'better for everyone. The SA teams will mean bigger, tougher games'

Interesting article here.
https://www.the42.ie/south-africa-pro16-5451128-May2021/


Its from a SA point of view but there was also this line: There is hope that the Pro16 could double or treble its turnover in the next six or seven years.


More competition, tougher games, big name players and teams with big fan bases, a straight forward league instead of conferences, better refs (hopefully). Sounds good to me. If Benetton get up to speed it would boost Italian interest too.


I also heard that it won't be called the pro16. Its going to get a new name.

Good article and I agree, I think this is a great concept and I hope it works for everyone. I feel for the Argentines who lose out. But that is not the fault of this new set up.

Great article, thanks for sharing. Sounds really good. Very positive.

If it is to be a single round robin I am all for it, if there is any other type of format I am not

Great news.

As Sarries, Sale, Montpellier and others have shown take average SA players and you become one of the more phyisicaly strong teams in their league.  Yes SA players have left, but the average players they still have left would walk into most packs in Europe.

Much like Ireland I like how each if the 4 teams have their own brand and each one will be a different challange (unlike the Aus & NZ teams where 4/5 were the same with only the Brumbies and Crusaders having their own brand)

I am sure the first season will be a steep learning curve for all involved especially on the SA side. In the Cheetahs first year they beat nearly everyone at home yet lost to Zebre away losing every game convincingly .  They talked about how much more phyisical and tactical NH teams were which only the Bulls won't have any issues with next season.

Also all the SA are able to run the ball with ease. On the Pro14 Podcast one point regularly raised is is that the defensive set up is not as good as the NH teams and SA teams will need to learn how to find the smaller holes.  Cheetahs and Kings scored lots of tries at home but not so much away.  On a windy night in Connacht with wind and rain in your face against scrapper teams will they find those.

With the revivals of Glasgow, Ospreys and Benetton plus at least Bulls and Stromers adapting best (sharks will face alot of game plans like their collapse v Bulls away from home)

Teams fighting it out for top 8 I see being the 3 Irish, 2 SA, 2 Welsh and Glasgow (though still not convinced fully they are back) plus teams like Connacht, Benetton, Cardiff, Edinburgh and the Sharks and Lions looking to get in if any slip ups  Those teams that would go into the Challange Cup would surely be looking to win it and would be really strong teams against the bottom 6 of the Premership and T14 (14 Prem I think will be confirmed for next season especially as Ealing are no worse then Worcester and can pay plenty). Even Dragons and Zebre aren't the pushover they were.

Don’t discount the Lions either, in 2012 they were dropped from Super Rugby in favour of the Cheetahs, they lost all their stars and First year under Mtchell and then subsequently Johan Ackerman and Swys de Bruyn hit three Super Rugby finals in 2016/17 and 2018 with complete unknowns at the time.

Their failure was struggling against NZ teams. They are in a similar position now, and I won’t bet against them coming back.

Apart from the Bulls winning Super Rugby in 2007, 2009 and 2010, they haven’t been that great in the last decade, it is only Jake White’s recruitment drive and simplistic gameplan that has put them on top of the SA ladder in this period.

Sharks have actually in my view been the best Super Rugby team during the Super rugby era, their win rate vs NZ teams is played 108, won 51, lost 55 and two draws.

Bulls have a poor record vs NZ teams with played 107, wins 37, lost 65 and 5 draws,

Lions played 101 vs NZ teams with only 28 wins, and 73 losses.

Stormers have played NZ teams 105 times, winning 44, losing 59 and two draws.

Consideration must be taken into account that the SA Franchise coaches possibly have the toughest job in club rugby as they are forever rebuilding their squads, continuity is a luxury they seldom have.

Thus it is very difficult to predict how the SA teams will perform from one season to the next.

If you look at the SA conference winners of the last decade.

Stormers 3
Lions 3
Bulls 2 (If you include Super rugby unlocked last season)
Sharks 1 (Sharks led the Super Rugby table prior to Covid last year, after they completed their away matches to NZ and Australia)
Jaguares 1

Swings and roundabouts with these teams.

Overall also note the number of semi final appearences by the SA teams.

