SARrugby.com

 Brycy, not possibale to reply on your other post so created a new one- (please ask Beeno for technical support for any issues you get posting. "

May be worthwhile to grow Rugby into a worldwide sport, and without America this is not going to happen.

It is a little bit boring at the moment. The All Blacks win, or the boks win or Australia. Same stuff over and over. 

The format of the tournament would need to change though. More rounds in the tournament to seperate the wheat from the chaff, but still allow a more teams and local fans to participate

Perhaps it could start with round one being a local derby system to get the opening games out of the way, and get rid of the weak teams- but still allowing them to participate.  

The stronger countries can initially have more teams that qualify into the next round.

For example SA, New Zealand have 5 teams each. (The top 4 out of 5 of the 1st round of local derbies go into the next round.) Australia the top 3 out of 5.

Whp want to watch the Kings or Lions vs the Melbourne Rebels or Western Force?

As the countries even out in skills, or if they even out then more teams from each country could make it past the local derby into the next round. 

For example South Africa- would have 4 teams out of 5 that make it into the next round. (from local derbies of one match)

New Zealand- would have 4 teams out of 5 that make it into the next round.

Australia- 3 teams make it into the next round(International) 

America- have one team that make it out of their local round, into the next international round

Canada- 1 team

Japan- 1 team

etc, etc.-

Then have a seeding system based on points of the local round one derby conference system which would allow countries that have a 2nd strong team to come through the ranks into the international tournament. 

America would probably be able to buy good players with the size of their media market, so in time they would have more than one competive team that could progress into the international rounds.

As more teams make it into the international level, another round is added, and so on and so on.....

-

This is the best way to grow the tournament. Starting with local derbies as round one will still get a strong viewership as it will draw local fans like the Curry Cup, ITM etc. 

Then round 2 will be the best form each country. 

Brycy

I am not sure how this could be managed.   The season is already very long with the teams having to play a substantial number of matches.   I am sure they do not wat to have a secnd World Cup competition on club level.

Maybe the reference to some form of a conference system could be considered without changing the present system.   What could be done - and in fact should be done is to have a team from Argentina included in the main conference system - but even that would mean too many additional games,

I believe he only answer would be to have a conference system catering for the following countries - each with one team included:-

*   Argentina

*   USA

*   Canada

*   Japan

*   Samoa

*   Fiji

*   Tonga

These teams can then play home and away matches against each other  and the top four teams on the log can then qualify for play-offs  against the four teams at present in the play-offs - in other words there will initially be four play-off matches over a two week period instead of the present two play off matches.    This would mean the four winners would play each other in the second week to get to the semi-final stage.

The play-offs would extend the time frames of the competition by one week only - but could complicate the already problematic travel arrangments in the stages leading to the final stages, unless all the play-offs take place in one of the Zanzar countries on a rotation basis.

Very complicated with major financial impacts though - also will the TV channels and pubiic  buy into such a system?   Not sure about that.   

 clevermike,

Valid points. I forgot about the logistics. The travel would be a nightmare. 

Just if the Americas and Canda had their own tournament it might not generate enough demand. Any team probably wants to be in the SuperSouthern Hemishpere tournament, rather than the Northern Hemishpere stagnant version of the game.

-

If a system could be formulated it could work, but is it possibale for such as system to exist?

Sharkbok

I think like the IRB Zanzar would like to see a major extension of rugby as a sport worldwide and that may have an impact on final decisions taken.  Can it work - we will never really know unless some or other form of competition is implemented and rugby is professionalized in all participating countries on a more extendive  basis than at present.

Thanks Sharkbok.

Can't see this working with countries outside rugby's top ten ranked nations or the point of even considering the idea for another 20years ...how could that be a spectacle  ??? Dreamers.

Like many have said - we want our Super 12 Competition back where each team plays each other and we don't get ridiculous situations like last year where the Hurricanes miss playing the Bulls or the two top teams Chiefs and Stormers end up not even playing each other . Those games would have generated good crowds of paying public if it's more money they're after. 

Money is what it's all about otherwise they would include a Pacfic Island team or two if it was just about expansion. Perhaps they should ask the fans what they want....

IRB World Rankings - 21  January  2013

Position (last week)	Member Union	Rating Point
1(1)	NEW ZEALAND	90.08
2(2)	SOUTH AFRICA	86.94
3(3)	AUSTRALIA	86.87
4(4)	FRANCE	85.07
5(5)	ENGLAND	83.90
6(6)	IRELAND	80.22
7(7)	SAMOA	78.71
8(8)	ARGENTINA	78.71
9(9)	WALES	78.39
10(10)	ITALY	76.24
11(11)	TONGA	76.10
12(12)	SCOTLAND	75.83
13(13)	FIJI	71.52
14(14)	CANADA	71.41
15(15)	JAPAN	70.09
16(16)	USA	68.32
17(17)	GEORGIA	65.83
18(18)	SPAIN	63.09
19(19)	ROMANIA	62.12
20(20)	RUSSIA	61.49

Brycy

Your viewpoints are appreciated - I think we all prefer a stronger and less complicated system - but that is where it probably will end.  

