Super 18

First topic message reminder :

This looks like a bit of a dog's dinner

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/australian-rugby-union-boss-bill-pulver-reveals-super-rugby-expansion-plans-20140430-zr1xu.html

Super Rugby is poised to move forward with a four-conference model in 2016 - with two based in South Africa...On the eve of an important meeting with provincial chief executives, Pulver has backed a Super 18 model for 2016 where Australian and New Zealand conferences would remain the same.

Australia's five teams would play two less "local derby" matches in a 15-game regular season but would strengthen their Anzac ties by increasing their four matches against Kiwi rivals to five.

Significant changes will be made in South Africa with their six teams, including the recalled Southern Kings, put in two pools with a new Argentine team and a final side, which the ARU hopes will be based in the Asian market.

Those two four-team conferences - including an overseas expansion team in each - will only face one of the two Australasian conferences each year, which reduces fears of an increase in travel.

"It's likely to be a four-conference model and this will be finalised in the next couple of weeks to be announced," Pulver said.

LeinsterFan4life wrote:Nothing has been confirmed yet but in the article it says:

"South Africa will have two of the four conferences under the new format, with the six South African franchises being joined by an Argentine side and an African team."

So it looks like its going to be a team from close to SA basing it on that article.

Well theres a few teams moving forward. But who?

Zimbabwe as mentioned above surely dont have the structure or finances to cope.
Madagascar? Huge rugby nation...40000 crowds etc. Is it possible?
Kenya?

I would say it will be a 7th SA team or a 2nd ARG side but I was really hoping for a Japanese team but they could nearly support a conference on their own with the amount of money in the sport there.

That makes more sence.

Where would the 7th team be based?

I think it would make more sence to have Japanese team in with Australia. Its nearer logistically. I think they'll miss an opertunity if they dont include a team from there.

Or a PI team aswell.

The PIs more than deserve to have a pro team with the talent there, which could be based in Fiji's new 30k all seater stadium or in Auckland. But sadly its all about the money now in rugby.

I was going to say about the Pacific Islands, with the amout of talented players Samoa, Fiji and Tonga have at their disposal/ produce they could even create a confrence of their own. Imagine a couple of sides based in Fiji, one in Samoa, one in Tonga and another for 'exiles' based in Auckland. As you say though, there wouldn't be enough money (or interest/population?) for it.

You often hear how Japan ought to be included in Super Rugby but I've yet to see any senior Japanese officials speaking on the subject. John Kirwan and Eddie Jones get quoted a good deal but coaches don't hold wield much influence when it comes to club and union structures.

Perhaps there is an active back channel were all the negotiations are taking place. Nevertheless, I'd feel much happier about possible Japanese participation if there was some tangible evidence they are interested in the idea.

fa0019 wrote:Namibia can't really realistically be a genuine CC side. They have hardly any players, if you're a boer and you play for your school team in Namibia its almost guaranteed you'll represent Namibia by sheer lack of numbers.

Doesn't mean they don't produce top players now and again but simply they don't have the depth to put out a week in week out side to rival professional outfits.

In the end unless SA can find a model to increase financial wealth in the sport then they will stick with what they have got. If you pay players less, expect more to up sticks and leave.

Fa, that is a risk we have to take, there is no way we can compete with overseas salaries and because of that we foolishly run after the one tournament we believe might get us there.

Our future is in growing our Currie Cup to a competition similar to the French top 14, even if it means we have to clean house and pay players less than what they are currently earning.

We have to start at a new base and develop it from there, and of course there will be casualties on the way where players will leave for overseas contracts, but there is also a positive in it, the market will be flooded with so many proffessionals that some will have no choice but to stay.

If we grow our CUrrie CUp, have true transformation with non white players, get the whole country running to follow rugby we can treble our income.

But it has to start somewhere.

I'd imagine there would be huge complications with Japanese participation given the amount of money that has been put into their clubs by corporations. Like I said they could easily support a conference of their own..

Rugby Fan wrote:You often hear how Japan ought to be included in Super Rugby but I've yet to see any senior Japanese officials speaking on the subject. John Kirwan and Eddie Jones get quoted a good deal but coaches don't hold wield much influence when it comes to club and union structures.

Perhaps there is an active back channel were all the negotiations are taking place. Nevertheless, I'd feel much happier about possible Japanese participation if there was some tangible evidence they are interested in the idea.

Problem with Japanese rugby is that it is the corporations that keep it going, other than that there is not enough spectators or following of rugby yet.

Can anyone tell me what a ticket to a Rabo match costs?

For Leinster its 20 euro for the cheaper seats up to 60 for the expensive ones. It would be different for every team in the league though.

In the prem...

My team the Falcons.

Most expensive west stand £40 a ticket. Cheapest in other stands £15

Cheers

Whats prices like down there Bilts.

Cheap, Most tickets start at around R80, which is probably close to 6 Euros.

