The last 20 years of Super Rugby have demonstrated two inarguable facts:
1. The ability of the New Zealand rugby system to develop All Blacks is unparalleled across the rugby world.
2. Super Rugby has been a financial failure for South Africa and Australia, and the writing is on the wall for New Zealand if they don’t take heed of what has happened to their southern hemisphere partners.
Clearly Super Rugby, and in particular New Zealand Rugby, must find a way to balance these two facts.
The threat
The gloomiest outlook for southern hemisphere rugby is that Australia is the next domino to fall, with domestic rugby becoming a second-tier competition for talent not wanted by NRL teams, and getting regularly flogged by their cousins over the ditch. New Zealand being the last domino, losing players to the dual threats of cashed-up northern hemisphere rugby (the Springbok model) or an expanded NRL with two teams based in New Zealand (the Australian model).
It is important to consider that the NRL is highly likely to introduce a second New Zealand team in the next five years, and having two NRL teams both with double the salary cap of the Super Rugby teams respectively means New Zealand rugby might start to see more of the player drain that Australia currently has with its schoolboy talent. Remember 20 years ago the Wallabies were the best in the world and were higher-paid than NRL players, so it’s not impossible that it happens to New Zealand too.
(Photo by Albert Perez/Getty Images)
The solution
Super Rugby must act now and become a true club-focused competition to survive in an increasingly competitive sporting landscape. Clubs must have equal salary caps across the competition and shared broadcast revenue with the ability to sign players from any nation. Allow opening the clubs up to private ownership where possible – à la the Western Force – tempered with an NBA-style luxury tax that allows teams to go over the salary cap with a percentage of the excess redistributed to the other teams.
Of course, the above scenario would be instantly shot down, and deservedly so, by New Zealand Rugby – the greatest rugby system of the professional era should not have to give away all its advantages. However, a compromise is possible. New Zealand has the strongest foundation of amateur and schoolboy rugby, and with an overhaul of the professional game will continue to dominate the international scene within a financially sustainable Super Rugby competition.
Allow each national union 30-40 central contracts to keep top-tier and developing players in their respective nations. Meanwhile, allow fringe international players and the true club-level players to play for whoever is willing to pay them the most. Crucially, these players must maintain their international eligibility and be rewarded for improvements in form with international call-ups.
The respective unions must recognise the clubs’ role in developing previously unrecognised players, and allow them to stay at their respective Super Rugby clubs with rewards for form. New Zealand and Australia need to acknowledge that it is better for talent to remain both internationally eligible within the Super Rugby system, rather than lost overseas.
Also, clubs should be rewarded for developing international talent that has slipped through the cracks of the traditional pathways to Test rugby selection, and be able to keep said players.
Finally, having moved towards a balanced and competitive competition, Super Rugby must focus on increasing viewership, both in person and on TV. This requires two approaches.
(Photo by Mark Evans/Getty Images)
Increased broadcasting revenue may be achieved by introducing the top Japanese teams as a third conference. The South African shift to Europe has shown that timezones are more important than geography, and the Japanese market is perfectly situated as a target for growth within the correct time zone, and is an economic powerhouse that needs the powerhouse talent of New Zealand and Australian rugby talent stars to be unlocked.
Providing seven or eight competitive matches within prime time television viewing is an easy sell for broadcasters, and a four-fold increase in content in comparison to two matches a weekend as seen respectively in Super Rugby Australia and Aotearoa.
Secondly, although economically minor in comparison to TV rights, in-person attendance is the true heart of any sporting competition. What Super Rugby Australian and Aoteroa has shown is that fans respond to local derbies. Kids need to see their sporting heroes live. These matches should be maximised through the competition structure.
I propose a three-conference system (Japan, Australia and New Zealand), with each respective conference playing two home-and-away fixtures within themselves, and a single fixture against the other conference clubs, alternating home-and-away games on a two-year basis.
Importantly, there should be a single competition ladder – providing two key benefits over previous systems.
