Cash-strapped Rugby Australia remains furious with South Africa for pulling out of the Rugby Championship and admits the Springboks’ no-show will cost it – and all SANZAAR’s competing nations – millions of dollars.
South Africa’s governing body only announced last Friday it was withdrawing, just two weeks before the tournament kicks off.
The world champions’ absence has forced SANZAAR into reverting to a Tri Nations tournament featuring Australia, New Zealand and Argentina, with the original 12-match competition reduced in to six games.
It’s been speculated that South Africa will forego 50 million rand ($A4.3 million) for not fronting up.
“The financial loss for them will be great,” Rugby Australia chairman Hamish McLennan said on Wednesday.
But the Springboks’ scratching will also seriously impact RA’s finances.
Even before COVID-19 struck and wiped out the entire Super Rugby season, forcing RA to lay off more than 40 per cent of its staff and slash players’ wages, the governing body forecast a loss of some $9 million for the 2019-20 financial year.
Leaking more money because of South Africa’s doing is the last thing RA needs.
“It will cost us quite a lot of money but we’ll find a way through it,” McLennan said.
“We were surprised because South Africa did agree to the tournament scheduling.
“So we’re disappointed that they pulled out but we’ll just have to move on.”
McLennan all but ruled out RA seeking compensation from their South African counterparts.
“It is what it is. We’ll just all have to deal with it,” he said.
“We’ll just find a way to deal with it. It’s very tough for all sports in Australia through COVID.
“We’ve proven so far that we’re a pretty resilient organisation and we’ll just make it work.”
South Africa sighted “player safety”, having missed months of rugby, as the reason for not coming to Australia, which is hosting the entire tournament.
“Our view’s different to theirs. We think we’ve given them ample time to prepare for the Tests. We thought it would be good,” McLennan said.
“We’ve already got the Argentinians out here at the moment, and they’re quite satisfied with how their preparation will go.
“But, to be honest, we’re very disappointed that they’re not turning up.
“They agreed to the tournament so we expected them to turn up. I think it would have been great for their game.
“We hear on the grapevine their players wanted to play.”
McLennan pointed out it will be 20 months between Tests for the Springboks by the time the touring British and Irish Lions arrive in South Africa next year.
Asked if he expected the next Wallabies versus Springboks Test to contain extra spice, McLennan said: “I think there will be, also with the All Blacks and the South Africans too.”
However, the RA chairman didn’t believe the Springboks’ non-appearance suggested in any way that South Africa wanted out of SANZAAR and Super Rugby – when it returns to normal after COVID-19.
He reaffirmed RA’s preferred Super Rugby model for 2021 was a trans-Tasman competition featuring New Zealand, if not just another domestic tournament involving only the five Australian sides.
“We’ll be better players if we play Kiwi sides week in, week out and I think the broadcasters want that as well, and the fans,” McLennan said.
“There’s no stumbling block from our side so it’s really up to New Zealand – what they want to do.”
Old Bugger
Guest
Much to the dismay of the NZ rugby public, NZR have already announced that the SRA comp in 2021, will only consist of the current 5 SR franchises. No 6th franchise will be introduced in 2021.
CPM
Roar Rookie
Well he is SANZAAR and he gave the 48 hour extension, so by reason the original date for a decision was given as 48 hours before the extension. No surprise here.
Qld Rugby
Guest
Heard a rumour today coming out of Hamilton, Warren Gatland has whispered that in 2021 he will pull the whole team out of the Lions tour to SA at the last minute and blame player welfare. A lot of money at stake here. Two can play at that game.
Old Bugger
Guest
scrum You may want to widen your envelope mate and look at each union having their own SR comps before joining each other in a cross-conference champions type comp. As I tried to explain above, such a format would need approx 14-16 weeks of rugby competition. It allows each union to earn an income from their own SR comp and share the income from a champions comp. Current SR comp with 2 byes, is approx 18weeks. So, these schedules aren't too far apart which should then alleviate your concerns, for a long term solution.
ScrumStability
Roar Rookie
I like South Africans and I like watching them play rugby, but I honestly don't understand the administration.
ScrumStability
Roar Rookie
I think the suprising part is the last minute cancellation. If they insist it was player welfare, surely they could have made that call weeks ago when the schedule was clear? What was the factor that kept the decision being made at the 11th hour?
potsie
Guest
Yes they are all already under contract with NZR so all available - although for about a third of them they are Mitre 10 contracts. NZ players are primarily contracted to NZR not to super rugby teams so rejigging possible to a considerable extent. None are Australians so no worry about losing Australian eligibility. There are only 2 or 3 players that are arguably past their prime but you want a mix of experience and youth and Messam and Ranger who are the oldest were both excellent last weekend. The world rugby funding would not be for the NZ teams but rather for a Fiji team (Fiji made an expression of interest in NZR's invitation process but their participation is subject to World Rugby funding to enable them to bring players back from Europe) or an island based Pasifika team - just like the Jaguares are part funded for super rugby and the PI teams are funded for Pacific Nations cup etc. No guarantee of that funding of course because even though the PI countries would like their players to play at home, the decision makers at World Rugby would probably vote to keep them subject to Euro club teams.
