Super Rugby needs an under-21 competition
Roar Guru By biltongbek, 15 Aug 2012 biltongbek is a Roar Guru & Live Blogger
- Tagged:
- Rugby Union, SANZAR, Super Rugby
Related coverage
There is a saying “when it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”. Broadcasters, SANZAR, sponsors and fans on the whole all seem to be satisfied with the format of the Super Rugby Conference system.
Reading blogs and websites, however, there seems to be a genuine concern regarding the development of rugby union in Australia.
All the talk surrounds the idea that rugby is fighting hard to compete with other football codes.
New Zealand have a situation where their highest populated city only features one team in Super Rugby. The young talented players are slowly but surely being enticed to move to rugby league.
South Africa had to reduce their Currie Cup premier division due to less time available on the calendar.
New Zealand changed the format of their ITM Cup to be played in a shorter period of time to include midweek games.
It seems as good as the structures SANZAR have put in place it also has it debilitating aspects, limitations and challenges for each country.
How can Australia increase their rugby union footprint in a country filled with football codes? How can they increase their player depth?
How can South Africa and New Zealand be accommodated to restore their provincial competitions former status while still having their cake and eating it?
Some have suggested that the Super Rugby should expand to allow each country an additional team, which would create an even bigger shortfall of players in Australia.
Others have suggested that the import limitations be relaxed in order to add value to developing franchises.
I have been pondering these issues for some time, and it just suddenly hit me.
As things stand at the moment it seems that all three countries are yet to put their last penny into the collective pot that is called SANZAR.
SANZAR need to find a system whereby all three nations can benefit from senior level all the way down to age group level if they want to continue to be the top three nations in world rugby, of which development and retention of players is key.
Finances are the biggest obstacle and some astute thinking will have to be done.
However the next step before expanding the Super Rugby competition too far is to introduce an age group Super Rugby competition.
Step 1
We need an Under-21 Super Rugby tournament.
South Africa runs their Currie Cup on the basis that every province has an U19, U21 and Senior Currie Cup team.
Why not get each Country to start up three or four age Group franchises?
They can either just piggy back on current franchises or use this as an opportunity to develop new regions.
This will immediately make an impact on development, and with the cooperation of broadcasters, fund the development of the age group franchises.
Players will be drawn to professional rugby union at an earlier age and it could stem the tide towards other football codes.
Step 2
The ITM Cup and Currie Cup can easily become part and parcel of Super Rugby.
South Africa has six teams in the premier division this year, as soon as the competition expand to six teams each, it will mean that all six teams will be competing against one another already in the conference.
A separate Currie Cup competition will simply just be a duplicate and unecessary.
Eventually you could argue each conference could have as many as eight teams. Being fed from an age group Super Rugby tournament, the issue of player depth is solved.
What do you think Roarers? Something to ponder, or just a pipedream?
Have you seen the new Wallabies jersey? Want one of your own? We're giving away a brand new 2013 Wallabies jersey to one lucky Roarer, click here to go in the running to win.
- Explore:
- Rugby Union, SANZAR, Super Rugby
August 15th 2012 @ 1:08am
allblackfan said | August 15th 2012 @ 1:08am | Report comment
NZ and SA are running the equivalent of this. So the only question is …
can Aust afford to do this? Or do they need to get onboard with NZ?
August 15th 2012 @ 2:29am
cwrigh13 said | August 15th 2012 @ 2:29am | Report comment
ARU will be dead in 20 years at the rate they are going, and sadly they will drag rugby union in Australia into obscurity.
August 15th 2012 @ 6:47am
Football United said | August 15th 2012 @ 6:47am | Report comment
Step 2 is silly. if your going to go in that direction, you’re better off going to national competitions and the top teams go into champions league.
I do agree that there needs to be a greater emphasis on youth and academy players playing a full season with their professional teams. Surely a Australian u21 team could play each other australian team home and away (8 games) and then play in the state league following (or prior to) that (18 more games). This gives younger players the full european length season they need, the exposure to other high level players and a gradual introduction to first grade rugby.
And why are we stopping at u21? Shouldn’t these academies be going right down into teenage development? Even if the private schools have a hold on them, surely a couple of training camps through the season and the odd game after for talented players between the ages of 13-18 could make a difference in their junior development.
August 15th 2012 @ 6:59am
biltongbek said | August 15th 2012 @ 6:59am | Report comment
Why is step two silly?
When you consider there are already local home and away derbies for 5 franchises, you add the other team that forms part of the equation, you only need to add the fixtures for the extra team within the current structure.
Which means the same teams will play in the Currie Cup which is struggling to find a slot.
By doing it this way, the “Conference derbies” doubles up as the Currie Cup round robin matches, so the only thing that changes in the Super Xv is an extra team for each conference.
As far as going down the line to younger ages, you need to expand one age group at a time.
August 15th 2012 @ 8:41am
Football United said | August 15th 2012 @ 8:41am | Report comment
because for one, the currie cup is controlled by SARU and Super Rugby by SANZAR. If the currie cup is just integrated into the super rugby, SARU lose sole control of their flagship competition and it’s revenue. While they control it they decide what works best for South African Rugbys teams without interference from Australia or NZ. You could potentially lose promotion and relegation, the finals which are quite popular, the right to decide what day and time games are to be played.