1. Weaker conferences will receive a small competitive advantage by playing more games within themselves and ensuring all conferences have a chance to be represented during finals footy.
2. Truly dire teams will not be granted a sympathy top-three finals spot, purely for finishing on top of a bad conference, they must still be competitive against the other conferences for a top-three finish.
I know the ideological purists will be against anything that is not a true home-and-away round-robin schedule, and in an ideal world they would have it their way. However a compromise is needed to balance a packed international schedule, the need for local derbies and player welfare requirements – given the brutal reality of professional rugby, a jam-packed schedule as seen in European club football is just not realistic.
Finally, the makeup of the conferences. Financial sustainability must be a priority. The competition should start with five teams in each respective conference, with a five-year plan for expansion to six teams around the time of the 2027 Rugby World Cup, to be (hopefully) played in the southern hemisphere. These teams will be comprised of the current five Australian and New Zealand Super Rugby clubs and the five best suited current Japanese franchises.
(Photo by Dave Rowland/Getty Images)
Expansion is an admirable goal, however, the Super Rugby approach to expansion has been abysmal compared to other professional sporting leagues. The proposal to include the Fijian Drua and Moana Pasifika in 2022 is a pie-in-the-sky approach. Expecting Rugby Australia to pay for a Fijian team purely out of goodwill when they are already bleeding money and players is just straight up unworkable, as nice as the idea is.
Similarly with Moana Pasifika, if they are unable to select players who are eligible for All Blacks selection they will never be competitive with the New Zealand teams. And expecting top-tier Pasifika and Fijian players to reject big money in Europe to play clubs that haven’t even worked out their funding model is completely unrealistic.
Expansion should be a five-year approach, with all new clubs given an equal footing to succeed. Clearly, both the Fijian Drua and Moana Pasifika should have their development pathways located in their respective countries of origin, however, they must also be able to access top-level Super Rugby talent to provide leadership and stability while growing their own home player base.
Furthermore, the current financial state of Super Rugby does not allow for these clubs to join Super Rugby in 2022 and be financially successful.
Instead, each club should be incorporated in the respective second-tier rugby competitions in Australia and New Zealand, with a five-year focus on developing player pathways to Super Rugby. Allowing for five years of growth will also provide the financial security needed, as these clubs will realistically require subsidisation from World Rugby and other Super Rugby nations to be viable.
Expansion within the Japanese conference should mirror this timeline. The sixth team could either be a sixth Japanese franchise or the return of the Argentian Jaguares, depending on the make-up of South American Rugby at said point in time. Although re-introducing the Jaguares directly contradicts my earlier argument about time zones, only 1/18 teams in the wrong time zone is sustainable and allows Super Rugby to achieve a secondary aim of growing professional rugby outside of the traditional rugby nations.
Let me know your thoughts in the comments – clearly the current set-up has not worked, and I propose this model as a financially sustainable and competitive path forward for Super Rugby while still allowing unions to focus on developing international talent.
If you’re reading this Rugby Australia, feel free to give a broke university student a job.
CPM
Roar Rookie
https://www.sportspromedia.com/news/japan-new-rugby-union-league-2022-launch If they make half that amount then it will still be the as big as the Top 14. We will see soon enough.
Emery Ambrose
Roar Rookie
I kind of think that if it was still Super12 then all would be ok, or maybe Super14 with the 2 extra teams from SA in 2006, this would have given the largest supporter base more games and for European primetime watching. I think going forward it has to be round robin with whatever amount of teams they go with for a trans tasman comp. If they stay internal comps, then have a top 4 from AU, NZ, Japan compete in split pool comp over 7 weeks in May/June. Japan Rugby union seem more open to joining Super rugby then 5-6 years ago, maybe now they could want 4 teams in there making up a new Super Rugby - 5 NZ, 4 Japan, 5 AU, 2 Pacific, 1 round robin, 18 weeks with finals. Know doubt we will know structure of next year in a couple months that's for sure. Japan is the logical choice right now with SA out, they have a population that can be tapped into and are still prime viewing times for Australasia.
