Super Rugby 2016 Season

Here's a thread for stray observations on this season's matches.

The Blues just pulled off an exciting 33-31 win over the Highlanders, while the Brumbies are comfortably ahead of the Hurricanes at half time.

Brumbies put a real walloping on the Hurricanes! 52-10 is quite a result

Looking forward to the Jaguares game against the Cheetahs, looking at that pack, that's almost the Argentina's one!

Cheetahs killing the Jaguars.

Argentinian player just put his knee into an opponent who had scored a try. Lucky to avoid a card. The Argentinian side is already two men down with yellow cards.

Jaguars are much better value with 15 men. The score has gone from 24-3 to 24-17.

Talk about a game of two halves! Whats the second half score? 31-9 to Jaguares??

Great game!

Edit: Or maybe they began the comeback before half time. But they were down 24-3 at a point! ANd had about 7minutes playing with two men less.

33-34 win for the Jaguares!

That was some game, much better than the crap that is going on. Impressed by that Cheetahs front row. Jaguares very lucky to win as the ref showed empathy in the 1st half when Lavanini should have seen a yellow.

Im probably a bit biased but the Blues Highlanders game was a display of some brilliance and pace,for an entire 80 minutes.

That Ben smith try in about the 75 th minute was how talented Rugby players can play this game.

More or less what I'd expected so far. Blues much better without JK (great player who failed at every coaching stint he had), Canes will do it tough this year after blowing their best chance ever for a title in last season's home final, Jaguares to be a real force, Sunwolves to struggle badly (and possibly only last a few seasons in the competition).

VinceWLB wrote:That was some game, much better than the crap that is going on. Impressed by that Cheetahs front row. Jaguares very lucky to win as the ref showed empathy in the 1st half when Lavanini should have seen a yellow.

Quite easy to have exciting rugby when there are 73 missed tackles in a game.

The only match I watched was the Brumbies-Wellington. Brumbies looked in mid-season form, but Wellington seemed in pre-season mode. I doubt Wellington will play like that the rest of the way. Some of the Aussie Internationals in the Brumbies squad looked very good. The Brumbies-Waratahs match next weekend should be fun.

Impressive result from the Lions today who won in Hamilton against the Chiefs.

Looking forward the the Sharks-Jaguares game later today.

Jaguares came up just short this week. Shame. But they're looking very competitive.

Enjoying this season a lot more than I thought I would. Wonder if it will all get a little much eighteen weeks in but good attendances, great matches. Big money. SH (and Japan) rugby is lit

I haven't had a chance to see much of the rugby yet, unfortunately, but reading about it has become a tad confusing with so many teams and four different conferences and all.

Rowanbi wrote:I haven't had a chance to see much of the rugby yet, unfortunately, but reading about it has become a tad confusing with so many teams and four different conferences and all.

In the words of Schalk Burger, "we don't really understand the format so we'll just keep trying to well every week!"

Still a bit early, but it seems SANZAR may have shot itself in the foot with the admission of a Northern Hemisphere team. The competition no longer has a regional identity, so what are they playing for?

Rowanbi wrote:Still a bit early, but it seems SANZAR may have shot itself in the foot with the admission of a Northern Hemisphere team. The competition no longer has a regional identity, so what are they playing for?

They needed to try find more money somewhere and the Japanese market could be massive; just look at the viewing figures of the world cup. I don't think they could have imagined the difficulty in getting players to play for them however.

They might have over-estimated Japanese interest, however. The World Cup is one thing, but a club team in a Southern Hemisphere regional competition is quite another. The average Japanese fan is surely more perplexed by the multi-national Super Rugby circus than the Kiwis, Saffas & Aussies are themselves. I just don't see the Sunwolves getting a huge backing; not unless they were highly successful on the field and won a bunch of trophies - and that's not likely in the foreseeable future.

Rowanbi wrote:They might have over-estimated Japanese interest, however. The World Cup is one thing, but a club team in a Southern Hemisphere regional competition is quite another. The average Japanese fan is surely more perplexed by the multi-national Super Rugby circus than the Kiwis, Saffas & Aussies are themselves. I just don't see the Sunwolves getting a huge backing; not unless they were highly successful on the field and won a bunch of trophies - and that's not likely in the foreseeable future.

I didn't see what the attendance was for their first game but the stadium looked pretty full. If they can keep that up they could prove to be very successful from a financial pov

The attendance was 19K, well short of capacity for their debut in the championship. Interestingly, they're using a modest 27K stadium in Tokyo, but a 55K stadium for their home games in Singers. It'll be really interesting to see what kind of crowds they pull for their home games in the latter venue . . .

Thought you were all for bringing new teams into comps? Development etc.

Within reason, yes. But not if it destroys the geographical identity of a competition - and thereby its entire meaning. I'm not sure why you'd think somebody should be either at one extreme or the other.

