The Future for the PRO14 - Part 5 - How are the Unions doing?

First topic message reminder :

Some of the Irish provinces seem to be doing fine.  Munster might be able to pay back a few shillings to Landsdowne HQ this season.  Leinster have finally started sharing. Connacht have survived Mr Grumpy and have managed another Challenge Cup quarter.  Could they make the final?
Ulster need a separate topic to cover all their issues.  Oh - and they have one.  

Italy.  Treviso are now Benetton and improving to the point of it being grudgingly admitted outside of Italy.  Zebre?  See Ulster above.  The FIR continue to fiddle the other unions while Rome burns.  

Scarlets on the other hand continue to see Byrne roam.  And sidestep.  The WRU must be grinning from ear to ear as Scarlets are simply steaming.   Who needs union monies when you can assemble a squad like this?  Top of their conference and finishing top of their pool in front of a packed house to gain a home quarterfinal in the Champions Cup. What more could you ask for?  Possibly a sneaky Welsh cap for Tadgh Beirne but little else to complain about.  If Gatland can harness the Scarlets, a la Leinster and Glasgow, and get Wales moving to the top in the Six Nations, the WRU might need to send a little more love (hard cash) over Llanelli way to encourage them further.  

Dragons got bought by the WRU.  And then hired an Irish coach. And then fixed their pitch.  And then things went so so.  And the jury went out on Jackman.  And then they started losing. A lot.  And then they had lots of announcements about new players for next season. And then they got knocked out of the Challenge Cup.  
And now it’s a wait for another season.  Not sure if the jury has come back in yet but Jackman has a battle on his hands.  

Ospreys continue to plumb new depths and eventually decided to fire their coach after failing in the Champions Cup once again.  Will they be in the Challenge Cup next season?

Cardiff have at least made the knockouts of the Challenge Cup but they’re still batting eyes at the WRU some say.  Will they succumb to the union’s clutches?

All the way down to Port Elizabeth for the new entrants.

The Southern Kings? See Zebre.  X 100.   Massive squad revamp needed and SARU investment.

Cheetahs?   Just when they’d notched another triumph on their league bedpost, came the news that another of their players had been nicked for another SR side. Their top try scorer is leaving too.  They’ve 8 wins in the bag, can they get a few more to make it into the playoffs?  

And finally the Scots.  Cockerill is definitely making inroads and if it doesn’t happen this season, they’ll be making life difficult in 2018/19 for a few of the higher up clubs. Their sassy and classy neighbours look strong prospects for the Championship title with a single loss so far.   Not too long ago, the SRU was making plaintive noises about the costs of running the two clubs and seeking private investors.  Then they went quiet.  Then they announced a profit for the first time in a long while.  And investment in academy is starting to pay off.  And the Test team isn’t doing too shabby either.  SRU CEO, Mark Dodson, says long term objective is to secure external investment to ensure the future of the game.  

We’ve had the first inkling of a change and expected increase in TV revenues for the Championship with EirSport announced as the new broadcaster for games in the Irish territory.  Anayi & Co still have to deliver a substantial increase on previous revenues.  The SARU/SuperSport deal has ensured part of that with a reported 36m six-year agreement.   What will GB deliver?

Private investment and Union control/money.  Will a happy marriage eventually be reached?

The Oracle wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

The Oracle wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:
Again I ask how do you know they could spend more money under private ownership? Do you know another South African consortium that wants to throw money into a European club?

You keep telling us Leinster are spending around the same as the top French and english clubs ;and they propbaly arent far off given the size and success of the club but yet you continue to claim they would be somehow better off financially without the IRFU? No wonder you don't understand.

Remind me again who paid for the top ups of (at least) Sexton and Heaslip. Remind me again of who (at least part) funded the UCD Academy set up. So why are you asking about South Africans?

I'm amazed that you can't work out that a privately owned club, working on the fair funding models used in England and France, wouldn't allow Leinster's spend to increase dramatically. Think of the extra finance that would open up - even through an equity purchase.

In the light of all that, your final sentence is deliciously ironic.

Again you haven't provided any evidence as to how this will result in more money being spent by the club. If Leinster are already spending as much; under the IRFU as the top privately owned clubs in Europe, then how will going private allow them to spend more??? Why would they change?

Phils logic is that if he say's it, then it is so.

Sounds like your logic too in fairness, Marty.

There was me thinking it was Phil saying Leinster would be able to spend more under private ownership and parrot it without actually explaining how, my bad forgetting that was me

You’re like different sides of the same coin. If Marty says it, then it is so too!