Sharks 8
Bulls 7
Lions 5
Stormers 4

Final appearances

Sharks 4
Bulls 3
Lions 3
Stormers 1

The lions also won the Super Rugby 10 tournament in 1993 in its inaugural season. Somehow it doesn’t count as part of the Super Rugby history.

I suspect NZ has something to do with it as the Reds won the next two.

With the SA teams in the Euro Heineken Cup, we will have teams from France, Italy, SA, England, Wales, Ireland, and Scotland. Kind of a GMT+ club championship. What an amazing free-for-all this could be.

Old Man not discounting the Lions I just think that they will struggle the most with adapting to the NH defence systems and the phyicallity away from home.  Like the Cheetahs I expect them to get lots of wins at home but strrugle on the road.  I still have them as pushing for top 8 I just think they will struggle their first year.

Rainbow Cup final should give us a better idea of who is where.  The current league system has Leinster, Munster and Ulster out in front but the next 7 teams are all about the same standard and can and will beat each other regularly.  Edinburgh went from 1st to 5th in Conference B in one season so Lions and Sharks could easily finish 4th or 14th and there only be a couple of wins difference.

No problem Brendan I don’t think the Lions will be ready next year either, just trying to show the SA teams go in cycles, hence the consistency will be up and down for all of them

I wonder of the effect on the players of playing so many games in a different continent. The travel, the fatigue, the time away from families, the time stuck in hotels and departure lounges - all for less money than they can earn by making the move full time.

I fear this move is a mistake by SARU.

I got bored with Super Rugby, the conference format to me took away any credibility the competition had, for me a competition has true credibility when you get to play either a single or double round robin where everyone plays everyone.

Such a log has credibility and those qualifying for the play offs deserve their spot.

When I got bored with Super Rugby I advocated for a good number of years that we revive our Currie Cup into a 14 team comp similar to The French Top14 or the Premiership.

Sadly it was never seriously considered as there simply isn’t enough revenue to make it sustainable.

When SARU announced they are making the move north I was against it. But after watching the four Super Rugby Franchises play each other ad infinitum since Corona I realised we need something else.

If the Pro 14 provide a single round robin where every team play each other it will at least give credibility to the comp.

Any nation wanting more derbies can find a window where their own teams can do a short comp to crown a champion if they are so inclined.

Whether it will be a mistake I don’t know. Personally I think having a straight forward qualification of the top 8 teams into the European Champions Cup will be something every team plays for and would provide more important matches and the excitement of qualification will be high.

I do think it will be vital for the SA teams to find a way to retain their best players, it will be rather challenging though

Old Man wrote:
If the Pro 14 provide a single round robin where every team play each other it will at least give credibility to the comp.

Whether it will be a mistake I don’t know. Personally I think having a straight forward qualification of the top 8 teams into the European Champions Cup will be something every team plays for and would provide more important matches and the excitement of qualification will be high.

I do think it will be vital for the SA teams to find a way to retain their best players, it will be rather challenging though

There's very little credibility in a competition where a) teams don't play each other twice in a season (home and away) and b) where how the fixtures fall dictates how successful a team can be (i.e. the interference of the international game negatively impacts on a true competition).

You're right about the top 8 but, again, it won't be a true measure of the best teams.

e.g. Leinster at home during a period when the Irish national team players are unavailable is a better chance for points than Leinster away when the Irish national team players are available.

This isn't a proper competition. It's just something to fill the time between European and International fixtures. Once the SA teams cotton on to that, it will be interesting to see what comes next. I think Mr Rupert's links to CVC will then come out in the wash.

PhilBB wrote:

Old Man wrote:
If the Pro 14 provide a single round robin where every team play each other it will at least give credibility to the comp.

Whether it will be a mistake I don’t know. Personally I think having a straight forward qualification of the top 8 teams into the European Champions Cup will be something every team plays for and would provide more important matches and the excitement of qualification will be high.

I do think it will be vital for the SA teams to find a way to retain their best players, it will be rather challenging though

There's very little credibility in a competition where a) teams don't play each other twice in a season (home and away) and b) where how the fixtures fall dictates how successful a team can be (i.e. the interference of the international game negatively impacts on a true competition).

