- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
With the start of the rugby season just days away, here is an alternate format of Super rugby which will hopefully end most of the debate surrounding the future of the tournament.
My proposal is to break the league into two tiers.
This proposed league would begin in 2018, which would give teams the time to get their squads organised in time to finish as high as they can in 2017.
But using the 2014 season as a starting point, the 2015 tables would look like this:
Tier 1 – Waratahs, Crusaders, Sharks, Brumbies, Chiefs, Highlanders, Hurricanes, Force
Tier 2 – Bulls, Blues, Stomers, Lions, Reds, Cheetahs, Rebels
Format changes
A team plays only against another team in their own tier on a home-and-away basis.
The top four teams advance into a finals series where they will play semi-finals and a grand final.
The bottom two teams from tier 1 will be relegated to tier 2.
The grand finalists from tier 2 will be promoted to tier 1.
Advantages
Players play fewer games. A tier 1 grand finalist will play 16 games as opposed to a grand finalist now, who plays 19.
A shorter season is not only good for players but also advantageous for domestic competitions.
Introducing new teams is simple. Stick them in at the bottom of tier 2 and offer an extra promotion place to even the tiers out (if appropriate).
There would be less travel for some teams. The Australia/New Zealand teams in tier 1 will only have to spend one week in South Africa during league play. South African teams in tier 2 would spend three weeks across the Indian Ocean, as opposed to the four they spend now.
It also creates a bit more love for your own team. Nothing unites a fan-base more than the feeling of ‘us versus them’. Right now for example, South African fans are united in their hate towards all the travel they have to do. Sharks fans will have a bit more to complain about than a Bulls fan in 2015.
Promotion and relegation creates tension which adds to atmosphere.
Disadvantages
Broadcasters get fewer games – 104 in 2015 versus the 125 in 2014. This could lead to a reduction in TV money.
More travel for some teams. The Sharks would be in Australia and New Zealand for a whopping seven weeks as opposed to four right now. They would however, have a vested interest in other South Africa teams achieving promotion, which can be good for cooperation, and can only lead to a better standard of play.
There would be a loss of some marquee games, such as Crusaders versus Blues, Sharks versus Bulls, Waratahs versus Reds. This could be a good thing in one sense as one set of supporters will have bragging rights over the other set. When the other team eventually does get promoted, you can bet more than a few people will be circling that game in their calendar.
The end of the debates surrounding the conference style of play. No more controversy regarding not playing every team home and away or having the winner of one conference ahead of the second placed team of another conference even though they are behind on points.
There are obviously more pros and cons which I have not listed, but I am keen on hearing your thoughts on this proposed format. Let ‘er rip!
Join The Roar rugby editor Christy Doran, former Wallaby Matt Toomua and a cast of regular and special guests as they look at the biggest issues in the game on The Roar Rugby Podcast. If you’re looking for great odds on the next game check out Aussie bookmaker PlayUp. Chances are you’re about to lose. Set a deposit limit.