SANZAR releases viewership numbers for Super XV.

Attendances have been strong, with many fixtures throughout the season setting new records for teams and grounds alike.

SANZAR CEO Greg Peters said this was further proof that Super Rugby was arguably the best international interprovincial competition in world rugby.

“This is the second year Super Rugby has been in its current conference guise with 15 teams, and it is pleasing to note that fans are registering their approval of the new format with record numbers,” Peters said.

“The Conference system and increased local derbies are again showing the intense competition within each territory, with grounds, as well as our broadcasting partners revealing some stunning figures.”

“Fox Sports in Australia, Sky Sports in New Zealand and SuperSport in South Africa have been thrilled with viewing numbers this season, and as a result our stakeholders have been pleased that the current format is yielding desired outcomes.”

New Zealand has been seen the biggest growth, with Peters stating that this was exactly the follow on from Rugby World Cup that had been hoped for.

“The Legacy Programme implemented by the New Zealand Rugby Union was designed to capture the effects of hosting the third largest sporting event in the world, and as a consequence New Zealanders are watching the game in record numbers.”

The cumulative figure continues to rise for NZ with 9,916,300 fans tuning into the 100 matches played to date.

While 2011 had one less match played, with 99 matches played by end of Round 15, a total of 7,458,600 tuned in, seeing 2012 with a considerable increase of 32%.

A combined total of 538,959 NZ fans have attended 32 home matches (an average of 16,842 per match) over the first 15 weeks. That is two more matches than the 30 that were played by this time in 2011, with a total of 390,946 (average of 12,217 per match). This represents a 37% increase in average crowds per match.

Australia, the boom performer in 2011, spearheaded by the inaugural championship success of the Queensland Reds, has continued to turn in strong numbers.

“Numbers in Australia have been consistent with the remarkable results achieved in 2011, where the Reds title success resulted in new viewing records across the country, while Queensland Rugby has since turned in some great results off the field, maintaining record attendances while shattering membership numbers,” Peters said.

After fifteen rounds a cumulative total of 5,888,000 fans have viewed the 100 Super Rugby matches in Australia. This average is only slightly down 3% on the highs of 2011 and has climbed considerably as the season progresses.

With 34 matches played on home soil, 633,847 Australian fans have attended Super Rugby matches to date (average 18,642 per match). 2011 at Round 15 was one game behind with 33 matches played, but was slightly ahead in the cumulative crowd with 640,910 attending those matches (average of 19,421 per match).

South African viewing numbers continued to increase, while their match attendances were slightly down compared with this time last season – but these figures are likely to change with a host of local derbies to come.

“Once again South Africa continues to pour in strong numbers” Peters said.

“While their numbers are down on this time last season in terms of ground attendance, we expect this figure to jump, especially considering some of the remaining derbies to come in the South African Conference.”

A massive cumulative total of 34,074,497 South African fans have tuned into the 100 matches to date. By the end of Round 15 in 2011, 99 matches had been played with a total of 28,658,402 viewers. While only one game less had been played in 2011, the difference of 5,416,095 is a significant gap and therefore a great increase in viewership for South Africa compared to 2011.

(Please note that the SuperSport figures exclude HD viewership. There are over 400,000 HD households in SA, which if measured would add significantly to the viewership numbers.)

A total of 852,838 fans have attended the 32 matches played to date (an average of 26,651 per match). This is two matches less than the 34 that were played by the end of Round 15 in 2011 with a total of 914,249.

There have also been reports of some great viewing numbers in the United Kingdom, with BSkyB reporting an average of 35,000 live in-home viewers per Super Rugby match.

Peters said that the second stage of the 2012 Super Rugby season would only build the momentum seen over the first 15 rounds.

“With three rounds still to play, we have nine teams still in Super Rugby Finals Series calculations, a heady group including the defending champions, three former Super Rugby winners, and a collection of other contenders who have exceeded expectations this season,” Peters said.

“What will make the run home special are the local derbies and that any team is capable of beating any other and upsetting the Finals Series contenders.”

Puts into perspective the television revenue doesn't it?

Putting the Super back into rugby hey!

The main headline I get from this is:

A total of 852,838 fans have attended the 32 matches played to date (an average of 26,651 per match)

That's pretty good attendance figures. Not as good as "The big game", but much better than European averages. From http://www.rugbynetwork.net/boards/read/s103.htm?106,12690427:

Position Club 2010/11 Average Attendance
1 Leicester Tigers 21,096
2 Toulouse 18,239
3 Clermont Auvergne 15,810
4 Munster 15,430
5 Bayonne 14,588
6 Leinster 13,707
7 Toulon 13,460
8 Northampton Saints 13,358
9 Perpignan 13,063
10 Gloucester 13,041
11 Harlequins 12,680
12 Montpellier 12,648
13 La Rochelle 11,973
14 Bath 11,853
15 Stade Français 11,722

(Why no Welsh clubs in that list?)

