Super XV roundup: Week 9

After week 9 it is very clear that the Crusaders, Chiefs and Stormers are in serious hunt of the top position. Chiefs beat the Sharks in an error ridden game where both teams struggled in the humid conditions, the Stormers managed to score two early tries against the Reds with little Gio Aplon being an absolute livewire and the Crusaders had little trouble in dealing with the Hurricanes.

The Australian Franchises are yet to register a win on foreign soil this season with both the SA and NZ Frnachises being on the plus side of wins vs losses away from home.

Here is a list of the travelling results so far.

Home team first.

Stormers 39 - Hurricanes 26
Lions 28 - Hurricanes 30
Western Force 19 - Hurricanes 46
Brumbies 24 - Cheetahs 23
Highlanders 18 - Waratahs 17
Bulls 23 - Blues 29
Chiefs 29 - Brumbies 22
Stormers 27 - Blues 17
Sharks 27 - Reds 22
Rebels 26 - Cheetahs 33
Waratahs 34 - Sharks 30
Crusaders 28 - Cheetahs 21
Brumbies 33 - Highlanders 26
Bulls 61 - Reds 8
Highlanders 43 - Rebels 12
Hurricanes 38 - Cheetahs 47
Chiefs 30 - Waratahs 13
Brumbies 26 - Sharks 29
Lions 13 - Crusaders 23
Highlanders 6 - Stormers 21
Western Force 12 - Chiefs 20
Hurricanes 42 - Sharks 18
Rebels 34 - Blues 23
Bulls 32 - Crusaders 30
Blues 23 - Sharks 29
Crusaders 31 - Stormers 24
Cheetahs 33 - Chiefs 39
Reds 13 - Stormers 23
Sharks 12 - Chiefs 18
Bulls 36 - Brumbies 34

Summary.
Australian teams at home: 4 wins - 5 losses
Australian teams away: 0 wins – 7 losses

South African teams at home: 6 wins – 5 losses
South African teams away: 6 wins – 5 losses

New Zealand teams at home: 7 wins – 3 losses
New Zealand teams away: 7 wins – 5 losses

I want to discuss the South African Franchises a bit. It is now midway through the Super Xv and Heyneke Meyer is busy furing the bye week of the franchises to have camps with extended squads to lay out his vision of how he wants the springboks to play and what he expects from each selected inidividual and where they stand in relation to selection.

There is a common thread amongst South African Franchises to not put away opposition teams. The Bulls have the ability but they rarely put teams away, they will rather build a lead and then kick possession away at the end, happy to defend a lead, now this is evident in this evenings game where they led the Brumbies by 16 points with 7 minutes to go and yet conceded two tries in the last 7 minutes to only win by 2 points, if this happens we will fail in the Rugby championship.

The Stormers have a similar illness where they will score most of their points in the first half and then sit back, only once this season thus far have they scored more than 27 points and they rarely look to score more than 2 tries in a match. this inability to extend their lead and scoring more than 27 points in a match will cost us the Rugby championship.

The Sharks, has the ability to control possession with their physicality but yet continue to make handling errors, committing fouls on attack and not finishing moves with the necessary patience, this will cost us the rugby championship.

The Cheetahs may not have the big names, but they show even when they struggle in the physical stakes, they can run the ball from anywhere, hit the gaps, make the offloads and compete for 80 minutes, we need this to win the Rugby championship.

The Lions, well you can only feel sorry for them, no stars, many injuries, and no luck, at least they have guts.

Current log without bye points.

Chiefs.................. 31
Stormers...............29
Bulls.....................29
Highlanders............26
Crusaders .............24
Sharks..................23
Brumbies............... 22
Hurricanes.............21
Waratahs.............. 21
Reds.................... 17
Cheetahs.............. 17
Force...................13
Rebels.................. 10
Blues....................8
Lions.................... 6

Watched the Brumbies/Bulls game. Good match. thought the Brumbies looked quite lively - almost Leinster like in some of the tries they scored early on.

But the Aussie don't seem to have the stamina/strength/lasting power against the NZ/SA teams this season. The log doesn't lie.

The should reduce the Super XV to 12 teams.

I thought Reds were candidates for the title again until they recieved 3 thrashing on the trot. Have they been decimated by injuries?

Also, what is the rule behind the 'conference', as I noticed Chiefs were third in the table but had less points that some others in 5th and 6th. Was it anything to do with being top of the NZ conference?? :-s

Morgann the actual table works like this.

the top team from each conference ( country specific) goes on top of the log, then there are three wild card seedings for the top three placed of the remainder of the teams.

