Super Rugby will expand from 15 teams to 17 teams next season. A sixth South African franchise joins, alongside a maiden team from Argentina.
Argentina thoroughly deserves a place in the competition. As a member of the Rugby Championship this is surely their right.
The Pumas have performed with great distinction in the professional era.
They have beaten England, Australia, France, Scotland, Ireland, Wales and Italy, some of those countries several times, and held South Africa and the Lions to draws.
In 2007 Argentina finished third in the World Cup.
Those results are almost miraculous given Argentina’s top players are almost exclusively based in Europe and the local competition is essentially amateur.
A Super Rugby franchise in Argentina will have obvious benefits for the game in that country. The chance to increase playing depth, create revenue for the sport and aspiration for future players are all positive outcomes.
The same can’t be said about South Africa’s sixth team. The fifth team has been a perennial poison chalice.
The Central Cheetahs originally came into the competition in 2006 after the Southern Spears, a financially unstable entity to start with, settled out of court in a legal dispute claiming they had the right to be the fifth team.
The Cheetahs have been poor performers winning only 42 of their 126 games. They have made the playoffs once in eight full seasons.
In fact on performance alone South Africa can hardly justify a fourth team, let alone a sixth.
The Lions, or the Cats, or whatever, have been last six times and only won 53 out of 210 games.
They were so bad in 2013 they were kicked out of the competition and replaced by the Southern Kings, who guess what, were last, before they died and the Lions came back.
SANZAR is short-sighted. They are chasing short term TV dollars, instead of doing something that will actually improve the competition and the game worldwide.
If expansion is a priority why not add a Pacific Islands team? I hear the, “It won’t make money” cry already.
Why not base it in Auckland where the Polynesian population is huge, especially in the South?
The commercial setting is better and Mount Smart Stadium or Eden Park are two fine venues in which to play. Once established the team could play an occasional fixture in Suva, Apia or Nuku’alofa.
Hell the team would be really talented. Any fool who watches rugby knows and admires how many big and talented Polynesians there are playing the game.
With a little bit of infrastructure and opportunity rugby in the islands would explode.
On the subject of the islands when is the last time the Wallabies, Springboks or All Blacks played a test in Apia, Suva or Nuku’alofa?
Oh and when will Super Rugby get a Colts competition similar to the Holden Cup?
Nick
Guest
Redsfan1. With all due respect, I seriously don't understand your problem. If you look at the comments section you will find that only a sparse few are actually against a sixth South African team. Most don't find a problem with it. If they are weak, so what. The only people standing to benefit from it are us Aussies and the kiwis. If, before you started your 'whinging' you took a look at the demographics and geographics of SA you would see that the inclusion of a sixth team is vital. SA have the largest player base, just look at the stats, and they are working towards translating that into more top notch players for their six big unions. For now, we can only let them try it out instead of whining and complaining.
Riot Act
Guest
18 seems to be the magic number we are heading for in the three major football codes - AFL, NRL (16 + Brisbane 2 and Perth) and now the Super Rugby. 18 teams allows for 3 groups 6 and in the case of Super Rugby, it makes sense for these groups to be "closed conferences" to limit travel. But while NZ + Pacific and South Africa can support 6 teams each, Australia can really only support 4 teams. So if Argentina and Japan are the 17th and 18 teams, then we need to find a suitable conference for them.
The only thing damning about that stat is that we have 4 stronger teams which makes our fifth team the whipping boys in our conference.
Adam Julian
Roar Guru
Wait till they hit the road. 13 out of 18 wooden spoons to South Africa in Super Rugby history, pretty damning really.
Old Bugger
Guest
Johno You know what, the concerns about all travel impacts on player performance did not originate from NZRU or ARU - it came from SARU. And I agree, the SA sides were doing all the travelling, having longer SR tours to visit both AU & NZ but, it was and still is, part and parcel of SR. My point now is with ARG's entry, it increases AU & NZ travel participation in the SR but already, both national sides have been doing this trip for the past 2 RC comps. It definitely increases the travel for SR sides, but lets hope it also minimises compromises at future SR negotiations. So I really dont see what logistical nightmares you are forecasting. The annoying issue for me is the continued conference format and its rort implication that is now so obvious - let's get rid of this format and wish good luck to all teams in the comp striving to make the top-6 and not just the top 2 teams per conference, with guaranteed top-6 entry. Problem is, it may be wishful thinking on my behalf cos now that its in, I really cant see either partner giving up on guaranteed finals attendances for its successful teams......but at the very least, have a review on what happens if a 7th side scores more points than any of the conference's top-2 finishers. If that happens, then allow this 7th side to progress at the expense of the lowest top-2 finisher. If it doesn't, then nothing changes and the top-2 finishers progress accordingly.
