It’s a sad indictment that when Australia’s Super Rugby teams now travel to New Zealand, the prevailing mindset is one of damage minimisation.
Wins seem almost fanciful, losses inevitable.
The trip to Auckland to face the Blues is the only clash – to any sane Strayan rugby fan – that truly offers any hope of jagging a precious victory.
The other four foes have the potential to humiliate, as the Melbourne Rebels found out in Round 2 when they were hammered 71-6 by the Hurricanes in Wellington.
Depressingly, the Waratahs’ 38-28 defeat to the Canes a fortnight ago is about as good as it currently gets: blasted off the park in the first half and in all sorts of trouble down 33-7, the Tahs showed a fair bit of ticker against a bruising opposition to edge reasonably close.
Nonetheless, they were never a realistic chance of knocking over the reigning champions. The 10-point losing margin was honourable.
Trips across the Tasman have been the competition’s most arduous for many years, but certainly over the past 12 months the gap between the five Aussie sides and the five Kiwi teams has widened and the inequality shows few signs of receding. It’s a harsh reality.
This season’s 12 straight losses to Kiwi teams proves travel isn’t the only impediment to victory.
The Brumbies take on the Hurricanes in Napier tonight and it could get ugly. Already red-hot, there are enough Hurricanes who have aspirations to win an All Blacks jersey for the first Test against the British and Irish Lions.
The Hurricanes are at odds of $1.12 to win; the Brumbies at $8.
In fact, this round of Super Rugby looks like the perfect example of why the broadcasters are so keen to urgently reduce the number of teams to improve competitiveness.
Out of the eight games, four or five could conceivably be blowouts.
The Roar’s erudite rugby fans will be aware of the discrepancies in form and class of some of this round’s adversaries.
On top of the Canes-Brumbies, the Waratahs ($1.06) face the Kings ($9.50), the Lions ($1.13) take on the Jaguares ($6.05), the Highlanders ($1.002) meet the Sunwolves ($81), the Western Force ($5) host the Chiefs ($1.18), the Crusaders ($1.13) are at home to the Stormers ($6) and the Rebels ($6.50) are in Durban to battle the Sharks ($1.12). The remaining clash is – at least to the bookies – relatively even with the Bulls ($1.36) against the Cheetahs ($3.15).
Hopefully we’ll see some boilovers. But for now it can be regarded as a fairly straightforward tipping round.
So who could blame the broadcasters for bemoaning the lack of close matches and therefore their push for the much-maligned restructure?
For Fox Sports, they’ll be lobbying SANZAAR and the national unions to deliver a trimmed-down format that resembles the competitiveness of the NRL and AFL.
If you take the NRL as an example, you could argue that just about all 16 teams have a chance of beating any other team on any given day. There are many factors in play, but it’s a big reason why Fox Sports often get TV ratings of around 250,000 for NRL games. They will probably be cringing at what numbers the Tahs-Kings match tonight will dish up.
The ARU decision on which Australian team is being cut is likely for next week. It’s arguably a bit easier to deliver the news if the Rebels or Force have been carved up, which is entirely possible.
There’s plenty of doom and gloom around Australian rugby, but fast forward to next year when there are four teams and the quality has been condensed.
Hopefully for Australian fans, the impending Super Rugby reset will bring optimism that matches in New Zealand – and even at home – won’t need to be viewed nervously with the solid dose of dread that currently lingers.
Douglas Bunge
Guest
You mention how the Aussie teams are no match to the Kiwis. They also no match to the South African sides, in fact the Waratahs have lost all their matches to the South African sides including the King at home.The Lions and the Sharks have destroyed the Aussie teams on there own home soil. It's the Aussie teams that are the weak link. The only reason an Aussie team will make the play offs is because they finnished top of their conference. If you look at log points they out of the top eight.
Deano
Guest
@Sheek "So because SANZAAR basically stuffed up because they were too greedy & too needy, someone else, like an Aussie province, has to suffer." No. An Australian franchise has to go because it makes a huge loss and propping it up will eventually bankrupt the national union. The decision was Australia's...just as the decision was to browbeat SANZAR into accepting the Force and Rebels in the first place. The structure of the competition had to change because the spectator and TV viewer numbers have plummeted. SANZAAR: the new strawman for Australia. You can accuse it of anything you like because that's far easier than facing the unpalatable facts about rugby in Australia.
Kevin Higginson
Guest
Total agree WCR. My adaptation would be to make the cross-conference games based on rankings, so: Top 3 ranked teams from previous season play top 3 from each other conference Bottom 3 play each other. This would create an uneven season, but would mean that lower ranked teams get a better chance of having a good season, think like the NFL system of strength of schedule. I also think there needs to be a hard salary cap in USD so that it is fairer, and more freedom of movement of players between teams, especially between countries, as the is no overlap between SR and TRC, like in NH, so it is still easier to control player welfare.
robel
Roar Pro
Skelton is going os because he slipped down the pecking order. This is exactly why we should keep 5 teams. It means there are more guys contesting for the wallaby spots. Back stab the Force and the up and coming guys go straight to Europe rather than trying their hand here in Aust first. I.e. there is less competition around to push players to the next level. Betraying WA and the Force is the most irresponsible course of action the ARU could possibly take for the future of Aust Rugby.
