Super Rugby 2016 Season

First topic message reminder :

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.

But I think the geographical name is a part of the charm. Everybody associates Barca with the wonderful beaches and magical architecture of the city. I doubt they'd have quite the same appeal if they were playing out of, say, Badajoz, Extremadura. Many, many football fans like to visit the cities of their favourite teams, but how are they going to do that in rugby if they don't even know which cities the teams are based in? In fact, the primary reason geographical names were dispensed with was because the country yokel unions decided they didn't want to be associated with the names of their nearest major metropolitan centers. That's a definition of small-minded self importance, if ever there was one . . .

It's just a guess but if people start to support a team they may be able to look up facts about the team on the internet?

Mr Fishpaste wrote:

Rowanbi wrote:Interesting that Pro Rugby is going only with geographical names (Sacremento and Denver got off to winning starts yesterday). I think that is really crucial in terms of attracting and maintaining a fan base. Does anyone else think Super Rugby made a big mistake by pandering to the whims of country yokels and dispensing with its geographical team names?

As far as South African teams go, the various teams have such an established regional identity already, that it doesn't matter whether you include the name of the region or not, everyone knows which team is from where...

Absolute.  The difference with the American league is that in American sport the city (or region) name is part and parcel of the name and identity of each team.  Everyone knows the Yankees are from New York.  But the symbol of the team is still the interlocking NY, and virtually everyone calls them the New York Yankees.  Other sports in other countries may be different.  Just a lifestyle choice I presume.  

I would agree as Super Rugby goes more global, it might help the non-core or global Rugby fans to see city or region names attached to the team names. It would certainly have more meaning in America.

I would agree as Super Rugby goes more global, it might help the non-core or global Rugby fans to see city or region names attached to the team names. It would certainly have more meaning in America.

& that's all I'm trying to say.

Rowanbi wrote:I would agree as Super Rugby goes more global, it might help the non-core or global Rugby fans to see city or region names attached to the team names. It would certainly have more meaning in America.

& that's all I'm trying to say.

Then why didnt you just say that?

I believe I did, but you and a couple of others like to distort every comment I make and fill the threads up with lots of pointless questions and silly remarks - like the one you just made. You really can't help yourself, can you...

Rowanbi wrote:I believe I did, but you and a couple of others like to distort every comment I make and fill the threads up with lots of pointless questions and silly remarks - like the one you just made. You really can't help yourself, can you...

You should take a leaf out of Docs book, he made his point without being condescending or abusive, it makes you look like a Muppet.

[quote="aucklandlaurie"]

Rowanbi wrote:I believe I did, but you and a couple of others like to distort every comment I make and fill the threads up with lots of pointless questions and silly remarks - like the one you just made. You really can't help yourself, can you...

You should take a leaf out of Docs book, he made his point without being condescending or abusive, it makes you look like a halfwit.

But you are the one being condescending and abusive. Look at what you just posted

The fact is I made a perfectly straightforward suggestion, but juvenile morons like yourself think posting lots of silly questions and comments to cloud up every thread I contribute to is really, really clever...

Rowanbi wrote:But you are the one being condescending and abusive. Look at what you just posted

The fact is I made a perfectly straightforward suggestion, but juvenile morons like yourself think posting lots of silly questions and comments to cloud up every thread I contribute to is really, really clever...

No, not clever at all, Dont try to deny that you include sarcastic insulting language in your posts for no other reason but to be insulting.

Case in point, You asked the question about Super Rugby dispensing with its geographical team names. but you go further than that you loaded it with one of your usual discrediting taunts ie "made a big mistake by pandering to the whims of country yokels"

Doc grey comes along and says"it might help the non core or global Rugby fans to see city or region names attached to the team names". No insults, no taunts, just makes his point and clearly.

Hence you dont see me treating Doc like a fool.

made a big mistake by pandering to the whims of country yokels


If that light-hearted comment offended you so much then you're even more of a moron than I thought. This is a rugby chat forum, dude, not an international diplomats conference. Everybody uses language roughly and loosely and makes lightheared throw-away lines. If you're that precious you might be better off joining a knitting club or something.

There ia a huge difference between rough or loose language and lighthearted throw-away lines and repeatedly coming along with sneering contempt to attack anything and everything that one particular poster writes because you don't happen to share the opinion. That's nothing more than juvenile narrow-mindedness.

Wow, bit of a turn-up to start the weekend off with defending champions having a man sent off early on and going down at home to the struggling Sharks

Meanwhile, looking forward to the battle of the expansion franchises in Tokyo tomorrow. Both teams desperate for a win...

