Super 15: A step in the right direction?
Roar Pro By Armchair-critic, 21 May 2009 Armchair-critic is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- NZ, Rugby Union, SANZAR, South Africa, Super 15, Super Rugby, Super Rugby 2011
Tuesday saw the unveiling of the much anticipated overhaul to the Super Rugby competition. Whether it is a positive move remains to be seen, but it certainly presents some significant changes.
The biggest transformation can be seen in the form of a conference system.
This will more than likely see the three SANZAR nations grouped according to their nationality. The magnitude of this step-forward should not be underestimated. This is the most drastic change to Southern Hemisphere rugby since the inception of Super 12 in 1996.
Southern Hemisphere rugby has taken a significant step in the direction of its Northern Hemisphere counterparts.
It is of course inevitable that this change in format will bring heated debate, and most probably opposition. Many rugby pundits have already suggested that the conference system will create inequalities across the 3 countries.
This argument seems to hold some merit too. If we take a look at this year’s competition ladder, there are 3 New Zealand sides within the top 4 and none from Australia. The table also sees 3 South African sides languishing near the bottom.
This supports the widely held belief that the NZ conference will be at a disadvantage because of the apparent strength of their sides. The fact that Australia had no teams is also highlighted as a reason for possible inequality, as this would make their conference easier.
However I believe this possible inequality is offset by the addition of a top 6 finals series rather than the current top 4. In previous articles I have been an advocate for an increased finals format and this is one of the most promising introductions to the Super Rugby competition.
The new finals format will give the top qualifiers from each pool automatic entry as well as the next 3 sides with the most points. This allows a stronger conference to have higher representation in the finals series, which should eliminate any potential disparities.
The main positive to come out of the conference format is the increase in local derby matches. In a sense this could create a mini-domestic competition within the 3 nations to gain the number one position in their conference. This should surely provide a higher level of intensity and interest in each game.
It is widely accepted that a game involving 2 Australian sides will attract a larger audience than if a foreign side was playing. In saying that, the fact that each side also plays a number of games with sides from the other 2 nations also provides variety for audiences and fans. This aspect of the Super 15 could prove to be the point of difference in the battle with AFL and NRL conversely; the presence of South Africa and New Zealand is nothing new to the competition.
From John O’Neill’s perspective, the biggest benefit of the Super 15 will be the sheer increase in rugby. This should help to promote the game as it battles with falling audiences and ticket sales.
The addition of a 5th side in Australia, if it goes ahead, will provide a new fan base as well as more potential TV viewers. While it may take a number of years for this side to become established, any opportunity for expansion is seen as a blessing for O’Neill.
All in all, this appears to be a step in the right direction for Super Rugby. There is no doubting it is not perfect, but it is definitely a significantly more bold and expansive move than what occurred in 2006 when 2 teams were added to the Super 12.
The move to a conference-based tournament allows possible further expansion in the future to include the likes of Argentina or Japan.
Super 15 will provide fans with plenty of changes, what remains to be seen is how well they will be received.
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- NZ, Rugby Union, SANZAR, South Africa, Super 15, Super Rugby, Super Rugby 2011
May 21st 2009 @ 8:49am
Brett McKay said | May 21st 2009 @ 8:49am | Report comment
Armchair, all good discusion points, but as this has been discussed at leangth in other threads, I’ll just answer your question with ‘yes’…
May 21st 2009 @ 8:56am
GaryGnu said | May 21st 2009 @ 8:56am | Report comment
I would like to offer the perspective of a general sports fan, not just the Rugby fan, on the lengthened season.
Rugby is not the sport I choose as a priority, but I do enjoy it watching and supporting it when I can. Over the last decade or so I have grown used to the respective timing of each sports seasons. There has been the occasional drift here and there, see Cricket, but more or less it has remained stable, allowing a sports nut like me to enjoy one sport or another with surprisingly few conflicts between codes.
This may change with the extension of the Provincial/International Rugby season into September. When forced to make a choice between Rugby and my first passion, League, there is no choice – my attention will go to the 13 man game almost every time.
I realise that the longer season and therefore more games are essential for generating more TV rights revenue but I wonder just how successful it will be in growing the game by keeping the interest of the less than rusted on supporters deep into finals season of the other winter codes in Australia.