Bugaluggs
Guest
Bit of hardcore after 10pm perhaps?
Michaelj
Guest
In truth our true concern is the Wallabies. Provincial and pro club team performances are a distant second to the national team, unlike in Europe. When the Wallabies can't compete with the best, then it is time to worry.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
The Tahs game against the 'Canes looks great compared to the Brumbies. They only beat us by 10 after leading by 33.
Timbo (L)
Guest
They will spread out all right. Ireland, England, France, Japan, Toulon boss Mourad Boudjellal will be rubbing his hands together so fast they will catch fire.
davSA
Guest
Its a shame all round . I know he has aspirations of another test gig but the way forward would clearly have been better in Australia than Japan. He cant get a job in SA because he is too outspoken . Its a pity.
sheek
Roar Guru
Agreed WCR, The best medium-term solution was 3 x 6 pools. Clearly, there appear to be some agendas here by various people that don't have much to do with the rugby itself. By people I mean SANZAAR & broadcasters specifically.
sheek
Roar Guru
Mania, Yes, you're right, I am obstinate about many things. It took me 50 years of hard life-experience to become obstinate. And if you're around my vintage, say about 60 or so, you'll understand precisely what I mean by that.
davSA
Guest
Yes Sheek . All the expanded competition has done is expose the underlying issues which were there all along. Keeping the Sunwolves as a long term investment seriously strengthens the Kings case for inclusion. Cutting teams to improve standards is a pipe dream. Merging teams smacks of desperation.
Old Bugger
Guest
Ummm Robert.....the way I see it, they need all 23 places to be held by WBs but then again, even that won't promise, a turn in fortune....will it???
Paul D
Roar Rookie
Japan doesn’t have a veto in SANZAAR, Australia does It was not about whether the ARU chose between the Sunwolves or an Australian team was cut. By all accounts the ARU went to the meeting with the intention of cutting a team, irrespective of the Sunwolves participation. You can argue the merits of that all you like, but it has nothing to do with whether the Sunwolves are in Super Rugby or not. I think Japan has an important role to play in SH rugby. In the long run I'd like to see Super Rugby and the Rugby Championship make way for a 6N type tournament. With each partner country focusing primarily there own domestic competitions. The lack of domestic footprint will be the death of Super Rugby whether we have 4 or 5 teams in Australia. I believe the ARU needs to limp through a shoddy period without going completely broke while it builds the NRC. Hopefully then we'll have more domestic rivalries in a slightly expanded NRC, and more Wallaby tests to spread across the country by way of a 6N comp including Japan and a PI presence.
sheek
Roar Guru
Mania, I don't care about Sunwolves & frankly, at present, i don't care about NZ, SA or super rugby. I care about Australian rugby. There's enough rationalists here telling ARU & everyone else what they should do. It's not always about the money, although I acknowledge I'm probably wrong about that. Anyway, I'll have my say until the decision is made, which will probably be to cull an Aussie team, in which case sayonara from me.
sheek
Roar Guru
DS, Original poster that you responded to has a name - Sheek. Feel free to quote me. As long as you're accurate I don't mind.
Lostintokyo
Guest
The ARU states it is cutting a side as they can't afford five teams. Cutting the Sunwolves will send the ARU closer to bankruptcy as the bigger Sky deal was in part due to Japan's audience being added. You are mixing things up on emotional grounds. The Sunwolves were dragged into the comp due to money.
Oblonsky‘s Other Pun
Roar Guru
Darwin Stubbie, you could well be right about Japan being a good growth market, maybe it is a good financial decision, but the argument that 'the fact that some Aussie supporters don’t give a stuff about them can equally be spun around and compared to whether fans in the other competing countries give a flying toss about some of the Aust franchises' is completely irrelevant. Japan doesn't have a veto in SANZAAR, Australia does. I don't care if an English person or a Japanese one or a Kiwi or a Safa or even if an Aussie doesn't care about the Australian teams, it's irrelevant, because the ARU does care about Australian rugby, and it is the ARUs job to represent the best interests of Australian rugby.
Paul D
Roar Rookie
You lost the set piece, possession, territory, penalty count, the breakdown and missed 4 times as many tackles against the Waratahs short their own share of players, including Foley. The only thing reasonably close in the game was the score line.
Oblonsky‘s Other Pun
Roar Guru
Concerned, I'm not a lawyer, but I did study lawyer. Most damages in Australia are compensatory (e.g. the Force/Rebels would be compensated for any losses due to the ARUs breach of contact, if there is a breach of contract). It is usually in America that you get massive punitive damages awarded.