The top two franchise placings get a home semi final, and the thrid placed conference leader plus the three wild card teams play off in a knock out round to establish the other two semi finalists.

The semi finals then follow plus the final.

THe problem with the actual log is it shows log points recieved for bye matches which is very misleading when you try to read the log, as you aren't always sure whether a team has already earned their bye points or not.

THe log I put up shows actual log points earned for matches played.

Well you can tell by the number of games played. I still don't see a problem with that. If ones played more than another then 4 points has been added (provided the round has been completed).

You mean Brumbies are 3rd don't you Morgan. The problem with the each conference format is top of each conference MUST qualify. That's why they separate them out at the top.

On points alone the highest team from Oz is overall 6th. They should have made a rule that the top of each conference at least has to make the top 6. Finals spots should be a reward, not a guarantee, and it may be that one team misses out that is better than the top Oz side. I doubt it will happen as sides have to gain points at home but it could.

Biltong that knock on by Steyn was a huge injustice to the Brumbies- how can all 3 officials just miss a completely dropped ball. The Brumbies players were standing there waiting for the whistle while Kirshner and co looked just as dumbfounded and decided to carry on when they realised no one saw it.

So the 2 points the Bulls 'gave' the Brumbies as you've put it were the least they could do. At least the Brumbies worked hard for their points.

You could also say the same for the Chiefs gifting the sharks the 1 point. Pulu should have gone round and made the conversion easier but obviously he was just as stunned as everyone else by not kicking it out he was just relieved to get it down.

But agree with you re Steyn though. He kicked brilliantly I thought but when he goes up another level he'll plod as he usually does and it'll be Naas Botha's wedding anniversary all over again.

Yes, I agree about the knock on, but then the Bulls may not have backed off in the last ten.

Irrespective of that, the reason why I brought it up is due to the lack of killer instinct we have and the fact that once again in the upcoming Rugby Championship it will cost us a test match along the line.

Mark my words, it will happen.

He kicked brilliantly I thought but when he goes up another level he'll plod as he usually does and it'll be Naas Botha's wedding anniversary all over again

One last point, I am glad you guys are seeing these mistakes that cost teams matches, becuase whether it is a contentious penalty, contentious forward pass etc. It all boils down to what I have been saying for some time now. the game is too fast and the laws too ambiguous for the referees to handle.

biltongbek wrote:
One last point, I am glad you guys are seeing these mistakes that cost teams matches, becuase whether it is a contentious penalty, contentious forward pass etc. It all boils down to what I have been saying for some time now. the game is too fast and the laws too ambiguous for the referees to handle.

Which is why I don't tend to attack refs specifically. Barnes put most of us Kiwis through the ringer well before any of the recent examples.

But I've moved on from that.

But agree...we'll always have these weird one off's- such as the knock on, various forward passes (there were a few on the weekend- Saders Canes had a few) but we can't control that. But with Steyn I agree- he holds the key to SA rugby firmly in his hands if selected and his lack of vision will continue to stifle them. He instinctively wants a (as GH called it) 'no rugby game'. One where kicks go up, mistakes are made, goals are kicked. Territory is gained by long kicks to touch, or pressure on the opposition to put it out.

I think he sees everything else in between as 'noise' that he can't deal with- the more chaotic, the more stressed he gets and wants to return to 'the structure'.

For us, its that 'noise' that forms the heart of our rugby, and why its difficult for him to play us. The response must be to create more noise of your own, and with Steyn, thats not going to happen.

TBH, the conference and the white card seem pointless to me.

Morgan
The only other team that has won as many games as the Chiefs is the Stormers,however the Chiefs have won more bonus points.

The Chiefs have scored a total of 203 points in their 8 games, however the Brumbies,Bulls, Crusaders,Hurricanes and Cheetahs have all scored more points in their games and I think that is what is confusing you,but they havent won as many games.

The Chiefs are top of the overall standings,and also top the New Zealand conference standings.

If you dont understand the above you've got no show of understanding the merits of the "on report ' system.

Put rather simply the conference format is designed to:

1 Find the best team from each country (top of each qualifies automatically)
2 Find the next best 3 from any of the 3 countries (4-6)
3 From 1 and 2, find a winner.
3 Provide for more 'local' derby's (two matches each same conference)
4 Provide for less travel

Trouble is most of it is revenue driven. More local derby's means more tickets sold (thats the theory).

Doesnt account for a poor performing conference- Oz are in that position. Brumbies are top Oz side, so are in the top 3, even though theyre placed 6th.

