In my article a couple of weeks ago I voiced my dismay at the direction SANZAR are taking our game into the future.

After reading countless articles and comments since the details of Super Rugby post 2015 were released, it seems to be a position that is shared by many of my fellow roarers.

In attempting to reconcile the new format in my mind, I’ve looked at the different goals and parameters that those involved in the negotiations faced. While some of these objectives will be met in one way or another, it still seems to be a mind-boggling conclusion that our rugby administrators have arrived at.

I’d now like to share an alternate proposal that I believe more closely resembles what’s required for all those with a stake in Super Rugby. In crafting this proposal, I’ve attempted to take the eight considerations I mentioned the other week into account. Obviously this is from an Australian perspective and it would involve compromises, but I believe the end product is a model that’s beneficial for all concerned.

I would effectively dissolve Super Rugby’s current format while elevating altered versions of the third tiers to create two new competitions. This includes a Trans-Tasman League (TTL) involving nine teams from both Australia and New Zealand and a 10-team Currie Cup. These are the leagues and the teams I propose in each:

Trans-Tasman League
Brisbane Reds
Gold Coast Sharks/Breakers/Cyclones
Sydney Waratahs
North Sydney Rays
West Sydney Rams
Hunter Hawks
Canberra Brumbies
Melbourne Rebels
Western Force
Auckland Blues
North Harbour Mariners
Waikato Chiefs
Hawke’s Bay Magpies
Bay of Plenty Steamers
Wellington Hurricanes/Lions
Taranaki Bulls
Otago Highlanders/Razorback
Canterbury Crusaders

Currie Cup
Pretoria Bulls
Eastern Province Kings
Johannesburg Lions
Western Province Stormers
Free State Cheetahs
Natal Sharks
Boland Cavaliers
Northwest Leopards
Mpumulanga Pumas
Northern Cape Griquas

Both leagues would kick off on the same weekend and be run over 20 weeks. Teams in the TTL would all play each other once for a 17-game regular season before the top eight are involved in a three week playoff system. Teams in the Currie Cup would play home-and-away for an 18 game regular season before the top four play in a two week playoff structure.

Following the home international season (home Tests and Rugby Championship), all of these 28 teams would be involved in a champions league-style tournament called the Indian Pacific Cup (IPC) to be played over eight weeks. This would also involve some changes to the international season but I won’t go into that right now.

The 28 teams from Australia, New Zealand and South Africa would be joined by the grand finalists from the Top League in Japan and the Argentinean club competition. These 32 clubs would then be split over eight groups of four with groups being organised using a seeding structure while ensuring no group holds more than two teams from the same country. Teams would play each other home-and-away for six games before the top two from each group progress to the round of 16 and so on.

Now let’s take another look at those objectives I touched on yesterday and see how this proposal fits in with each goal and piece of criteria.

New Zealand wants to maintain a relationship with South Africa
While the proposal involves creating two domestic competitions where South Africa stands alone, the IPC will ensure all New Zealand and Australian teams play against South African opposition at least twice a season with one of those games on South African soil. This is only one less game against South African opposition than what’s being proposed by SANZAR for 2016.

South Africa want 6
Under this proposal, South Africa not only get six they get 10 of their Currie Cup sides to assume the role of their second tier. I chose these 10 based on a conversation I had with respected South African Roarer, Biltongbek, a while ago regarding his thoughts on the strongest Currie Cup sides.

Apologies if your thoughts have progressed Biltong, but he arrived at this conclusion based on the populations and economic strength of the regions that each of the 14 Currie Cup teams represent.

I also chose 10 because it fits in nicely with the length of time required to run the TTL and I think going the full 14 would dilute the playing talent and finances required for a professional competition in the Republic.

It’s also important to note here that I believe South Africa are in a strong position to take full control of their domestic destiny and promote some version of the Currie Cup as the tier directly underneath the Springboks. There’s currently great interest in the Currie Cup and without Super Rugby cannibalising its supporter base, there’s little doubt this interest would be magnified.

An emphasis on derbies
Obviously in the case of South Africa, all of their Currie Cup games are ‘derbies’.

In the case of the TTL, each team would have eight games against opponents from their home country which is on par with the status quo and two more games than what’s being proposed for 2016.

What’s a key feature of these two domestic competitions is the fact that all games are in reasonably viewer friendly time zones. The Currie Cup would involve five local games between all South African teams while the TTL would involve nine games each weekend with no fans having to set the alarm for a 3am wakeup.

Taking Super Rugby to new frontiers
For the two competitions forming the bulk of the IPC, there’s no place for any Asian or Argentinean teams, and for good reason.

At the heart of this proposal is creating leagues that are more localised, allowing for greater coverage of the markets they represent while presenting a more engaging format for fan involvement. The fact that derbies generate the most interest and support suggests that fans on mass are drawn to games where they know something about the opposition team and where they come from. Furthermore, fans shouldn’t have to wake or stay up until all hours to watch their team play an away game. Including teams from Asia and Argentina in these domestic leagues doesn’t align with this.

