SANZAAR, formerly SANZAAR, is the collective representative body of the South African, New Zealand, Australian and Argentinian rugby unions.
The organisation governs Super Rugby and The Rugby Championship, with TV rights for both competitions collectively pooled for both competitions.
The original SANZAAR was effectively the same organisation with Argentina excluded and The Rugby Championship’s predecessor, Tri-Nations, still in place. It came about in 1995 following the introduction of professionalism for rugby union; ousting World Rugby Corporation to establish the Super 12 tournament.
The argument for the organisation at the time was to provide the southern hemisphere’s three largest unions with adequate control of players and consistently high level of competition. Plus the benefits of collectively bargaining for TV rights was a lovely bonus to the whole thing.
The question now is, has SANZAAR become defunct? Have the unions lost control of the players? Does competition remain of a high enough quality? Is the money worth it?
The answer to the last one remains yes. The money brought in from South African TV provides significant funds to all unions and this is unlikely to be generated if they left. But what if they do leave.
SA rugby already has two franchises competing in the Pro14 competition; and rumours remain that at least another two teams could potentially join the tournament given its preferable time zones.
If that happened that could leave just two South African teams in Super Rugby, the question would come about which teams should these be and is it worth it?
I could easily see SA rugby deciding that the Stormers, Sharks, Bulls and Lions would all be better off playing in a northern hemisphere competition and the Cheetahs and Kings returning to Super Rugby.
This would not sustain the level of competition for New Zealand and Australian teams.
Who’s ready for the World Cup? (Photo: Mark Metcalfe/Getty Images)
Look away now Mr Pichot, but maybe New Zealand and Australia need to abandon Argentina and focus closer to home for adequate competition.
It has long been the preference of some that Australia and New Zealand teams compete in a Trans-Tasman competition, with preferable kick-off times (no late night/early morning kickoffs) and reduced travel for players.
An easy traditional league format would also be more customer friendly to fans than the convoluted conference system that sees the poor teams in poor pools rewarded with home knock-out rugby ties.
From an Australian perspective, it could lead to the re-introduction of the Western Australia Force to regular rugby re-establishing the national elite footprint. I would then look to go one step further and have teams from Tonga, Fiji and Samoa in the competition in some form (maybe one each, two combined or a Pacific Warriors team).
Realistically this comes down to money. Or rather a lack of it. There would be a loss of TV income for the new competition. However, I feel this would be short term and offset against a crowd/fan buy-in that could be gained from real intense rivalries.
Also, you just have to look at the attendance at all Drua games in the NRC to see the impact the Pacific community can have on atmosphere if they have a team to back.
Another way to address money issues would be to invite some private funding. Each rugby union should retain a 51 per cent share of its respective franchises, keep control; and competition rules should outline that teams are financially rewarded for having a significant percentage of match day squads eligible for their respective nations. For instance, the Waratahs need to have at least 80 per cent Australian eligibility throughout the season to then get an extra portion of funds from Rugby Australia.
This currently operates in the English Premiership with clubs provided with financial incentives to sustain an eligibility rate of 75 per cent in all match day squads across the season (regardless of competition).
Private funding could support the elite side of the game, particularly in Australia and the Pacific Islands, allowing a larger proportion of funds to be channelled towards the community game. Growing those grassroots and developing rugby union activity in non-traditional markets, i.e. state schools and traditional AFL/league hotspots.
It would also help retain or bring back players currently oversees due to longer term financial benefits.
Unions would also have greater control over where players play. If the Reds had a significant number of equally high quality wingers but the Force had none then RA could actively encourage these players to move, much in the way the IRU influences its provinces.
Anyway, back to the tournament. I would propose a 14-team tournament as below:
| Pool A | Pool B |
|---|---|
| Waratahs | Reds |
| Rebels | Brumbies |
| Blues | Crusaders |
| Highlanders | Hurricanes |
| Chiefs | Force |
| Fiji reps | Samoa reps |
| Tonga reps | Japan reps |
My proposed league would include a team from Japan, potentially the Sunwolves but preferably a predominantly Japanese team; and follow the Pro14 format. Each team would play the others at least once and then play derby matches on top of this.