But Taylorman, there isn't really much less travel. Each team would in the past travel for 4 and then 5 overseas matches every alternative year, now it is 4 every year.

Not really much difference at all, is it? At least in the past you played everyone. Te onlu reason you travel less is due to that fact

Yeah its only slightly less travel- with 15 teams you would have had 5 every year so its really just a shorter trip.

Its becoming a farce really and may be giving way to the 4 nations for some individuals in some teams. Said it at the beginning but can't see why JOC and Beale will think they have to play their heart out just to be standing behind the goal posts watching kicks a lot of the time. Why would they bother?

Can't understand why one of the top line internationals bother playing for a team that has no chance from the beginning which is a fact with the Rebels and the Force.

Ok for the regular national players to some degree but your two strike players, ones who you rely on to create those rare moments in test rugby to produce the goods sit there all year getting the stuffing knocked out of their confidence when things don't gel. They need to at least be holding their own to maintain that winning feeling for when it comes later on in the tests.

Cannot believe De Jongh actually broke his opponent's collar bone/shoulder with a tackle. That's just mental.

Not sure how it is mental, it happens, he recieved a hospital pass and was nailed.

You have to feel for the Reds though, injuries have decimated their team, I think the only other team that comes close to number of injuries are the Lions.

biltongbek wrote:Not sure how it is mental, it happens, he recieved a hospital pass and was nailed.

You have to feel for the Reds though, injuries have decimated their team, I think the only other team that comes close to number of injuries are the Lions.

Biltong - I wasn't querying the crazy notion of why someone playing a contact sport was hit - just noting its an increasingly brutal world out there.

Totally agree about the Reds - my best mate is from Brisbane and he's tearing his hair out.

Surely they have to recruit from the NH in a few weeks - do they actually have any specialist 10s left now?

No mate, by last count they were down to their fourth choice and now he is also out.

I think this is now the opportunity for SANZAR to start looking at contracting the Argentinean players. As it is the countries are struggling to fill 5 franchises with quality, you see more under 20's in the australian squads than ever before.

If they start looking at perhaps contracting a limit of 3 Argentineans per Franchise it will help Argentina tremendously and also the Franchises who struggle with depth.

biltongbek wrote:No mate, by last count they were down to their fourth choice and now he is also out.

I think this is now the opportunity for SANZAR to start looking at contracting the Argentinean players. As it is the countries are struggling to fill 5 franchises with quality, you see more under 20's in the australian squads than ever before.

If they start looking at perhaps contracting a limit of 3 Argentineans per Franchise it will help Argentina tremendously and also the Franchises who struggle with depth.

Harris (their #2 10) played 12 on the weekend so should be available to play. Cooper is back training, though he apparently hobbled out of a touch rugby game last week.

I agree with you on Argentine players. Encouraging a few more European based PI internationals back closer to home would be good for the Island teams too.

True, I forget about them, problem is the players all run after the money, so they aren't perturbed about playing in the same season as what would suit their national teams.

biltongbek wrote:True, I forget about them, problem is the players all run after the money, so they aren't perturbed about playing in the same season as what would suit their national teams.

That's true. However part of the reason the NH cash is attractive is that it's really hard for a capped PI international to get a SuperXV berth in NZ & Aus - the NZRU pays the wages for NZ Qualified players, and franchises have to make a case for picking non-NZQs, and the Aussies only allow the Rebels to shop around other nationalities. That cuts down the earn potential a lot for PI players in Australasia - NPC will earn a living, but there's not much left over for when you retire and have to find a new job.

taylorman

I was watching the Rebels on the weekend and was wondering if Beale and O'Connor havent been put there on purpose by the ARU.

1.Deans knows there potential,and it leaves opportunities for young Aussies to perform that may be coming through, in the other squads.

2.Australia doesnt have the depth for 6 competitive teams,and so that it not too noticeable to the outside World,theyve put those two into the Rebels to maintain a reasonable standard.

Laurie do you think that is fair on those two players though?

How much opportunity do they get to play at their peak, less space, less ball, mostly under pressure. It seems to me that is a failed experiment.

Kiwi, if SANZAR opens their doors for Argentinean players, surely then will they also open the doors for PI players?

Biltong
I thought I read somewhere that James O'connor has a girlfriend in Melbourne,thats why he didnt make the launch of their World cup campaign,secondly it can be made fair on these players by giving them a few extra dollars.
Melbourne is also the home of Aussie rules and its in rugby interests that the Rebels have a good presence in that city,and a couple of players with marketable value.
The other thing I should mention is that I dont have an iota of evidence to support this idea.

