SANZAAR is at a crossroads

Yes Jacko!! I am sorry if I am late joining the discussion but being an Argie I do understand the pains of NH professional leagues - when we did not have any annual competition we relied on the EU teams for player development and we are great-full for that: Now since we joined TRC and SR we are now suffering from their continued drain of our top players. Now, I do believe that one way for stopping this "bleeding" is far simple - establish a rule that National teams can only use players born and raised on the country!! In addition no player can dress up two different national jerseys in his life - meaning that if the player represented a country as a U18 or U20 team he is no longer eligible for a different nation. This is especially important when you find that there is only ONE country among all tier one that is formed by 100% B&R!! The Pumas!! With this simple changes the European countries will go back and look for development of local talent and therefore the indiscriminate hiring of foreign players will end!!

SANZAAR greed has killed Super Rugby in Australia & SA. NZ on the other hand, have had the best of it. They have taken the increased money, kept the same 5 teams since its inception and wisest spent money on their development programs, while Aust & SA try to support new franchises and all that it entails.

Never is a very long time....

On the other hand....the Superugby final and rugby tests in Soweto and the 1995 RWC. The potential is there to unite the nation. There are a few elements that South Africa got wrong: (1) The struggle to blend the natural speed and agility of black and coloured players with their traditional strength aggressive and big white forwards (the Blitzbokke did it successfully) (2) SA picked teams with weaknesses just to meet racial quotas and in the process the prestige and brand value of the Springbok has been devalued. As a result few players are staying on and knock back more lucrative offers until they become a Bok (3) The ANC see rugby as a their favoured wipping boy, a way to get to whites and continue to interfere in a very destructive way. If the ANC saw rugby is a mechanism to unite like Nelson Mandela did, they would have worked with SARU to take rugby to townships. There is huge unrealised potential in South Africa that could have been unlocked.

Peter you continue to report the factual mistake that SA and NZ forced RA to cut a team. Rugby Australia was not forced, they volunteered to cut a team. It is Rugby Australia's mistake - 100% theirs, they even admit to it.

Watch the Bulls play prior to Mitchell and you people enough to watch that kind of rugby. Kick, tackle and pressure with no regard for the entertainment value of the sport. They had Habana on the wing in his prime years and he never saw the ball - just used to chase kicks. No even the fanatical Bulls supporters want to watch them play anymore, supporters that only watch when they win. This win at all cost mentality is changing, at last with Mitchell as coach. The same coach that got the Lions to play rugby that people want to watch The Cheetahs were always the one SA side that wanted to play attractive rugby, however they got axed for their efforts. The best superugby games I have seen were games played between the Force and the Crusaders at Subiaco oval...running running played in an entertaining way....then Rugby Australia gave us Richard Graham to coach us. Absolute travesty. Looking at how the Force played against Fiji, they are much better to watch than the Rebels, Tahs, Reds and Brumbies at the moment.

Hey OB. The split per team is not uncommon. I’m not familiar with Sanzaar finances in any way so I can’t comment on the specifics. But let’s theorise based on what you’re arguing. Let’s say, if SARU are entering a four way negotiation and each party is bringing their own TV deal to the table from their territory and the other three say, for example, we’ve got 25m each for our 11 teams and SARU say we’ve got 50m for 4 teams, what would you want as an outcome? I’m exaggerating the disparity in the numbers to make the point as I don’t know what the actual figures are. If SARU, for example, were carrying a disproportionate amount of the overall travel and logistics costs, would you want that evened out? If the previous deal was initially agreed on 18 teams, and SARU got 6/18ths of the monies, what happened when they were reduced to four teams as I understand the broadcasters committed to the same amount of money? If SARU came to the table and said we want to go back to 14 teams, we’re only entering 3 teams for SR, and have the comp finish at end of May, every second year. We’ve done a deal with our PRO14 partners to have a global club finals in June in which we all participate. There’s a separate deal for that but we’re the comp organizers so it won’t be an even split of the additional monies. Should those who bring additional value to the table be rewarded/limited as a result?

DM Fully understand your comments and this comment, definitely caught my eye....."I think SARU wants to enter SANZAAR negotiations with the strongest hand possible." I agree wholeheartedly with this statement. Except, SARU needs to tread carefully with how strong a position, they wish to pursue. The last thing they would want to do, is to try and dominate their partners to succumb to lesser deals, they currently receive. That won't work. At present, the funds are shared on a per team basis, in SR. I think anything less than that basic shareholding, will drive a split between the partners especially when, their SR/RC results haven't been to healthy, these past few seasons. Had SA's super sides of late, been producing success after success and winning the SR competition consistently, then yes, I'd agree that they could be, in a negotiating position of strength. But they haven't and I don't think, any amount of departure threats, will change the previous shareholding/funding regime.