The Waratahs, in this case, would play 13 normal matches; and a further four matches against the other Australian teams, meaning that there would be 17 fixtures minimum.
For the Pacific rep teams, playing “derbies” would only provide 16 matches so then I would suggest that Fiji play Samoa at a neutral venue (Aus or NZ) and Tonga play Japan (again at a neutral venue).
Although not an ideal format, it does reduce the amount of time players would be away from home and does retain some competition. The Kiwis would not doubt say that the quality of competition would not be high enough but just look at Super Rugby at present to see that the level of competition, at best, is inconsistent.
Rugby Australia and the New Zealand Rugby Union need to take a longer-term look. They need to see the dwindling attendances at Super Rugby.
They need to recognise the contribution that the Pacific Island communities make to not only the sport but the wider national community and harness this. Short term pain could be worth it for long term gain. Neither will know until they try.
Istanbul Wingman
Roar Guru
I think there was a huge sense of fascination at the outset to see how the Australasian teams would stack up against their South African counterparts, because we all knew how strong WP, the Blue Bulls and others were from their performances against international touring teams - often winning - but we had never seen them against our own best provincial and state teams. & for a decade or so we were not disappointed, with some epic encounters in the Super 10 and then Super Rugby itself. But that sense of fascination is long gone now, and the Kiwis' increasing domination of Super Rugby has been a major factor. Time to move on and evolve, and splitting into separate spheres of influence seems the logical next step forward. a Pacific tournament, in particular, would be an exciting prospect in itself.
Why don’t just have Western Pirates in the NRL then in Perth ,we may see a winning franchise instead of the current Circus?
TimO
Roar Rookie
Fair point about the Force still being around. Also agree that Oz produces a lot of excellent players, but has a problem retaining enough of them (if that's what you're saying). Also agree that keeping the Rebs in the super comp ahead of Force seemed very unfair (if that's what you're saying). But, super comp is only sustainable if teams from one country are competitive with teams from other countries. Rugby is #1 national sport in NZ but not in Aust, and having 5 teams from either country in the comp wasn't working that well. Maybe if RA had taken Twiggy's $ they could have used it to get they players back for 5 competitive teams. Who knows?
andrewM
Roar Rookie
And how would I know how many players would decide to return from overseas looking for a gig in Australia? And how many up and coming players are put on hold or not getting a look in or are leaving or OS because they perceive there are now fewer contracts..how is signing players like AAC, despite his experience and abilities for the good of Australian Rugby past the next six months. All short term reactive thinking to ensure the success of a very expensive Melbourne Experiment. And the Force are still around Tim..they may not be the first team of choice but they are still in the market for Australian Players. From your perspective are they are lost to Australian Rugby until they play for a Super team?
Bozo
Guest
It has long been the preference of some that Australia and New Zealand teams compete in a Trans-Tasman competition By "some" you must mean some Australians. Seriously, why does this keep coming up? No one in New Zealand rugby...and certainly nobody in the NZR support this idea. It has been shot down countless times.
TimO
Roar Rookie
How do you know how many of the current Tahs or Reds or Brums would have been signed over the last 2 years by Force if Force was still in Super comp? How do you know how many current Tahs or Reds or Brums would have been signed over last 2 years by Rebs, if Rebs hadn't been able to get the Force players instead?
Harry Jones
Expert
The only moral dilemma comes when you aren't sure if 'pineapple' is a safe word or just a yearning for a pina colada.
andrewM
Roar Rookie
I call BS on that Tim..apart from the Rebels, show me how the supposedly increased depth of Australian rugby has benefited the Brumbies, Tahs or Reds? The results from last year are hardly conclusive and this year, whilst promising, has been marred by the resting of key players by the Kiwis in the lead up to the RWC. Whilst most of the Force playing group from 2017 has moved on, the team will continue to be in the market for Australian talent and who know what undiscovered talent they may find? Of course the other proposed GRR teams will also be in the market for players from Australia and across the globe so in the coming years Australian Rugby will have more player pressure to deal with, not less.