scrum
Roar Rookie
All under contract are they. Do you have any idea the complexity of setting up a Professional teams. Some of the names you mentioned are well past their best. A country of 5 million cannot support a comp. If the Western Force defects their players not eligible for Wallaby selection- that’s a real incentive. World Rugby funding. Dream on
potsie
Guest
How is this for squad from which to pick 2 teams - a South China Lions team based in Tauranga and a Western Force team based in Taranaki/Perth (or a Pasifika team based in South Auckland) made up of either 3rd choice Superugby players (or 2nd choice if the current 3rd choice is good enough) - players that aren't getting game time supplemented with up and coming talent from Mitre 10. 1. Chris Eves / Reuben O'Neill / Isi Tuungafasi/ Sona Taumalolo / Robb Cobb 2. Liam Coltman / Ricki Ricatelli / Tyrone Thompson / Leni Apisai / Latu Tolai / Greg Pleasants-Tate 3. One of Angus Taavao or Atu Moli / George Bower / Jared Adams 4. Isaiah Walker-Leawere / Geoff Cridge / Manaaki Selby-Rickit or Jack Whetton / Luke Romano 5. Jacob Pierce / Tom Parsons / Josh Lord 6. One of Tom Robinson or Dalton Papalii / One of Lachlan Boshier or Luke Jacobson / Liam Messam / Te Kamaka-Howden 7. Gareth Evans / Mitch Jacobsen / Kara Pryor 8. Devan Flanders / Waimana Riedlinger-Kapa / TeAriki Ben-Nicholas / Tyler Laubsher 9. Te Toiroa Tahuriorangi / Xavier Roe / Jonathan Ruru / one or Kane Hammington or Folau Fakatava 10. Fletcher Smith / One of Stephen Perofeta or Harry Plumber / Simon Hickey / Zarn Sullivan 11. Leicester Fainganuku / Rene Ranger / Julian Savea / Tanielu Telea / Chay Fihaki 12. Vince Aso / Orbyn Leger / Thomas Umaga-Jensen / Gideon Wrampling 13. Stacey Ili / Luteru Laulala 14. Jacob Kneepkens / Salesi Rayasi / AJ Lam / Josh McKay / Lolangi Visinia 15. One of Solomon Alaimalo or Etene Nanai Seturo / Chase Tiatia / Nehe Milner-Skudder. Plenty of Super rugby and sometime international experience, and a couple of future stars. Little bit thin at tighthead and 2nd-five. The 8th team might be the Fijian team funded by World Rugby or a Pasifika team of players committed to the island national teams funded by I don't know how. I reckon you could have at least 2 pretty credible and competitive teams out of that lot. Likely to be stronger than all but maybe the Brumbies.
scrum
Roar Rookie
Pity the final comments in the article contradicts your last sentence- and how can a 5 or 6 team comp be a long term solution
rnmnsw
Roar Rookie
If the team takes a knee they will lose even more
Spot on potsie and I just cant see the broadcasters paying over double for a 10 team TT than they would for a 5 team SRA from NZ. The revenue per team would drop so why would NZR be interested. Ans RA still insists its their way or the highway then get upset when the Highway is chosen
Old Bugger
Guest
Well said potsie. Having their own competitions allows both unions to secure income for themselves, through broadcasting and attendances. I was against a champions cup comp but in hindsight, a 2-round home comp would only last about 8-10weeks (without finals, to determine the home rankings and top team, wins the home comp) so there'd be some time available for all sides from each union, to play rounds of RA teams vs NZR teams with no need, to play their own union teams, again. If my maths is right, that's about 4-5 weeks (or 6weeks if you toss in a bye) and no home/away. If this comp provides some income success, then the home/away is reversed, the following year. All up that's about 14-16 weeks of SR for each union and a champions comp. And, in this champions comp, the income can be shared 50/50. The only problem is, I doubt if both unions would adopt the KISS principle for this format and we'll probably end up with a TT competition, after each union's own competition, where all teams play each other.....again, in some games!!
fiwiboy7042
Roar Rookie
It could happen partly by having the visiting team play several games in a row in the host country. NZ is likely to have a 6-team comp next year if the TT comp fails to lift off.
Ex force fan
Guest
SARU made the right decision from their point of view and it has been predicated by several laymen including myself months in advance that it would not be in SARU interest to participate. If NZRU and RA spend the money they have not earned yet, they took the risk. NZRU and RA have rights in the commercial agreements that they can pursue if they are not happy with how it played out. I guess they would not as they are (1) not blameless in their own conduct and (2) the lawyers would have advised SARU on the best way to pull our of the RC and the "players welfare" argument would be water right. To make a fuss now can just damage the relationship further that could impact future money spinning RC tournaments.
CPM
Roar Rookie
Perhaps, but it could easily have been zero and even it is 50% of the original deal it’s better than nothing. He also knew about the conditions and seemingly accepted it anyway, so I don’t know why he is surprised that conditions for participation were not met.
AndyS
Guest
You don't think he is probably talking about the effect on the various broadcast deals of halving the number of games being played...?
scrum
Roar Rookie
A fair point but I would think with the bulk booking required that a reasonable deal could be arranged with one of the airlines. Plus 5 team comps are too small to be considered a proper comp long term. NZR plans to have a domestic 8 team comp is fanciful and would make a mockery of their “desire” to have a “quality comp”. Where are those teams coming from. Pasifika ruled out so targeting the Force ( the worst performed Aussie team) and Asian teams that do not exist is going to produce a better comp than going with the established Aussie SR teams. Surely nobody can accept that as being a serious concept. NZR tried a power play and failed. Subject to Covid I will be surprised if a TT comp does not happen. Sure Aussie lacks depth but is the NRL an even comp?
PeterK
Roar Guru
just proves you cannot trust sarfu , their word means nothing, dishonest and deceitful
scrum
Roar Rookie
The difference in 2020 is that all revenue is shared. Previous the hosts were rewarded for gate takings. So any comparison to previous seasons is hardly valid. So this is going to cost SA more but Argentina, NZ and Aussie are all going to get less money- Aussie does not pocket the money from the tournament . Your attempt to denigrate McClennan has no basis in reality.