Rugby had itself a very nice little niche in the season and now it threatens to lose it in the chase for more dollars and the ever elusive growth. I wonder how many there are like me in the Northern States. I would almost certainly bet that this would be a counter productive strategy when trying to increase support in the AFL obsessed Southern States (Notwithstanding any potential Melbourne Super 15 side). If I recall correctly each Bledisloe Test down south has co-incided with the Bye week of the AFL in Melbourne. I would not like to try and sell tickets and get media attention for a Rugby Union test in Melbourne anywhere from Mid August to the end of September.
Good luck Mr O’Neill in growing your game but in a way I resent being forced to make a choice between sports in September. I wish you well but you’ll have to do without my patronage.
May 21st 2009 @ 9:05am
LeftArmSpinner said | May 21st 2009 @ 9:05am | Report comment
Armchair, Timing is everything!!!
The 15th team will establish itself quickly. its maintaining that initial excitement that is the problem!!! Get McQueen back!!!
May 21st 2009 @ 10:00am
Hemjay said | May 21st 2009 @ 10:00am | Report comment
Armchair,
While in some ways I agree with much of what you have said I do strongly disagree that the so called stonger conference(s) would get more of a showing in the finals makeup. In the stronger conference common sense would tell me that the available competition points will be more evenly spread as oppossed to the weaker conferences where one or two teams will be 90% certain to be streaks ahead re South Africa with the Bulls and Sharks. Also Australia with the Tahs and Brumbies I’m just basing this on the general success of the various countries teams making finals previously.
This in itself will distort the competition greatly in favour of the better teams from the weakend provinces as the road to the finals will be that much easier. The NZ teams this is hypothetical I must add, after having played a much more competitive home and away series could be 10 pts behind the best of Aus and SA due to it being simply that more competitive and the points being shared more evenly, it would be a huge up hill battle to get those points in the Cross conference.
while it is a great step forward it cannot be seen as very fair unless every team gets the chance to play everyone in the cross conference either. Every year some teams will avoid the tougher teams and again distorting the table and throwing up teams who don’t necessarily deserve to be there come finals time.
I am not a fan of automatic qualifiers but its something we will have to live with I guess. Surely this will be tinkered with over the coming years to try and make the competition as fair as possible
May 21st 2009 @ 10:37am
sheek said | May 21st 2009 @ 10:37am | Report comment
I’m amazed how much attention has been given to the final 6 arrangements. As if this is somehow the most critical part of all the announcements. Personally, I have no problem with the conference winners being quarantined.
And as I said elsewhere, it’s almost inconceivable that one of the conference winners wouldn’t be among the top 6 best performed teams across all the conferences.
And finally, with the teams placed in their respective conferences, casual fans will finally begin to understand where the Bulls, Sharks, Brumbies, Force, Chiefs & Highlanders, etc all come from!
And yes – S15 is a massive step in the right direction.
As Big Kev used to say – “I’m excited”!
May 21st 2009 @ 10:58am
Hemjay said | May 21st 2009 @ 10:58am | Report comment
Sheek,
By agreeing with Conference winners getting direct finals placement you are also saying you support a competition that doesn’t necessarily have the best teams in the finals. While highly unlikely it is possible that one conference will fail to make the top 6.
Also another point you make is that there is alot of attention is focused on the finals. Well 15 teams every year from 2011 will be contesting to win wait for it …. the final. And on the way to get to that final wait for it…. they will need to make the semi finals. The whole super rugby has been designed to increase teams to make the finals and compete with other codes. the finals series is the integral part of the whole deal and what gives super rugby any credibility. While we may see increased interest at the local derbies you could just about guarantee noone is really gonna give a rats until its finals time and a few weeks before when teams are jockeying for the final three places.
As yet we don’t know exacvtly how the top team from each conference will be decided.
Will it be soley from games against those in their conference or an overall tally including cross conferences?
There will be without a doubt stronger conferences which in itself can and will distort the final standings.
If anything only the best deserve to go through to the final not pity placements.
So Sheek in summation if you are so confident that a team from each conference will make the top 6 every year then there is no need for guaranteed placements right?
Your statement in this regard cancels out the need for the poor me I’m not that good but I did beat my countrymen so can I play with the big boys scenario.
Also another flaw is that not everyteam will get to play each other once again a big negative as like I have pointed out before some teams will avoid the stronger teams from each conference while others may get the top teams from every conference. So there is no way that you can fairly judge the merits of each team.
the finals sheek what everyteam aspires for and every fan hopes their team to make.
