The New Zealand Rugby Union (NZRU) will not back any push for a replacement of the Super 14 rugby competition that excludes South Africa.
The union’s general manager of professional rugby, Neil Sorenson, told NZPA today that such a restructure would be at odds with the union’s preferred position at the moment.
Leading New Zealand provincial teams North Harbour, Wellington, Canterbury, Auckland, Waikato, Otago, Hawke’s Bay, Taranaki and Southland rugby representatives were reported to have been meeting in recent weeks over a restructure and realignment of Southern Hemisphere and domestic rugby.
The unions wanted a new direction because they felt that the Super 14 competition had reached its use-by date, The Dominion Post said.
The group wanted to replace Super 14 with a trans-Tasman trophy home-and-away competition involving nine New Zealand teams and five from Australia.
This would mean doing away with New Zealand’s premier domestic competition, the Air NZ Cup, as well.
They also want a European-style tournament to run alongside the trans-Tasman trophy which would then include teams from South Africa, New Zealand, Australia, Japan, the Pacific Islands and America.
This tournament would contain 24 teams in four pools of six playing matches every four weeks.
Sanzar’s Super 14 and Tri-Nations contract with News Limited does not end until 2011.
Renegotiation of the current deal would have to be brought forward so as to have the new competitions up and running in 2010, the report said.
“Sanzar’s current position is that it is a very much a three-country expansion of Super rugby with South Africa involved,” Sorenson said.
” The trans-Tasman idea does not include South Africa and that is absolutely not the NZRU’s preferred position at the moment.
“At this stage Sanzar are unified in New Zealand, Australia and South African teams being involved in Super rugby and Tri-Nations going forward.
“There can be no breakup of Sanzar, absolutely not.
“Sanzar needs to remain very, very strong, particularly in today’s rugby environment which is very trying.”
Sanzar had been re-committing over the last few months, had been meeting on a monthly basis and was probably closer and more unified as a group than it had ever been and needed to be in the next 24 months.
Sorenson said the NZRU had had a lot of options “thrown at us” from its provincial unions, the Super 14 franchises and former All Blacks such as Mike Brewer and John Drake.
“This one has been mooted before … we have been over some of these ideas over the last few weeks.”
There was a meeting due on Friday to which the NZRU had been invited to attend but Sorenson was unsure if it was about this reported issue with the nine unions.
“There is nothing dead in the water at the moment because reviews are taking place over the next 12 months and we are happy for all options to be included, happy for any suggestions to come forward from any people whether it is players, sponsors, provincial unions or franchises,” he said.
mitzter
Guest
TembaVJ Ending the Super Rugby competition does not necessarily mean the end of 3N (or future equivalent). The NPC is now a semi-pro competition and i think NZ would like more profesional teams than are in the super comp. The continual travel to SA makes Super rugby very expensive for all parties. I'm sorry SA but a trans-tasman comp would very much be the best thing for Aus and NZ. Currie cup can instead be the number one focus for SA (which i suppose it already is). 3N should be kept (of course expanded to include the argentina national side)
True Tah
Guest
TembaVJ, please dont take my posts as being anti-South African, my partner is South African and I have loved holidaying their, so much we are going back in December, and I love South African rugby, the passions between the likes of the Bulls and Province are as deep as any other sports. But my interest here is what is best for Aussie rugby. The benefit for the NZRU is that they would only be running one full-time professional competition with nine teams, as opposed to five super rugby teams and 14 Air NZ teams. Surely there must be some cost savings involved in that?? Plus NZers dont have to support a franchise, they can support their province! The benefit for the ARU is that we get the benefit of a longer comp in much more viewer friendly times, we really need to be in the faces of everyone. The South African sides generally draw considerably smaller crowds than other sides, and I would expect that the away games dont bring in the numbers either. Im optimistic, but hopefully a FTA channel other than 7 would be interested in a comp which can be shown during a prime time hour. The cost of airfares would be reduced significantly as well. I would have thought there would be interest in South Africa doing the same, given the history of the Currie Cup.
Peter K
Guest
When I read the suggestion I thought they had been reading your posts True Tah, either that or you were involved in it! As I guessed though, money talks and the various National RU bodies will never do it. Globalisation, media etc.
TembaVJ
Guest
It wont be good for NZ or AUS if SA is taken out, do you think this new comp will cover the expenses? 40% of the dosh in SANZAR comes from good old South Africa. O"Neil knows it and will fight to keep it alive. At the end of the day their is plenty of places for the Springboks and provincial teams to go, Europe will be very lucrative for them but do we really want to see the end of the S14 and 3N?
True Tah
Guest
This was exactly the format I was previously putting forward, and unfortunately it looks like it is going to get shelved. The inclusion of the South African teams really hinders the growth of professional rugby in Australia. The proposal put forward by the NZ provinces suits what Australian rugby needs to a tee, a trans-tasman comp which has an extended season, they are even willing to compromise the Air NZ Cup.