It does make for debating the pro's and cons of sacraficing quality game time for a marketing ploy.

aucklandlaurie wrote: Morgan
The only other team that has won as many games as the Chiefs is the Stormers,however the Chiefs have won more bonus points.

The Chiefs have scored a total of 203 points in their 8 games, however the Brumbies,Bulls, Crusaders,Hurricanes and Cheetahs have all scored more points in their games and I think that is what is confusing you,but they havent won as many games.

The Chiefs are top of the overall standings,and also top the New Zealand conference standings.

If you dont understand the above you've got no show of understanding the merits of the "on report ' system.

But I'm not debating the Chiefs , I'm talking about conference system, which was brought to my attention weeks ago when Chiefs were 2nd or 3rd despite having less points than 4th place. I had an idea what this 'conference' was but needed Biltongbek to confirm it for me. And it still seems a bit naf.

Well planted paid domesticated or not theres an old idiom that success breeds success and theres not a lot of that going on in oz right now.
That and the injury toll must have the welsh in a bouyant mood.

Whatever way its looked at, it can't be a good thing. Then again...Not a lot that can be done now.

Deans sure has a tough job ahead of him sifting through his lot to come up with a competitive side when compared to the relative riches of the NZ and SA sides.

Taylorman let's just hope Hansen and Meyer can use these riches to good effect. I think you can have more confidence than us.

not sure about that Biltong
Meyer - not proven at international level
Hansen - proven to be poor at international level

Yikes

Taylorman wrote:Deans sure has a tough job ahead of him sifting through his lot to come up with a competitive side when compared to the relative riches of the NZ and SA sides.

That's always been the way though, we can usually find 22 blokes who can be competitive but that's about all we can find.

I don't think the Reds have done that badly this year given what they have gone through. They weren't setting the world alight but they were winning all their Australian games prior to heading to SA. First game there against the Sharks they were up 17-0 and doing it easy then they got 2 more horrible injuries, Digby got binned then the wheels fell off. Genia being moved to 10 was one of the more horrible things I've witnessed, matched only in horror by his comical attempts at goal.

The massacre at loftus pretty much all happened in the second half which was in part brought about by bringing in a young kid from club rugby to debut against a red hot bulls at altitude. A few missed tackles here and there then the guys around him don't have faith in the defensive line and try to cover which exposes holes elsewhere.

The reds are now down to their 6th choice fly-half. Not 5 injuries across the whole team, 5 to the one position! And the playmaker role at that. It's one thing for the All Blacks to have 3 backups to Dan Carter at national level but Queensland had to go scouring the globe to find Sam Lane who was looking promising but alas, the curse of the Reds 10 jersey got him as well. Losing him and Ben Tapui (arguably our best back currently able to take the field) in the first 10 minutes against the Stormers was always going to make an uphill task even harder.

The Brumbies are a real surprise packet this year. A virtual team of no-names are really getting stuck in and having a go. Scoring 5 tries to 2 and losing is a travesty. Take out the knock-on howler of a reffing call that gift-wrapped the bulls a 5 pointer and it could have been a different story. But it's hard to feel sorry for the Brumbs as the first thing you're taught as a kid is to play the whistle, I doubt those guys will make the same mistake again any time soon.

Fair enough FC but I still dont get with all this they allow JOC and Beale to play where they are. If anything it makes them more prone to injury as those around them arent making the hits, leaving them with more work than they would with a better team.

But fair enough, it sure is exposing the lack of foresight of having 5 in the Oz conference.

I'd have also thought there'd be a tier of League players who are not quite good enough to gain NRL contracts that might sign over for the year?

I guess in time youngsters will see there are spots available in rugby and make the switch but until then we're probably going to have a few teams that are below the standard required. Hopefully it's just short term pain for long term gain.

Queensland and NSW (and by association the ACT) have good rugby roots but I worry about Melbourne and the Force. One can't emphasise enough just how entrenched people in Melbourne are to AFL. The Melbourne Storm have been around for 15 odd years and have been very successful in the NRL yet it still barely registers a blip down there. The Rebels are new and so far pretty hopeless so they have to try something to get the punters interested. If that means putting JOC and Beale in with a team of mugs then so be it. Personally, I think it's a fruitless exercise trying to make inroads in Melbourne.

The force could be in real trouble in the next few years. Having lost JOC last season, Nathan Sharpe retiring, the coach Richard Graham to the Reds next season and rumours that Pocock might be coming with him the Force could be a rudderless ship. If Pocock left Perth it would be a disaster for them.