You're right about the top 8 but, again, it won't be a true measure of the best teams.

e.g. Leinster at home during a period when the Irish national team players are unavailable is a better chance for points than Leinster away when the Irish national team players are available.

This isn't a proper competition. It's just something to fill the time between European and International fixtures. Once the SA teams cotton on to that, it will be interesting to see what comes next. I think Mr Rupert's links to CVC will then come out in the wash.

The new season will be shorter, and from what I understand won’t interfere with the international fixtures, thus you can play your best team all the time, depth from one team to the next will vary, but that is not the fault of teams like Leinster who has better squad depth, I disagree with you about that completely.

Just to add, a single round robin will mean the home fixtures will alternate from one season to the next, so if one team has a theoritcal advantage one season they won’t the next.

Old Man wrote:
The new season will be shorter, and from what I understand won’t interfere with the international fixtures, thus you can play your best team all the time, depth from one team to the next will vary, but that is not the fault of teams like Leinster who has better squad depth, I disagree with you about that completely.

No, that's sadly not true.

The international game will still take its toll. Wales will still play 4 Autumn Internationals, Springbok selected players will not be available for the first two to three weeks of the league, the 6N rest weekends will still be without International players who will also rest one week before and one week after international windows.

Leinster has better squad depth because the IRFU fix it that way, sadly. They could have even more depth were they allowed to be an entity in their own right.

Plus, of course, the issue of not playing each team home and away is key to a proper competition. It's why the Six Nations fails.

Old Man wrote:Just to add, a single round robin will mean the home fixtures will alternate from one season to the next, so if one team has a theoritcal advantage one season they won’t the next.

That doesn't mean a jot when the 'Champions' are crowned.

Nobody has ever valued a Welsh Grand Slam more valuable when they play England and Ireland away over a Grand Slam when they play the three Blue teams away. It's still a Grand Slam. It's still half a competition.

PhilBB wrote:

Old Man wrote:Just to add, a single round robin will mean the home fixtures will alternate from one season to the next, so if one team has a theoritcal advantage one season they won’t the next.

That doesn't mean a jot when the 'Champions' are crowned.

Nobody has ever valued a Welsh Grand Slam more valuable when they play England and Ireland away over a Grand Slam when they play the three Blue teams away. It's still a Grand Slam. It's still half a competition.

To have a double round robin is impossible with 16 teams, purely because there aren’t enough weeks in the year. You have to compromise the one way or the other, a single round robin has enough credibility in my view.

As for squad depth, each union has to sort that for themselves, if one lacks in commitment of funds, development structures or whatever, it isn’t the fault of others.

As for South African players (or other nation’s players) not available the odd week here and there, don’t recruit them. We are all in the same boat on that one. South Africa probably more so than others.

We have players in every pro league in the world, when it comes to prepping for a test series or tournament it is like collecting smarties in a tumble dryer

Old Man wrote:To have a double round robin is impossible with 16 teams, purely because there aren’t enough weeks in the year. You have to compromise the one way or the other, a single round robin has enough credibility in my view.

As for squad depth, each union has to sort that for themselves, if one lacks in commitment of funds, development structures or whatever, it isn’t the fault of others.

As for South African players (or other nation’s players) not available the odd week here and there, don’t recruit them. We are all in the same boat on that one. South Africa probably more so than others.

We have players in every pro league in the world, when it comes to prepping for a test series or tournament it is like collecting smarties in a tumble dryer

Yes, it is impossible with 16 teams involved. For me, a single round robin lacks credibility.

As for squad depth, the other three IRFU teams could, with a stroke of a pen, have more depth. And that's why the league also lacks credibility: the entrants aren't assessed by their own strengths and weaknesses. This is why credible tournaments prevent single ownership of multiple entrants.

The SA players in the Springbok teams are already recruited.

My point is simple: the structural and catastrophic fault lines in the PrO'Whatever still exist even with the addition of the SA teams which, we know, is being done purely for the payment from SARU each season. What SARU are doing is putting their own players more strongly into a shop window when they can barely afford their own prices, plus they are stressing those players further by expecting them to travel to the NH for 11 or more games per season.

