Rugby in a post-aBokalypic world

By Rob9 / Roar Guru

This week the looming prospect of a southern hemisphere rugby landscape without South Africa got a step closer with the Springboks’ withdrawal from this year’s Rugby Championship.

The withdrawal from the international tournament comes after confirmation South Africa’s four sides will leave Super Rugby to join an expended Pro16 competition in 2021.

The official line at this stage is that SANZAAR will remain intact and the Rugby Championship will proceed beyond the COVID-impacted 2020 season. But with South Africa’s domestic interests shifting to the north, one would have to believe that it’s only a matter of time before their international side follows suit.

South Africa’s late withdrawal from this season’s Championship suggests that switch could come sooner rather than later, but it at very least darkens the cloud of doubt that hangs over SANZAAR at the moment.

South Africa’s withdrawal from the Rugby Championship for an expanded Seven Nations – or perhaps Eight Nations to avoid bye weeks while accommodating Georgia – is a frightening prospect for the health of southern hemisphere rugby.

(Photo by Mark Tantrum/Getty Images)

Losing one of global rugby’s genuine heavyweights, leaving just Australia and New Zealand – yes, there’s Argentina and Australia have hardly been setting the world on fire in recent years – to anchor an engaging regional competition outside of the Six Nations would be a significant blow.

Unfortunately this is a scenario Rugby Australia and the New Zealand Rugby should start to plan for.

It’s something I’ve started to play around with in my mind as the bits of news about Super Rugby AU appearing to distance itself from SANZAAR.

What I’ve come up with is much less desirable than maintaining the status quo with the Rugby Championship, but it represents something close to our best regional option if South Africa is no longer available to us.

It involves nine Tier 1 and 2 countries in an eight-week window playing up to six games, with these nine nations divided into three regions of three teams.

The first stage involves each of these regions playing their own championship. We have the ‘Northern Pacific Championship’ which would include Japan, the US and Canada. The ‘Pacific Islands Championship’ would include Fiji, Samoa and Tonga. Finally, the ‘Southern Pacific Championship’ would include the three Tier 1 nations of Australia, New Zealand and Argentina.

Sports opinion delivered daily 

   

The first stage of the concept involves these competitions being run over six weeks, with each team playing the others in their region in a home-and-away format similar to the original Tri-nations. Through that process the three competitions between nations are decided like the Bledisloe Cup and the Puma Trophy – Australia and Argentina – before a champion in each region is crowned based on points collected during the six weeks of home-and-away games.

Then we launch into the ‘Pacific Championship’ which includes the three regional champions along with the second-placed from Tier 1 Southern Pacific Championship. The first weekend involves the second-place-getter from the southern hemisphere championship hosting the champion from either the Pacific Islands or Northern Pacific depending on which was more dominant in their regional championship. Then the South Pacific champion hosts the less dominant champion of the two Tier 2 regions.

Going on current world ranking and assuming the higher-ranked Tier 2 team was more dominant in their region, the first weekend of games would look like be New Zealand versus Fiji and Australia versus Japan.

Meanwhile, the third-place-getter from the South Pacific Championship is hosting the two second-place-getters from the northern and Pacific championships on consecutive weekends, while the thrid-place-getters from the north and Pacific play a one-off game to avoid the spoon. This ensures that all Tier 1 countries get six games of content while those Tier 2 countries that don’t win their regional championship all get five games in total.

(Photo by Phil Walter/Getty Images)

The two winners from the first weekend of games in the Pacific Championship, which act as semi-finals, advance to the final to decide the overall champion. The losers play in a third-place playoff game.

And there we have it: eight weeks of rugby with all Rugby Championship teams playing six games, just as they do under the current format, and at least four of them against fellow Tier 1 opposition. As suggested previously, it’s a shadow of what we have with South Africa, but it’s something many of us could get behind if the Boks decide to fly the coup.

The Tier 1 countries are somewhat distanced from the mismatches that would occur with Tier 2 opponents, but the format provides those developing and smaller nations with some exposure to the big boys. It also engages those ‘sleeping giants’ that are Japan (awakening) and the US while also bringing the Pacific islands into regular meaningful competition.

While the balance of rugby power tilts well and truly in favour of the northern hemisphere and though South Africa heading that way further compromises our position, it would be nice to think that some Yen and US dollars running through our streams will soften the blow that comes with South Africa swapping sides.

But while it’s exciting and our logical response to look further afield in the Pacific for partners, it’s important to be mindful of how we engage them in competition to ensure inter-Tier 1 content makes up the guts of the concept and the games that do involve Tier 2 opponents are meaningful and not set up to be trial runs.