South Africa single handedly carrying Super rugby again?

Yes gowales, in terms of viewing figures you are right. Stating the obvious aren't we?

In terms of the actual competition, no. NZ have produced the most winners by a mile.

Yea you know what i mean, financially.

Sadly I feel this will be seen as confirmation that the conference system is working.

Frankly I'm surprised that Australia and NZ are so close to SA viewing figures in terms of people going to the matches at least. Obviously SA is way out and front but I have the impression that their matches are almost always sell outs. I would've thought 1M+.

Kia the Stormers and Bulls average 10 000 per match more, it is the Cheetahs and Lions have much less than that average.

Just want to add a little snipe here.

It seems us South Africans love our predictable one dimensional rugby, eh?

You'd think the rugby the Lions and Cheetahs can play would draw bigger crowds.

They aren't winning and don't have the money to keep players.

But they're entertaining to watch. Much more exciting than the Stormers or Bulls usually.

You go tell the Bulls and stormer fans that.

I read an article on a South African newssite this mornig about the Bulls standing behind Morne Steyn and his class and his greatness and his brilliance etc. blah di blah di blah.

There has been over 150 opinions so far, and most of them can't see past the blue and pink tinge of his jersey.

Well we had Todd Blackadder as AB captain once upon a time so I feel your pain. And I'm a Cantabrian!

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Sadly I feel this will be seen as confirmation that the conference system is working.

What do you mean "Sadly I feel this will be seen as confirmation that the conference system is working"? The conference system is working. Viewing figures and attendances are up.

Here is a debate I had with another saffer about Steyn.

ME

Morne Steyn has proven without fail he cannot perform under pressure, when we are agead and we are scoring points he is good enough, but when we need someone to control the game when we are in dire need of points he doesn’t have the vision to take a game by the scruff of the neck.

ONE OKE.

I’m more with Craven on the Morne Steyn issue.

Morne saved the boks and the bulls bacon more times than I can remember with good kicking, just have a look at the facts DavidS put up earlier.

Everybody has forgotten how he put a penalty through from the touchline on début in injury time to save the Lions series. If that wasn’t pressure, nothing will be for him quite frankly.

ME.

The stats of XXXX only shows we kick a Poopie to posts, hence Morne being the leading scorer so often.

put another flyhalf in that same position then he will also kick the points, the point is not to remain the thirf best team in the worls, is it?

We want to be better and to be better we need a pivot that can get us out of tough situations, not one that kicks possession awy.

Where do you want us to be, ontop, or just top three?

ANORRE OKE.

biltongbek. I take you back to super 14 semi final 2009, crusaders are up 23 (aound there, cant remember the exact score) to 0. Up to the plate steps one Morne Steyn, and with a couple of drop goals and really clever play, I give you the 2009 S14 champs, the Bulls. Now I take you one step further, to the second Lions test in at Loftus. Boks trail on the score board in injury time, Boks get a penalty on the sideline, about 5m inside their own half. Up steps replacement flyhalf Morne Steyn, and he kicks the goal to win the boks the test and series. Need I go on? He can handle pressure. That said, his kicking this whole season has been iffy to say the least. If he does not kick at 100% in the remaining Super rugby games, he should be worried as he is not doing his job good enough.

ME

XXXX it is not 2009 anymore mate, do we want the same situation again where players live of past reputations?

ANORRE OKE

Yep so who was going to add that something ‘special’ in that test from 10 mate?

ME

Lambie has never been given a proper chance and Argentina is the chance to do it, two tests 160 minutes.

ANORRE OKE.

Lambie is and was injured…

HM chose to yet again ignore how important missed PK’s are an play RP on the bench with zero other option in the 15…

That was the difference between a white-wash like the Aussies and not…

ME

Yes, I agree he was injured and hope that was the reason why Meyer persisted with Morne, but as I say, we will now see his ture intentions when we play Argentina.

By the way, why the hell is Basson on the bench?

He offers no addition to the bench and as you say, we needed a back up for 15.

And why did RP not kick.

Don’t tell me Meyer is as inflexible as previous coaches, if that is the case we are doomed.

THE REAL OKE

Biltong you are judging Lambie on his 2010 form so guilty of judging on the same basis you accuse others, judging on past form.

Truth is in CC 2011 he was owned by Elton Jantjes.

By that token you should actually say Elton Jantjes was the guy for the Bok 10 position.

Aside from which you are warped… Steyn has stepped up and delivered under pressure many many times… He’ll even in RWC 2011 against Wales it was Steyn’s kicking that saved us!