For me, the whole things reeks of desperation and it's a marriage of convenience and money. The PrO'Shambles is so bad that it needs the SA money, the SA local market is insufficient to be able to afford it's own domestic tournament (which, in itself, is a really sad social statement for a country of 60 million people, just 7m less than France).

And marriages of convenience rarely benefit either party and, most importantly, rarely last.

Yes, I concur with the desperation.

You need to remember SA teams have been travelling for 25 years, time zones, longer periods away from home, and the European tours will be shorter, less fatigue due to time zones etc.

Old Man wrote:Yes, I concur with the desperation.

You need to remember SA teams have been travelling for 25 years, time zones, longer periods away from home, and the European tours will be shorter, less fatigue due to time zones etc.

Agreed, but this time it is allowing the players to check out what they would be getting when offered contracts in the North. This is a free trial run for the players. Take a player offered a gig in Wales, he'd have three goes in a year (potentially) to check out his potential new community. He'll now have easier meets with agents of other European teams etc.

I doubt there can be much more recruiting done on SA players than is currently the case.

Old Man wrote:I doubt there can be much more recruiting done on SA players than is currently the case.

Cardiff have four open slots! I'm hoping they can pick up a 2, 5, and 8, at least!

PhilBB wrote:

Old Man wrote:I doubt there can be much more recruiting done on SA players than is currently the case.

Cardiff have four open slots! I'm hoping they can pick up a 2, 5, and 8, at least!

Yeah we have plenty of those.

There are plenty of competitions where teams don't play each other home and away.  To say that the RC is a real competition but the 6N isn't because of home and away is a bit silly.

The SA team games were pencilled to be played in the 6N window so that the SA teams wouldn't be affected by the RC.

I don't think the WRU would agree to not playing their 4th AI but the simple thing is it is outside the international window so that is a WRU problem not a league problem.

Very few teams miss out on things because of 1 match.  The top 8 going into the quarter finals allows for and bad draw to fix itself.  I am fairly sure like the conferences they will link teams so that the Bull don't have to play Leinster, Munster, Scarlets and Ospreys away while the Stromers get Ulster, Connacht, Dragons and Cardiff.

The French League works because they have 40+ professional teams which can import top players.  The English system is only surving because of cheap SH imports.  Their top teams struggle in Europe and the league is a 2-3 horse race add in that the championship provides no pressure from below so the system is failing..  SA need the international setup to bring in new idea as their teams will be the most home grown players and home growth coaching setups in the league.

The world Cup is a random draw.

Brendan wrote:There are plenty of competitions where teams don't play each other home and away.  To say that the RC is a real competition but the 6N isn't because of home and away is a bit silly.

The SA team games were pencilled to be played in the 6N window so that the SA teams wouldn't be affected by the RC.

I don't think the WRU would agree to not playing their 4th AI but the simple thing is it is outside the international window so that is a WRU problem not a league problem.

Very few teams miss out on things because of 1 match.  The top 8 going into the quarter finals allows for and bad draw to fix itself.  I am fairly sure like the conferences they will link teams so that the Bull don't have to play Leinster, Munster, Scarlets and Ospreys away while the Stromers get Ulster, Connacht, Dragons and Cardiff.

The French League works because they have 40+ professional teams which can import top players.  The English system is only surving because of cheap SH imports.  Their top teams struggle in Europe and the league is a 2-3 horse race add in that the championship provides no pressure from below so the system is failing..  SA need the international setup to bring in new idea as their teams will be the most home grown players and home growth coaching setups in the league.

The actions the shareholders in the league clearly have implications for the league. So, therefore, the actions of the WRU negatively impact on the competition as do the actions of the SRU and IRFU.

Why are you mentioning conferences?

Of course, you're wholly wrong about the 'imports' into the French and English leagues. The English teams struggle in Europe because of their self imposed salary cap, so you've got your reasoning wrong there, too.

It's quite clear that half a competition (playing only once against the other entrants) is a tainted competition by the fact of it being half a competition. That's just simple logic.

profitius wrote:The world Cup is a random draw.

You might want to tell the seeds about that.

PhilBB wrote:

profitius wrote:The world Cup is a random draw.

You might want to tell the seeds about that.