When the top two Tier 1 countries do come up against a Tier 2 opponents initially, it’ll be in a knockout format for the right to play in the championship final. I think that’s somewhat marketable as opposed to a model where these games are happening as just a regular fixture with the result holding no direct ramifications beyond points being added to the competition table.

The concept also concludes with a ‘grand final’, which will go some way towards capturing some of the magic that we lose without having the Boks involved.

What are your thoughts, Roarers? I’m probably getting a little bit ahead of myself and it’s certainly a question most of us would hope our collective unions never have to answer, but what do you think a post-Bok world should look like in our little corner of the globe?

The Crowd Says:

2020-10-19T16:22:21+00:00

Germán

Roar Rookie


The existing South American Rugby Championship has 6 teams : Argentina(10), Uruguay(17), Brazil (26), Chile(29), Peru(75), Colombia(33). Drop the weakest team Peru(75) from the SARC add in the USA(16) and Canada(23) from the Northern Hemisphere and play an 8 team Americas competition Ahem… The Americas Rugby Championships already exists: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americas_Rugby_Championship The last 4 iterations featured Argentina XV (Jaguares subs and newcomers to camp, U20 graduates, other PLADAR players coming from amateur club rugby) against full—or, almost full, sometimes others missed European based players—test sides from Uruguay, Brazil, Chile, the US and Canada. The thing is… Argentina XV only lost one match, against the US in 2018 (and they dropped the ball forwards on the match-tying try). How come putting the Pumas in this set up will benefit anybody? Argentina has to remain within the SANZAAR scope. It is the only way we can progress forwards. We tried for years to go to Europe and it did not work. We cannot wait 15 years for Canada and the US.

2020-10-18T08:18:04+00:00

JD Kiwi

Roar Rookie


Even the big three come to New Zealand according to the rota CPM. Sports rely on sporting competition to succeed.

AUTHOR

2020-10-18T07:48:31+00:00

Rob9

Roar Guru


I don't think the closeness of those rankings provides an accurate comparison of the long-term strength of Japan and Argentina. Things are happening in Japan and that's exciting but I think Argentina is a far more mature rugby nation with stronger mid-term prospects than Japan has. There's still a sizeable gap between Australia/New Zealand and Argentina; I wouldn't be pinning our hopes on an engaging competition with a country that's even further behind. Of course all of this is fluid and able to change as nations gain strength. We're getting a dose of how things can shift with ease at the moment. It would be nice to think that the likes of the US and Japan will be snapping at our heels in the future- but we've got to build based on what's in front of us now and that starts by looking at who's available from the 1st tier. Not building up Japan to be something that they're not quite yet or clutching at straws with any other parts of Asia.

2020-10-18T07:46:17+00:00

Paul

Guest


Yeah PeterK, they were too scared to play the Wallabies, but perhaps they should have watched Bledisloe 2......

2020-10-18T07:33:35+00:00

Daffyd

Roar Rookie


The US will be the key to that region. Let's hope their club completion can raise the standard. I believe the college based comp held their overall development back for a long time. I've coached American kids, and they love Rugby, and they have a talent for it. If there is a way to get just a miserable 1% of Americans interested, that's 3 million people. Get 10% and that serious numbers.

2020-10-18T07:26:38+00:00

Daffyd

Roar Rookie


Hi Rob9, I hate to see the Pumas head to the Americas, but it is their logical home and as they and Japan, are as close as it comes in the standings (at 9 &10), with the Pumas heading home to the Americas it adds some home based strength to the American competition, but most importantly, it keeps the wealth of Japan in the Eastern / Asian / Pacific. Asian countries, potentially, have a lot of money to bring to the table. I'd love to see China get serious.

2020-10-18T07:03:26+00:00

CPM

Roar Rookie


With the 7 week window do you really believe that the folks at Twickenham are going to miss the opportunity to fill their coffers even more? Why travel to the end of the South Pacific for a non profitable away march and throw away all that revenue. You will discover that just like in Cricket where the big 3 call the shots on fixtures and locations those with the might are the ones that will be right. The 8-12 Nations cup will be the norm.

AUTHOR

2020-10-17T23:57:51+00:00

Rob9

Roar Guru


Cheers mate. Still holding out hope we can all play in the sandbox together for many years to come. We’ll just have to see how that cookie deteriorates!

2020-10-17T23:37:48+00:00

JD Kiwi

Roar Rookie


That's wrong for one logical reason and one factual reason. First, the window you just talked about is long enough to fit in the second half of the NC, so logically if they can get that done and dusted, as you seem to believe, they can get the NC done and dusted. And the fact is it hasn't been binned - I took the trouble to research the facts if you care to read my article from September.