Sunwolves beat the Jaguares in Tokyo. Good match, and a happy crowd. Just shows how daft it was to have the Sunwolves play in Singapore.

'Canes v Chiefs is a belter, skills on display always make me wince for the NH touring sides :S

Not sure what rules weirdness is going on. Chiefs have just been told they have to play with 14 men and scrums are not uncontested. Anyone enlighten us?

Rule 3.6(d) for anyone interested.

In a squad of 23 players...a player whose departure has caused the referee to order uncontested scrums cannot be replaced

Sunwolves Jaguares was a cracker alright. Bit disappointed in the Jags though, for a team which claimed they were going to make the play-offs in their first season, and certainly appeared to have the personnel to achieve that, it's been a pretty lame season results-wise.

Yes, I copped a bit of flak for it (inexplicably), but I think Singers should be ditched as a Sunwolves home base next year. And, yes, I'd also like to see the Japanese franchise move to the Australia conference.

Just looking at flight times, I was surprised to discover Buenos Aires to Auckland is quicker than Buenos Aires to Jo'burg. Is that right? If so, the obvious solution seems to be a return to three conferences, with Japan joining Australia, Argentina joining NZ, and SA on its own with one six-team conference. This reduces inter-conference match-ups to six per team in the regular season, but I don't see any major problem with that.

NB: Just looked at another source which suggests flight times to J'burg from BA are quicker than to Auckland, but only by a couple of hours.

Sunwolves-Jaguares will make sure to download that one! Must have been a cracker.

Indeed

Not often you see a team get 90 points shoved up them one week, and clock up a victory one week later.
Jaguares cant get home soon enough.

aucklandlaurie wrote:
Not often you see a team get 90 points shoved up them one week, and clock up a victory one week later.
Jaguares cant get home soon enough.

Especially when you consider that the Jaguares, whom the Sunwolves beat, had already beaten the team that put 90 past the Sunwolves.

Way too much travel. Gotta streamline this competiton next season. I've already made my suggestions and corresponded with the appropriate officials.

Crusaders 40...Brumbies 14.

Crusader are the Real Madrid of Rugby

Chiefs 24...Sharks 22.

Blues 36...Rebels 30.

Highlanders 23...Brumbies 10.

NZ teams holding down 4 of the top 5 spots on the combined table, & all 5 NZ teams with winning records (and at least 4 wins apiece). Canes ought to win today too. Saders have a bye.

Main interest for me, however, will be if the Jaguares can manage their second win of the tournament when they host the Kings in a bottom-of-the-table clash this afternoon.

Games played overnight:

Reds 30...Cheetahs 17.

Waratahs 32...Stormers 30.

Lions 17...Hurricanes 50.

And this mornings game:

Jaguares 73...Kings 27.

An even hundred!

Well done, Jaguares. A much-needed second win following a string of defeats since they beat the Cheetahs in the opening round. I thought they'd win but never envisaged 73 points. Ditto the Canes, that was very decisive against an in-form opponent on its home ground. The question is, will the top 4 Kiwi teams now all make it through to the playoffs?

I watched that, that was some proper open rugby, credits to the Kings as well, they played some great rugby themselves and even at the 82nd minute they still tried to run the ball but they need to sort out their defense.

Sharks, Brumbies and Tahs starting to come into form out of the non-Kiwi sides. Saders, Chiefs & Otago still look like the best teams in it. Canes unfortunately are not going to atone for last season's epic choke this year. As for the Sunwolves, they still look hopelessly out of their depth, as do the Kings of course. Jury's still out on the Jaguars.

Results this weekend so far:

Crusaders 38 - Reds 5.
Brumbies 23 - Bulls 6.
Force 40 - Sunwolves 22.
Warratahs 21 - Cheetahs 6.
Highlanders 26 - Chiefs 13.
Sharks 32 - Hurricanes 15.
Blues 34 - Kings 18.

Good win for the Highlanders over the Crusaders, 5 tries to 2. By far the better team.

The Sunwolves had another good result today with a draw at home to the Stomers in Singapore. Barring that freak embarrassing thrashing they received earlier in the season, they really haven't done too bad in their first year so far!

Shocker from the Blues! Was it an aberration, or are they back at square 1?

Blues had a tough day at Ellis park, absolutely pouring with rain, down 19 nil by the ten minute mark, had their first atempt at kicking a goal for points in the 74th minute and luckily scored a try just before full time or would have been zero.

Puma/Jaguares losse forward got 10 weeks for chomping on Sharks flanker Keegan Daniel.

aucklandlaurie wrote:
Puma/Jaguares losse forward got 10 weeks for chomping on Sharks flanker Keegan Daniel.