Geographical identity meaning a made up line drawn through the earth rather than proximity?

If they averaged 19k the whole season that would fantastic TBH

kingraf wrote:If they averaged 19k the whole season that would fantastic TBH

yup, 19k is fantastic for a team that has just formed. Imagine if they got the likes of Leitch, Mafi and Goromaru playing for them.

Geographical identity meaning a made up line drawn through the earth rather than proximity?

You just described every geographical region that exists, including Europe - which is not a continent but merely a peninsula.

If they averaged 19k the whole season that would fantastic TBH

Most often teams debuting at home in a high profile professional sports competition draw a sell-out crowd. I can remember several such instances. Of course, a tremendous amount of promotion will have led up to that match, thus ensuring public attention is at its optimum. Unless the team becomes inordinately successful, its average attendance will always struggle to match that debut home-crowd figure. The Sunwolves are playing in a modest 27K stadium in the world's biggest city, but the debut crowd was well under capacity nonetheless.

Rowanbi wrote:If they averaged 19k the whole season that would fantastic TBH

Most often teams debuting at home in a high profile professional sports competition draw a sell-out crowd. I can remember several such instances. Of course, a tremendous amount of promotion will have led up to that match, thus ensuring public attention is at its optimum. Unless the team becomes inordinately successful, its average attendance will always struggle to match that debut home-crowd figure. The Sunwolves are playing in a modest 27K stadium in the world's biggest city, but the debut crowd was well under capacity nonetheless.

Well that's not true, it took Italy almost a decade to get people to go to the 6 nations as most of their small stadium used to be mad up of away fans. Not to mention the crowds that Aironi, Zebre and Treviso have gotten in the HC. 19K is fantastic for this new franchise when you see what their domestic teams get in the league.

Rowanbi wrote:Geographical identity meaning a made up line drawn through the earth rather than proximity?

You just described every geographical region that exists, including Europe - which is not a continent but merely a peninsula.

So why the big deal about Japan? Very strange for someone wanting to give others a chance?

Well that's not true, it took Italy almost a decade to get people to go to the 6 nations as most of their small stadium used to be mad up of away fans. Not to mention the crowds that Aironi, Zebre and Treviso have gotten in the HC. 19K is fantastic for this new franchise when you see what their domestic teams get in the league.

It may not be true in all cases. I'm not really familiar with the crowd figures in Italy. But I distinctly recall a number of occasions when teams made their debut in a high profile professional sports competition amid much promotion and fanfare, and the stadiums were sold out well in advance. The Warriors in NRL is one that springs to mind.



So why the big deal about Japan? Very strange for someone wanting to give others a chance?

You seem to think I was agreeing with your earlier comments. I wasn't. I simply applied your method of evaluation to dismiss geographical identity entirely. Whereas probably 99.9% of team sports leagues on the planet are based on this paradigim. & your second comment is inane. Do you think Swaziland should join the 6 Nations tomorrow? If not, does that make you an opponent of globalization?

You don't want Japan as they are based north of the equator, I just feel that's a bit strange as that's their best chance to develop.

Japan is closer to Australia/NZ than South Africa. Argentina is arguably a greater problem to the new competition than Japan as it means a new different time zone, even though for us Europeans that means even more rugby on the box.

By the way i thought Japan were effectively a SANZAR team.

Japan is almost the antipodes of South Africa. It's as far from SA, in fact, as Australia is from Europe. It's also roughly as far from NZ & Australia as SA is from Europe. The way I see it, you either have a Southern Hemisphere competition which includes Argentina but excludes Japan, or you have a Pacific championship which includes Japan (& the Pacific Islands) but excludes SA & Argentina. What we've got now is a sprawling, meaningless circus that encompasses about two thirds of the globe.

Japan is nearer NZ than Argentina is. Maybe they should just get rid of the Argies rather than try to expand and improve their product as they see fit>

Not being funny but the average attendance in Aviva is what 13k? How on earth would a start up with no history in a sport with very little noteworthy history in Japan be seen as anything but a raging success?

Japan is nearer NZ than Argentina is. Maybe they should just get rid of the Argies rather than try to expand and improve their product as they see fit>

Well, that's either a Japan centric or NZ centric view, whichever way you look at it. South Africa and Japan are still antipodes and the problem remains that there competition would have no geographical identity - and therefore no real meaning.

Not being funny but the average attendance in Aviva is what 13k? How on earth would a start up with no history in a sport with very little noteworthy history in Japan be seen as anything but a raging success?

The Warriors drew a capacity 30 K to their home debut in NRL. 19 K was a fairly modest crowd for a home debut in a city of almost 40 million, in my view, and it was signficantly below capacity. One would assume that the Sunwolves' entry into Super Rugby had been promoted extensively. From here on in they'll be judged on performance, of course, and I seriously doubt they're going to be very successful.

