I realise most Roarers seem to loathe the Super Rugby conference system, so excuse me while I sing its praises.
While rugby purists might wish to see their team tested against each and every opposing side in the hemisphere, I say, neh!
Now don’t get me wrong, all power and total respect to our brothers and sisters in New Zealand and South Africa who enjoy a decent domestic competition of their own, but in OZ, we’ve got five Super Rugby teams and then club land (metropolitan based, not even national!)
All power to them too.
Thing is, as much as I enjoy the Reds doing battle against all comers from East and West of our flat, dry land, I still want to see the Reds play the Waratahs both in Sydney and at home, ditto for Canberra, Perth and Melbourne (god bless em’!)
Last week’s match between the Reds and the Brumbies is a case in point. All manner of niggle and spite. Again, I’m not for a second suggesting that matches against South Africa or New Zealand teams are less of a spectacle or in any way inferior.
There is after all, nothing quite like a Ma Nonu or Bakkies Botha creating car crash havoc with Australia’s finest.
I don’t buy that argument either that is makes it easier for teams in the ‘easier’ conference to make the finals. Which conference is that again?
I’ve read that it was because of South Africa that the first placed in each conference goes through automatically.
Sounds like a good idea to me. 50% of matches are against teams from the other two conferences, so how do you realistically expect to top your conference if you can’t match it with them?
Even if that was the case, you’d cop a drubbing in the first play off.
So if I have to forgo the pleasure of seeing one team from each neighbour against my boys once a year, well, that’s a price I’m willing to pay.
That’s because the niggle and spite in local derbies is just so damned personal. As awesome as the number sevens are abroad, none of them are competing against Liam Gill for a Wallabies jersey.
I mean, did you see him in action against George Smith?
Who cares who won the bout, just watch em’ go at it like a pair of pit-bulls with road rage.
I am obviously getting emotional here and I haven’t even started on the front row or Horwell v Dennis.
Well just look at me, a no. 10 raving about forward packs!
And it gets worse rugby fans. I’m also a mungo lover. However, of late I find I’m watching less and less NRL and more Super Rugby. That thing you rugby monogamists keeping going on about, that repetition…
But what it does offer is visceral rivalry, and in the case of St George, intense hate.
Then of course there is AFL, soccer and that other sport where they stand around all day in the sun. Anyway, in OZ, rugby has to fight harder for cash and attention than a tone-deaf busker.
Until the French stop writing bigger cheques than even the Japanese clubs, our comp has to produce maximum cash for minimum cost, or land a billion dollar TV rights deal.
So no offence. Love us or hate us Southern bros and sisters, if you want us around, and I like to think you do, we need something approaching a viable domestic comp.
Oh and I almost forgot, we also need some of your best coaching staff too.
Wii
Guest
Carl I agree whole heartedly and said the same last year, the Reds IMO deserved a finals spot but only as 6th best qualifier. They did not deserve to be shifted up to 3rd and the other teams down a spot. Unfortunately many Australian posters resorted to woe is me and personal attacks that I had the audacity to have raised this point. This year if the top two,Australian teams keep,travelling the way they are they could potentially end up 1st and 2nd on the overall table yet one of them will be shunted down to 4th place at best and have to travel away and play the 1st week of finals. I would not back the Reds to beat the Blues in Auckland should they have to play them there. It to me would,be a travesty firstly because they (reds) would have qualified higher, and secondly they beat the Blues in season play. Home ground advantage can make all the difference, Reds vs Bulls, Canes, Blues - Crusaders vs Rebels tonight a prime example. Chiefs vs Sharks. You are right again if a country can not qualify 1 of its five teams in a 6 team finals series they really should think about their position in the tournament
Carl
Guest
The only thing I think they should fix is top 6 instead of conference winners being automatic top 3. For example the Reds should be second in table points right now but are fourth because they are under the NZ and SA conference leaders. If a country can't get a at least one of there teams in the top 6 come finals time they should consider leaving the comp, enough with conference leaders being 1,2,3 regardless of points on the log.
atlas
Guest
propped up by teams rooted in 11th, 12th and 13th spots; dominating the lower portion of the table, again.
chris
Guest
Oh and SA crowed aren't big because the teams are situated close together. The best supported team is situated a 1000km from their nearest neighbour. People simply don't travel round to support their team.
chris
Guest
MH you are missing a couple of point here. 1- Your idea of prime-time (meaning eyes watching the tv) is simply wrong. Over the last 20 years people in SA have grown used to watching games over breakfast and do so in great numbers. 2- Your idea of what is out prime-time is simply wrong. Sat mornings are fine, even on the rare occasion that it is 5:30. Friday evening (ozzie time) is much worse because the only people able to watch the Stormers (the best supported rugby team in the world) on tour are students and the unemployed. 3- I have never heard the rumour that the boks would join the #nations. At super level and below definitely (but mostly in the murdoch owned press, but don't get me started on that). 4- The conference structure actually leaves south africa with FEWER meaningful "derby" games. The damage the super16 has done to the currie cup is terrible for our local game.