The Late News
Roar Rookie
Yep. thanks for that. just exploring an idea.
NH Fan
Guest
No offence but the Japaneese leagues are not going to make that much money a year. 481 for 25 teams is nearly 20 million a year so you are talking 25 Toulouse being created. As it would be 3 divisions you would be talking the top teams having as much money a year as the Scottish or Italian unions. Added in that if you are the 50th best player in the J league you earn a massive €570k I doubt rugby will be able to generate that kind of money unless people are making massive losses In Japan a baseball team in the top division get about €100m a year. The Soccer team about €50m a year. Top14 is about €25m a year. NRL about €20m per team. No idea how people think Japan will suddenly turn rugby in Japan into the equivalent of soccer that is a much more popular game.
NH Fan
Guest
Transfer fees only apply to u23 or people brought out of their contract. If there was a few for u23s then the rich clubs would just take them at 23. As most rugby players see out their contract there wouldn't be any fee other than a signing bonus for the player/agent. SA probably gets fees because your players aren't on alot so buying out their contract is worth it. If a player is on 400k a year and has one year left the incoming club isn't going to be paying massive fees and will just wait the year.
NH Fan
Guest
Good ideas, but I see some issues with Japan. They want to build their own domestic league to rival England and France. They aren't going to put teams into a Pacific tournament that is funded by them but doesnt help them grow the domestic side. If they could get extra money on top of their domestic league they might be more willing as they will want to test themselves. A world club cup will give Japan places if stand alone, not if part of TT and will be big money for them. Japan doesn't have massive squad budgets, what they have is a few players on lots of money and everyone else on very little. Against teams with the same payment structure it works fine. If they had to compete in a Champions Cup style competition they would take less stars but build better squads reducing pressure on Oz/NZ for top wages. A Pacific Nations Cup at international should also be created to align the nations that would increase revenue for unions to spend (Also keep the RC). If the international teams play each other the champions cup style is sold to fans aswell. The Euro Cups work as fans see it as an extension of the 6Ns and how teams will do come the internationals. When a countries teams do good in the Champions Cup they do good in the 6N (Wales excluded) If the TT fails or becomes a place for people playing for contacts in Europe or Japan. If you don't align with Japan/Pacific and the US/America while you can get a good deal the chance is gone. Ask the Welsh who were offered 4/12 in the Premership and turned it down leaving them behind for 20+ years because they thought they didn't need them. SR never grew the pie and when the TV markets of Europe, SA and USA looked to spend their share of the SR pie on their own competitions suddenly the pie got really small while those countries got bigger pies (£55 for URC per year not including Euro rugby up from £30 last year and £15 in 2016). The TT struggles to sell in Europe and North America, that puts them into big trouble and your suggestion doesn't grow the Japan market (there is a reason Japan want to restructure their own league and are not knocking down SR door to replace SA in SR)
873perth
Roar Rookie
Both countries need each other for various reasons I would personally keep the 5 Aussie teams ,break up the kiwi franchises creating 8 teams plus Fiji and moana pacific creating a 15 team Comp 7 games each week , that should make it a even competition with wins shared each week , example keep highlanders as is , base a team in both Christchurch and Tasman ( combined side any way ) , add a central team Hawkes bay manawatu Taranaki , Wellington , Waikato & BOP , Auckland , and a northern side north harbour& northland , Moana pacific to be aligned with counties , you could still split the comp into a 5 team conference system also creating a home and away game for each Aussie team creating local derbies ,
Micko
Roar Rookie
Look who’s talking. You’re a stubborn parochial kiwi like Jacko and the rest. Despite being proved wrong constantly you won’t concede an inch. Please tell me again about your vast kiwi knowledge of soccer internationals woodart! :silly:
woodart
Guest
your rants cover such a wide range of subjects, most of your statements are either somewhat correct, mostly incorrect, or totally incorrect.all delivered with a massive chip....