Joe
Guest
GRR is garbage, 70 minute rugby games and against midow nations? No thanks
Pinetree
Roar Rookie
Nothing better than hearing the neighbors adding to the din in unison in the still of a winters night, enjoying the tussle with some fine liquor.
Oblonsky‘s Other Pun
Roar Guru
Yep, even as an Aussie it is very frustrating. Especially as an Aussie who loves the matches against the South African teams in both super rugby and Internationals. In fact, I would love to go back to Super 12/14 and back to the Tri-Nations. I loved the three match series of the Tri-Nations.
Charging Rhino
Roar Guru
I know mate. But it does amaze me how some Australians speak on behalf on Kiwi’s and just assume they can dictate what’s best for them, which in turn is also dictating to South Africans (having a comp without them). Whereas in reality NZ and SA and far more similar in terms of wants/needs for their rugby comps and many would love to put more emphasis back on their domestic comps (Currie Cup and NPC). When you look at it that way Australia is the odd one out. But Australia is close to NZ, whereas SA is far away. In the 90’s and before the Currie Cup was by far the most successful domestic rugby tournament in the world. Now those lie in France and England.
Brian
Guest
You know, it would be much easier, and way more realistic to just fix super rugby. Closed conferences home and away in first half of season. Sort top half and bottom half in each conference. Then make top half and bottom half cups from the conferences for two single round robin competition. Same-same but different from Europe’s incredibly popular competitions. First half is purely table over 10-12 weeks, round robins end with finals takes another 10-12 weeks. Rotate finals to each country each year. If you want to reduce anything then reduce rugby championship. Bloody thing goes for longer than a cricket World Cup. You say people in Aus don’t watch 1-3am matches in SA. But people in SA still go to them. Granted, attendances are suffering just as in Aus and NZ. We are in it together. Just have to find the magic formula.
Oblonsky‘s Other Pun
Roar Guru
Somehow, I don’t think that will happen.
Oblonsky‘s Other Pun
Roar Guru
I love all the clashes against the Saffas in super rugby and international rugby. They’re great.
Kris
Guest
I must be the only person who values Rugby between SA and AUS. It has been the most evenly split rivalry in recent years in TRC. Super Rugby contests are also close with the same two teams often trading wins depending on who is at home. The rugby itself is an enjoyable clash of styles with the two countries having opposite traditional strengths.
Peter Kelly
Guest
I'm actually a Crusaders supporter even though I'm from Southland which is affiliated to the Highlanders. I followed a couple of Southlanders in Justin Marshall and Corey Flynn who didn't make the Highlanders, Marshall also from my home town of Mataura. My Grandsons follow players and support the team of where ever they play.
sul
Guest
I can see your point. If I had choice here in Australia I would certainly be happy with Queensland if I couldn't have Brisbane. But in reality if you look up at the makeup of a lot SR teams and were their playing stocks come from, a high percentage of their playing stocks certainly have no geographical ties with the area they are playing for. How many of the Rebels come from Victoria, or the Sunwolves from Japan, so really the point is probably invalid. And just to add insult I have just read that one of the NZ teams has just imported a South African, and how many players from the PI nations are spread among the NZ and Australian teams ? The point was, I think more fans tend to get behind teams when they can relate the team to a geographical location, especially those that maybe only take a passing interest, it builds on tribalism. "Red, Hurricanes" where the F@#K! are those places, who does that team belong too!
Ken Catchpole's Other Leg
Roar Guru
But sexy
Foot up
Roar Rookie
Not sure about nsw, but the rest of Queensland would not care.