So in my opinion the amount of attention awarded to the top six is imperative to the success of this competition
May 21st 2009 @ 11:41am
sheek said | May 21st 2009 @ 11:41am | Report comment
Oh Hemjay,
Get a grip. Re-read what I said – highly unlikely any of the conference winners won’t be in the top 6. Is that so difficult to digest. And if it were to happen once in 20 years, does that make the system totally wrong???
Surely you have more important fish to chase. I’m off to a luncheon.
May 21st 2009 @ 12:20pm
Hemjay said | May 21st 2009 @ 12:20pm | Report comment
Sheek while your at your luncheon maybe you want to have a think about what i said to you.
If you are so adamant that teams from the conferences will always be in the top six then you will agree right that there is no need to guarantee fianlists? After all if what you say is true noone should be worried as there will 99% of the time be a team represented from each country. If you had read my post you would see that I actually said while highly unlikely it is possible that a conference winner may not make the top 6. So maybe you need to get a grip becasuse it seems you get all wound up and reply before you actually read what others have said.
I normally like reading your posts but you have really gone of the boil here and made some silly remarks that were just not needed. I have highlighted a few points that were a little off the mark as I see it Sheek nothing more.
Also I highlighted some of the reasons why people could be and are focusing so much on the finals after all you are amazed why there is so much attention being payed to them. So I offer up some reasons and you tell me to get a grip. How ridiculous Sheek if you don’t want to know don’t ask.
While I can see merits in guaranteed finalists, I think it will distort the make up and the best teams will not necessarily be their when it counts due to pity placements. Also why should a team who finishes 1st in their conference get an Automatic Semi finals berth even if they finish up overall in 3rd of 4th place. Should the team who finished second be made to make way to accomodate a team who just weren’t quite up to the mark. because this is how I am interpreting that you see it. You don’t necessarily agree that the best teams go through as long as one team from each conference /country is there am I right in saying this? That your more than willing for the finals to be fingered to promote a lesser team above a more deserving franchise.
Guaranteed finals are nothing but pity placements and seedings. While it is probable every conference will have a team in the top 6 it is still yet to be defined how the conference winners will be determined. This in itself could lead to various scenarios come the make up of the finals.
If say the Conference winners were picked solely on home and away. It could lead to said team coasting once the conference final was in the bag. Also it could lead to otherteams from within the same conference finishing above the winner on the overall table.
Another scenario is if the conference winner is not determined until after the complete competition taking into account both the Home series and the foreign series it could lead to SA teams finishing 1 and 2 NZ 3 and 4 Aus 5 SA 6 so your telling me that the NZ team placed third should be shunted up to the Guaranteed semi and the 2nd placed Safa team be dropped to a sudden death match to accomodate this?
It all comes down to winning the competition Sheek and it has to be in the fairest way possible and I personally and as it seems many others do not believe guaranteed placements is the fair way to go.
Once again like you said theres not much chance that one team wont make the top 6 from each country.
And with this I say to you there is no need to have the pity finalists simply because of that fact/statement you have made
May 21st 2009 @ 12:46pm
ohtani's jacket said | May 21st 2009 @ 12:46pm | Report comment
Why wouldn’t there be discussion about the finals? Not all of us have a stake in where the fifteenth franchise goes.
The format of the Super 15 and Tri-Nations directly affect New Zealand teams, just as the scheduling affects our Air New Zealand Cup. The winner of each conference will always receive a finals berth, whether they’re the top ranked team or the seventh ranked team. The conjecture is how they should be seeded, because seeding gives the top two teams a bye into the semis and the 3rd and 4th seeds home ground advantage in the first week of the finals. That’s not only a playing advantage, but a near guaranteed sell-out. Loftus is a sell-out this weekend. That’s 50,000 people. If the Bulls are screwed out of a home semi-final, I don’t think the Blue Bull Union won’t be happy with that.
Considering Melbourne, Gold Goast, West Sydney or whoever it is won’t be in the finals for years to come, I think this is a relevant issue. The NBA didn’t foresee it as a problem when they re-aligned into six divisions, yet the system was exposed in the second year of playoff competition. The NBA rectified this the following year. The Super 15 can avoid it altogether.
Clearly this will only mean something when the Waratahs finish 4th despite having the second best record overall!
May 21st 2009 @ 1:14pm
Yikes said | May 21st 2009 @ 1:14pm | Report comment
It’s tough to have this argument in two threads!