Expansion in Super Rugby?

By The Crowd / Roar Guru

The Southern Kings want in on Super Rugby, which would expand the South African conference from five teams to six.

Currently the New Zealand Rugby Union and the Australian Rugby Union are very much against the idea, they argue that there can be no expansion until the end of the next five year TV deal in 2016.

I believe there are models which can be invented, or copied from other organisations, or are even already in use e.g. the Rebels, which could allow expansion to happen before the 2016 dead line.

I believe that SANZAR should not only allow the Southern Kings into the competition but also allow Taranaki to be involved, along with another team to be created in Australia expanding the current competition from 15 to 18 teams.

Reasons for expansion

There are several reasons for expanding the Super Rugby competition, including building Argentinian rugby and keeping South Africa happy.

Argentina as of this year is joining the rugby championship. They have guaranteed the IRB and SANZAR that they will have their top players available for the competition. However, most of their players are still located in Europe and the European clubs are now going to start thinking twice about paying lots of money for Argentinian players who have to spend a considerable amount of time out of the early part of the European competition while they satisfy international duties.

Currently it is these clubs which have allowed the Argentinian players to be fully paid professionals which has kept Argentinian rugby strong, however if these players are kept out of the Euro-competitions and room within SANZAR’s 15 Super rugby competition can not be found, and its going to take time for Argentinas teams to form their own conference system.

Anyway if SANZAR are true to their word then this couldn’t happen before 2015 at the earliest. They have left a gaping hole which is going to have to be filled – the Rebels can’t take the entire Argentinian team and plus it would weaken Australian rugby if they did.

On the Rebels, I believe that they have done far more good for Australian Rugby then they have bad. I do not buy into the theory that less teams of condensed talent is better then more teams where some teams are weaker.

This is because not all the talent is defined or located from one or two sources and talent is not always identified by the same individuals. I believe that the more teams you have the more cracks you can cover and the less talent which can slip through those gaps before being identified and moved onto higher honours.

The Rebels do not need to be competitive and beat the Crusaders, Reds and Stormers week in and week out. Its my belief that if they cause a few upsets like their games against the Crusaders and uncover players who could make it into the Wallabies, they have served their true purpose.

Their job is to assist Australian rugby with growth and slow the drainage of top players to other codes. From this perspective they are doing a great job.

Aside from this, they also have done pretty good with their attendance figures as well.

Considering the success of the Rebels in achieving these aims, its time now for the Australian Rugby Union to consider another round of expansion in another state. Currently we have Queensland, NSW, VIC and WA.

Perhaps teams in SA or Tasmania should be considered? Or as some Roarers believe, another team in New South Wales or Queensland. Either way expansion can only continue to strengthen Australian Rugby with their core role of identifying and promoting talent into the top team

Taranaki want in Super Rugby almost as much as the Kings do, the only difference is the SARU is supporting its existing franchise. The New Zealand Rugby Union is leaving one of its iconic provinces out in the cold.

The New Zealand Rugby Union have ignored their requests for entry into the competition for far to long, as they believe it will destroy the ITM Cup. Well, sorry to break it to you, but Super Rugby has already broken the back of the ITM Cup.

Super Rugby’s conference format has to be the main priority and it its time for the New Zealand Rugby Union to allow more provinces to buy their way into Super Rugby.

Then, there’s TV ratings. I’ve been tracking the TV ratings across Sky and Fox and from my view this is one of the best reasons for expansion of the competition. We must include another three teams, meaning more home derbies. This has been the catch cry of SANZAR since the Rebels joined and the conference system was created.

In 2010, after 14 rounds of Super Rugby played on Australian TVs, the combined figure coming from Fox was 3,550,000. Under the conference format the ratings have passed 3,500,000 in 10 rounds with the Australian V Australian team ratings normally out doing the Aus V New Zealand and New Zealand V New Zealand games.

This is how its meant to work and it works very very well. If you add another team from the Australian conference, you will see the competition grow a little bit more in Australia and thus have the further advantage of allowing more talent to be identified along with more local games and higher TV ratings

The case for a new team in New Zealand is pretty obvious. Another team will assist Sky in further expanding their reach into the New Zealand population. Believe it or not, there are some New Zealanders still holding out on getting Sky because of the Super Rugby format and how it does not fully represent their province.

New Zealanders are very loyal about their provinces and will support the inclusion of the Naki. I believe it will build their market share to 85 percent.

As for South Africa, I always feel like the Saffas get the short end of the stick. They provide the best attendance figures and the best TV ratings. Adding two Super games a week by adding a additional team will grow their TV ratings substantially.

To put it into perspective, from my understanding SA TV ratings are at about the same level as NZ/Aus combined.