For the IRB and Zanzar there piorities are different inasmuch as -

*   they want to enhance rugby as a sport on a world wide basis; and

*   for them there is only one thing that really counts and that is money represented by TV rights and sponsors.

What we as arm chair critics think - counts with them for nothing and they definitely will not listen to the public in their decision making deliberations.

Anyone remember that Fiji/Tonga/Samoa combined XV that played SA,NZ and Australia back in  2004?? Pity they dropped the ball on that because that combined team could have had potential 

A While back someone made the suggestion of an expanded Superrugby system that consists of 20 teams with 2 tiers each. 10 top ranked sides in tier 1 and 10 bottom ranked sides in tier 2. Everybody in a tier play each other once, there is a promotion relegation system in place and the season is still shorter than it currently is with 5 more teams. This could even be expanded to include 24 teams with 12 teams per tier and the season will still be shorter than it currently is.

This way lower tiered superrugby teams get to have the chance to qualify for the top tier and teams from the so called developing nations get to have regular exposure against good competition.

I still think this is the best idea.

Stormer: Yes i remeber the Pacific islanders team, that was a nice idea, but a logistical nightmare for the nations involved I think. They could however expand on the Idea and Make it the same as the B&I Lions concept. Mayb now with the USA and Canada in the Pacific Nations Cup. they could take that concept even further and organise a tour for a Pacaific Nations team consisting of all players from the pacific nations cup during the Lions tour. This team can then play 3 tests. one against each Southern Giant (SA, NZ, Aus - 2 tests against the side not playing the Lions) and one test against Argentina.

Just an idea could be nice to see.

the logistics would be a nightmare, and the only way to cater for it would be a two tier system.

i also think that spXV with teams from the SANZAR countries is silly, but going back to spXII is a bit extreme, instead i would be happy to see it go back to spXIV, 5 teams from SA/NZ and 4 teams from OZ.

SANZAR have chosen to expand super rugby with every chance possible lately, so maybe its ime to just take a step back and not expand, instead concentrate on strengthing the current teams in the comp.

the almighty dollar will have the final say as usual though and if i was a betting man, i would say that japan have the best chance of all the countries to get a team in, i cant see anything else more than that though.

1. Stormers

2. Chiefs
3. Reds
4. Crusaders

5. Bulls

6. Sharks

7. Brumbies

8. Hurricanes

9. Highlanders

10. Cheetahs

11. Waratahs

12. Blues

1. Rebels
2. Force
3. Lions
4. Kings

5. Argentinian team

6. Argentinian team
7. Argentinian team
8. Japanese team
9. Japanese team

10. Tongan Team

11. Samoan team
12. Fijian team

Ek

I think a two tier system will work - but their could be serious complications.   SA is the main financier of Super 15 and may be unhappy to have four teams in the Top tier - with New Zealand having 5 and Australia having 3.  Zanzar is desperate to expand the game in Australia - as the wealthiest country by far - and will not do anything like suggested - so there could be complications as to how to structure the tiers  is concerned.  

The problem is also to be how to fund the second tier - without substantial contributions from the teams from the indicated countries.  New Zealand - having no representation in the second tier - will not contibute and the Aussie franchises concrned are in dire financial straits.   Nothing much can be expected from the Pacidic Island nations and rugby is as yet not progessionalized in Argentina - their professionals all play overseas mostly in France.  

I am pretty sure SARU will also baulk at dishing out money - whilst the other countries cannot contribute at all.   Without exceptional funding from TV - it would not be financially viable.   There may be a solution - with a two tier-system - but I think the better idea would be to keep the present Zanzar teams  out of the second tier and  and get the IRB more involved from a rugby development perspective.

The idea will always be to play strength against strength - and there is a massive gulf betwen Zanzar and the other countries  involved - the gulf being less between the Zanzar teams and Argentina if  the Championship tests are borne in mind - that draw being a very unhappy indicator what coukl happen to teams selected with bias or on reputation.

This is just a startoff suggestion Mike based on where the teams ended on the log. The tiers will continuesly change with a promotion relegation system. You could do the promotion relegation system with the bottom 4 teams and the top 4 teams, which increases the statistical lileyhood of teams continuesly changing tier.

This is a good thing as it introduces constant change and vibrancy to the competition.

This means that the teams that end year one in positions 9, 10, 11 and 12 on ther log play a promotion relegation series against teams that ended 1, 2, 3 and 4 on the log in tier 2.

1 plays 12home and away

2 plays 11home and away

3 plays 10 home and away

4 plays 9 home and away

over the two weekends.

So there will be no such issues as statistically the teams will not stay in those tiers for very long.

This will be strengh versus strength as the top 12 teasm play against each other and the bottom 12 teams play against each other. With a reward system for the team that does well.

This also has nothing to do with i give this you give that. It is the responsibility of SANZAR and the IRB to develop the Game, So money gained should be money invested. Long term benefits of the game to grow in should be counted in profits gained in the growing markets.

Don't think small, think beeeeeeggggg. :)