Sam
Guest
or 2nd and 4th
Sam
Guest
i think the conference system should be scrapped its unfair to have teams coming 4th and 5th when they should be coming 2nd or 3rd. But there not cause there not the top team in there country.Scrap the conference system and have each team play each other once with the top 6 overall going through. this is what the table lookes like: When it Should look like this: REDS 37 REDS 37 BLUES 32 BRUMBIES 35 BULLS 28 BLUES 32 BRUMBIES 35 CHIEFS 30 CHIEFS 30 BULLS 28 HURRICANES 28 HURRICANES 28 But having said that im not exactly sure how it would look without the home and away local derbys
Jayvan Collins
Roar Pro
brilliant!
MH
Guest
we are having a discussion about the importance of local derbies for SA, so yes the fact that 13 of the 18 most viewed matches in SA last year were local derbies is pertinent. i'm not sure how you've drawn your conclusions from these figures that show SA is in the driving seat and can hold us to ransom. not the other way around. that is why we have gone with the conference sysytem and the doubling of local derbies. local derbies = prime time sponsorship and adds because of the greatr viewing no's plus more bums on seat through the gate.
MH
Guest
well i wasn't aware you were being sarcastic... it came across as casually ignorant and patronising to european rugby and i apologise for any offence
MH
Guest
i lived in uk for ten years. i supported saracens and although they won a premiership (i was at the game and the atmosphere was nothing like a heineken cup final) they'd kill for a heineken cup. i'm not saying the premiership isn't important, it is, but there is no way the heineken is second fiddle it's at-least parallel and imho more important to most club fans in reality. if you were asked to choose next year whether to win the heineken or the premiership.... you'd hand on heart take the premiership???... really??? i don't think so. you may be different but i think most would take the heineken because its the greater competition.
hog
Guest
+1
Abnutta, cheers for that info, is it possible to provide a link from where you get those viewer numbers please?
NicolasPA
Guest
ajajaj good point
abnutta
Roar Guru
MH, Only 11 of the 20 were SAF derbies, but that's not the point or the most compelling figure to extrapolate from those stats. - 19/20 involved SAF teams - the other match was a NZL derby - of the 19 matches involving SAF teams - on average roughly 98% of all viewers were from SAF - only 1 of those matches was hosted in NZL and even then, the majority of viewers were SAF (58.43%) followed by NZL (33.34%) and AUS (8.23%) - even for the all NZL derby (Blues v Crusaders) the majority of viewers were SAF (50.38%) followed by NZL (37.03%) and AUS (12.59%) - there was even a match in the top 20 which had statistically 0 viewers from NZL So, here's the major point that I glean from those figures: The Rugby Championship and TEST match component of the SANZAR broadcast revenue is so compelling that SAF is basically held to ransom by NZL and AUS on the domestic/2nd tier front. Basically, SAF has to "play ball" on Super Rugby to keep the lucrative SANZAR test match deal together.
abnutta
Roar Guru
"might want to look that word up fella….." IRONY: an outcome of events contrary to what was, or might have been, expected. Anyone who has followed my opinions on the structure of Super Rugby, knows that I'm a staunch advocate of: - the conference system - the institution of a Heineken Cup/Champions League style knockout system - the continued participation of SAF in SANZAR competitions - the prevalence of "local derbies" over "inter-conference" matches
madrid john
Guest
Now sure where the ´divisive´ criticism keeps coming from. I had nothing but good things to say about NZ and SA. And don´t get me started on the huge financial draw backs associated with increasing the amount of international flying that would go with more international super XV games. Especially at time when all three countries are struggling to keep their talent out of the clutches of Japanese and French clubs. We all want sport to rise above the all mighty dollar, but then i also want a packet of Tim Tams that never runs out.
John
Guest
It was set up so that the Aussie were guaranteed a team in the finals , $$$$ for Foxtel who else would suffer the absolute rubbish commentary that we have to suffer here in Australia , I watch AFL if it is a local derby they are so bad . Sure they are not working for the ABC ?
cjones
Guest
MH as a English RU fan i would much prefer to see Northampton win the premiership than the Heineken. in England and France the domestic comps are generally seen as more important with European success a bonus..
MH
Guest
some research According to the Front Row Grunt blog, all but two of the 20 most viewed matches in last year's Super Rugby tournament were hosted in SA - and a staggering 13 of the of the 20 most viewed games were SA derbies. that means the games in prime time are vitally important to south africa and if 13 of the 18 most watch matches in south africa were local derbies well..... there you go!