AndyS
Guest
Public listing certainly may be a new concept that wasn't considered last time. But if if a comp (or anything else for that matter) is part of a system that isn't financially viable, using PE to prop it up is a fast way to the poor house.
Micko
Roar Rookie
You can't refute what I said woodart, so you make it personal. Was I wrong or what?
woodart
Guest
you have a massive chip about kiwis. did your best girl run off with one?
fiwiboy7042
Roar Rookie
don't know where you were in 1995, Micko, but NO-ONE in SH rugby was happy to go pro at that time, partly because they knew their administrators on the whole weren't up to it. The writing was on the wall even then and it read: "the NH is richer than you SH mob". Setting up the franchises was in line with the development professional competition that was being set up and so they remain separate from domestic teams to this day; that is, for countries who have domestic teams in a domestic competition. Super Rugby was a survival strategy that was developed in a remarkably short time in the face of NH disapproval. Fans were panicking, players were panicking and Murdoch was winning his chess game with the stolid NH blazer brigade at the then IRB.
Muglair
Roar Rookie
We don't produce enough players because we keep doing the same thing year after year. Our coaching development is even worse. Yes, New Zealand has a great system, but when will someone in Australia decide that even some parts of it might be worth copying, or even maybe just trying to learn from. The conference system with local derbies was going to be the answer in 2016. It wasn't, just better than the ratings of Australian teams playing at midnight in South Africa. Private ownership is a dream, there is no money in it. Twiggy is an exception because he has an enormous excess of loose cash, is apparently a patriotic Sandgroper, has significant commercial enterprises in WA subject to ongoing government interference, would be pretty annoyed at the rest of Australian Rugby because they said no to him, was interested in launching Rapid Rugby in Asia because he has significant commercial interests there. There may be other reasons, but he is a one off. Also if we go it alone here, don't be surprised if WA is a 7th Aotearoa team, he is intent on it being the best provincial team in the world, he wont be achieving that in a domestic competition. That will drive ambitious p[layers to WA and they will soon dominate a SR AU which will affect the levels of enthusiasm in NSW and Queensland. I could go on. Everyone here has a blind spot for rugby while they would mock any other group which continued to set ever lower benchmarks and fail to achieve them. There is one common denominator between sports and business, if you don't have a vision and a plan to be the best, then you will never be more than mediocre, and most likely fail. In Australian Rugby only Twiggy and other "Australians" like Dave Rennie and Brad Thorn seem to aspire to that.
fiwiboy7042
Roar Rookie
PE funding would help with that. Also, apparently, public listing.
itsgoodtobelucky
Roar Rookie
Haha who knows! Regs money, yes, that needs clarity but taking out SR tier takes out significant cost too. And I only partly agree about spreading talent too thin as there are already 14 NPC & 8 NRC teams, and not all full of school leavers. Also NPC/NRC schedules in Test season means no test players, but matches are still pretty good quality. Imagine if Test players WERE available and played in double round-robin comps? How much more broadcast/ticket/merch/sponsor revenue would that generate for the clubs & national unions? The ~ 1.1mil combined annual spectators of existing SRA/SRAU & Mitre10/NRC would definitely grow if they could watch local teams, traditional rivalries, test stars, every weekend ... Then a 2-tier 'Pacific Cup' for top & bottom of NPC/NRC, top 4 & next 4 from TL, + MP, could have pool games and semis+final done in 8 weeks. All top clubs/players are involved, leaving 20+ weeks for national club comps & 12-13 test w/ends for a 40-odd week season. Voila! ;)
JD Kiwi
Roar Rookie
You really shouldn't post when you're drunk Micko
P2R2
Roar Rookie
Maybe NZ like playing Aussie....
P2R2
Roar Rookie
what other winter sports are played in Adelaide....NRL??? nope....FAA yes...RUGBY/.,..nope...
Micko
Roar Rookie
Wasn't referring to that but super rugby. I've seen NPC sporadically on Foxtel throughout the years, and it seemed far more interesting to me. There were teams and places in NZ where they were playing I wasn't aware of.