Why would there be no meaning just because of geographical idenitity. It was already a sprawling mass of a comp, no real difference. Why would you judge success on new teams being added to a comp purely by their immediate performance and results. To draw comparisons to expanding the 6Ns to include a new team, if it were to happen they would be thrashed by everyone. Take rugby league's Super League, when they introduce a new team that team is protected from relegation for a few seasons, an acknowledgement that success doesn't come over night.

It was previously regarded as a Southern Hemisphere Rugby Championship, and actually continues to be so in the media in spite of Japan's inclusion. Are you telling me there would be no opposition to, say, North African teams joining UEFA competitions? Well, I have no doubt there would be. It is also likely that plenty of people wouldn't have a problem with that, so perhaps there is no right and no wrong on this issue; just opinions, and I am only expressing my personal opinion (on a chat forum) when I say that Super Rugby has lost its meaning. Incidentally, I don't think it was such a 'sprawling mass' prior to this season. It was conversely very easy to follow - basically resembling one half of the NFL competition with 15 teams divided into three geographical conferences.

Why would I judge a team on its immediate performance and results? What would you like me to judge it on? Star-gazing perhaps? Of course, we will look at the Sunwolves' opening game and made assessments, and I was personally very surprised they did not draw a capacity crowd for their home debut in a relatively small stadium in a gigantic city of almost 40 million.

Geographically is a sprawling mass. The 6 Nations used to be British and Irish. Then France came and Italy came and there's calls for more.

It makes sense that Japan are trying to get access to higher levels of rugby, as you point out these nations (through international and club) want to cement their success. Given before now the comp didn't cover South America it's just geographical fluke the 3 nations were SH surely. Why does the introduction of a Japanese team spoil it more than an Argentinian one? Both are on new continents joining the comp after all.

Why does the introduction of a Japanese team spoil it more than an Argentinian one?

Once again, because it is/was regarded as a Southern Hemisphere championship. Argentina is in the Southern Hemisphere. Japan is not. Japan is in fact the antipodes of South Africa, as far from the republic as Australia is from Europe. So that's like asking me what's the difference between Italy being added to the 5/6 Nations and Tonga or Samoa hypoethically wanting to join the same competition. In fact, at one point late in the amateur era the possibility of Canada (then among the world's top 10 or 12 teams) being added to the 5 Nations was raised. One of the main arguments against it, as I recall, was geography. & geography is a criteria which applies to the vast majority of professional team sports leagues in the world.

Why was it regarded as a Southern Hemisphere comp though? It didn't contain teams from all the SH. Japan is closer to Aus and NZ than Argentina is. Geographically it makes more sense from that point of view to include them over Argentina surely?

Is the 6 nations equally spoilt for you now it isn't the home nations championship?

Why would it be? That's a natural progression, no different to Argentina joining the Tri Nations/Rugby Championship. But there is no geographical identity which binds SA, Australia, NZ, Argentina & Japan. Therefore the competition is without meaning. The champions will be the champions of where?

Japan are being groomed to join the rugby championship I would say. The market potential is just too huge to ignore for the cash strapped SH teams. I can't see them ever leaving super rugby if their crowds stay above 10k.

Certainly they should be involved in the Rugby Championship if they are already involved in Super Rugby, I agree, and any fears they would not be up to it should have been dispelled at last year's Rugby World Cup. Still, it all seems very unfair on the Pacific Islands. & there remains the issue of a lack of geographical identity.

Rowanbi wrote:Why would it be? That's a natural progression, no different to Argentina joining the Tri Nations/Rugby Championship. But there is no geographical identity which binds SA, Australia, NZ, Argentina & Japan. Therefore the competition is without meaning. The champions will be the champions of where?

It was a home nations tournament. British Isles and not isn't. Same thing. Super Rugby didn't used to cover South America or Asia, now does. What have you got against Japan?

The Six Nations championship is very clearly a European championship, although there ought to be promotion-relegation with ENC to give every one a chance. The champion will effectively be recognized as the champion of Europe, because that is its geographical identity. In fact, North African teams were removed from FIRA/ENC competition at the turn of the century precisely because they didn't fit into the geographical framework of professional rugby competitions. Your last question is inane, and you still haven't answered the question of exactly where the Super Rugby champions will be champions of . . .

The Home Nations Championship was the British Isles. It was then expanded.

They would be the Champions of Arg, Japan, NZ, SA, Aus (there's a plan for a Samoan team has it got off the ground)? What have you got against Japan though? They are now rightfully part of the comp. It's not a SH comp it just so happened to have teams from the 3 most successful countries.

You wouldn't say having French teams involved in the 6Ns has devalued the comp or made it less than it was. And it took a while for them to be successful.