I have to agree with Phil Kearns on this one, Perth need to sign a big name coach like the Brumbies did with Jake White to encourage players to the west otherwise the force could fade into oblivion.

If SANZAR are going to be adament to grow Super Rugby and eventually allow another team per country to allow 18 teams, they will have to find a way to get rid of the current system. The reality is not playing every team simply does not work.

Here are some options I see can be viable.

1. Make a two tier system with 9 teams per tier and they play home and away round robins accounting for 18 weeks, then have semi's and final to conplete 20 weeks for the length of both the tier one and tier two teams.

Seeing that the Currie Cup and ITM cups are now jst an afterthaaught they might as well to it right.

2. Use the Super Rugby as a competition that can serve both domestic and international franchise league, byt first having each conference complete their home and away legs at home before the June test series.

Then after the June test series let the top 4 teams of each Conference play off in a round robin (ten weeks) where everyone plays each other and you get semi finalists and ultimately the final. That will take 13 weeks.

Any comeptition every team must play everyone else, that to me is the first criteria to call it fair. The Super 14 worked because everyone else played every other team.

So if they want to expand this thing, there needs to be an element of the competition that can double as the ITM and CUrrie CUp, and then a further part whereby top teams have to qualify.

The only country in the S15 that can sustain 5 teams are NZ, this year it doesn't even look like that. In SA the Lions really can't compete and the Cheetahs always punch way above there weight but I can't see thim getting to the playoffs any-time soon. Realistically I think SA can only sustain 4 teams in Super-rugby and the same with Australia. Why not just have 4 teams from each country - NZ might be peeved off because 5 of their teams can compete but I think 4 teams from each country would be fair.

The problem is SANZAR wants more teams so that there are more matches. This in itself is a double edged sword, they are spreading it too thin.

If they do 3 teams with each country and have a double round robin for home and away matches, instead of having to pay salaries to three squads they now currently pay salaries to 5 teams and pretty soon it will be six teams.

By using three teams they will still have the same number of matches and will be able to pay three franchises top dollar. This will enable each of these three countries to retain their top 100 or so players as the wages will then compare favourable with the NH.

Be hard if NZ had to remove one or two of its franchises. Each has made at least one final and overall the Chiefs, the current overall leader would be the team removed if based on performance historically alone.

All he franchises have very strong backing and fan bases so that would be a very unfavourable approach. Dont know the answer but these boards suggest there will be a growing dissatisfaction with the current setup.

The NZ Conference team crowds have been the smallest of the three for the past few years, although are better this year. Based on comments (and actions) of Steve Tew they also struggle for funding.

If a mix of fan base and finances were a determinant, first 9 past the post would be 4 or 5 SA (Lions finances?) – 2 or 3 NZ – 2 or 3 OZ.

http://www.rugbyweek.com/news/article.asp?id=32534

As the franchises will only be available to the New Zealand market and the players would still be controlled by the NZRU the question of who would be interested in buying a franchise with such limitations comes to mind.

"We are short of fresh capital or equity in these businesses and we have to find some way of injecting that into it," Tew told the NZHerald.
"We've got an issue around the long-term financial survival of the franchises if the current economic environment continues and we've got to find a way of improving that."

I think most of these problems are due to firstly finances being stretched too far by having too many salaries to pay.

Less squads will solve that issue. New Zealand may have the ability to field the most teams, but they have financial constraints, australia can't field 5 teams, SA neither.

The initial idea of the Super rugby tournamnet was to build a group of players in each of these three countries capable of playing at the highest level and keep us ahead of the pack.

The compeition has been diulluted by the expansion and put unecessary strain on available calendar, finances, players resources as far as injuries go and provides less and less time for the international coaches to prepare their teams for various tours and competitions.

The answer is right in front of them.

either reduce the number of teams, but hen as someone said the new Zealand franchises all have their followings and in any country how do you get rid of teams?

The answer is then in a two tier system.

two groups of 9 teams, home and away round robin, completed in 16 weeks, plus the finals, all done in 18 weeks.

Bottom two teams in the 1st tier do promotion and relegation matches vs the two top teams of tier 2.

That will solve the issue of player depth in the first instance as all three countries will be able to field three strong teams, and the rest of their player depth can be spread amongst the three other teams.

It provides australia with a sustainable 6 franchise system, and SA and NZ will also have enough time to have the domestic comps run.

Money earnings will be more as their are more matches, and top tier teams gets more money whereby the second tier teams get less. This balance will mean each country will be able to pay their top franchises more and hopefully be able to match european contracts.

This system will ultimately be able to accommodate Argentinean, Japanese teams etc.