All teams don't play each other once, nevermind twice.

profitius wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

profitius wrote:The world Cup is a random draw.

You might want to tell the seeds about that.

All teams don't play each other once, nevermind twice.

The clue is "Cup". That's what happens in Cups.

It's not a World League.

PhilBB wrote:

Brendan wrote:There are plenty of competitions where teams don't play each other home and away.  To say that the RC is a real competition but the 6N isn't because of home and away is a bit silly.

The SA team games were pencilled to be played in the 6N window so that the SA teams wouldn't be affected by the RC.

I don't think the WRU would agree to not playing their 4th AI but the simple thing is it is outside the international window so that is a WRU problem not a league problem.

Very few teams miss out on things because of 1 match.  The top 8 going into the quarter finals allows for and bad draw to fix itself.  I am fairly sure like the conferences they will link teams so that the Bull don't have to play Leinster, Munster, Scarlets and Ospreys away while the Stromers get Ulster, Connacht, Dragons and Cardiff.

The French League works because they have 40+ professional teams which can import top players.  The English system is only surving because of cheap SH imports.  Their top teams struggle in Europe and the league is a 2-3 horse race add in that the championship provides no pressure from below so the system is failing..  SA need the international setup to bring in new idea as their teams will be the most home grown players and home growth coaching setups in the league.

The actions the shareholders in the league clearly have implications for the league. So, therefore, the actions of the WRU negatively impact on the competition as do the actions of the SRU and IRFU.

Why are you mentioning conferences?

Of course, you're wholly wrong about the 'imports' into the French and English leagues. The English teams struggle in Europe because of their self imposed salary cap, so you've got your reasoning wrong there, too.

It's quite clear that half a competition (playing only once against the other entrants) is a tainted competition by the fact of it being half a competition. That's just simple logic.

OK, so what would you want?

Which type of tournament, would you like salary caps, better infrastructure, less rugby, more rugby?

Old Man wrote:
OK, so what would you want?

Which type of tournament, would you like salary caps, better infrastructure, less rugby, more rugby?

Firstly, I don't think cross hemisphere leagues are viable in terms of the carbon footprint alone. They are a crazy idea, to me.
Secondly, I don't think that the ownership models should mix competitions. Teams privately owned should not be in a league with teams Union owned. Personally, I'd ban the latter altogether but that's for another matter.

So, for me, the Welsh clubs should be in the English system. The Italians should be in the French system. The SA teams should play amongst themselves and the SRU and IRFU can play gerrymandered rugby together all they like.

PhilBB wrote:

Brendan wrote:There are plenty of competitions where teams don't play each other home and away.  To say that the RC is a real competition but the 6N isn't because of home and away is a bit silly.

The SA team games were pencilled to be played in the 6N window so that the SA teams wouldn't be affected by the RC.

I don't think the WRU would agree to not playing their 4th AI but the simple thing is it is outside the international window so that is a WRU problem not a league problem.

Very few teams miss out on things because of 1 match.  The top 8 going into the quarter finals allows for and bad draw to fix itself.  I am fairly sure like the conferences they will link teams so that the Bull don't have to play Leinster, Munster, Scarlets and Ospreys away while the Stromers get Ulster, Connacht, Dragons and Cardiff.

The French League works because they have 40+ professional teams which can import top players.  The English system is only surving because of cheap SH imports.  Their top teams struggle in Europe and the league is a 2-3 horse race add in that the championship provides no pressure from below so the system is failing..  SA need the international setup to bring in new idea as their teams will be the most home grown players and home growth coaching setups in the league.

The actions the shareholders in the league clearly have implications for the league. So, therefore, the actions of the WRU negatively impact on the competition as do the actions of the SRU and IRFU.

Why are you mentioning conferences?

Of course, you're wholly wrong about the 'imports' into the French and English leagues. The English teams struggle in Europe because of their self imposed salary cap, so you've got your reasoning wrong there, too.

It's quite clear that half a competition (playing only once against the other entrants) is a tainted competition by the fact of it being half a competition. That's just simple logic.

The reason for the mention of conferences as the post states is I am sure that the teams you face away from home will be of a similar standard to those you play away.  No team is going to face Munster, Ulster and Leinster at home while another faces them all away.