As well as the factors affecting the SANZAR partners, there are number of reasons any new union should be cautious when attaching themselves to a 15-game, 17-round Super Rugby season:

– There would need to be significant involvement of foreign players for these teams (particularly the one from Asia) to be competitive.

– The closest away game for both of these teams would involve 10 hours on a plane.

– There’s cause for considerable doubt over whether fan and corporate engagement will be able to sustain these teams.

Recently the president of the Asian Rugby Football Union, Trevor Gregory stated that Asia was nowhere near ready for involvement in Super Rugby. He’s also chairman of the Hong Kong Rugby Football Union which is why we’re seeing Singapore as the only alternative to a Japanese side and not a more logical Hong Kong bid.

Instead of Super Rugby coming in over the top and creating another platform, SANZAR should work with the existing structures. Let Japan and Argentina organise themselves and continue to develop leagues that are tailored for their individual markets. In creating the IPC, there’s an opportunity to include these markets in a format that doesn’t detrimentally affect the principles that should underline an effective second tier.

Rugby markets in Asia and Argentina are still very much in their infancy. Engaging in a long season where many games are played internationally and in foreign time zone is a huge commitment. This is essentially why there are question marks over whether these teams can be sustained. The shortened IPC structure on the other hand, provides an appropriate platform that meets what these markets are ready for.

Yes, club teams from Japan and Argentina will get a touch up when playing opponents from Australia, New Zealand and South Africa, but it’s really about exposing these markets to SANZAR rugby without over doing it. It will only be 6 games as opposed to 15 and unless there’s that significant foreign presence beefing up their teams, I’d suggest their results in Super Rugby will be no different, just more of them.

The travel
Travel benefits during the TTL and Currie Cup seasons are quite obvious when compared to Super Rugby pre or post 2016. Travel does becomes a factor during the IPC with groups of four made up of teams from three or four countries, but it’s still a slight improvement on what’s being proposed for 2016. Looking only at the pool stage, South African teams will play no more than three games that are 10 hours plus from home and no more than two games for Australian and New Zealand sides.

Protecting the third tier in New Zealand and South Africa
While this proposal involves elevating four or five third tier clubs from South Africa and New Zealand respectively, I recognise it would require changes to these proud competitions. What it doesn’t require is folding the formats altogether. All that needs to change is the purpose they each serve for their respective unions.

Considering this proposal involves a minimum of 23 games per year, there’s more than enough rugby for all professional players. So I propose the old ITM and Currie Cup formats become third tiers that exclusively involve those players looking to progress to full time and professional rugby on the second tier.

As professional rugby players are getting their fair share of games, it wouldn’t matter so much when these tournaments were played throughout the season. I’d suggest running them during the TTL and second tier Currie Cup so you could use many of the third tier games as curtain raises.

This would create a structure similar to what we have with rugby league in Australia. The NRL operates as the professional and elite competition with the Queensland and New South Wales Cups occupying the tier underneath. The old ITM and Currie Cups can fulfil these roles. They would provide a platform for players to push their case for a fulltime contract as well as a tier that can be used to drop players outside the match day 23 and easing in those coming back from injury.

For those promoted clubs, it presents an exciting opportunity to restore themselves as legitimate national team feeders while taking their place towards the top of the elite rugby pyramid. Unfortunately some tough calls need to be made to decide which clubs are provided with this opportunity. I don’t believe New Zealand or South Africa are in a position to lift all 14 ITM and Currie Cup teams to operate effectively from a second tier platform.

As I mentioned above, in the case of South Africa, I’ve used the help of Biltongbek to come up with the 10 Currie Cup clubs that are in the best position to be involved in a fully professional and national competition.

The nine ITM Cup teams I’ve included are based purely on population where there’s the best chance to attract the fans and corporate dollars required to survive at this level.

Mo’ Money
The major driving force behind this proposal is creating a structure that’s engaging for the fans. That being the case, it presents a great opportunity to build the viewership and interest in the three markets Super Rugby is supposed to be focused on. That can only be a good thing when counting dollars from broadcasters.

By focusing on the development of a second tier that has a wide domestic footprint to take the professional game to the masses, the FFA has achieved a broadcast deal that trumps what the ARU generate from TV for Super Rugby and the Wallabies. Initially, results will probably be slow, but the ARU has to take a similar internally focused approach to reach the games potential and eventually maximise its earning capacity.

As I mentioned above, South Africa has the supporter base to go it alone and run their own domestic league as their second tier. Australia and New Zealand aren’t in as strong a position individually, yet we’re in close proximity to one and other geographically and culturally and there’s a significant kiwi expat community living in Australia.

Although most Australian’s wouldn’t know the first thing about Pretoria or Durban let alone where the Bulls or Sharks come from, we’re a little more clued on when it comes to our knowledge of our friends across the ditch. For these reasons, we present a stronger product to sell by joining our domestic interests together, just as we do in Netball with the ANZ Championship.