The current total of the combined TV ratings across Aus/NZ is 11,081,247 is up to the end of round 11. With only the top rating programs making the score each week, South Africa is reaching about the same with only two viewing games a week in their time zone. If anything, the Kings should be added purely to give our South African friends more TV room in their time zone, because they are the ones who are truly sacrificing for the success of Super Rugby.

They provide the bulk of the cash, viewing numbers and game attendance ratings. They have done their part and carried the bulk of weight of Southern Hemisphere rugby. Without them our rugby talent would have been taken by rugby league and the European clubs, because New Zealand is too small to stand on its own and rugby in Australia is too weak to go through the A-League style of rebuild / collapse / rebuild.

I’m not saying we should just give in to the South Africans every time they throw a tantrum but we should consider all the facts before decisions are made.

I believe there is plenty of room for and arguments in the positive to justify expansion

Problems/Issues
The biggest issue of course is money. Grand ideas are great but unless the capital is available to make them workable, then they are nothing but grand ideas.

How can SANZAR resolve the issue of cash flow? The obvious answer is to use the Melbourne Rebels as their primary model. I know that both the Kings and Naki are leaning towards this line for their funding so once again it surprises me that the New Zealand Rugby Union is rejecting the idea, while the SARU is doing everything it can to get the Kings in the door. The idea in itself is workable and can be used to expand in all three countries at the same time.

Australia has more problems with both funding and a player shortage. I believe the player shortage can be resolved by allowing more players from South America into the competition, which goes a long way to resolving the Argentinian problem and helping Australia’s issues.

Also they can source players from New Zealand as required to fill gaps in their own player shortage if players from Argentina are not available, or not good enough to fill the gap.

The final issue with expansion is the length of the season and the problems caused, but this is a no brainer. There will be less crossover rounds and more home games. The number of weeks does not need to increase.

SANZAR has many issues to face over the next five years starting with not having enough places in the competition to accommodate the arriving Argentinian cohort and reconciling the demands from South African Rugby. However I believe the issues can be solved by following the process above.

Expansion at this point to an 18 team competition can only be good for the game. SANZAR are being far too conservative in their reach even though they have grand ideas about the USA and Japan.

It is my opinion that Japan and the USA are not going to be interested unless they also are able to be involved in the Rugby Championship, which means they will also want a equal share of the profits.

If we expand to six teams per conference we are building a competition to rival those in Europe.

We currently have a window to advance our sport. The question is will SANZAR move before the window closes.

The Crowd Says:

2012-05-26T01:12:14+00:00

Nick

Guest


@ Sheek. I couldn't agree more with your post, well said. The reason why Aussie SR teams and the Wallabies struggle more to be competitive is our lack of a strong, robust and competitive domestic competition. SAF and NZ both have this and for that they have more depth and talent to burn. And yes, an aussie domestic comp requires some leadership in the ARU to grow and build this competition, tv deals on FTA and a busload of public relations to grow interest in the community. Also it needs a far greater committment to schoolboy (and schoolgirl) rugby. My greatest concern - and what I believe the greatest threat to rugby in australia - is the 'fear' that aussie parents have developed about contact sports. Hence why soccer is killing off the other codes at the grass roots level....

2012-05-17T02:00:22+00:00

kingplaymaker

Roar Guru


Emric it would mean that were any international expansion to take off in a big way, then the effect would be felt in all the new markets within the old SANZAR countries too, which could erupt in a way that they could not without a Super team.

2012-05-17T01:54:42+00:00

Emric

Guest


I agree KPM

2012-05-16T21:14:52+00:00

kingplaymaker

Roar Guru


Probably any international expansion would have to take place at the next TV deal. Before then there is plenty of time for internal expansion, which would lay a solid financial platform for international expansion by adding several markets and increasing the TV money that would be paid at the new deal, money that could underpin expansion.

2012-05-16T09:43:11+00:00

Emric

Guest


TC Seven a side rugby does not translate into instant success for a franchise in super rugby

2012-05-16T07:07:54+00:00

tc

Guest


Emric If it is true that a ten million dollar price has been paid for the New York 7s franchise then your argument simply doesn't stand up . Rugby is growing at a phenomenal rate in the US at all age groups . Ten million dollars may not sound like that much when compared to say 1.2 billion dollars that was paid for the Dodgers recently ,but we are not trying to compare Baseball and Rugby In the states. What might be considered modest in the states would be considered big anywhere else.

2012-05-16T05:07:09+00:00

Emric

Guest


TC - Rugby is weak in the US expanding into the US before they are ready is crazy. SANZAR would be taking massive risks. Yet SA and NZ are ready to expand Super Rugby and Australia would benefit from having another team

2012-05-16T03:59:36+00:00

Emric

Guest


Ratings in Australia are so low that Fox isn't willing to pay as much as what Sky and SS. Even so between NZ/Aus with a approx 4 games available per week and totally on pay tv the ratings are not that bad with Sky breaking with 8,000,000 and Fox having about 4,000,000.