Secondly, if merged with SR the importance of these competitions could potentially be lost in the scheme of greater things.
August 15th 2012 @ 8:38am
Blue Blood said | August 15th 2012 @ 8:38am | Report comment
At the start of super rugby this year the Australian teams played a pre match game of B team vs B team. This allowed the coach to see where their extended squad was at. As the playing squads are not large enough to accommodate two full 22 teams they also filled the gaps out of club rugby. If the academy was still in place then it would have been academy boys. This was only done for Australian teams in the first few weeks, if my memory serves me well. This was a great way to see the talent depth, or lack there of in some cases/positions that was supporting the super teams. Alas funding meant that they played only 4 games I think. Perhaps this can be extended to increase the depth and true opportunities. I’m not saying do this instead of the U21 idea. Just another layer to consider. Currently there is a huge gap between club rugby and super rugby. Men/boys taken from the academy come in disjointed and have had no experience with the group or the playing style. This would allow a smoother transition into super rugby. Plus it is a great way to fel like you ate getting value for money seeing two games for the same price.
August 15th 2012 @ 9:22am
Elisha Pearce said | August 15th 2012 @ 9:22am | Report comment
Uh oh. Biltongbek, you’ve suggested change. Be prepared to defend yourself!
We all know rugby needs some change and fixing, just don’t suggest that we change or fix anything!!!
August 15th 2012 @ 9:27am
Elisha Pearce said | August 15th 2012 @ 9:27am | Report comment
Btw, I won’t just poke and walk away.
I like the idea, especially step 1. Step 2 would take some serious working out. I’d say they are definitely ‘stages’ not just steps and that we could work on the first idea with a view to getting the second part under way a few years after. Step 2 could be a champions league style tournament as mentioned above if it needs to be.
I don’t mind these ideas mate, good thinking. Step 1 especially should be done. I don’t know that there is political will for step 2 yet. Would have to prove that it’s needed even more for people to change that drastically.
In reality I think a number of ideas could be successful in helping rejuvinating rugby. I’ve suggested a few as well. There are pros and cons to all of them. Basically what we need is committment and vision to implement one of many options available to us!
August 15th 2012 @ 9:27am
Happy Hooker said | August 15th 2012 @ 9:27am | Report comment
There’s no shortage of ideas to strengthen the playing group just below super rugby. Just money.
August 15th 2012 @ 9:42am
Roscoe said | August 15th 2012 @ 9:42am | Report comment
Surely the simple answer is what Blu Blood states: every Aussie derby has TWO games. The Super 15 match and a “B” curtain raiser”. Use fringe and young players to get the full 22 man squad, hey make it 23 if need be. In Victoria someone (Rebels? VRU?) are telling young blokes to move interstate to get more experience.
Meanwhile Rebels players are encouraged to play local club footy. If there was EIGHT “B” fixtures than that’s got to be more beneficial than sending blokes away.
Furthermore, why have Super 15 players play club footy- to increase standard- yet send local players interstate? Surely if young blokes stay than standard lifts?!
Personally I’d love to see a Trans Tasman comp. Benefits Oz but Kiwis hace NPC so don’t need/want it.
August 15th 2012 @ 10:20am
sheek said | August 15th 2012 @ 10:20am | Report comment
Biltongbek,
Full marks for effort.
An U/21 comp, or even a 2nds comp, is certainly an option for the SR franchises. And it would work in the short-term.
But I’m afraid it doesn’t solve Australian rugby’s long-term problems.
You see, the SR, as good as it is, is only a one-third owned Australian operation. By “owned”, I mean, we contribute 5 teams to the comp, same as NZ, same as SA.
Now of course, NZ & SA both have the same problem as us in that they also only own one-third of SR. But this is where the comparison ends.
SA has the Currie Cup, which is 100% South African. And NZ has the ITM Cup, which is 100% New Zealand. Australian rugby has nothing, nought, zip, zero.
SA fans can get right into the Currie cup, following their own teams & own players. NZ fans can get right into the ITM Cup, following their own teams & own players.
Australian rugby fans can look at the AFL (18/18 – 100% Australian), NRL (15/16 – 94% Australian) & A-League (11/12 – 92% Australian). Not to mention the Sheffield Shield (6/6 – 100% Australian).
The gaping hole in Australian sports is the lack of national domestic rugby comp. Until Australian rugby develops its own national domestic comp – ARC – then it will continue to rely on the arrival of a “golden generation” every 10 to 15 years to lift it out of the doldrums.
Such a ‘bust-boom-bust’ policy is idiotic, to say the least. This is really quite a silly way to develop your favourite code, but it seems to be the modus operandi of the ARU.