What was I saying about bottom feeders the other day?
Harry Jones
Guest
I think we all need to apologize to the 2-0 Lions
Nobrain
Guest
Sorry, but I do not see any more money in giving argentina a team. To the contrary, it will add up more traveling expenses and do jot see to kany people , other than Argentines( very few) watching the games. I think they are thinking long term with Argentina.
Mark Fredericks
Guest
The interesting thing about South Africa reeling in the most money - especially via pay per view TV, is that half of those watching support either New Zealand, or Australian franchises. This will indeed be an interesting period, and as with everything, probably a long term exercise. SANZAR is driven by greed, as with every corporate endeavour, and it will, in the end be the undoing of a fantastic initiative - which started way back with the Super 10. In my view, the dominance in world rugby, into the foreseeable future will remain with New Zealand, gravitating to Australia & England, as the pull of larger salaries attract more and more players straight out of high schools. Clubs will become more important than countries - looks like 7's will be the crowd pullers at stadiums. That's still a long way away, but we can all see the trends.
Magic Sponge
Guest
Johnno. Not really rugby is totally different to EPL in terms of market. It is a different comp. the supporters at rugby games are largely grass roots supporters that want local players they identify with. They don't want the British lions squad or Gareth Delve playing for the tahs as it is meaningless no one wants to see just a mercenary team play for their S15 squad. EPL and S15 Is chalk and cheese you can't compare.
Crazy Horse
Guest
Play al any Aussie team v any South African team in Perth and you'll always get close to full house.
hog
Guest
Rugger, I pretty much agree with everything you say above. The issue has always been the top down approach of the ARU, who are simply paying for 10/15 years when they have not developed any genuine growth for Rugby in this country. The code has not developed from its private school background (I’m not having a go at private schools rugby), just that the ARU has ignored the need for the code to grow outside of its traditional areas. As you have stated it has totally relied on a top down (wallabies) model that has seen them literally have to prostitute them to continue to keep the revenue coming in. (to the point they now have to pay up to 20 games a year. Their complete model is reliant on Pay TV revenue, which in itself restricts the growth of the code as 80% of the population don't have access to the product. (Maybe that's the reason they call it the invisible code). After 19 years. Super rugby just does not interest the Australian sporting public, look at the other 3 codes that is the model that works in this country. (why why why why!!!! does that not register at ARU headquarters). From 2016 literally only 20% of Super rugby will be relevant to the Australian market. And i'm sorry the aussie sporting public are simply not interested in teams from Argentina/SA or whatever continent they come up with next. I like Pulver and think he is doing a good job, but I fundamentally dis-agree with Junior rugby teams having to pay for the incompetence of previous ARU management. And the best way to grow the game b. its simple allow each country to run its own domestic competition and then Heineken cup style between as many nations as you want. Look if Australia had its own genuine domestic comp with club and city rivalry, with proper grassroots development. I personally reckon the we could compete with the NRL/AFL in 8/10 years.
SA doesn't deserve more team, correct, yet that is what they want for bringing in the most money.
Tane Mahuta
Guest
Are you serious? Its not about winning? If its not then why bother, the NH detractors are right, its exhibition rugby. SA doesnt deserve 6 teams any more than Aus or NZ.
PeterK
Guest
Cheetahs have only been competitive for last 3 years. A bit early to say there are 4 from inter conf matches. Bulls might not be this year. By far the majority of years there have been 2 weak SA teams.
Tane Mahuta
Guest
Im not saying anything. Thats what the complaint is about.
Katipo
Guest
This is a mess. The national unions have to rethink sanzar now with this broadcast deal. By far the best solution is to leave each nation to its domestic tournaments then play Super Rugby as an invite-from-sanzar finals tournament of some sort. Sanzar should be deciding what format the finals series will take; how many countries they will invite and how many teams they will invite from each country; no more conference talk and no more round robin talk. Leave that to the national rugby unions to sort out. That's the best way to solve this. Sheesh!
Digby
Roar Guru
No live blog for the blues and highlanders tonight?
Tane Mahuta
Guest
Johnno, Delve and Haskell just left super rugby for Europe in case you didnt notice and 80 Super players left from last season so if you cant understand what that means then good luck. And WTF does Sam Warburton have to do with anything? very few top players come here Johnno, some just for the experience but nothing is stopping more coming and yet they dont come. There is a reason, money, national honors and being close to family and friends being a few reasons.
Tane, Super arugby stopped being about who wins a long time ago. If you compare depth we are the only nation who has 4 teams who are competitive against opposition from inter conference matches.