Andrew Mehrtens recently created a little bit of controversy with his comments about not playing South African teams and focusing on closer neighbours and regions within reasonable broadcasting hours.
He has a point, but there is more to it.
The shared sentiment from both sides of the Indian Ocean is that South Africa could break away from the Super Rugby competition, but the details haven’t truly been thought of as yet.
This talk isn’t anything new. A few South African commentators have hinted at South African teams joining in on the European circuit.
The time difference, or lack of, will allow games to be played at ‘normal’ hours, giving people a chance to watch the games, but this is a double-edged sword which I’ll write about later.
By joining the European circuit, there won’t be midnight or early morning games for South Africa. The broadcast revenue potential can be astronomical but it requires an already stretched European season to accommodate teams from the south and for the long-haul travel.
South Africa is already accustomed to long flights but I doubt that many European teams would favour an 11-12 hour flight for a game of rugby.
The Australasian teams (New Zealand and Australia) will then battle between themselves and try to invite the Pacific nations and Japan.
The cash cow to fill the void of South Africa would be Japan as there is money there, but I cannot guess how much of it would be shared.
The broadcast of rugby in Japan is sad, to say the least, so the ‘company’ teams may have to front some of the cost. Modern professional sport relies on broadcast revenue, so having a limited broadcast audience could hurt competitions financially.
Mehrtens also went on to say that the interest in watching South African teams has waned. This is partly true. The entire competition is suffering this disinterest.
The fat cats at the top of SANZAR have the belief that if they expand the competition, it will increase the cash flow. But too much a good thing is bad for you.
The uniqueness and aura of a match has been lost as it has been assimilated into a league format – a guaranteed match almost every weekend for 10 months (referring to the Southern Hemisphere).
The ‘special occasion’ feel has been lost and now games are no more than background noise for a barbecue or drinks at a bar. What happened to the ‘event’ of a rugby match? The aggressive expansion of the league has given us too much to watch and we have lost interest.
It’s all good to try and split an established competition for reasons of lack of interest, but there are other problems that need to be addressed first.
sixo_clock
Roar Guru
:)
sixo_clock
Roar Guru
Refute my argument Jorji, not the waffle easily swallowed by RM's audience. I was not subtle enough when I stated I would not bother to read it? One point however, just how much of that squillion dollar deal was ever going to see the light of day, just another journal entry by an accountant. You can fool ... all of the time (my paraphrase). They can of course open the books and let us see the payments, leases, purchases but would that ever happen?
Jorji Costava
Guest
Simply put, if ARU has no content to put to Fox Sports then both Fox Sports and the ARU suffer. The next tv deal will bankroll the enterprise, just like it did for the good old NRL and A-League. Roy is quoting the old financials and not taking into account the next tv deal. Don't forget Roy actually said the NRL tv deal would surpass the AFL tv deal. Look how that ended up.
Jorji Costava
Guest
Roy Masters wrote a similar article about how badly the AFL was doing 12 months ago too just to put some perspective on the type of stuff he conjures up. Take it with a grain of salt he clearly holds a grudge against rival codes.
Jorji Costava
Guest
A-League soccer gets more than that!
Higgik
Guest
SH rugby has a much better structure to the season. Think of the different levels of players Tier 1 internationals Tier 2 super rugby Tier 3 CC NPC NRC Tier 4 vodacom, club rugby x 2 Payers from each tier play in two levels, international and super rugby, super and domestic, etc. This gives a natural progression ladder for players to move up. Unfortunately, the staff as want the CC to be more important. The way of doing that is to rename the SA conference the CC. Up in the NH a suggested format for European rugby was produced and involved domestic cups as well http://www.rugbyworld.com/tournaments/heineken-cup/europe-we-have-the-answer/ A similar system could be replicated for SH, with 18 teams in 3 conferences of 6, playing home and away in conference and then 3 of the teams in the other 2 conferences, giving 16 matches in regular season,(during this time the tier 4 competitions would be played, to give potential reserves match practice) The play off would include domestic championships, with the top 2 teams in each conference playing for own domestic championships. Currently the domestic finals would be Brumbies v Waratahs Chiefs v Crusaders Sharks v Bulls The next round would be between domestic champions and the next best domestic runner up Brumbies, Chiefs, Sharks and Waratahs The semi finals would be Sharks v Waratahs, (Durban) Brumbies v Chiefs (Canberra) There would be a weeks break before the super final at prearranged neutral venue, the week off to give acclimatisation time to the teams. The tier 3 competitions would start during the super rugby play offs season, with internationals going into training camps. This would mean a 12 week tier 3 competition. The only issue would be incoming tours, when they would be programmed, especially trying to link with NH season. The outgoing tours would happen at end of RC, with the NH season altered to allow this date to be opened.
Eddard
Guest
Well the status quo is making the ARU broke and leading rugby union to sporting oblivion in Australia. Some significant changes are needed to 'get our house in order.' And Bill Pulver is under significant pressure from key stakeholders (particularly the super rugby sides and the players union) to force change.
Warren Adamson
Roar Pro
It's great to hear contradicting points of view from former team mates and All Blacks. This issue will raise its ugly head every time the broadcast contract is up or one Union wants something from the others. Wilson makes some interesting points about why the competition is good and I like what he says.
Digby
Roar Guru
http://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/opinion/9959965/Wilson-Super-Rugby-must-keep-South-Africa Another point of view from Wilson everyone may be interested in
tc
Guest
Eddard That's your reality, now whats Pulvers reality, he's sticking with SANZAR and he will begrudgingly accept Super Rugby expansion. My advice is get your own house in order and all will be fine.