August 15th 2012 @ 4:38pm
kid k said | August 15th 2012 @ 4:38pm | Report comment
South africa also already has the vodacom cup, the varsity cup and the age divisions of the currie cup and most of the teams of SR in SA already use the currie cup to bollster their SR squads so an u21 SR comp wouldnt really be helping SA it would just be a waste of cash really
August 15th 2012 @ 4:43pm
biltongbek said | August 15th 2012 @ 4:43pm | Report comment
Kid, the idea is to help Australia. In other words if you use the current setup in SA or their U21 and add NZ and OZ in there and making it a cross continental competition it would be more financially viable for OZ to entertain an U21 format, if they had to do this on their own would it not be less financially viable for them?
August 15th 2012 @ 4:53pm
kid k said | August 15th 2012 @ 4:53pm | Report comment
So your saying foot the bill to help AUS out? I’m sorry but isnt that something they themselves have to figure out, i just dont see why we would want to because we’ve already had to cut down on the currie cup season who knows what the impact will be if we do decide to help what else do we lose? The vodacom cup? The age group levels of the currie cup? Honestly we’d be better of trying to help out other african rugby playing nations
August 15th 2012 @ 5:04pm
biltongbek said | August 15th 2012 @ 5:04pm | Report comment
We won’t foot the bill Kid. The idea is that a cross continental comp will be a saucy appetiser for the broadcasters, hence it will provide more revenue to start up an under 21 comp.
August 15th 2012 @ 7:32pm
Altus said | August 15th 2012 @ 7:32pm | Report comment
I am sorry.
The Aussies have to look after their own rugby development.
i know the conference system is popular in Australia, but if you ask mst South Africans, they would love to go back to the Super 12. South Africa has already diminsihed their own historic and traditional competition to help Australia’s lack of their own rugby competition. Why should we help them further. It is time they have to look after their own rugby development and not wait for a Sanzar bailout.
August 15th 2012 @ 7:58pm
p.Tah said | August 15th 2012 @ 7:58pm | Report comment
SA hasnt diminished it’s tradition to help Australia. It embraced Super Rugby because of the money it brought to SA.
August 16th 2012 @ 12:13am
Bakkies said | August 16th 2012 @ 12:13am | Report comment
What about the fringe players who are too old to play Under 21s? They will get left out in the cold again. That’s why I prefer a second XV comp.
August 15th 2012 @ 4:43pm
Johnno said | August 15th 2012 @ 4:43pm | Report comment
-Great ambitions Bilttong but for a youth comp wow it sure will not be cheap , love to know who would foot the bill. Wow super rugby style travel with 3 countries. In reality it would be fantastic to have but reality is just so expensive.
August 15th 2012 @ 4:50pm
biltongbek said | August 15th 2012 @ 4:50pm | Report comment
Sure it may be too expensive, but it is worth while pursueing. Think of the benefits of doing this, have a can do attitude.
Imagine they start off with 3 teams each. That is 90 players from each country under 21 that gets exposed to top class rugby, you have a draft system end of the season for those that “ages” out. You fisr of all provide a feeder system for your Senior Franchises and stop the rot by offering more opportunities inside Rugby Union.
You don’t have to pay these young kids big money, you just need to find a way to make it break even.
In fact you could find a way to reduce travel. Host the tournament in one country, find sponsor ships for accommodation. Instead of having them shack up in hotels arrange accommodation on the same basis as you would for exchange student for the duration of the tournament.
It brings the public closer to the players, it will be an awaesome experience for these players to learn the cultures of the other countries and you centralise it in one city.
There are always ways of solving challenges.
Maybe I am thinking too laterally here.
August 15th 2012 @ 7:16pm
Johnno said | August 15th 2012 @ 7:16pm | Report comment
Biltong some great ideas I have a few and they may be used in our national rugby league and national soccer youth comps next season:
-Play matches mid week to insure more exposure and not market saturation by having to compete with the senior1st grade teams on weekend, so mid week you have the week to yourselves to grow your brand and get good tv ratings.
-The ITM cup in NZ do this now have a high content of matches mid week maybe currie cup should do the same , great tv ratings.
-The non player payment is a tough thorny issue and is always of big conention in college football in USA.
-These talented rugby players 18-21, still have to eat and need money and pay bills, yes there getting great training for 2 years but who will pay for there big food bill, and rent money, and mobile phone and university tuition fees. How it works in amrerica i just don’t know but the young adults seem to get by,maybe they don’t train as much who knows.
-Would be a greta idea if one can do it. You can put the kids in economy class on the plane, and have them stay in backpackers and cheap motels. at 18-21 you actually love this lifestyle so communal kitchens and bathrooms, wont bother you.
-Or have an exchange student billeting policy or even do sponsor deals with airlines and hotels. It can work.
-I would have separate franchises for the spree rugby youth teams to create new brands and sell merchandise though.
August 15th 2012 @ 8:06pm
biltongbek said | August 15th 2012 @ 8:06pm | Report comment
In other words you agree some srious think tank sessions and this can be done.
August 15th 2012 @ 9:43pm
Johnno said | August 15th 2012 @ 9:43pm | Report comment
Yes i do if done properly it can work, and be financially successful or break even or if it loses a small amount the investment will be well worth it.