Biltong wrote:

fa0019 wrote:Namibia can't really realistically be a genuine CC side. They have hardly any players, if you're a boer and you play for your school team in Namibia its almost guaranteed you'll represent Namibia by sheer lack of numbers.

Doesn't mean they don't produce top players now and again but simply they don't have the depth to put out a week in week out side to rival professional outfits.

In the end unless SA can find a model to increase financial wealth in the sport then they will stick with what they have got. If you pay players less, expect more to up sticks and leave.

Fa, that is a risk we have to take, there is no way we can compete with overseas salaries and because of that we foolishly run after the one tournament we believe might get us there.

Our future is in growing our Currie Cup to a competition similar to the French top 14, even if it means we have to clean house and pay players less than what they are currently earning.

We have to start at a new base and develop it from there, and of course there will be casualties on the way where players will leave for overseas contracts, but there is also a positive in it, the market will be flooded with so many proffessionals that some will have  no choice but to stay.

If we grow our CUrrie CUp, have true transformation with non white players, get the whole country running to follow rugby we can treble our income.

But it has to start somewhere.

BB

I understand your drive to improve the domestic game in SA but I don't think turning to the old format of the Currie Cup is the way forward.

A team like Namibia, Boland, Pumas, Griquas will never be able to compete with the giants of WP, Bulls & Sharks. Demographically, financially, support wise they will always be feeder clubs.

If you want to make a domestic competition with more clubs the only option is thus...

break up the provinces and add another club to the cities of Cape Town, Jo'burg and Durban.

That way the financial strength of WP for instance will be split in two.

I think Pretoria is already at their max, as is Bloemfontein & PE.... but the above 3 can accomodate another team in the respected cities.

See London and Paris as examples. London has what 4 clubs in the AP with 2-3 regularly in the HC. Paris has 2.

No point having say 4MM people in Cape Town all supporting one club. Why not give them a 2MM split.

That way you can have

2 clubs in Cape Town
2 clubs in Joburg
2 clubs in Durban
1 club in PE
1 club in Pretoria
1 club in bloemfontein
1 club from Griquas/Pumas etc etc.

That would give SA 10 clubs which most important 7 would be in the major urban areas of Cape Town, Durban & Gauteng. Thats where players want to be. They don't want to be in some provincial backwater.

10 clubs would literally double the number of home players playing top class rugby... given the number of players in Europe and Japan its probably realistic.

However, money talks.

As much as SA makes things attractive, they will not be able to compete with European finances. Its impossible.

The economy of SA is still weak compared to Europe. Take a look at the rand for instance, over the last 3 years the rand has gone from what 11/1 GBP to 17/1 GBP. A contract worth say r800k in 2011 matched a salary of 70k GBP then, the same contract only matches 45k GBP now. The SA economy is just too raw, too subject to economic cycles to compete with stable giants such as the UK & France.

Lower the finances and players will leave in droves. Unless we can compete with Europe on a financial basis we can't do the above. It would be suicide.

Better to say, if you can't beat them, join them and lets take some of the pie for ourselves.

I'd rather have 6-7 strong clubs filled with the best SA players in a Euro-Africa tournament than 10 average clubs filled with average SA players in a domestic league. Most pundits with common sense see this as the only likely way we're going to find stability and financial strength in the long term. You and I have spoken about it at length for years, John Smit and a host of others also.

FA, your demographics makes sense, either way, it is our future.

Cardiff Blues currently £22 = 27 Euros to sit in one of the 2 stands. Kids cost £ 10 = 12 Euros. To stand on the terrace its £18 = 22 Euros. And they've been crap the last 2 seasons. And they wonder why they struggle for crowds and no kids go in one of the poorer parts of the Uk. Most welsh regions the same. But thats another debate.

Maybe start a thread on ticket prices Biltong ?

Asia doesn't seem interested in this expansion plan. Did anyone ask them beforehand?

http://www.supersport.com/rugby/super-rugby/news/140522/Too_soon_for_Super_Rugby_in_Asia

$100MM (AUS) over 5 years is 55MM GBP. Thats quite a lot required... £11MM a year. No wonder.

However I think its a mistake on the Japanese front if they don't try and enter. The RWC in 2019 will be hosted there so to get the worlds finest players coming over for say 3 years prior is just what the game needs there to grow.

However the figure sounds very steep, for instance the entire expenditure of SARU is £45MM a year (2013 from their annual report).

Looking at the Waratahs annual report (one of the few I could find, their entire expenditure for the year was 18.7MM AUD which is about £10.3MM GBP 2013.

So in essence, the fee requested for the new franchise is greater than the entire expenditure of an average existing SR franchise. This won't include salaries and other basic overheads.

Its quite steep and I wonder why its been placed so high, especially if they're trying to entice unions to bid/join?

fa0019 wrote:However I think its a mistake on the Japanese front if they don't try and enter. The RWC in 2019 will be hosted there so to get the worlds finest players coming over for say 3 years prior is just what the game needs there to grow.

Money aside, no-one has really highlighted how Japan is supposed to participate in this tournament.