Dally M
Guest
And if it wasn't for that Australian Rupert Murdoch & Fox Sports where would rugby be now? A NZ/SA comp would mean less content & less viewer friendly games for both countries. How will that sell to the broadcasters?
Bakkies
Guest
The problem was that Aus only had three teams and the third team from a small market sent a wake up call to the big two. This showed that a raft of players in Australia needed game time to strengthen the depth of Australian rugby and the ARU had to expand in to another city. Despite Canberra's rugby and player development there were calls to move the Brumbies to a larger city. As vital as Melbourne is as a market I didn't want another team. The money and players weren't there, other teams had to close academies plus reduce squads and the VRU given their failed bid in 2005 weren't up to the task. A big tv contract is no good if the teams aren't benefiting. With poorly financed teams the quality suffers and people tune out. This is happening in the Superleague in the UK. As for Masters league in Oz is in a bind. They know they have to expand and reduce the amount of NSW teams but that is their stronghold and the fan base is tribal. The game also has several failed expansion teams.
Jackster
Guest
As a Blues supporter I hope Super Rugby is shown the door pronto. One team to cover a population 1/4 our nations size encompassing 3 provincial unions has helped kill off union in this city. How ironic to see over 100,000 kiwis support an Australian league competition played at NZ rugbys spiritual home Eden Park recently? Sign of the times me thinks and not good if youre a union supporter in this part of the country. I dont have the answers but after 10+ years mediocrity from Auckland rugby, a former and long time power house of NZ rugby, I welcome your solutions fellow Roarers.
Eddard
Guest
First of all, I'm talking about going it alone at super rugby level not test level. Secondly, if we left super rugby as it is currently then NZ would come begrudgingly with us...because the alternative would be absolutely terrible for them. But lets say they didn't. What I imagine would happen is Australia would create a new 8-10 team competition (perhaps with a team or two from Asia, and maybe some renegade Pacific team in NZ not associated with the NZRU - if that was possible). Matches between Australian super rugby teams regularly outrate the A League and they have a $40 million per year deal. That's $15 million more than the ARU get from both Super Rugby AND test rugby combined. With a significant increase in local matches, played at suitable broadcast times, and without our teams disappearing for a couple of weeks during the season to play in the middle of the night, that competition would provide more value to our broadcasters than Super Rugby does currently. So perhaps we'd get $40 million a year for that competition...add that to the test rugby rights, and add the savings we make from not having to fly around the world to compete and I think Australian rugby would do okay holding onto our players. Probably better than we do now.
paul crann
Guest
Who sanctioned that crappy American style din that comes on for 5 second sound bites every time there is a stoppage, which is often ? What genius thought spectators would rather be bored stiff watching players practicing before a game than watching a curtain raiser. Fair Dinkum what a bunch of drips. Pulver was asked repeatedly today when Rugby is going to get any free to air action, his answer was typically out of sync with the broader community. What's the point hijacking a team of pacific islanders for your national squad if you can't bring the broader community along with you. The ARU are obsessed with the Wallaby's winning and wonders why it's broke. Japan and the USA are not going to save the ARU, what pie in the sky nonsense. What will save rugby in this country is a strong domestic competition with common sense marketing, player payments integrated into a southern hemisphere season with a much reduced Sanzar competition that mirror's Europes Heineken cup. If they can get rid of those ugly scrums and penalties it might help too.
paul crann
Guest
Warren, Sorry to pull you up Buddy but both test matches to which you refer were played at Prince Chichibu Stadium. Japan will do just fine. As for the future of top quality Rugby, it rests in Europe. It's up to the ARU to learn how to deal with that reality. I know I'd rather be in the ARU's position than Rugby League. If it survives the next decade as a viable alternative to Rugby I'd be very surprised.
tc
Guest
Hay eddard Tell me, if you guys go it alone, how will you lot keep your players ?.
tc
Guest
I know who he is we were from the same bloody city
Brady-Aj
Roar Pro
Also funny how history starts to repeat it self, 2003 the ARU were flush with cash after the Rugby world cup and were the Number two sport in Australia. But instead of looking after Rugby, you over paid all your players from club players to wallabies and cheapened the Wallabies jersey by giving it away to league players, while demanding extra Super Rugby Teams. Fast Forward to 2014 the ARU is broke. In the same Period of time the NZRU has gone from strength to strength, not only is the ALLBLACKS making money, the NPC is as well which means more money for everyone. Now you want the NZRU to basically to bail you out yet again (and yes Rugby NZ has done it before) with a trans Tasman comp. Personally i would love to have a trans Tasman comp between NZ and Aus,but only because I live in Melbourne . But a trans Tasman comp would not help rugby NZ, I believe it would hurt it, Aus rugby players play a lot like Kiwis. But having young and fringe players playing in SA against some of the most passionate rugby players in the world makes them better AllBlacks. NZ could Probably go it alone for a while just like SA, with the Selling power of the AB they could probably make more money by playing a Tri Nation each year in the June test window playing different sides each year plus a Twenty round NPC than playing in a trans Tasman comp. The Point I'm trying to make is NZ doesn't need the Money from Australia anymore as much as it use to, what they need is to be playing the best of the best and just playing Aus wont cut it.
sheek
Roar Guru
What a funny old world it is. It wasn't that long ago some of us Aussies were saying we didn't need a domestic comp because we punched above our weight. "Huh" to that.....