And how the he’ll do you say he is out of form when he is the top scoring kicker in this year’s Super Series.

And as for the “South Africa kicks a large percentage at goal” remark…. Dude honestly.. Can you not see how little thought a remark like that demonstrates…. Duh… all teams who win penalties in kicking positions kick at goal unless they have a kak kicker… like when we didn’t have one in 1997 – by your example the Kiwis should let go Carter becaue he had a poor kicking year in 2009.

There is no thought in your reasoning.

ME

XXXXX me and you are never going to agree on anything it seems. But hey here goes.

I judge Lambie on what I know he can do, and would like to see him get a shot at it before he is too bloody old to do it.

Kicking at goals, let me explain it this way, while the all blacks score an average of 2.8 tries per ntach against us we score only 1.7, hence we need to make up every possible opportunity with penalty goals in order to beat them.

THE REAL OKE

Biltong

You cannot blame one player from a single international team because on average the All Blacks score more tries than us in test matches.

And when the chance comes the All Blacks are just as willing as us to take threepoints when on offer as we are. To take matters further, in tri nations of the past three years statistically we have been the team that has kicked the least amount, in fact last year Quade Cooper kicked far more than Morne Steyn.

We however gained the most kick meters with our kicks each year, which speaks volumes.

S econd, Steyn is key part of a Super Rugby backline that presently has two of the top ten try scorers in it. So the position must clearly be that he Can run the ball. In fact going back to 2007/8 one of the primary issues with him was that he was a running flyhalf and not a kicking one which meant that the then Bulls were more comfortable wasting him at inside center or as an occasional come on in the last 15 kind of guy and preferred Liefling, so the “kicking ten man only flyhalf” moniker is totally undeserved and inaccurate.

This is not me disagreeing with you. It is facts disagreeing with you.

ME

XXXX, I get that, what you don’t seem to be seeing is his deficiencies. Why is it that you cannot see the benefit of trying something new. With all due respect you are reminding me so much of the same conservative grip that has taken hold of international coaches in SA, they simply are too afraid to give a youngster with obvious talent that migh, I am not saying will, take us to the next level.

We all know what Morne can do, we also know his deficiencies.

I am tired of sucking the hind Holly Wilaboobie of a donkey, losing to Australia and New Zealand because they outscore us simply due to one indesputable fact, our fear of failure that kerbs our willingness to dare.

The stats are out there, forget about the other nations, lets look at our stats in the tri nations, 28 wins and one draw out of 72 matches, are you telling me you accept those stats?

I sure as hell don’t so let’s man up, only a fool keeps trying the same thing and expecting a different result.

Just one last thing, I don’t give two hoots at what Steyn does for the Bulls, I can remind you if you want to look at individual stats, then have a look at what Goosen and Lambie has done on attack.

Its time to move on man.

He hasn't responded back yet.

Feckless Rogue wrote:

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Sadly I feel this will be seen as confirmation that the conference system is working.

What do you mean "Sadly I feel this will be seen as confirmation that the conference system is working"? The conference system is working. Viewing figures and attendances are up.

Feckles the system is stupid.

You miss out on playing some teams, you are guaranteed a spot in the play offs if you win your conference even if you are the 8th best or 10 best team in the comp. And it is too long.

Becaue Feckless many (if not most if not all) on here don't like the conference system. It takes away playing everybody and familiarity breeds contempt. SA and NZ already have local derbies in their provincial comps. The conference system also guarantees one finalist from every nation regardless of whether they have earned the right to be in the finals.

Also teams take turns each year of who they don't play and sometimes teams miss out on playing cellar dwellers.

Lastly, they may see these viewing figures as an excuse to further expand this competition and turn it into a juggernaut spanning more than four months and causing player burnout and needless injuries.

So that is why sadly mate as I hate seeing our domestic season turn into something too big and too long. The conference system adds to this because they can justify further expansion based on these increased figures.

Good luck with that one Biltong. Throw in Goosen's name and see what he says about him.

As Kia says the problem is that you don't play every team. Can you imagine if each league had to have 2 teams in the HC quarters. How happy would we all be then.

With the southern kings going in will that affect South African figures for next year.

Biltong, I feel for you. It must be frustrating.

Thanks mate, can you imagine how hard headed the coaches must be if the fans are that blind?

biltongbek wrote:Thanks mate, can you imagine how hard headed the coaches must be if the fans are that blind?

My brain starts to hurt when I try to imagine it.

Do ye think that an Aus team will make it up to third on merit or will they be piped by the stormers/bulls Cheifs/saders

By my calculations the best OZ team will end up 4th or 5th

Current standings withuout the bye log points which just confuses the real log.