You totally ignore the point of why the salary cap makes teams worse that won't affect SA.  There are very few players from England and France playing outside their league system.  The French and English don't have loads of players going abroad that would be at home if the cap was higher.  What makes the top teams stronger is their imports.  SA don't really import and ones that are would be to to lower Quaility end when they come in.  No SA team is going to bring in a Sexton or Bigar who are established top players to their team but the French and English can and do.  Because of that SA teams need outside influences to bring in new ideas and push standards at competition level because they aren't getting it at team level.  With the current English teams would you really see improved teams as a whole or would you see 4 teams with all the good players and the rest with poor teams or heavily imported (such as Sale)  imports bring ideas ask Leicester if their current coach is better because he left the league and learned new ideas.

Regarding the WRU and the league.  Just like the league doesn't care that the SRU have imposed a player wage cap which hinders the Scottish teams it doesn't care that the Regions take money to compensate them for giving up players outside the international window.  The Regions obviously considers it a good deal or they would only allow players to leave during the window and take them back on rest weeks as would be their right.

The league's purpose is to provide games in a structured manner that is cost effective to the teams.  It is not their job to make the competition fair so that Zebre and Leinster have the same access to players and budget because it is not what the shareholders want.  Again it highlights that your issue is with the WRU and not the league (or you don't understand what the league admistrators are paid to do).

PhilBB wrote:

Old Man wrote:
OK, so what would you want?

Which type of tournament, would you like salary caps, better infrastructure, less rugby, more rugby?

Firstly, I don't think cross hemisphere leagues are viable in terms of the carbon footprint alone. They are a crazy idea, to me.
Secondly, I don't think that the ownership models should mix competitions. Teams privately owned should not be in a league with teams Union owned. Personally, I'd ban the latter altogether but that's for another matter.

So, for me, the Welsh clubs should be in the English system. The Italians should be in the French system. The SA teams should play amongst themselves and the SRU and IRFU can play gerrymandered rugby together all they like.

Well, I am not a climate change protectionist, but those planes fly across the world either way, so I highly doubt the carbon footprint is influenced by teams travelling.

I would love SA teams to play by themselves, I would also like us to retain our stars to play in our domestic teams, but both are pie in the sky, as neither is going to happen the way I want.

Not sure why you believe Italy should play in the French comp, or even why the French would want them, same with the Welsh teams in the Premiership.

So what we would like or prefer isn’t attainable, so I suppose in the end we accept compromises and all that is left is to enjoy the rugby, as crooked as it seems.

The alternative is what?

PhilBB wrote:

Old Man wrote:
OK, so what would you want?

Which type of tournament, would you like salary caps, better infrastructure, less rugby, more rugby?

Firstly, I don't think cross hemisphere leagues are viable in terms of the carbon footprint alone. They are a crazy idea, to me.
Secondly, I don't think that the ownership models should mix competitions. Teams privately owned should not be in a league with teams Union owned. Personally, I'd ban the latter altogether but that's for another matter.

So, for me, the Welsh clubs should be in the English system. The Italians should be in the French system. The SA teams should play amongst themselves and the SRU and IRFU can play gerrymandered rugby together all they like.

It's a classic I wouldn't start from here.

Under your proposal the three Welsh Private teams would be playing like the SA teams had to this year.  Endless derbies and no money.

Benetton fans don't seem to care about being a private team in with all the unions.
Banning union owned teams would mean that all but England, France, Japan the 3 Welsh and 1 Italian would all be illegal.

Your gerrymandering falls flat when you consider that the Scots have Regions since 1872 competing in a competition.  The Irish have been around since 1946 as district teams who played in a competition.  Can you advise when the 4 private teams in the league were created and their first year in a competition, and how their boarders weren't gerrymandered to create them.

The 4 provinces were gerrymandered back when the Irish King was removed in the 1100s so well spotted that 900 years ago we made Leinster stronger then the other 3.  But I guess we just plan in advance for times like this.  It was part of the campaign in the 1800s to make Dublin the second most important city in the Empire so we could fund all these Private schools.