You ain’t wrong, Oracle. It’s like ‘Mr Oil meet Mr Water’ every time.

News emerging today that 2-3 more SA teams will join PRO14 in two years time with at least three in place for 2020/21 season.  Natal-based Sharks to lead the way with Lions and Stormers to follow.

If it reaches 18 teams then it’s possible that three conferences would be created with IRFU, WRU and SARU teams anchoring each one.

SARU would probably join the 3 Celtic shareholders in Celtic Rugby DAC who own the PRO Rugby competition.

SANZAAR new rugby strategy for 2030 was leaked to Australian media this week with possible developments focusing on a US-based conference joining their comp if SARU leaves completely. It remains to be seen if The Rugby Championship would be changed in any way.

Pot Hale wrote:News emerging today that 2-3 more SA teams will join PRO14 in two years time with at least three in place for 2020/21 season.  Natal-based Sharks to lead the way with Lions and Stormers to follow.

If it reaches 18 teams then it’s possible that three conferences would be created with IRFU, WRU and SARU teams anchoring each one.

SARU would probably join the 3 Celtic shareholders in Celtic Rugby DAC who own the PRO Rugby competition.

SANZAAR new rugby strategy for 2030 was leaked to Australian media this week with possible developments focusing on a US-based conference joining their comp if SARU leaves completely.  It remains to be seen if The Rugby Championship would be changed in any way.

South Africa's political experiment, otherwise known as he Kings should be thrown to the scrap heap in favour of the Sharks if they are serious about joining. The Sharks are a huge franchise, they would be quite a coup for the league.

If we do see SA turn to Europe what effect will that have on Aus and NZ?

It’s like a game of thrones! “

“The Southern Africans join forces with ‘house Celtic’ in order to weaken the tribes in the south (hemisphere), resulting in an influx of SH warriors, seduced by offers of gold and glory, to the armies of the North. Meanwhile the white walkers of England continue to build their empire for the annual battle with the Celts to the north and west and the French to the south”!

The Oracle wrote:It’s like a game of thrones! “

“The Southern Africans join forces with ‘house Celtic’ in order to weaken the tribes in the south (hemisphere), resulting in an influx of SH warriors, seduced by offers of gold and glory, to the armies of the North. Meanwhile the white walkers of England continue to build their empire for the annual battle with the Celts to the north and east and the French to the south”!

Which Celts are in the East?

Who would be the 4th team joining since that would be the Pro 17 which really doesn't work.

Surely the Bulls will join if it's true and make it the pro 18 with 2 conferences of 9 or 3 conferences of 6.

Welly wrote: Who would be the 4th team joining since that would be the Pro 17 which really doesn't work.

Surely the Bulls will join if it's true and make it the pro 18 with 2 conferences of 9 or 3 conferences of 6.

You’re right. What’s not clear from the journalist who wrote the story is he said Natal Sharks were likely to move first. IIRC, that is the name of the Currie Cup side, as opposed to the Super Rugby side - Sharks.

Most likely a negotiation factor from the SA union to keep more of its TV money. Idealy I think SA want all the Currie cup sides in professional leagues. It would mean Griquas and Pumas moving up. I think one will go into Pro 14 and one Super Rugby, with the Sharks who have been making noises about going the Pro 14 moving across. Maybe both join SR and Sharks and Stomers join Pro 14 (north south devide?) Two stronger and weaker sides in each.
I wouldnt really want the Pro 14 to succeed at the expense of Super Rugby.
Some may think SA cannot support 8 sides, but it has over 100 players already playing in Europe. If it can afford to bring back the best of them it can. England has 12 professional teams SA can easly do 8 if it can generate enough to keep players.

Pot Hale wrote:

The Oracle wrote:It’s like a game of thrones! “

“The Southern Africans join forces with ‘house Celtic’ in order to weaken the tribes in the south (hemisphere), resulting in an influx of SH warriors, seduced by offers of gold and glory, to the armies of the North. Meanwhile the white walkers of England continue to build their empire for the annual battle with the Celts to the north and east and the French to the south”!

Which Celts are in the East?  

Whoops! My internal compass was left next to my extra large magnet over night!

I’ve updated the post.

I am sure there was talk last summer that one of the 4 super rugby teams was looking to join the Pro 12 but was told they couldn't. I'm sure it was suggested it was the Sharks.

There is money in South African Rugby which is providing 50% of the finance to Super Rugby. That means if they kept the money they would be able to finance 6 teams at the level that is needed up North (about 5m)

The kings need to be kept. Yes they were rubbish but was the same in the first year in Super Rugby. The second year they finished above the Bulls and beat teams away from home in Oz. Even towards the end of this season they had a few close games that they lost at the death.