Andy Rome wasn't built in a day so yes, I'll admit it will take some time before NZRU may see, the end of this tunnel. But you are wrong, to suggest NZRU went to SANZAAR for the audience and the money because, it couldn't be generated internally. They went to a professional league venture solely, to retain control of NZ rugby, in the face of the WRC challenge. In fact, I don't really think either of the 3 Unions had any idea, of where this professional journey was heading just as long as, what happened in Cricket was not, going to happen in rugby. So yes - the SH unions of 1995 were for better or worse, pushed into deciding on a professional league simply because, of what they witnessed had happened to global cricket, after Mr Packer's interjection. I'm not against SANZAAR - I'd like it to continue because you are right....commercially, it is the only option for SH pro-rugby to continue but, the concerns I've been raising are to determine what happens if SANZAAR, ceases to exist. But I will say this.....Australia is more than a different problem. It will become the yolk on the current environment and so SANZAAR faces not only the potential departure of an inaugural member but an implosion within, of another inaugural member. Now tell me, where and what, does that leave the 3rd inaugural member, to do??? PS If there were other sources for money they would be tapping them now?? They are tapping with AIG and Adidas. However, tapping other avenues are restricted until, the SANZAAR contract agreement terminates and no longer exists. We can only hope and assume more business enterprises, may want to share their fortunes, with NZ rugby.

.Eng,the celts and France.

Things can absolutely change. And for SA teams interestingly it was with the change to 14 then 15 teams in the competition. Adding another team (Lions and Cheetahs no longer a joint entity) actually coincided with the Bulls, Sharks and Stormers all becoming regular finalists. Playing against the Bulls (for example) was suddenly as tense an atmosphere and as satisfying as getting a win against the Crusaders. We also witnessed six different winners in that 10 year period compared to just the three in the 10 years of Super 12, so far more parity and competitiveness across the teams. Perhaps it is the conference system more than the number of teams that is causing the problems in viewer interest.

Sounds good OB, and all NZRU would have to do is continue to pay the five teams worth of players the same money they are on now for SR, find similar money for five additional teams worth of players expected to step up and be similarly professional, plus some extra for the semi-pro players as the number of games increases, all off a population of 4 million and whatever they can capitalise from elsewhere. Because any less, or even if the transition is less than seamless, and all the best players will be out the door. Then the value is less, so the money is less, so more players leave, reducing everything further, round and round. If there were sources for the extra money, they would be tapping them now. They stick with the status quo because they know what is likely to happen when they are on their tod, whether by choice or circumstance. If it happens, plans or not, they will be scrambling to save their professional presence. They went into Sanzar for an audience and the money because it couldn't be generated internally...that paradigm hasn't changed in 22 years. Australia has a different problem, in that while it has always had scope to expand audience, systems and player base, it has singularly failed to do so. The result is the same however, come the day it falls apart.

neutral if SAANZAR falls apart then there is the ABs matches to sell as part of the Mitre 10 cup as well so I see no problems in selling the product

Just some......The French seem to be starting to drive new rules as they sometimes have 1 or 2 French players in the Top 14 run on teams but also the people involved with the Aviva championship seem to be thinking along similar lines....Isnt their some restrictions coming in next season? Neutral...Yes TV $$ forms half of NZRUs income but this is where we differ in thought. I believe their will be those willing to buy NZ rugby's matches and i believe the NZRU wont end up doing too bad out of it. You dont believe it could maintain somewhere near where it is...Thats where we differ....After all...NZ is the best rugby so many want to watch the best and what is peanuts to some is enough to others....And if you want to isolate NZ rugby then the ABs will have massive pulling power ( like they do now) so just lump it all ion together....Anyway I dont see SR dying so it will be around in some form or another

Fair comments derm, I don't think you are far off the mark, I think the spread of the SA franchises will be planned to be equitable in the hope that all the teams can over time be competitive