The West is very hypocritical when it comes to global warming.  We make all the money.  We buy more and fly more and waste more.  But it's allowing the SA people join the league that is the problem.  I would happily wager more carbon is burned in the RC, 6N and WC with all its related consumerism then for the Pro14 over the same period.  Is 100 people taking part of a plane worse then 2-3000 fans driving from Exeter to London (not sure if any would fly). More is burned on one weekend on flights from the UK to Spain in the summer than the entire league does in a season.

Old Man wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

Old Man wrote:
OK, so what would you want?

Which type of tournament, would you like salary caps, better infrastructure, less rugby, more rugby?

Firstly, I don't think cross hemisphere leagues are viable in terms of the carbon footprint alone. They are a crazy idea, to me.
Secondly, I don't think that the ownership models should mix competitions. Teams privately owned should not be in a league with teams Union owned. Personally, I'd ban the latter altogether but that's for another matter.

So, for me, the Welsh clubs should be in the English system. The Italians should be in the French system. The SA teams should play amongst themselves and the SRU and IRFU can play gerrymandered rugby together all they like.

Well, I am not a climate change protectionist, but those planes fly across the world either way, so I highly doubt the carbon footprint is influenced by teams travelling.

I would love SA teams to play by themselves, I would also like us to retain our stars to play in our domestic teams, but both are pie in the sky, as neither is going to happen the way I want.

Not sure why you believe Italy should play in the French comp, or even why the French would want them, same with the Welsh teams in the Premiership.

So what we would like or prefer isn’t attainable, so I suppose in the end we accept compromises and all that is left is to enjoy the rugby, as crooked as it seems.

The alternative is what?

Ask NZ and Australia. Playing in a competition that no one cares about that is not able to help retain players.
Or the PIs where domestic forces cause no top domestic rugby.

It is better to have a half eaten pie than an imaginary pie.

As CVC showed in F1 they didn't stick more races in western Europe to consolidate but they opened up new markets to grow the brand. Yes some people in Europe complained but more people in the world care about F1.

I prefer to cut the pie in two before someone ate the other half

Old Man wrote:I prefer to cut the pie in two before someone ate the other half

I hope the 3rd teir euro cup (continentalshield) will includes a couple of SA teams maybe the top 2-3 from a Vodacom Cup type competition. If run right both champions and challange would have 24 teams.

14 T14, 14 Prem 16 Pro16 and 4 Continental shield.

Continental Shield would have a NH and SH group. The top 3 from each could go into a playoff. NH would have Russian, Italian, Georgian, Rominain etc. Strongest teams going off past competitions are the Russians and Italians so would provide SA with two extra spaces most likely.

With NZ and OZ refusing to go down a champions cup style tournament it limits growth and removes any SA involvement so I think the third euro cup works well for growing the game while only the better teams being advanced to face the 3 Big leagues teams.

Brendan wrote:

Old Man wrote:I prefer to cut the pie in two before someone ate the other half

I hope the 3rd teir euro cup (continentalshield) will includes a couple of SA teams maybe the top 2-3 from a Vodacom Cup type competition.  If run right both champions and challange would have 24 teams.

14 T14, 14 Prem 16 Pro16 and 4 Continental shield.

Continental Shield would have a NH and SH group.  The top 3 from each could go into a playoff.  NH would have Russian, Italian, Georgian, Rominain etc.  Strongest teams going off past competitions are the Russians and Italians so would provide SA with two extra spaces most likely.

With NZ and OZ refusing to go down a champions cup style tournament it limits growth and removes any SA involvement so I think the third euro cup works well for growing the game while only the better teams being advanced to face the 3 Big leagues teams.

Article about potential European involvement for Cheetahs

I really hope it happens as it would also allow for the Griquas and Pumas to take a similar route if it became financially viable for them too.

The great thing with the euro cup system is it provides a way to allow team like the Cheetahs, Griquas and Pumas a way to show they are good enough to be included in the Pro16 league in the future and help build professional rugby in SA.

Yep, I would agree with tha.

Old Man wrote:Yep, I would agree with tha.

Have the SARU said what they want to do below the Pro16.