If South Africa do jump ship we need to be mindful of treating them better than Super Rugby did. My father in law like many South Africans feel that Oz & NZ make decisions among themselves and then bring it to SANZAR to be rubber stamped.

South Africa could run the Currie Cup as their league and then play games in Europe in the two cups so we would need to treat them like equal partners and make them feel welcome.

The addition of the Union President and National coach (I think that was their positions) to the board was really significant

The SA inclusion has been a failure (for them). For all the talk of them getting the money to be able to retain their top players, well they haven't.

Cheetahs showed they aren't quite the same team without their X-factors players, and they are going to lose even more players before next season so may never get to the playoff ever again.

VinceWLB wrote:The SA inclusion has been a failure (for them). For all the talk of them getting the money to be able to retain their top players, well they haven't.

Cheetahs showed they aren't quite the same team without their X-factors players, and they are going to lose even more players before next season so may never get to the playoff ever again.

Not sure you can call it a failure after one season. The biggest name the Cheetahs have lost since joining is Mapimpi who went to another SA team.

To early to say about them retaining players entry into the Champs cup will generate revenue to help. While they are already playing against the best teams in Europe it would also allow them to play English and French teams.

The Cheetahs lost players like Mapimpi because the year before his contract was up the Cheetahs could only offer Currie Cup for definite.

So players the Cheetahs and Kings lost during the season was mainly down to what they were signing on to as no one knew. Same happened in Italy.

Now if you sign for the two teams you know you are playing PRO 14 and in the European shop window

We will see if it is a sucess/failure after three years

Brendan wrote:The Cheetahs lost players like Mapimpi because the year before his contract was up the Cheetahs could only offer Currie Cup for definite.

So players the Cheetahs and Kings lost during the season was mainly down to what they were signing on to as no one knew. Same happened in Italy.

Now if you sign for the two teams you know you are playing PRO 14 and in the European shop window

We will see if it is a sucess/failure after three years

Who’s joining the Scarlets next season?

If playing for Springboks still matters to SA players, then perhaps SARU should indicate that playing in Super Rugby or PRO14 automatically makes you eligible for selection. And not 30 caps.

Pot Hale wrote:

Brendan wrote:The Cheetahs lost players like Mapimpi because the year before his contract was up the Cheetahs could only offer Currie Cup for definite.

So players the Cheetahs and Kings lost during the season was mainly down to what they were signing on to as no one knew. Same happened in Italy.

Now if you sign for the two teams you know you are playing PRO 14 and in the European shop window

We will see if it is a sucess/failure after three years

Who’s joining the Scarlets next season?

Blommetjies the fullback and Cassiem the No8.

I’d say Cheetahs performed better than expected. But truth is they are not really tearing it up, they proved hard to beat at home, although they certainly got ran close a few times (Scarlets went out during the AIs and got close, the blues got close too), but if they are to be more than a gimmick to get the tv money then they’ll need to improve.

The Kings don’t even need commenting on. For some of the hype that was here before the season about them being competitive, it’s just a major let down.

If there are new sides coming in, then it’ll have to either be one-in-one-out or and even amount of sides coming in. Otherwise we will end up with one conference bigger than the other, or worse three conferences. And either of those lead to the whole kettle of fish where one set of teams will be getting an easier ride.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

Brendan wrote:The Cheetahs lost players like Mapimpi because the year before his contract was up the Cheetahs could only offer Currie Cup for definite.

So players the Cheetahs and Kings lost during the season was mainly down to what they were signing on to as no one knew. Same happened in Italy.

Now if you sign for the two teams you know you are playing PRO 14 and in the European shop window

We will see if it is a sucess/failure after three years

Who’s joining the Scarlets next season?

Blommetjies the fullback and Cassiem the No8.

I’d say Cheetahs performed better than expected.  But truth is they are not really tearing it up, they proved hard to beat at home, although they certainly got ran close a few times (Scarlets went out during the AIs and got close, the blues got close too), but if they are to be more than a gimmick to get the tv money then they’ll need to improve.

The Kings don’t even need commenting on.  For some of the hype that was here before the season about them being competitive, it’s just a major let down.  

If there are new sides coming in, then it’ll have to either be one-in-one-out or and even amount of sides coming in.  Otherwise we will end up with one conference bigger than the other, or worse three conferences.  And either of those lead to the whole kettle of fish where one set of teams will be getting an easier ride.

What a lot of people, including myself, didn't know was the true extent to which the Kings squad had been decimated. Furthermore, if the big SA teams come it's a whole different ball game. If they are going to commit to the Pro14 ahead of Super Rugby, that is completely different to their two weakest sides coming to escape extinction (which makes the Cheetahs making the playoffs in their first season all the more impressive).

This could be a massive land grab by the Celts, not just against Super Rugby, the competing league in the SH, but also against the English and French leagues. We've been hearing for years that the Celts can't compete with the English and French leagues and that our league is unsustainable. There is an opportunity here to make a power house of a league if we can bring in the major South African teams. We aren't doing badly at the minute with three Celtic sides making the semi finals of the Champions Cup, but bringing in recent Super Rugby finalists like the Lions - massive coup.

Artful_Dodger wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

Brendan wrote:The Cheetahs lost players like Mapimpi because the year before his contract was up the Cheetahs could only offer Currie Cup for definite.

So players the Cheetahs and Kings lost during the season was mainly down to what they were signing on to as no one knew. Same happened in Italy.

Now if you sign for the two teams you know you are playing PRO 14 and in the European shop window

We will see if it is a sucess/failure after three years

Who’s joining the Scarlets next season?

Blommetjies the fullback and Cassiem the No8.

I’d say Cheetahs performed better than expected.  But truth is they are not really tearing it up, they proved hard to beat at home, although they certainly got ran close a few times (Scarlets went out during the AIs and got close, the blues got close too), but if they are to be more than a gimmick to get the tv money then they’ll need to improve.

The Kings don’t even need commenting on.  For some of the hype that was here before the season about them being competitive, it’s just a major let down.  

If there are new sides coming in, then it’ll have to either be one-in-one-out or and even amount of sides coming in.  Otherwise we will end up with one conference bigger than the other, or worse three conferences.  And either of those lead to the whole kettle of fish where one set of teams will be getting an easier ride.

What a lot of people, including myself, didn't know was the true extent to which the Kings squad had been decimated.  Furthermore, if the big SA teams come it's a whole different ball game.  If they are going to commit to the Pro14 ahead of Super Rugby, that is completely different to their two weakest sides coming to escape extinction (which makes the Cheetahs making the playoffs in their first season all the more impressive).

This could be a massive land grab by the Celts, not just against Super Rugby, the competing league in the SH, but also against the English and French leagues.  We've been hearing for years that the Celts can't compete with the English and French leagues and that our league is unsustainable.  There is an opportunity here to make a power house of a league if we can bring in the major South African teams.  We aren't doing badly at the minute with three Celtic sides making the semi finals of the Champions Cup, but bringing in recent Super Rugby finalists like the Lions - massive coup.

Fair comments, dodger. However, I think there’s a bit of a way to go down the road yet. I think SARU want to maintain a presence in both camps. They said they’d committed to having strong teams in PRO14 and that there would be test quality players in the teams. So next season will be the litmus test for seeing if that is delivered on with proper pre-season and planning.

Cheetahs have lost Venter to Worcester, Goosen to Montpelier, as well as Botha to Ospreys and Cassiem and Blommetjies to Scarlets. They’ve 8 players coming with 2-3 of them former SA u-20s players. That’s it. To date. Kings have scrum-half Pretorius coming in from Dragons. Maybe when Super Rugby finishes or once finals stage is reached in mid-July, there’ll be further player transfers.

I understand the theory that it’s good the SA sides seem to be keen on coming over. And it does seem like the league is making good strides to an interesting future.

Looking at it from a negative point of view. Like Dodger said, the two SA sides we have are cast offs. And one of those made the playoffs, showing how week the league is in comparison. If the big SA sides come over and shine, what’s to stop them deciding that a Sa/Eng league wouldn’t be more fancifully suitable and jumping ship in four/five years time? After all if they are on about shifting teams to our league, they’ll have a track record for it. And that’ll leave us take a huge hit financially.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:I understand the theory that it’s good the SA sides seem to be keen on coming over.  And it does seem like the league is making good strides to an interesting future.

Looking at it from a negative point of view.  Like Dodger said, the two SA sides we have are cast offs.  And one of those made the playoffs, showing how week the league is in comparison.  If the big SA sides come over and shine, what’s to stop them deciding that a Sa/Eng league wouldn’t be more fancifully suitable and jumping ship in four/five years time?  After all if they are on about shifting teams to our league, they’ll have a track record for it.  And that’ll leave us take a huge hit financially.

Yep those are possible negatives although SARU have said they are bound to deliver competitive squads for the PRO14 including test-quality players. That’s what participation agreements and potential future shareholdings are all about, SS. From media reports, it’s a six-year contractual agreement. That takes it into 2022/23 season - beyond the various change points that are likely to occur during 2020/21 across a number of competitions and leagues - north and south. Maybe SARU won’t or can’t deliver. Time will tell, I suppose.

From the people in South Africa SANZAAR is an Oz & NZ organization where they are told what to do by them and that refs favour their style and not the South African style. And all of this then is paid for by South Africa while they have no money to keep their own players because they are paying to keep Oz & NZ players at home.

If Super Rugby had been set up like European Competitions where you can do what you want and have your own league and then have Super Rugby on top of it we would not be having this discussion. Oz is struggling as they have no setup under Super Rugby so they have no grassroots.

The Currie Cup was to South Africans like the Top14 is to the French. They feel a lot of hurt that they had to sacrifice it for Super Rugby (at the start the top three Currie Cup teams would then play in the Super Rugby)

As long as the South Africans feel treated fairly and are only paying to hold onto their players and are retaining them they will stick with the Pro 14/16/18

The other thing that holds South Africa from moving North is the belief they need to play New Zealand

Brendan wrote:From the people in South Africa SANZAAR is an Oz & NZ organization where they are told what to do by them and that refs favour their style and not the South African style.  And all of this then is paid for by South Africa while they have no money to keep their own players because they are paying to keep Oz & NZ players at home.

If Super Rugby had been set up like European Competitions where you can do what you want and have your own league and then have Super Rugby on top of it we would not be having this discussion.  Oz is struggling as they have no setup under Super Rugby so they have no grassroots.

The Currie Cup was to South Africans like the Top14 is to the French.  They feel a lot of hurt that they had to sacrifice it for Super Rugby (at the start the top three Currie Cup teams would then play in the Super Rugby)

As long as the South Africans feel treated fairly and are only paying to hold onto their players and are retaining them they will stick with the Pro 14/16/18

First point is nonsense given the amount of times I've seen SA refs officiating in games involving SA teams. Plus the lions have made the final the last two years.

If they feel so passionate about the Currie cup, why are the crowds so pitiful until the final?

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

Brendan wrote:From the people in South Africa SANZAAR is an Oz & NZ organization where they are told what to do by them and that refs favour their style and not the South African style.  And all of this then is paid for by South Africa while they have no money to keep their own players because they are paying to keep Oz & NZ players at home.

If Super Rugby had been set up like European Competitions where you can do what you want and have your own league and then have Super Rugby on top of it we would not be having this discussion.  Oz is struggling as they have no setup under Super Rugby so they have no grassroots.

The Currie Cup was to South Africans like the Top14 is to the French.  They feel a lot of hurt that they had to sacrifice it for Super Rugby (at the start the top three Currie Cup teams would then play in the Super Rugby)

As long as the South Africans feel treated fairly and are only paying to hold onto their players and are retaining them they will stick with the Pro 14/16/18

First point is nonsense given the amount of times I've seen SA refs officiating in games involving SA teams. Plus the lions have made the final the last two years.

If they feel so passionate about the Currie cup, why are the crowds so pitiful until the final?

You may feel it is nonsense but they don't. Yes they have S.A. refs but they face Oz & NZ refs that like the ball moving so negates their physical game plan and set pieces

The reason not many of the top players play until the finals is because they are with Super Rugby national team until the end. This is because they have sacrificed it as I had said.
Crowds are away because of political things such as race quotas. Currie Cup had the highest average attendance of any non national tournament prior to being sacrificed. It has been around since 1889 and in 2013 average attendance as 16k and had $10m (assume US) annual tv revenue. So while poor was much better than PRO 12 at the time for attendances.

Brendan wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

Brendan wrote:From the people in South Africa SANZAAR is an Oz & NZ organization where they are told what to do by them and that refs favour their style and not the South African style.  And all of this then is paid for by South Africa while they have no money to keep their own players because they are paying to keep Oz & NZ players at home.

If Super Rugby had been set up like European Competitions where you can do what you want and have your own league and then have Super Rugby on top of it we would not be having this discussion.  Oz is struggling as they have no setup under Super Rugby so they have no grassroots.

The Currie Cup was to South Africans like the Top14 is to the French.  They feel a lot of hurt that they had to sacrifice it for Super Rugby (at the start the top three Currie Cup teams would then play in the Super Rugby)

As long as the South Africans feel treated fairly and are only paying to hold onto their players and are retaining them they will stick with the Pro 14/16/18

First point is nonsense given the amount of times I've seen SA refs officiating in games involving SA teams. Plus the lions have made the final the last two years.

If they feel so passionate about the Currie cup, why are the crowds so pitiful until the final?

You may feel it is nonsense but they don't. Yes they have S.A. refs but they face Oz & NZ refs that like the ball moving so negates their physical game plan and set pieces

The reason not many of the top players play until the finals is because they are with Super Rugby national team until the end.  This is because they have sacrificed it as I had said.
Crowds are away because of political things such as race quotas.  Currie Cup had the highest average attendance of any non national tournament prior to being sacrificed. It has been around since 1889 and in 2013 average attendance as 16k and had $10m (assume US) annual tv revenue.  So while poor was much better than PRO 12 at the time for attendances.

But the Bulls and Sharks are playing wide and expensive rugby? Look I've seen enough super rugby to see the ref thing is pure nonsense .They haven't been good enough simple as, but to be fair a lot that can be put down losing many players to Europe and the quotas.

At the end of the day, during the height of South African rugby the Bulls and Sharks had the highest average attendances (Bulls had 30k average attendance not too long ago ) in world rugby and signed the biggest t.v. deal in world rugby back in the early 00s. They didn't dump the Currie cup for nothing; super rugby was far more lucrative.

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

Brendan wrote:From the people in South Africa SANZAAR is an Oz & NZ organization where they are told what to do by them and that refs favour their style and not the South African style.  And all of this then is paid for by South Africa while they have no money to keep their own players because they are paying to keep Oz & NZ players at home.

If Super Rugby had been set up like European Competitions where you can do what you want and have your own league and then have Super Rugby on top of it we would not be having this discussion.  Oz is struggling as they have no setup under Super Rugby so they have no grassroots.

The Currie Cup was to South Africans like the Top14 is to the French.  They feel a lot of hurt that they had to sacrifice it for Super Rugby (at the start the top three Currie Cup teams would then play in the Super Rugby)

As long as the South Africans feel treated fairly and are only paying to hold onto their players and are retaining them they will stick with the Pro 14/16/18

First point is nonsense given the amount of times I've seen SA refs officiating in games involving SA teams. Plus the lions have made the final the last two years.

If they feel so passionate about the Currie cup, why are the crowds so pitiful until the final?

The first bit almost sounds like a carbon copy of complaints from Welsh fans about the Pro12 during the HEC dispute. Actually most of it does.

It's interesting that although Sanzar have denied that this move of South African franchises to the Pro 14 is happening the SARU have not.

Contractually, as I understand it, the SARU are obliged to field four South African sides in the Super Rugby competition for the next couple of years. But which four sides these are is up to them. They could have all of the current Super rugby franchises move to the Pro 14 and promote other teams to Super rugby next year if they wish to and fulfill their obligations that way.

It may be that the SARU just want to have a useful bargaining chip when the next negotiations come up with their partners and that's why they haven't contradicted the report, or that they will genuinely make the move to the pro 14. If they do want to make the jump then it would make sense to wait a while longer to see how or if attendances pick up for the two teams already competing in it. I doubt that even the best pro 14 sides are well known to most rugby fans in South Africa and they will need more than a convenient viewing time to lure in the same kinds of crowds that Super rugby draws. If attendances and the successes of their teams currently in the pro 14 pick up next year then I can imagine that this jump may happen. But otherwise I'd be surprised.

I also wonder where this rumour originated. If it comes from the negotiations for tv coverage of the pro 14 then it's possible that this idea is no more than a carrot to lure in a more lucrative deal.

Having seen how easy it was for the two current teams to be added on short notice and it working fine.  Yes pro 12 teams made silly mistakes like not checking visa status of non-EU players and forgetting men can be like little kids and pet lions but overall went well

As a result S.A. can delay the Super Rugby decision until they are happy because adding in 4 more teams to the PRO14 wouldn't take much planning.

If the four big teams feel they will make more money in the PRO 14 and we are happy to have them, I don't see why the Union would care as long as they can keep more players at home. As others have said they only need to provide 4 teams

Adding four more teams would mean the current tv revenues cut four more ways. How happy will the pro 14 partners be to have less money on short notice?

Is €30 split eighteen ways more than what SARU get from Super Rugby now?

Intotouch wrote:Adding four more teams would mean the current tv revenues cut four more ways. How happy will the pro 14 partners be to have less money on short notice?

Is €30 split eighteen ways more than what SARU get from Super Rugby now?

The current TV deal is predicated on 14 teams and 152 games. If PRO14 were to become PRO18, a new TV deal would be negotiated. That’s why the new one is only for three years. It’s also worth considering that SARU didn’t just give away all the SuperSport TV monies to the other teams in the comp (500k each). SARU would have got more money for the Cheetahs and Kings participation as well.

However, SARU plan to have 4 plus 4 in each comp. They tendered for two new professional franchises and the Griquas and Pumas were selected last December.

SARU will not remove itself voluntarily from Super Rugby. They want to be in the rugby championship.

One of the head guys of the Sharks said on NZ radio they had made no plans or had talks to move
One of the heads of the Lions is quoted on Sport24 that they may end up going North due to the money

So still no clear word

I would say everyone knows the name Wales on-line by now

Going to Pro 16 may simplify the schedule a bit. 8 a conference playing everyone within twice (14) and everyone else once (8). Not sure how you would split it.

Would not like to destroy SR for the sake of a Pro 14. Would the stakeholders in SR take a second Argentine or Japanese side in exchange for a South African side?

If we went to 8 in each conference would like to see something along the lines of changing teams on a three year cycle which would make it more interesting as you wouldn't play the same teams each year while also giving lesser teams a shot at the playoffs. You could also introduce a trophy for Conference Champions and still have the play off champions

Con A Con B
A&B C&D
A&C B&D
A&D B&C

A= Ireland B= Italy/Scotland C=South Africa D=Wales

Hazel Sapling wrote:Going to Pro 16 may simplify the schedule a bit. 8 a conference playing everyone within twice (14) and everyone else once (8). Not sure how you would split it.

Would not like to destroy SR for the sake of a Pro 14. Would the stakeholders in SR take a second Argentine or Japanese side in exchange for a South African side?

Still hits the stumbling block of derby games

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

Hazel Sapling wrote:Going to Pro 16 may simplify the schedule a bit. 8 a conference playing everyone within twice (14) and everyone else once (8). Not sure how you would split it.

Would not like to destroy SR for the sake of a Pro 14. Would the stakeholders in SR take a second Argentine or Japanese side in exchange for a South African side?

Still hits the stumbling block of derby games

Three 2-year blocks of teams:
Year 1&2 - Put the Irish & South African teams in one conference and Welsh, Scottish and Italian in the other.
Year 3&4 - Wales and Irish in one and SA, Scot & Italy in other
Year 5&6 - Wales, SA in one and Ireland, Scotland and Italy in the other.

I wouldn’t have a problem with any of these three blocks. It allows all Derbies to take place with no extra matches. 14 games home and away, and play the other conference once either home or away. Alternate the following year.
Move onto Block 2, then 3.
Repeat.

That is probably a better system than rotate every year.

"They tendered for two new professional franchises and the Griquas and Pumas were selected last December. "

You sound unusually well informed and definite about this. It sounds like you were at the negotiating table. Or are your spies everywhere Pothale?

Intotouch wrote:"They tendered for two new professional franchises and the Griquas and Pumas were selected last December. "

You sound unusually well informed and definite about this. It sounds like you were at the negotiating table. Or are your spies everywhere Pothale?

Lol.  Nope - no spies.  It was reported in media last year that SARU were running a tender.  And the tender decision was reported too in December.
https://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/pumas-griquas-laud-sa-rugbys-franchise-decision-20171209

Obviously, the Anglo-Welsh has gone as an option, so what’s their next option if SARU want to use them in international competitions?  

Here’s an interview with Harold Verster, CEO of Cheetahs on his views of the comp.   Some interesting views on finances involved and why the sale of players such as Blommetjies and Uziem is beneficial to them.  It also references Griquas and Pumas as next possible entrants to PRO14.  

https://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/cheetahs-boss-sa-rugby-has-a-future-up-north-20180513-2
Extract:

There are lots of changes we need to make to our business. We need to think about playing in smaller stadiums because they play in 10 000 - to 15 000-seater stadiums; we play in 50 000-seaters and it looks empty. But if we go smaller, the vibe will be great.

“We need to promote and market the competition because too many of our people don’t even know who Benetton or some of these teams we play against are. We’re also thinking of changing our season tickets to a combined package deal (Currie Cup and PRO14), where our season ticket holders can tour with the team to Ireland and we can have party areas for kids.

“We’re now focusing on a new generation of rugby fans, not just black fans, but white and brown ones, too. These young kids and young workers want stadium Wi-Fi and a party, and social integration is very important to them - we’ve got four to 500 of them, we want to grow them to about 5 000.”

But the immediate perks have also been pretty rewarding: the Cheetahs’ sponsors were pretty happy with their exposure in Europe and no less than four players - Clayton Blommetjies and Uzair Cassiem (Scarlets), Francois Venter (Worcester) and Tom Botha (Ospreys) - were sold.

“We got Clayton from Varsity Cup and now we’ve sold him for millions. And the sponsors we’re looking to bring on board pay in pounds.”

With PRO14 thinking about expanding to 16 teams (Griquas and Pumas could get the nod in their new guise as franchises), Verster said the future was definitely up north.

“There’s a future for South African rugby in the northern hemisphere, and it doesn’t have to be the Super Rugby sides. It’s a brilliant strategic move by (SA Rugby chief executive) Jurie Roux. This is an investment that will pay off in about three years.”

“We got Clayton from Varsity Cup and now we’ve sold him for millions. And the sponsors we’re looking to bring on board pay in pounds.”


Couple of queries about the above quote. Firstly, I'm assuming he means millions in rand?! But secondly, I'm surprised that they've 'sold' him. Perhaps I'm light years behind the times but I didn't think players were sold, as such, in rugby? Not like in football anyway. Some players have their contracts bought out (e.g. Faletau when he went to Bath), but this is still fairly rare I thought. The Scarlets are not exactly a mega-bucks club so I'd be surprised if they've paid a big signing fee for a player rather than just signing him at the end of his contract (the way I assumed the vast majority of signings work).

Maybe it's the norm and I've just missed it over the years?!

www.newshub.co.nz/home/sport/2018/05/super-rugby-cheetahs-boss-harold-verster-backs-move-for-south-african-teams-to-join-pro14.html

In the article he states that money for the champions cup is more than Super Rugby. Not sure if that includes Pro14 as well. If there is more money in Europe than Super Rugby you would wonder how long the bigger teams can stay South knowing the weaker teams are getting more money.

As they also believe the North is weaker as far as standards, they would also believe they would get more Glory up North and more fans as people support winning teams.

The boss of the cheetahs also said he made more friends up North in one year than all of Super Rugby. Speaks volumes of how we have made them feel welcome

Thank you Brendan and Pothale for the links and detailed information and analysis!

This is really interesting. This SA further expansion into the pro 14 is looking more like a reality to me and less like a bluff to be used to bargain a better deal with their Southern partners.

Brendan if SA do see the North as having weaker teams then surely this would make them want to keep their super rugby sides playing where they are? Otherwise they'd risk their teams playing at a lower standard to win and therefore becoming weaker themselves.

Intotouch wrote:Brendan if SA do see the North as having weaker teams then surely this would make them want to keep their super rugby sides playing where they are? Otherwise they'd risk their teams playing at a lower standard to win and therefore becoming weaker themselves.

South Africa like New Zealand and England believe they have they produce enough players to the top standard to be the best in the world
South Africa still want to stay in the 4 Nations to keep to their best. The problem they have is at club level they might be playing 4 of the top teams (excluding Blues) with rubbish teams because they can't keep their top players. If they don't keep their top players they get nothing from club level but fan disillusionment.

Well let's hope that this pro 14 experiment will help the SA sides earn more and keep more of their talented players. It's a real shame that Super Rugby couldn't bring them enough money to do this. Sometimes I think that a world wide salary cap should be introduced and that the French clubs are slowly ruining rugby in every rugby playing country, including their own, with their salary inflation.

Intotouch wrote:Well let's hope that this pro 14 experiment will help the SA sides earn more and keep more of their talented players. It's a real shame that Super Rugby couldn't bring them enough money to do this. Sometimes I think that a world wide salary cap should be introduced and that the French clubs are slowly ruining rugby in every rugby playing country, including their own, with their salary inflation.

The French have a salary cap. Last year's DNACG report showed the average spend in France is €9.4m plus social security taxes.

I bet you Leinster won't be far off the same spend.

Don't believe the cowpat the Irish press tell you.

Think you have to acknowledge the add ons and work around s that occur.

PhilBB wrote:

Intotouch wrote:Well let's hope that this pro 14 experiment will help the SA sides earn more and keep more of their talented players. It's a real shame that Super Rugby couldn't bring them enough money to do this. Sometimes I think that a world wide salary cap should be introduced and that the French clubs are slowly ruining rugby in every rugby playing country, including their own, with their salary inflation.

The French have a salary cap. Last year's DNACG report showed the average spend in France is €9.4m plus social security taxes.

I bet you Leinster won't be far off the same spend.

Don't believe the cowpat the Irish press tell you.

Ignoring the last sentence dig I suspect with central contracts Leinster do indeed come close to that.
However that is the French average there will be half a dozen French team who are way over that from anything from 30% to 80% more
That remains a huge difference.
I also would be certain the bigger English clubs get up to that level - although interestingly not necessarily the most successful, in the last two league years, i.e. Exeter.
Leinster and Exeter are over performing given their budgets.