Fair comments/questions. I can see flaws and advantages for SARU in that approach. However, a participation agreement allows for fluidity as to which teams to enter a comp. FIR did it with Aironi in early days of PRO12. And Zebre has been re-constituted twice, so it’s not unfamiliar territory with the long term shareholders in Celtic Rugby who had to contend with the early shift from Welsh clubs to regions, and the entry and exit of Border Reivers from SRU. Some teams come and go, it’s the nature of these kind of comps. I think SARU wants to enter SANZAAR negotiations with the strongest hand possible. It already has Cheetahs and Kings in place - one a ‘winner’ and the other looking like Aironi or Zebre. They’re banking on the latter and a turnaround in performance in time. The deal with SuperSport has helped assuage concerns that Celtic Rugby might have bought another Italian pup. Unlike FIR who brought no TV deal to the table and alledgely reneged on their participation agreement commitments to meet the additional travel costs of the PRO 10 clubs who let them in. But they’ve survived that hiccup. And Benetton and Zebre seem to be looking up. As you’ve pointed out yourself, the entry into European comps will likely push things along and give SARU a stronger hand in convincing their own internal people as well as with SANZAAR. The Champions Cup will likely condense in number of teams (20 to 16 if PRL gets its way) and comp duration and make it even more elite. The remainder into Challenge Cup. Equally, there are growing voices from PRO14 to have the SA teams included in qualification sooner than expected with lots of positive finger pointing to Cheetahs better than expected finish to the season. That may be the trade off along with anticipated additional TV revenues for EPCR and if everyone agrees to the changes with no dissenting voices, then the current agreement could be changed before 2022. If Jurie Roux can say internally and to SANZAAR, I’ve got a deal that’s given us a lasting foothold in European market, in a competition that is planning to expand and grow, that is attracting more TV revenues, that appeals to SuperSport and other European broadcasters, that has moved onto PayTV/streaming platforms already to make it more saleable internationally, AND we’ve got qualification entry to the elite European competitions, then he’s in a pretty good place to drive a hard bargain. Four and four teams in each comp makes sense because as Roux said himself, removing all teams from SR and then seeking to continue to play in Rugby Championship would likely get a very short response from the likes of Steve Tew. Having a strong, high profile, well regarded team in PRO14 such as a Lions, or Bulls or Stormers would help attract Europe-based SA players to play for it, and might make having 1-2 weaker SA teams more palatable to PRO14 without SARU having to sell all the family jewels as it were. And in turn, SARU may also want to include one of the weaker teams in SR and that’s the price of their continuation and participation with SANZAAR. It would expose their base of players to both NH and SH comps and environments - a benefit repeatedly made as highly valuable by Roux and Erasmus and widen/strengthen their playing numbers. It’s the ‘properly selfish’ move to make. Of course, if SuperSport has been one of the key revenue contributors to the SANZAAR pot up to now, they’ll now be paying into two comps and might reduce the amount that SANZAAR might otherwise get. But I wouldn’t underestimate their leveraging of power in all of this as well to ensure they get what makes sense for them too. Oh and I’d aim to finish the PRO xx by end of May or at least have the flexibility to do so. You never know what might crop up in the future that you’ll need time for. Them’s my thoughts/wild guesses/opinions.

NV If by having its own competition means, to pursue audiences beyond their own boundaries, then NZRU will have to make sure that it does have a product, that is worthy of attracting those audiences. The answer to that question won't be known unless it happens and neither you or I, will know otherwise, until then. We can assume all kinds of outcomes except, there was nothing to suggest but gloom and doom 20 odd years ago and yet, SH pro-rugby has survived albeit, along a very bumpy highway. Rest assured, if it is backed into a wall, I do feel comfortable knowing that NZRU, won't stand around and twiddle their thumbs - they'll come out scrapping boots-n-all and if all else fails, the least they can say to the NZ rugby fraternity is that, they gave it a go.

cuw I agree. It will take time but if the M10 becomes the only competition in NZ, then the players involved in the Premiership, Championship, Meads Cup and Lohore Cup competitions can be formed into a full pro and semi-pro league format. Again it will take some time before NZRU can get any returns but, something will need to happen if SANZAAR, collapses. Also, I think by having its own competition, it will allow NZRU to start looking at not only retaining its own players but retaining its own coaches because now, the pool has grown from 5 SR teams to 10 pro-teams and possibly 10 semi-pro sides.

I have to admit NV that back in 1995, it took a brave and smart organization to raise their hand and counter the challenge that was not just coming but, already on their doorstep, in the form of WRC. This challenge was launched immediately after the 1995 RWC GF - I mean, that was a massive challenge, to meet head-on. For the inaugural 3 unions to band together so quickly and, with very little time to have anything close to an agreement, was impressive but, we mustn't forget that this was mainly due to those ABs who were approached to join WRC, being cautious and inquisitive about what, was on offer. Another key aspect for all these behind-the-door discussions was all players who had already signed to join WRC made their signings conditional, upon WRC being able to secure AB signatures, in particular, those of the senior brigade. That wasn't happening as quickly as WRC expected because of the younger ABs, who refused to sign and stated, they would remain with NZRU. The players delays with signing any WRC contracts allowed the unions more time to get together and come up with a counter and as history now shows, SR/RC became the professional game in SH. The difference between then and now.......is nothing. There was a challenge then and there is a challenge now and the motivation remains the same - to ensure rugby down-under continues, to have a professional league.

I should add to this that It’s reported again that English Premiership want to reduce number of teams qualifying for the Champions Cup from 20 teams currently to 16 and reduce the time taken to complete the Cup. It’s also reported that there is growing pressure (presumably from PRO14 unions) for SA teams to be included in European comps sooner rather than later. 2019/20 maybe? Apparently, the participation agreement for European Cup allows changes to be made if there is unanimous agreement before it expires at end of 2022 season.