I know there are the 14 Unions plus Nambia have a team. Are they going to look at adding in the Pro16 A teams (Blue Bulls etc) and have 2 division of 8 or are they looking to do something else. I assume they want a strong level under the Pro14 to develop players and build up the finacial strenght of teams like the Cheetahs Griquas and Pumas.

Brendan wrote:

Old Man wrote:Yep, I would agree with tha.

Have the SARU said what they want to do below the Pro16.

I know there are the 14 Unions plus Nambia have a team.  Are they going to look at adding in the Pro16 A teams (Blue Bulls etc) and have 2 division of 8 or are they looking to do something else.  I assume they want a strong level under the Pro14 to develop players and build up the finacial strenght of teams like the Cheetahs Griquas and Pumas.

Griquas and Pumas were granted franchise licenses in 2017, however there hasn’t been any concrete evidence of any competitions they cpu.d enter outside of SA.

Eastern Province still has their franchise license but are basically bankrupt, SARU took over the management but I haven’ heard of any comp they would join.

The domestic Currie Cup is broken down into the Premier division and Currie Cup B division, I don’t think that will change, I think at this stage money is the limiting factor and if there is a financially viable option for Griquas, Pumas and Eastern Province to get involved with perhaps the same comp the Cheetahs are looking to participate in then perhaps

Depending on when the Continental Cup is held and getting into the Challagne Cup along with the Currie Cup Cheetahs could nearly have a full season of games.

As you say it all comes down to money.

Brendan wrote:Depending on when the Continental Cup is held and getting into the Challagne Cup along with the Currie Cup Cheetahs could nearly have a full season of games.

As you say it all comes down to money.

And would that 3rd tier pay enough money to offset the travel and other associated costs? I don't think I have ever seen it on television.

If the SA join the Pro-(whichever) are we looking at European qualification by nation (ie a guaranteed one from each nation or by league?) If the SA sides are strong are we looking at never seeing Italian (certainly) , Welsh (probably) and Scottish (possibly) not in meaningful European games for some time.

Cyril wrote:If the SA join the Pro-(whichever) are we looking at European qualification by nation (ie a guaranteed one from each nation or by league?) If the SA sides are strong are we looking at never seeing Italian (certainly) , Welsh (probably) and Scottish (possibly) not in meaningful European games for some time.

If 8 teams qualify it will be the top 8.  Haven't had nations guaranteed a place for years and at the time it was very much that if the Italians weren't good enough they would benefit more from being in the Challange Cup.  That is still true even though it's now bigger nations.

Not sure how strong the Premership's 7th and 8th teams will be but the Pro16s team will be very strong and I think that the Pro14 teams who miss out will be eying the Challange Cup (about time Pro14 teams did better in it).

I would say top 8 next year will be 3 Irish, 2/3 South African 2/3 Welsh/Scots and all would be looking to finish top two in their group (not that they all will)

Brendan wrote:

The reason for the mention of conferences as the post states is I am sure that the teams you face away from home will be of a similar standard to those you play away.  No team is going to face Munster, Ulster and Leinster at home while another faces them all away.

You have no way of knowing that at this stage and there's no need to mention conferences as it is supposedly (although who knows with this shower of drivel organisation) a 'league'.

So a) you're guessing about the fixture list and b) you're wrong to mention conferences.

Brendan wrote:
You totally ignore the point of why the salary cap makes teams worse that won't affect SA.  There are very few players from England and France playing outside their league system.  The French and English don't have loads of players going abroad that would be at home if the cap was higher.  What makes the top teams stronger is their imports.  SA don't really import and ones that are would be to to lower Quaility end when they come in.  No SA team is going to bring in a Sexton or Bigar who are established top players to their team but the French and English can and do.  Because of that SA teams need outside influences to bring in new ideas and push standards at competition level because they aren't getting it at team level.  With the current English teams would you really see improved teams as a whole or would you see 4 teams with all the good players and the rest with poor teams or heavily imported (such as Sale)  imports bring ideas ask Leicester if their current coach is better because he left the league and learned new ideas.

I don't understand why you wrote that, sorry. On one hand you write "the league is surviving because of cheap SA imports" and then you go on to explain "English don't have loads of players going abroad that would be at home if the cap was higher", which is a contradictory statement.