2020-10-17T23:36:47+00:00

Machooka

Roar Guru


Good read, Rob9... with plenty of meaty substance :thumbup:

AUTHOR

2020-10-17T23:27:23+00:00

Rob9

Roar Guru


Pretty much agree with all of that. Just to be clear, I think the best global model for a break down of the regions is the Rugby Championship and 6N as they are providing all tier 1 nations with their annual competition. Then a more defined Pacific Nations Cup giving the PI’s and the emerging powers of the North Pacific a competitive tier 2 concept to engage and continue to develop themselves in. Agree about the Nations Cup and it’s impact on the RWC. It’s for that reason that I’ve never been a fan of it. From a tier 1 perspective, I think the most significant reason against having SA in both regional tournaments is that it gives them the advantage of being exposed to all tier one teams annually in an tournament format.

2020-10-17T23:13:23+00:00

CPM

Roar Rookie


You seem to be the only person on the planet who thinks that the Nations Cup is somehow still an idea that Unions want. Well newsflash it was scrapped and binned. Do you really think that privately owned rich clubs are going to give up their schedules (read the meeting notes on it) just so that people can see the marvelous Cane do the Hakka more often. It’s delusional to think so.

2020-10-17T23:11:15+00:00

PeterK

Roar Guru


The RWC is diminished greatly by having a yearly 7N/8N's with only Aust and NZ missing. The proposed Nations league makes the RWC almost redundant, it's main value is as a knock out comp which means more pressure. The regionalism of the 6N's is destroyed by having SA (and Japan) included anyway, that horse would have bolted. SA's region is more within the RC imo.

2020-10-17T23:07:32+00:00

Tight-Head

Roar Rookie


Lions tours will be interesting once SA joins Europe - presumably there will be a lot less interest in lions tours there if every euro team goes there every second year anyway. Will we end up with aus and nz each getting a tour every 8 years, or will those two keep getting it every 12 and the lions spread the love around the pacific/Americas every third tour?

AUTHOR

2020-10-17T22:48:21+00:00

Rob9

Roar Guru


I just personally believe that the ‘regionalism’ of the 6N and Rugby Championship is something that adds to their aura and is worth protecting. Having a team(s) with a foot in each camp diminishes that for mine. We crossover in competition for the RWC and that’s something that I wouldn’t want to compromise either. Furthermore, I’m not sure South Africa limiting their pool of opponents to those in the 6N and RC outside of the RWC is a good thing for those smaller and developing nations.

2020-10-17T22:35:06+00:00

PeterK

Roar Guru


How is it not in the interests of global rugby? Please explain that. Aust, Arg and NZ would be better off and maybe Japan if they were included in the RC. Having Aust, Arg and NZ mixed with T2 nations in a comp might help the T2 nations , but won’t help Aust, NZ, Arg. So having a number of t2 nations improve at the expense of 3 t1 countries is better for global rugby? Wouldn’t the T2 nations be better off with their own comps which they can win? Of course a Nations league would be better, I just don’t think it will happen now.

AUTHOR

2020-10-17T22:20:01+00:00

Rob9

Roar Guru


Just running a side commentary Peter. Good for the Boks, but I don’t necessarily think good for the interests of global rugby. I think we’d all like to be involved in both of these competitions if we could.

AUTHOR

2020-10-17T22:17:06+00:00

Rob9

Roar Guru


I don’t think it will ever get comparable to the landscape and forces that are at play in soccer. Simply because rugby captures a fraction of the interest that soccer does in Europe. There’s already evidence to suggest that the money being thrown around in European rugby (which really isn’t that far away from what’s on offer in the Southern Hemisphere) isn’t sustainable with most clubs living beyond their means and many owners expressing a desire to implement structures that make the money pits that many of these clubs are more shallow.

2020-10-17T22:10:20+00:00

PeterK

Roar Guru


That is exactly what I said. They would drop the eoyt, who would they tour anyway? The NH teams who they have already played and it earns them nothing. The in bound July tours would be aust and NZ anyway. But Aust and NZ wouldn't earn anything so probably wouldn't do it unless it was part of a RC comp since they want countries to tour them. So you get rid of those 2 tours and the number of tests is similar and the boks have 2 major broadcasting deals in 2 comps 8n's and rc.

AUTHOR

2020-10-17T22:05:01+00:00

Rob9

Roar Guru


A country having access to the 2 significant regional competitions would be an interesting prospect. I guess they’d have to pull back a bit from the June and November windows to avoid heading towards playing 20 tests/year. But if it’s an option that’s afforded to them and it fits in the calendar they’d probably want to get on it. There wouldn’t be too many teams left to play in those June and November windows anyway.

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar