The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

More, not fewer, Australia-based Super Rugby teams are needed to save the game

Roar Rookie
20th July, 2020
Advertisement
Autoplay in... 6 (Cancel)
Up Next No more videos! Playlist is empty -
Replay
Cancel
Next
Roar Rookie
20th July, 2020
90
2725 Reads

It has been reported that there is open warfare between Australia and New Zealand rugby regarding the makeup of a Trans-Tasman Super Rugby competition.

Australia want multiple teams. The Kiwis want five New Zealand teams, one Pacifica team, and as few as two Australian teams.

Are the Kiwis right? Should Australia only be allowed to field two teams in a new look Super Rugby?

New Zealand are correct in some instances. Kiwi Super Rugby teams have dominated Australian teams in recent years. That is not in dispute.

Equally true, in the last ten years the Reds and Waratahs have won the Super Rugby Championship. And not too long ago it was the ACT Brumbies. When was the last time the Auckland Blues held the trophy aloft? If there is talk of Aussie teams getting the chop, why should Auckland be spared?

In the NRL, the QLD teams are struggling, and Southern teams are dominating. Does that mean QLD teams should be axed? Of course not.

I am siding with Rugby Australia on this one, but not completely.

Many pundits state Australia could field three strong teams. I would tend to agree. Reds, Waratahs, Brumbies may be a logical argument based on supporters, talent, historical titles and sustainability of club.

Advertisement

But what concessions do NZ make in all this? How does Melbourne get compensated if the Rebels are no more?

I believe an essential ingredient is being missed? NZ may be cutting off their nose to spite their face. Australia is a far larger market than NZ. With AFL, NRL, and A-League, Australia is a competitive sporting marketplace, but to cannibalise Australia of teams, is that really a sound strategy?

Give us poor Aussie bros a team to support and grow the revenue pie in the process.

NZR and RA next round of discussions should field an important innovation, dual NZ-AU teams, whereby powerhouse NZ teams are based in both NZ and Australia. Brand names and rivalries are paramount.

An eight-team Trans-Tasman Super Competition with some rebranding could be along the lines of this: Auckland Blues, Canterbury Crusaders, ACT Brumbies, North Sydney (current Waratahs), Randwick – Chiefs, Melbourne – Highlanders, Brisbane City (current Reds) and Queensland Country-Hurricanes.

At last there are more teams for Aussies to support. Sure they are predominantly Kiwi, but they are Kiwi teams with an Aussie base as well.

Advertisement

For the three dual-city clubs, home games would be split between New Zealand and Australia and awarded a higher quota of home games both as a reward for rebranding and ability to host home games to loyal fans back in New Zealand.

Has this been done before? Kind of. Brisbane Lions and Sydney Swans in the AFL. Both the Lions and Swans were monikers from heartland Melbourne.

This is a little different. So provided some local Aussie boys are amongst the Randwick Chiefs, or Queensland Country Hurricanes, fans will back them.

I realise some dual cities will be controversial. I’ve thrown in Randwick as you love them or you hate them.

What would be your ultimate eight Trans-Tasman teams?

close