Spoiler:

they still get a home quater though against the third best non conference winner.

I know lions are the worst team and look like getting the chop for the Kings but in the games against SA teams were would they be in the pile, propably still dead last but just wondering.

Do you think that with the HC review coming up that SA could enter their sixth team into the HC as an invited team. If they did that I bet they would have more bargining power to get more money back

There were some debate about that, don't know what happened though.

It would be nice to have our bread buttered on both sides though, have one foot in the Antipodes and one in Europe.

To be fair with the amount of SA in ireland and the uk they could get a good attendance.

I think that it would singal intent to Aus and Nz and also get a good deal from europe as the HC would be hoping to get more teams in.

you would have to say that the finaces would be bigger as they would get an equal share of the pot which would be more then they get from SANZAR

Well if yo look at the viewership numbers from SA 35 million to OZ and NZ combined 15 million, then europe knows it is viable.

biltongbek wrote:Well if yo look at the viewership numbers from SA 35 million to OZ and NZ combined 15 million, then europe knows it is viable.

Viewers are not important mate, it's paying viewers that count. South Africa could not hope to compete with England or France in terms of money. In fact it could be argued Argentina is bigger because they currently occupy 27th spot on the World list, while South Africa are 29th. Which puts things in perspective a bit.

Truth be told it would only take SKY to decide to invest in English rugby like it did in English football back in the 90's to turn the World of rugby on it's head. Sky could quite easily ask the English to start a new 20 team league and give them £200 million a season to bring in al lthe best players from around the World and not much could be done to stop it.

Those are all paying viewers mate, Super Rugby is exclusively on pay tv

biltongbek wrote:Those are all paying viewers mate, Super Rugby is exclusively on pay tv

by my reckoning that's about 3.5 million a game, which is really good out of a population of 49 million. 14% of the population pay to watch rugby on TV in South Africa?

biltongbek wrote:There were some debate about that, don't know what happened though.

It would be nice to have our bread buttered on both sides though, have one foot in the Antipodes and one in Europe.

Just to clarify your 9 Provinces were going to form a competition with 4 Italian teams and the Celtic teams to form a 6 team 4 pool competition though it was abandoned because funding could not be secured. the planning started in 2005 and for the competition to start in 2007 but was mothballed.

for the record I'd love to see some south African sides in the Rabo direct league. Adding the southern Kings would give you something to do in the off season when Super rugby isnt on!

Shifty there are 14 provincial teams.

Currently you have 5 Super Rugby Franchises for Super rugby

Then the next tier is Curry Cup Premier division - 6 teams (was always 8, but with the lengthened Super XV, there is no time)

1st division - 8 teams.

Then while the Super XV is on, all 14 provinces compete in the Vodacom Cup.

biltongbek wrote:Shifty there are 14 provincial teams.

Currently you have 5 Super Rugby Franchises for Super rugby

Then the next tier is Curry Cup Premier division - 6 teams (was always 8, but with the lengthened Super XV, there is no time)

1st division - 8 teams.

Then while the Super XV is on, all 14 provinces compete in the Vodacom Cup.

The Celtic nations are to link up with four Italian sides and South Africa's top nine provincial teams in a new and exciting competition.
The Rainbow Cup will feature 24 teams playing in a seven-week window in September and October.

It is hoped that the new tournament will commence no later than the 2006/7 season providing that certain criteria is met.

All four Irish and Welsh sides plus the three Scottish teams will take part.

The competition is likely to run along the lines of the Heineken Cup with six groups of four or, eight groups of three, with teams playing their away matches in one bloc similar to the Super 12.

Brian van Rooyen, President of the SA Rugby, stated that he was pleased with the discussions held between the parties.

"The competition has many benefits for SA Rugby," said van Rooyen who will be reporting progress back to the SA President's Council.


This is a good day for world rugby."
John Hussey
SARFU turned their attention to the Celts when their proposals for a joint competition with the English clubs floundered.

It is believed that there are assurances for television and radio broadcasting and sponsorship.

The Italians, meanwhile, have been pushing for inclusion to more European exposure and this is the ideal scenario for them.

Organisers would ideally like the green light to start next season, but changes must be made to the format of the Celtic League with Italian clubs set to join the competition outside of the Rainbow Cup.

Celtic League chairman John Hussey said: "We're very excited about the Rainbow Cup. Everyone is committed to realising the full potential of the competition. This is a good day for world rugby."

I put the BBc report in for you, it says top 9 teams not 9 teams my bad.

I wonder if it will ever come to fruition

biltongbek wrote:I wonder if it will ever come to fruition

This was in 2005, to start in 2007 it was abandoned due to funding issues.

It's more realistic to put 2 South African teams in the Rabo direct instead.