2012-05-16T02:17:12+00:00

tc

Guest


KPM. I was not disagreeing with you on internal expansion ,I was just saying I believe that the biggest potential now lies outside NZ,AU and SA . SANZAR knows the potential is out there in new markets ,and if Kevin Roberts was correct when he said forget Japan the US is where you (SANZAR) want to be ,and by recent reports (if correct) a single franchise for the new US 7s series which sold for ten million dollars is just a taste of what is to come if SANZAR can get the formula right .

2012-05-16T00:22:20+00:00

kingplaymaker

Roar Guru


Think: if you added Adelaide and Western Sydney, 1.7 million and 2.2 million, and two big South African markets (plus two Auckland markets), you would have hugely increased the TV deal BEFORE 2015 and U.S. Japan, Canada, Argentina etc...

2012-05-15T23:48:47+00:00

tc

Guest


This is why SANZAR are going to go full steam into new markets at the next tv deal ,and have specifically named the US and Japan as crucial targets .There might be some profit in new teams from the current three nations but the real rewards are going to come from outside ,imagine In the near future maybe six teams per conference and three completely new conferences from North/South America and Asia . SANZAR really does sit on something special if it has the courage to press forward and tap the potential of these vast continents .I truly do believe that when these two countries get involved with multiple teams the tv deal is going to skyrocket.

2012-05-15T23:48:28+00:00

Crazy Horse

Guest


Only if the financial and recruiting shackles are taken off the For e so they can compete on a level playing field with the likes of the Rebels.

2012-05-15T23:00:41+00:00

The Bush

Roar Guru


It is very, very unlikely that the next TV deal for Super Rugby + Rugby Championship would recieve anything like $1billion over five (5) years. Just to do some basic maths, if the deal was for $1b, let's assume Argentina only gets $100m (or less) due to having no Super teams. That leaves $300m for each for the other countries over that period. Super Rugby has a third the number of teams of the AFL, a shorter season and nowhere near the ratings - they can't even guarantee a "grand final" every season in Australia. Why would a broadcaster pay even a third of the AFL rights for the Australia part of SANZAR when it doesn't have the ratings or content to justify it?

2012-05-15T22:54:32+00:00

Jarmen

Guest


Second that allblackfan, All too often on this forum Auckland is overlooked as being a bas e for a PI team. It's a little short sighted considering the fact as you mention Auckland is the biggest polynesian city in the world and by a long way.

2012-05-15T22:48:31+00:00

Jarmen

Guest


From all sources that I have seen and heard Taranakis bid and its backer Mr Jennings is for a stand alone franchise they do not want to combine with other provinces. I personally think if they combined with Hawkes Bay it would give them a little more street cred in the talent department, however Taranakis bid is very strong and has ticked all the boxes everytime. The NZRU is as yet to give a solid reason as to why they can not be included they are keeping very mum on the issue. Like I said above the only thing working against Taranaki at the moment is their population base.

2012-05-15T22:43:45+00:00

sheek

Guest


Charcoal, I understand your concern, but if we were to come up with an ARC rather than an APC, then preserving Waratahs & Reds icons is essential. Transferring from NSW to Sydney & Qld to Brisbane is a very easy process, which keeps both the Waratahs & Reds brands at the forefront of Australian rugby. We don't want them consigned to the dustbin of history, do we.....???

2012-05-15T20:52:56+00:00

Emric

Guest


Steve. Super Rugby is paid for by all 3 entities not just one this is why the deals are so long and complex

2012-05-15T14:01:16+00:00

Steve.H

Guest


Is it possible that the next TV deal could fetch over 1 Billion Dollars for SANZAR? The way I understand it SANZAR sells the TV deal as a combined entity for both the Tri Nations and Super Rugby, which is then sold by News Corp to Sky and Super Sport. With the Television figures on the rise across the globe, addition of three more teams in Super Rugby and the addition of Argentina to form the Rugby Championship surely there is a case for SANZAR to fetch that deal. The expense of that deal is carried over multiple countries rather than one like the AFL and NRL so its financially sustainable.

2012-05-15T12:33:39+00:00

Charcoal

Guest


Spot on Sheek, although I think there might be a problem calling Brisbane the "Reds" and Sydney the "Waratahs" as these names have a long tradition of being associated with the State teams. Perhaps we could also have a one off traditional clash each year between NSW and Queensland. Also essential that the Sydney teams are based in their respective zones, as this was one of the failings of the short lived ARC.

2012-05-15T12:11:47+00:00

yewonk

Guest


i would not set up a bridge team on the gold coast much less a rugby team its likely to go bankrupt half way to cape town

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar