Super Rugby turning into the New Zealand league and friends

So alot of reports coming out of New Zealand basically saying that Australia should be happy to have three teams in any new Trans-Tasman competition.

New Zealand seem to think that they can go it alone if needs be as the players would potentially be playing against the best teams in Club/Regional rugby.  They might be right for now but any closed shop rarely stays ahead of the pack.  They also have had good deals for the TV money but it does help when you are the only show in town.

Australia have or are about to hit rock bottom so they probably aren't in a great position but is a competition with just three teams going to fix their problems.  Rugby Union is small and centred in one part of the country.  If they only have three teams from there then their problems carry on.  In Forrester they have a man ready to fund the Force which would help financially.  He isn't going to fund anything else unless it includes the Force.

Should Australia take what they are offered by the NZRU and be greatful as some writers and NZRU former employees have suggested or should they go down the Celtic league route of take the pain as they set up their own league in the hope that it will grow.

Should they both form their own leagues and then have some sort of Pacific Cup with the top teams from the respective leagues listed below.

I think it's important that even if the SH can't compete financially with Europe and Japan that they can already still have sustainable structures.  Currently the NZRU seem to hold the cards but would a partnership between the Japananese league and Australian league be better in the long run for them as Japan seems to be the rising boat.

Pacific Leagues
MLR - USA & Canada (2018, 13 teams one is from Canada)
SLAR - Argentina,  Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Paraguay & Uruaguay (2020 was to be the first season, each union had one team)
Top League (2003, 16 teams)
Pacific Rugby Cup (2006, currently the best home based players of the 3 PIs + Japan A - could easily be a 3 team play each other 4 times league)
Rapid Rugby had teams from China, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Fiji and Samoa and played in 2019.

Yes NZ and Oz should form their own professional leagues and have a Pacific cup - they should have done that 25 years ago.
'Closed shop rarely stay ahead of the pack' Really ? What was the S10,12,15 &18, if it wasn't a closed shop ?
Oz are not at rock bottom, participation rates are still high but not enough local home and away rivalries and access for fans. Oz is a big place, never mind the flying distances to NZ.
Oz economy perfectly able to compete with NH but the ARFU gave NRL and AFL a free head start with domestic leagues on free to air tv.

So no, Oz should not take what is offered by NZ, it would merely be rearranging the deck chairs, again.

Super Rugby wasn't a closed shop as you had 3 countries in it each with their own ideas.  If NZ went it alone then they would create a bubble that could not rate itself against others.

If it wasn't for the Champions Cup would Sarries and in turn England have progressed and become the machine that both have become.

Just look at how much English Football fell behind when it was put in isolation for 5 years at club level.  They no longer had a standard to measure themselves against.

I understand why you might think of a closed shop as being competition between teams.
I am referring to elite teams being nominated by a central authority for a league without any means for challenge and few real local rivalries. That is a closed shop. The standard of rugby might be high and entertaining but ultimately it becomes dull and fans know it.

As for the current era of Sarries and the Bath/Leicester/Wasp era's before them, winning the league remains the priority challenge and players are then subsequently being picked for Tests against the SH/6Ns, which leads to greater experience.

History shows for the Euro competitions you generally have to have a Test flyhalf, amongst others, in order to win that competition, not the other way round, winning euro comps in order to be selected and play in Tests.
Everyone can see it is different for the Irish setup as winning the league is not the priority and so you assume it is the same for everyone else, that is not the case.

One report here:

https://www.sarugbymag.co.za/nz-rugby-ditch-sa-argentina/

New Zealand Rugby has outlined plans to enter its five Vodacom Super Rugby sides into a new competition from 2021, which is set to exclude any South African sides.

In a statement released by NZ Rugby on Friday, chief executive Mark Robinson announced plans that would effectively see them cut their ties with Sanzaar as far as Super Rugby goes next year.

It will serve as a considerable shake-up to Super Rugby, with New Zealand eyeing an eight-to-10-team tournament, with a strong desire to include one side from the Pacific island. Expressions of interest are being sought from Australian Rugby.

However, there would be no space for either the South African franchises or Argentina’s Jaguares as NZ Rugby want to see all five of their Super Rugby teams take part.

This follows NZ Rugby’s three-month Aratipu review into both Super Rugby and the Rugby Championship.

‘Coming on the back of Covid-19 and its impact on future competitions, the NZR Board has committed to establishing a new professional team competition in 2021. We have also been heartened by the success of Super Rugby Aotearoa,’ Robinson said.

‘The focus is now on confirming the licenses for New Zealand’s five current Super Rugby clubs and that work is now underway. We have highly valued the partnership with these five clubs over the last 25 years of the competition and want that to continue.

‘We will be working with Rugby Australia to seek expressions of interest from their current Super clubs and other interested parties to join the competition and that work will begin in earnest. We are excited and interested to see what our Australian neighbours will bring to this competition.

‘There is a huge desire to have a Pasifika team involved which we think will be massive for the competition, popular with fans and is a priority for us,’ Robinson added.

‘As we know, our Pacific nations and Pasifika players in New Zealand have added so much to the rich history of rugby in Oceania and our game here in New Zealand. To have a team that would provide an additional pathway for Pasifika players to perform on the world stage would be hugely exciting.’

This could see SA Rugby’s plans to move their franchise rugby north accelerated. Rumours have suggested that the four South African Super Rugby teams could join an expanded Pro14 tournament as early as next year.

Tim O'Connor says South Africa moving closer to the Pro14 could have implications for governance.

https://twitter.com/timoconnorbl/status/1284040504460664832

Well if SARU joins the Pro whatever, then they are simply repeating the same mistakes that was made in Super Rugby.

The only format that is credible is a single round robin. Everyone plays everyone.

Anything else I have no interest in.

I've already given a way that a fair and balanced Pro 18 could be made, just in case you missed it.
Personally I think part of the undoing of super rugby was the unbalanced cross conference games, and now one team guarenteed from each conference,
The PRO 14 are already doing it to a lesser extent to keep derbies, but its unbalanced and favours some teams.

Personally i have said in past and was also mentioned above that I think its best to keep it fair and balanced. With the break and season realignment this may now become possible.

The only way to do this with conferences is to have no cross conference games. Start the season with each union running a domestic compitation. Each Union can decide on whats best like an inter pro league, or cup double header, open draw knock out cup. Scottish team play the Italians? (2-6 games)

After domestic comp, the cinferences are assigned pretty much like they are now, and its straight double round roblin home and away (16 games).
Top 3 in each conferce go into Cup, middle 3 for a shield and bottom 3 for a plate. (1-3 games)

That gives a regular season of 17-19 games, less than 24 games currently. With domestic comp it goes to 18-24 games depending on format.

This format means the SA team only need Two 3 game tours north, and can play a 6 team currie cup.
NH only travel down once for a 3 game tour.

Top 3 in each conference qualify for Europe, with the Shield finalists/winners depending if there are 7 or 8 qualifing spots.

Grand final may even be a double header, shield then Cup final?

Kingshu wrote:I've already given a way that a fair and balanced Pro 18 could be made, just in case you missed it.
Personally I think part of the undoing of super rugby was the unbalanced cross conference games, and now one team guarenteed from each conference,
The PRO 14 are already doing it to a lesser extent to keep derbies, but its unbalanced and favours some teams.

Personally i have said in past and was also mentioned above that I think its best to keep it fair and balanced. With the break and season realignment this may now become possible.

The only way to do this with conferences is to have no cross conference games. Start the season with each union running a domestic compitation. Each Union can decide on whats best like an inter pro league, or cup double header, open draw knock out cup. Scottish team play the Italians? (2-6 games)

After domestic comp, the cinferences are assigned pretty much like they are now, and its straight double round roblin home and away (16 games).
Top 3 in each conferce go into Cup, middle 3 for a shield and bottom 3 for a plate. (1-3 games)

That gives a regular season of 17-19 games, less than 24 games currently. With domestic comp it goes to 18-24 games depending on format.

Yes agree if you were to have conferences (pools) then you play in your pool only, qualify from that.

You could argue due to the closer proximity of the European teams you could have two pools of six teams, two irish, two welsh, one scottish and one italian team.

have the top two from each pool go to play offs plus two best wild cards.

that provides a finals series of qf, sf and final.

The benefit of the pools are that you can SA can grow their pool without affecting the rest of the tournament, if they want to add Griquas and Pumas at a later stage nothing prevents them from doing that.

Don't agree with set pools. One they arent balanced, it may be a lot easy to qualify from one than others which is unbalanced, whos to say the SA pool is equal to one of the European ones? Why would SA get all its derbies, and Ireland and Wales only half of them, scotland and Italy get none?
In no way would it be fair and balanced, and include all derbies like the one I proposed.
Your model would only suit SA, none of the others would benifit from it.

Only issue with you playing each team once is that who you get at home and away has a big impact on your points.

Generally the Pro14 works as follows
Playing Leinster Sucks lose home or away
Munster, Ulster, Glasgow, - nothing away, narrow win no TBP or LBP at home
Everyone else except Dragons, Zebre, Kings win at home lose away.

Each year the teams might change a bit but generally the rule.

Super Rugby failure has been down to a few major factors that the Pro14 have either been dealing with since birth or won't be an issue
1. Super Rugby went from this is amazing to this is rubbish in the press.  The Pro14 has only ever had to deal with the latter. Maybe the press is slowly getting better.
2.  Went from being compeditive to being a procession of a NZ team and lots of one sided results. The Pro14 playoffs was a processions for many years.  If anything it is getting more compeditive.  Look at Edinburgh's and Scarlets movement in league position since going to the Pro14.  It is anyone's guess who would have got the 3 spots in Conference B. There are less and less one sided battles.
3. Reduction in the spending power of Super Rugby compared to the other top leagues which started out at the highest and has dropped to being the 4/5th richest league.  The Pro14 has never been the richest league and with cuts to the wage caps of T14 and Premership the Pro14 has improved their position.  Pro14 teams excluding SA teams and Zebre can and do pick up SR players easily enough.  I am not sure that any SR team could afford a european Pro14 starter that would justify the wage.
4. TV times are a big issue with Super Rugby.  It is something that can't be fixed.  If a match between SA and NZ teams are always going to be early morning for one and evening for the other.  The Pro14 TV fights were over small things compared to that.  No games are to early and none are to late. It is more over who plays when but seems to have simmered down (till next year)
5. Fights between the unions and who deserves what when it comes to finances, teams etc.  The IRFU run the Pro14 and everyone else does what they are told.  While tongue in check the Pro14 isn't going to rip itself apart and the unions know it (but maybe not the fans). All the unions are happy with what the league does for them. They don't really care what the other unions do as long s they put out their teams.
6. Country v team.  Once SR went to the conferences it was alot about the country that the team was from rather than the performance of the team.  The Pro14 is firmly the team first and the country second. Scarlets get what they deserve, they don't get extra benefits for being Welsh.
7. Conferences were made a mess of with SR 18 as the conferences didn't even have the same number of teams.  They should have stuck with 3 Conferences and stuck the Jags in with NZ but NZ wouldn't have it.  They also did a combined table that made it even worse as fans/presenters looked at the combined able all the time and referred to it.  People complain about the Conferences in the Pro14 and say they don't know how it works.  But if you showed them the table they can easily tell you what finishing 1-5 will result in when it comes to playoffs.  No need to look at the other Conference other than to work out who they would play. Fans might compare themselves to teams in the other Conference but that is it.  Realistically I don't think anyone is upset about the conferences and the league is more intriguing for it and the league seems to be more even since doing it.  Before there were clear teirs now it's hard to say who are the best teams in the Conference.
Attendances in SR have halved. The Pro14 has doubled. The Pro14 know they have poor crowds but it's better than it was. They also have better stadiums for the teams needs apart from the two SA teams and Edinburgh.

Pro14 is a terrible competition but it is the best one we will have and everyone knows it that takes part. There are two many egos in SR. It don't think Ireland have ever said they were going alone because they were to good for the other unions.

Kingshu wrote:Don't agree with set pools. One they arent balanced, it may be a lot easy to qualify from one than others which is unbalanced, whos to say the SA pool is equal to one of the European ones? Why would SA get all its derbies, and Ireland and Wales only half of them, scotland and Italy get none?
In no way would it be fair and balanced, and include all derbies like the one I proposed.
Your model would only suit SA, none of the others would benifit from it.

I would rather see Ireland and Italy in one and Scots and welsh in the other. Irish travel more so helps with attendances in italy

Kingshu wrote:Don't agree with set pools. One they arent balanced, it may be a lot easy to qualify from one than others which is unbalanced, whos to say the SA pool is equal to one of the European ones? Why would SA get all its derbies, and Ireland and Wales only half of them, scotland and Italy get none?
In no way would it be fair and balanced, and include all derbies like the one I proposed.
Your model would only suit SA, none of the others would benifit from it.

I didn’t look at it from a perspective what suits SA, wasn’t aware there would be an issue with that.

The solution then is single round robin.

Everyone play everyone, the opponent you face away from home this year will be at home next year.

Other than that I have little interest in any conference format where teams don’t play the same opponents.

If Pro 14 wants to have credibility then that is the way to go.

Rightly Suoer rugby is dead, the conference system killed it, if SA agrees to another convoluted conference mess the likelyhood is the same outcome in a couple of years. We tried conferences it didn’t work, if we go for that again shame on SARU

Is it right to assume that there would be 6 SA teams in the PRO Championship?

I can see a strong argument for Cheetahs and Kings being dropped into Currie Cup and the other four joining - that's what Anayi said was the ideal number for them - a view shared by the unions.

16 teams is 30 games in a round-robin H/A - too many games.

So, two conferences of 8 teams with teams from each union split across conferences. 14 matches from your conference of home/away. And cross-conference derbies of home/away gives 18 matches in regular season. Top 3 from each qualify to finals stage - max 21 games for a team reaching final. And Top 3 in each conference qualify for Heineken Cup. No 7th spot should be allocated. SARU need guarantee that they can enter EPCR comps via same route as other teams. All of the unions will be dependent on revenue generation from home games.

Cross conference games are completely unnecessary, skews results and nobody plays the same teams.

Old Man wrote:Cross conference games are completely unnecessary, skews results and nobody plays the same teams.

They are necessary because the derbies provide much needed revenue for the clubs - don't know if this is the case in SA or not but I'm assuming attendances would be better, perhaps not depending on who the "foreign" opposition is.

If that bullet has to be bitten, the existing clubs would have to satisfy themselves that their gate revenues wouldn't take a substantial hit. For the likes of a Zebre or Dragons, maybe not so much, but even the likes of a Connacht who get in additional seating for a derby match and are still on course to upgrade to a 12,000 cap ground in next few years and the likes of Munster (25,000) or Leinster (50,000 at the Aviva for a Munster derby), the hit would be substantial.

I don't doubt the much improved quality of the SA teams joining would help to increase gates (albeit Covid is not helping with that) so perhaps a trial year to see how audiences take to it would help. In a year when attendances are hit anyway, it mightn't be a bad time to try it.

Tye long season in Europe has always been my biggest concern with SARU joining the north, in a case where the European teams insist on the extra derby matches I would then hope SARU declines joining the Pro whatever.

The focus should be prioritized for a shorter season, if not then SARU should steer clear of European involvement.

ok

Format I have given above, keeps derby games, has fair and balanced conferences with no cross conference games, in most cases it makes the season shorter than currently is by one week and still has 11 home games per team.

Still too long, you have a domestic conference, SA would be 10 weeks double round robin. then a 16 matches in the Pro14 then you have European Champions Cup which to the final is another 9 matches.

That is 34 matches before a test match is played.

No not quite.

Remember if you are wishing to reduce the season every European team will still want at least the 10/11 guarenteed home games they get now, so will have to be 20-22 rounds. The current Pro 14 is 21 rounds.

SA would have double round robin 10 weeks
4 of those are with teams in their conference so only need another 12 fixtures for conference not 16.

Current Pro 14 lasts 21 rounds with this format its
22 rounds for SA (due to having 6 teams, everyone else plays 20 weeks one less than currently), if SA wants to reduce the weeks they can have change the domestic cup they run.

Say
2 groups of 4 teams (so Pumas and Griquas are not left out) with a final between group winners, 6 weeks plus one week extra for finalists 20/21 rounds but not everyone gets to play each other.

Drop SK and Cheetahs so only top 4 enter, and it matches the IRFU and WRU 20 weeks. 4 teams play in Currie cup or can have a Guinness PRO 16 SA cup, and currie cup can be played by B teams like it currently is durning the season, much like the BandI League and now celtic cup are used.

Personally think SA would be best having a 6 team domestic Cup, with a B team domestic comp running below this (to be used for development, and players returning from injury) which one gets called the Currie Cup and what the top one is called is up to SA.

With 6 teams it means they do play 2 extra weeks compared to a European team

Rumours of gobal season have 6 Nations and Rugby championship to be played at same time after 8 rounds, in the model I'm using the week less than current Pro 14 would be used as a bye in round 8 so that international players can enter camp 12/13 days before.

The two extra weeks SA play would be arranged by having one less pre season friendly and the round I have scheduled for no games before the 6 Nations/rugby championship, the SA sides play a round in week 8 (minus their international's).

What you are missing about the real befit of this format is that SA team only need to travel north twice for a 3 game tour each time. European teams only travel to SA once for a three game tour, which greatly reduces travel costs.

An example of the possible season for a SA side would be Domestic Pro 18 cup, 9 rounds, break for rugby championship.
(The beauty of this it that international players will have 8 rounds [7 for NH teams] to get match fit and in form for the RC/6N meaning the domestic games will be full blooded affairs with the internationals on show and competing for selection).
After RC/6N final round of Domestic cup for SA sides, each will have played 5 home and 5 away games.
Next play 3 games at home, then 3 away (2 in Ireland and 1 in Scotland), 3 more home games and then 3 away ( 1 in italy and 2 in Wales).
Enter knock outs if have qualified and if have earned home advanage etc.

Who knows how the new HCup will work, the Pro 18 can only put forward its timetable, and its very good in that format.

Maybe it can be scheduled that the SA sides play 2 of their away games durning their northern tours so it would be two 4 game tours? And then have a home and away double header, so they would have to travel north 3 times, two four game tours and a one off game?

Maybe the HCup will change with the new season to play the group stage in a single block?

Maybe they will just have to travel north for one gane and back, it very much depends on how the HCup is arranged.
The Pro 18 can only help with its fixtures and two 3 game tours is very reasonable.

The two groups of four teams for SA would be a step backwards, public is already complaining that the Currie Cup Premiership being watered down to a secondary comp.

So it will ave to be a six team double round robin, no need for finals as the winner can be the log leader.

The benefit for us here is that the Springboks will play in the Currie Cup premier division and the Super teams essentially are the Currie Cup teams the .

Currently you hardly ever see a Super rugby or springbok player in the currie cup.

What i was wondering about it was if the 6 SA sides played in a Guinness Pro 14 Currie cup, would there be issues with Stormers competing in it under the Stormers name rather than Western Province and would this also effect others?

Kingshu wrote:What i was wondering about it was if the 6 SA sides played in a Guinness Pro 14 Currie cup, would there be issues with Stormers competing in it under the Stormers name rather than Western Province and would this also effect others?

From a legality issue they are two separate entities, but I suspect it depends very much what is decided going forward.

There have been rumours of private equity with some of the franchises.

Bilt, I don't think the glory days (late nineties, early 2000) of the Currie Cup are ever coming back mate, let it go. It's a bit like the Welsh here expecting a top flight premiership in south Wales, pro clubs within 5 miles of each other.

Can’t mikey, It plays a crucial role in our domestic rugby.

You look at the Top 14, Gallagher premiership, The Currie Cup should have been built to rival those comps, instead we had super rugby, funding other countries’ pockets rather than our own.

I still feel that the better solution for SA would be to have a domestic competition (call it Currie Cup or whatever you like) and then also enter the two ERC competitions.

Having decent SA teams in Pro16/18 makes that tournament stronger and more marketable but I doubt it would aid SA rugby any more than SR has done.

Completely agree LT, that is my preferred outcome as well.

LondonTiger wrote:I still feel that the better solution for SA would be to have a domestic competition (call it Currie Cup or whatever you like) and then also enter the two ERC competitions.

Having decent SA teams in Pro16/18 makes that tournament stronger and more marketable but I doubt it would aid SA rugby any more than SR has done.

Only problem with that is that realistically no team can run on so few home games which is in part why European leagues pay so much more.

If they do 8 team league they will have less gate receipts then they did in SR where they couldn't even compete financial with Europe. If the Currie Cup becomes their main tournament they then lose the Currie Cup games they were also playing.  It also limits when young players can play if the Currie Cup was it as right now it's the younger players who benefit while the Boks are away.

SA need to also insulate themselves against the Rand as that has resulted in them losing alot of their purchasing power. The Pro14 deal had to be paid in euros which meant any fluctuation didn't result in less money.

SA is plenty political for Rugby so I couldn't see it ending well if the SARU couldn't turn around to the government and say X tournament won't let us.  You would assume that Griquas and Pumas would be the two extra teams in an 8 team league but it is as likely to be another Kings fiasco where things get done for political reasons.

Even NZ realised that they don't have the money or players to sustain more than 5 teams. If SA had all their players at home they might be able to do the Currie Cup but without stopping the player drain and allowing the Boks to play in Europe/Japan the fans won't keep interest long

Old Man wrote:Can’t mikey, It plays a crucial role in our domestic rugby.

You look at the Top 14, Gallagher premiership, The Currie Cup should have been built to rival those comps, instead we had super rugby, funding other countries’ pockets rather than our own.

It definitely does do that. So, the Currie Cup are provincial teams right? Whilst the SR teams are franchises that take all the best players? It looks likely that the SR teams are joining Pro14 rugby. How would you have it so that the Currie Cup runs, and then runs into the SR teams entering the Pro14, whilst assuming SA won't be in the RCC?

I definitely agree with you on that one. I'm sure the Currie Cup rivalled / was better than the English and French domestic comps at one point.

If SA are coming up North then don't you think SA need a similar policy to Wales so that they keep their internationals in SA? The SA teams best players will be right in the shop window of the big spenders, more-so than they are right now.

The reality is we will never be able to compete with European money, SARU has accepted that fact, I think it was Welsh mushroom that was the closest to what might be the outcome out of this.

Top four SA provinces (you can call them super rugby franchises or top four currie cup sides, they are essentially the four big provinces) Lions, Bulls, Sharks and Stormers to compete in a Pro16 with single round robin (15 weeks) plus finals

Then the other ten Currie Cup teams play Currie Cup and become feeders for the top four teams.

That is what I suspect will happen from SARU perspective.

Old Man wrote:The reality is we will never be able to compete with European money, SARU has accepted that fact, I think it was Welsh mushroom that was the closest to what might be the outcome out of this.

Top four SA provinces (you can call them super rugby franchises or top four currie cup sides, they are essentially the four big provinces) Lions, Bulls, Sharks and Stormers to compete in a Pro16 with single round robin (15 weeks) plus finals

Then the other ten Currie Cup teams play Currie Cup and become feeders for the top four teams.

That is what I suspect will happen from SARU perspective.

So do I. I can't see Celtic Rugby allowing 6 SA teams into the comp - they'd want it balanced at 4 apiece with Ireland and Wales - and a PRO16 allows for a better competition structure. Perhaps the organisers would revert back to a single round robin as in the early days of the Celtic League, but more likely I think they'll stick with conference structure plus derbies.

I cannot express my utter dislike of conferences. I &$*@# hate them

I hope these derby matches the European clubs are so sold on takes place outside the Pro16, if you consider a 15 week single round robin as the format for qualification into the finals then that will make for a 18 week competition.

Add 9 weeks for the champions cup it will take the club season to 27 weeks excluding pre season and prep.

That is enough, if we do join pro16 that is the best format in my view, Conferences will never match the credibility of a format where everyone plays everyone, nowhere to hide, you want to qualify you beat the same opponents everyone else has to.

So seems there are conflicting reports over if the Super Rugby changes are permanently going with the NZRU 8-10 team Tasman league or if it is just for 2021 due to covid.

I can't see it just being 2021 as there is no way that RA would sanctioning the closing down of the Rebels for one year. This may mean that the other unions could point to the NZRU for the collapse of SR and all the legal issues.

I wonder if it is just unions covering their legal requirements saying that it is just covid related so that any TV and sponsorship  contracts are not null and void leaving unions with big bills.

You would expect alot of sponsership and tv deals being renegotiated or being walked away from. You would assume a contract entered into by good faith by SANZAAR but is caused to be null and void by another union could have issues. The fact that the two SR tournaments are using the words Super Rugby must be for legal issues.

SARU CEO Jurie Roux was clear in stating that NZRU was proposing to leave SR and that only agreement could allow Super Rugby to be disbanded and that they can't be removed from Super Rugby.

https://www.news24.com/amp/sport/rugby/superrugby/jurie-roux-on-sanzaar-split-theres-a-very-legal-agreement-in-place-20200721

This also means that any new trans-tasman competition wouldn't be able to be called SR as there is no way that the SARU would allow it to be called it, so it would have to do all the rebranding etc and would it be seen as good as Super Rugby by outsiders it don't think so as alot of European views is based on 10-15 years ago.

I wonder if the SARU could force the other unions to have to compete in some tournament if they linked it with the 4Ns.  I can't see the Argentines being happy having the SARL being their main competition with some champions cup type tournament.