As well as potentially putting more eyeballs on screens and bums on seats, this format will supply more content that’s predominately in viewer friendly time slots. The IPC would deliver a second exciting format to captivate fans and add that international flavour that Super Rugby will in 2016, without it dominating the landscape and turning fans off.

Each weekend throughout the domestic seasons would see a total of 14 games, with five games in the Republic all involving South African opponents and nine games in Australia and New Zealand where the time zones east to west are only four hours apart. Furthermore, each club will be involved in a minimum of 23 games each year which is eight more than what will be on offer from 2016. That’s eight more weekends of second tier rugby for broadcasters to sell advertising space, eight more games for clubs to add value to their sponsorship arrangements and four more home games to get the turnstiles spinning.

Growing the game
As I’ve mentioned on a number of occasions, this should and has to be priority number 1. This is particularly relevant in Australia where our domestic penetration is significantly behind our friends in New Zealand and South Africa. This unhealthy mentality of chasing rainbows in Asia has to shift towards an internal focus to attract and engage fans and kids.

The second tiers role in this objective involves beefing up its presence on the domestic landscape and increasing its footprint to take the game to as many people as viably possible. The NRL and AFL are surging ahead of rugby with established domestic competitions that have well and truly captivated those hearts and minds on mass. The FFA has followed that path cleared by Australian Football and rugby league and they’re now reaping the rewards with the A-League that grows year on year. It’s time for rugby to follow suit.

This model involves covering seven of Australia’s eight largest markets. The ARU has done a fine job of pushing the game to new frontiers and it’s one of the few competitive advantages they have over the NRL. Where we’re lacking is adequately tapping into and representing our heartland markets. As such, the four new professional teams will come from New South Wales and Queensland.

Sydney is an expansive market with one of the largest local rugby competitions in the world. Adequately representing the entirety of Australia’s largest city, as well as the northern and eastern reaches of the state is an awful lot of responsibility for the Waratahs and something I believe they can’t possibly achieve effectively.

Obviously at the moment they’ve got a lot more fans to join the bandwagon, but you can’t always count on times being rosy. During an average season for the Tahs, they seem to go back to being a brand synonymous with the eastern suburbs. Considering this, I’ve kept the Waratah brand alive and given them everything along the coast from the city and Bondi down to the Shire.

Those north of the harbour are notorious for not crossing the bridge and being one of rugby’s great strongholds in Sydney, they deserve direct representation with the Rays. Tony Abbott seems to be keen to give Brookvale a lick of paint, so within a few years there could be a boutique stadium on the northern beaches that the many rugby fans on that side of Sydney would be proud to attend.

Although not viewed as a traditional rugby heartland, western Sydney still has a lot going for it. The area has a large and booming population with a considerable number of those living or moving there hailing for New Zealand and the Pacific. Rugby would be foolish for ignoring the country’s third largest economy and one that all football codes have recognised as being incredibly important to their future endeavours. The area is also in line for a new boutique stadium or a significant stadium upgrade so there should be a fine venue for viewing live rugby in the coming years. Until then, Parramatta Stadium will do the job.

With a population creeping up to five million and one of the largest local rugby markets in the world, three teams from the second tier provides adequate representation of Sydney.

Newcastle or the Hunter will be New South Wales fourth team that will represent yet another important heartland for Australian rugby. The Hunter region has a population in excess of half a million people which makes it Australia’s seventh largest market. The team would take in the north of the state up to the Queensland border, which like Newcastle is an area with an established rugby interest that is growing at an impressive rate.

Finally, the Gold Coast will represent Australia’s sixth largest market and one of the fastest growing areas in the country. Like western Sydney, a large portion of the expat community on the Gold Coast comes from rugby loving areas. The coast has long been viewed as a resort town with a transient population, but as the population continues to boom with more families moving in, there is growing a thirst for professional sports to support.

It’s important the ARU recognises the potential of regional cities like Newcastle and the Gold Coast. They both have strong local competitions, a number of rugby nurseries and by Oceania standards, big and booming populations.

Eight more professional teams operating from the second tier across Australia and New Zealand will undoubtedly increase the games presence and exposure. As well as taking the game to more people, it will allow more Australian and New Zealand players to make a living from the game and allow them the opportunity to play rugby fulltime. This also can only be seen as a positive to add more depth while creating a real pathway for more young talents to play rugby at the elite level instead of switching to rugby league or moving overseas.

These are the sorts of objectives that are going to start to make a real difference to Australian rugby. Instead of worrying about what we can get out of Asia, the ARU has to make our own landscape its main concern.

Create a model that engages new and existing fans while encouraging them to get in front of their TV or part ways with their hard earned to get to a game. We need to get kids talking about the game at school and asking mum and dad to take them down to their local clubs so they can be like their heroes. When these become the ARU’s priorities, everything else like money and player depth falls into place over time.

I hate to use the old cliché, “listen to the fans”, but there does seem to be an overwhelming consensus that what we’re getting in 2016, isn’t what we want.