That sanction I feel is fair. Crevy, however, was a bit unfortunate to get a ban for his tackle on Deysel: the fact that Deysel landed on his head had as much to do with Deysel as it had to do with Crevy...anyways...

Graham Henry is disappointed in this year's Super Rugby competition, including the Kiwis' dominance, and says expansion to Argentina and Japan has diluted the quality:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/afp/article-3591145/New-Zealands-Super-Rugby-dominance-disappoints-Henry.html

Super 12 was the best format for me....the whole point was that you got to see your team playing all of the other teams from NZ SA and AUS...now in the current format (and in the Super 15 format) my team plays all SA opposition twice and only plays half the foreign teams...if I wanted to watch local derbies, I'd watch the Currie Cup.

I don't mind the conference system, because I've always been a big fan of NFL, and it's the only way the competition can expand beyond about 15 teams. I really wanted Argentina in there too, but instead of Japan I'd rather have seen a Pacific Islands franchise, perhaps based in Auckland. They would have been much stronger than the Sunwolves, though of course Japan brings much-needed financial clout.

Simplest way: 3 6 team conferences with the Jaguares joining NZ and the Sunwolves joining Australia. 10 games against conference rivals still leaves room for 6 games against teams from the other two conferences during the regular season (3 from each)?

ANDY MARINOS SAYS THEY ARE LOOKING INTO ALTERNATIVE FORMATS
Super Rugby’s controversial format will not be changed next year but a new format could be brought in as soon as the 2018 season.

According to reports SANZAAR has hired a consultancy firm who will look at the format over the next six months and they will map out its 10 year strategic vision (2016-2025).


A major part of the process will be look into the current problematic conference style structure which has teams with less points ranked higher than those with more points.

SANZAAR chief executive Andy Marinos says that everything will be looked at and considered including expanding into new territories or the reduction of teams in some countries.

It’s unlikely that New Zealand will drop one of their teams and it’s even more unlikely that South Africa will drop a team as they pushed the current expansion to include a sixth team.

There has however been rumblings in Australia about dropping the Force and adding a second team in Sydney.

A yet to be named consultancy company will work with the respective Sanzaar national unions, Super Rugby franchises, broadcasters and commercial partners before they sign off with a new and clear direction at the end of this year.

Critics of the Super Rugby system say that the current format lacks integrity as some teams get easier routes into the play off as they avoid the top teams so regaining some of the compromised integrity and credibility should be a focus.

Read more: http://www.superxv.com/sanzaar-planning-a-better-structure-for-super-rugby/#ixzz490gxmZze

New Zealand teams still with 4/5 top places, including the top 2. Expansion teams rooted to the bottom of the table. Jaguares have been a little disappointing, in my view, but appear more likely to improve in the future than either the Sunwolves or the Kings - neither of whom belong in the championship. A particularly bad year for the Aussies, meanwhile, with even perennial flag-bearers the Brumbies battling mid-table.

You are talking rubbish, how are Sunwolves not worthy of being in the championship when they have arguably done better than Jaguares? And if anything it is the Sunwolves who are more likely to improve in the future if they get more player from the Japan national team.

But I think we can all agree: the Kings don't deserve to be in Super Rugby...they don't even deserve to be in the Currie Cup!...

Mr Fishpaste wrote:But I think we can all agree: the Kings don't deserve to be in Super Rugby...they don't even deserve to be in the Currie Cup!...

Yeh, them & the Sunwolves - what a waste of space

At least with the Sunwolves and Jaguares there is conceivably room for growth, and they can fuel development of the game in their respective countries and hence attract greater squad strength. All the Kings do is buy up second or third string players from other SA teams, and stretch the pool of talent further than it ought to be stretched!

Problem is it's a major metropolitan area which feels it deserves to be represented. In South Africa it's always been about the big 6 - Johannesburg, Pretoria, Cape Town, Durban, Port Elizabeth and Bloemfontein. I think it would be difficult for non-South Africans to conceive of just how insulting it must be to any one of those major centers to be left out the way EP were. They've got the population, the player base, the fan base and the stadium. But for whatever reason, they just haven't managed to put together a competitive team.

Teams take time to build. How long did it take the Rebels to build up into a cohesive and competitive unit. Definitely didn't happen in the first season.

Yeah i think Kings deserve more time to gel as a team, there have been glimpses of a decent team in them but their defense has been appalling. I have seen them score some awesome tries you wouldn't guess they are bottom of the table.

New teams problems shows how tough the competition is. We are talking about the highest quality of club rugby here.