sides. An all round great result. I would love to see teh NZRU and ARU call SARU’s bluff and walk away.
P.S. Leinster beat Munster.
Rah Rah Rasputin said | May 4th 2009 @ 9:43am | Report comment
Spiro,
Spot on with your analysis.
I am concern though, if SANZAR goes with the 16 week “Sandton option” starting in at the beginning March won’t the June-July test period fall in during the final weeks of the tournament.
While I can’t imagine the franchises being to pleased, as a fan I think this would really affected the integrity of the tournament.
Ideally, the european nations would tour a the half way point, but this would require the northern hemisphere to change there schedule and we all know how well that worked out last time.
Even looser said | May 4th 2009 @ 9:50am | Report comment
Sorry to say it but as much as I enjoy having the Sth African teams in the S14……….it may be time to move on. The difficulty in viewing the matches in Africa is a real pain the neck and a comp in the same time zone has got to be the way to go to get Rugby out there and watched by the masses. More eyeballs watching = more bums on seats = more ticket sales = more sponsor money = more revenue streams.
Having said that, let’s hope that Sth Africa (are they still called the Boks or something else now?) don’t play silly buggers and always send a full strength team to the Tri Nations as they are one of the best running around.
Once the trans Tasman thing is sorted it will be over the likes of J.O. to sell the product to the networks. If netball can do it why not Rugby? WE NEED FREE TO AIR. Is that clear enough?
True Tah said | May 4th 2009 @ 9:55am | Report comment
Hayden, they showed the highlights of the Leinster v Munster on Fox, over 82k to the game!!!!
I actually reckon it would be fantastic if the Saffas went their own way and developed the Currie Cup, as it is, the Big 5 dominate everything in Currie Cup. Whilst it is a bit presumptuous for an Aussie to lecture the Saffas on what they could do to develop their competition better, they need to make it a more even competition.
The real issue is the whole Southern Kings/Eastern Province issue – their old name used to be the Mighty Elephants, a bit of an oxymoron. You have a large population base, and an area which is the renowned for being the centre of black rugby in the Republic. They have produced heaps of good players for other provincial teams – there are some deeper issues here, I would imagine corruption, it would need a fresh start.
The other side are the Griquas, who have a smaller population base, but can hold their own against the Big 5 on occasion, however like EP, they lose a fair chunk of their good players to other provinces (Zane Kirchner) or Europe (Ronnie Cook).
The other option is for them to base a Zimbabwe-based franchise in Currie Cup (although the current political situation makes this unlikely), or potentially a Namibian-based side (or perhaps both). There is clearly talent in both these nations, but a lot of it migrates elsewhere! On a more personal note, I would love to see a Madagascar-based side, they would get hammered every game but would get at least 20k to every game.
You would have a Currie Cup comprising the existing Big 5, Southern Kings, Griquas, Zimbabwe, Namibia.
Every year, the champions of the Pacific could play the champions of Africa!
Hemjay said | May 4th 2009 @ 9:56am | Report comment
Excellent summation of the facts and influences surrounding South Africas absurd bully tactics Spiro.
It will not be a big loss should the South Africans dig their heels in. While the initial standard of rugby may fall it wont take long for the Trans Tasman competition to get firing. As it stands 12 of the 13 titles in Super rugby are shared between the ANZAC nations. While the republic may seem to have a big share of the money your right in what you say and I have been saying for an age. A competition without the Wallabies and the All Blacks will just not generate the same revenue nor the interest.
The Safas are living in a fantasy world they are not the be all and end all in Southern Hemisphere rugby. I would be very interested to know what the South African fans really think,.
Are they backing Marinos and his vigilantes and all for another competition or are they secretly hoping that SARU stay in the SANZAR trio?
South Africa are doing themselves a huge disservice by taking the stance they have and refusing to budge on anything. It seems the Anzacs have bent over backwards to try and cater to their whims.
While the Currie Cup is a great competition who says its the best domestic competition in the world? I’d say there’s a fair few ANZC sides who would give the Currie Cup a run for their money as would some of the NH teams. Until there is a cross provincial; competition champions globally I think its a bold statement to claim yours is better than theirs or mine is better than his, Its all just hearsay and peoples opinions. And opinion doesn’t necessarily generate truth or facts.
Also I believe the Safas rate their Currie Cup so highly because they are guaranteed to win it no one else can come and spoil their party.
Once again Spiro you have written what many have been thinking and its great top see it out there.
The fans in NZ have definately spoken that they would much prefer a Trans-Tasman Pacific competiton and it seems the fans are on the same wavelength across the ditch. Many of the threads in here are mirroring public opinion.
South Africas bluff has been called and they are squirming realising that their bully tactics are backfiring big time on them. As for the 6th team you have to be joking and in all honstey I don’t think Australia are worthy either. The only country capable of fielding another team is NZ and we aren’t asking for it. I myself would much prefer a Island team.
Now coming to my last point I am strongly opposed to the concept of conferences then the top two going onto the finals after a copmplete round robin. Where is the fairness should the Australian teams finish 1st,2nd, 6th NZ 3rd, 4th, SA5th
Is it fair that one Australian team should drop out of the finals to accomodate a South African team in a sympathy finals berth? I personally think that the conferences should only be used as a chance to get a head start on the rest of the teams in the Superwide competition once the full round robin starts then its open battle whoever finishes in the top 6 go through. Spare me the sympathy finals because this in turn would also water down the competition. Only the best deserve the chance not the best of the rest
pothale said | May 4th 2009 @ 10:00am | Report comment
“he Magners League is used by Ireland to confirm their two teams to take part in the lucrative Heineken Cup tournament. Would teams like Leinster (a finalist this year after their splendid win over Ulster over the weekend) give up their chance to compete in the Heineken Cup for what is likely to be an more inferior tournament with six South African sides?”
The qualifications from the ML to the Heineken Cup are for the three best placed teams from Ireland – Ulster, Munster and Leinster have been those teams to date.
Leinster reached their first final this weekend having beaten Munster (not Ulster) in the semi-final.
The ML is already committed to bringing in two teams from the Italian Super 10. This will increase the number of games in the season. In addition, next season will bring in play-offs for the Championship – adding in more games/dates to the season.
The current provincial structure in Ireland is less geared to the Heineken Cup, but more to the development of the national side. Any change to this with the inclusion of SA sides would be a far greater impediment.
The Welsh have made noises over the years about joining up with the English teams in the Premiership. The Anglo-Welsh Cup was a sop to this. However, whilst currently all four Welsh regions can gain access to the H Cup, this would likely decrease if they were to join in the Premiership, and thus weaken the regional sides development for their national team.
Equally, the notion that Ireland would hitch their wagon to Scotland in a revised comp is …… I can’t find the right word…. laughable, inexplicable, off the wall?
As I said in another thread, the SARU will have their bluff called by O’Neill. But I wouldn’t be breaking out the bunting for SH rugby when he does.