South Africa no great loss
May 11, 2009
SA Rugby's Sanzar partners should be preparing to give them the flick from Super Rugby following their bullish stance over tournament expansion.
A meeting in Dublin at the end of this week could confirm their future fate in the Super Rugby arena.
For too long SA Rugby has virtually held their Super Rugby partners to ransom over the proposed introduction of a Super 15.
The plain truth is that SA Rugby's demands do not suit either the NZRU or ARU.
It has tried to play hard ball, saying if they don't get their own way then they will transfer their existing five franchises, plus a politically-driven franchise on the Eastern Cape, into European club competition.
Unless they agree to some reasonable form of compromise in the coming days in Dublin, then the message should be sent to them to move on.
SA Rugby's expulsion from Super Rugby won't impact on the Springboks' involvement in the Tri Nations.
That much has been agreed on.
But despites months of 'negotiations', what can't be agreed upon by the Sanzar partners is a unified stance on Super Rugby expansion.
Despite agreeing in July last year to work towards a Super 15, with the creation of three five-franchise conferences to be based in New Zealand, South Africa and Australia, SA Rugby have repeatedly changed their stance.
Sure, they say, a Super 15 is all good.
But it will only happen if South African gain the expansion side.
With South Africa already the benefactor of five franchises, there is no way they can be logically given the expansion team.
For the Super 15 to work, it has to be based in Australia; with options including a Pacific Islands/Japanese side or a joint venture between the ARU and NZRU.
SA Rugby is gunning for an Eastern Cape franchise to appease political factions within its game.
But there is no way that its Sanzar partners should have to tow the party line just so it suits SA Rugby's unique political structure.
Another fact that shouldn't be missed is that the proposed base for a sixth South African franchise is a virtual rugby wasteland. Its leading province is not even good enough to cut it in South Africa's provincial Currie Cup competition.
But again, like many things involved in South African rugby, it will appease political factions.
Aside from ridding itself of SA Rugby's ongoing bickering, going ahead with the NZRU and ARU's 'Plan B' option is enticing from a pure rugby point of view.
If it came to fruition, a trans-Tasman Super 10 would take place in 2011 and 2012.
It would then most likely be expanded to a 2013 with the introduction of up to two Japanese-based franchises.
It works from a rugby fan's perspective, with games being broadcast at friendlier times.
While it might not generate as much cash in the early years due to South Africa's non-involvement, costs would also be slashed due to the African travel factor no longer being an issue.
And from 2013 onwards, having the involvement of Japan is likely to reap lucrative Asian broadcasting revenue.
South Africa's exclusion from the future of Super Rugby would not be a fatal blow to the competition.
Instead, it could be highly invigorating - both on and off the field.
What do you think?
Should SA Rugby's Sanzar partners buckle to the African gamesmanship? Or is it time to farewell the Bulls, Sharks, Cheetahs, Lions and Stormers?
A meeting in Dublin at the end of this week could confirm their future fate in the Super Rugby arena.
For too long SA Rugby has virtually held their Super Rugby partners to ransom over the proposed introduction of a Super 15.
The plain truth is that SA Rugby's demands do not suit either the NZRU or ARU.
It has tried to play hard ball, saying if they don't get their own way then they will transfer their existing five franchises, plus a politically-driven franchise on the Eastern Cape, into European club competition.
Unless they agree to some reasonable form of compromise in the coming days in Dublin, then the message should be sent to them to move on.
SA Rugby's expulsion from Super Rugby won't impact on the Springboks' involvement in the Tri Nations.
That much has been agreed on.
But despites months of 'negotiations', what can't be agreed upon by the Sanzar partners is a unified stance on Super Rugby expansion.
Despite agreeing in July last year to work towards a Super 15, with the creation of three five-franchise conferences to be based in New Zealand, South Africa and Australia, SA Rugby have repeatedly changed their stance.
Sure, they say, a Super 15 is all good.
But it will only happen if South African gain the expansion side.
With South Africa already the benefactor of five franchises, there is no way they can be logically given the expansion team.
For the Super 15 to work, it has to be based in Australia; with options including a Pacific Islands/Japanese side or a joint venture between the ARU and NZRU.
SA Rugby is gunning for an Eastern Cape franchise to appease political factions within its game.
But there is no way that its Sanzar partners should have to tow the party line just so it suits SA Rugby's unique political structure.
Another fact that shouldn't be missed is that the proposed base for a sixth South African franchise is a virtual rugby wasteland. Its leading province is not even good enough to cut it in South Africa's provincial Currie Cup competition.
But again, like many things involved in South African rugby, it will appease political factions.
Aside from ridding itself of SA Rugby's ongoing bickering, going ahead with the NZRU and ARU's 'Plan B' option is enticing from a pure rugby point of view.
If it came to fruition, a trans-Tasman Super 10 would take place in 2011 and 2012.
It would then most likely be expanded to a 2013 with the introduction of up to two Japanese-based franchises.
It works from a rugby fan's perspective, with games being broadcast at friendlier times.
While it might not generate as much cash in the early years due to South Africa's non-involvement, costs would also be slashed due to the African travel factor no longer being an issue.
And from 2013 onwards, having the involvement of Japan is likely to reap lucrative Asian broadcasting revenue.
South Africa's exclusion from the future of Super Rugby would not be a fatal blow to the competition.
Instead, it could be highly invigorating - both on and off the field.
What do you think?
Should SA Rugby's Sanzar partners buckle to the African gamesmanship? Or is it time to farewell the Bulls, Sharks, Cheetahs, Lions and Stormers?
than we need them.Rugby inaussie would die without nz.
Post a comment
To post a new comment, you must Sign in first.