All these Aus local derbies ...................... better?

[Blue]

SAf rugby shouldn't adopt too much of a dog-in-the-manger attitude over the new SupeRugby format: the extra money'll come in handy keeping a few Saffers from going to the NH. At the moment SAf have by far the largest number of expats running around in Europe and Japan, we've even got a few of them here in Oz. Doesn't the prospect of continually losing players to NH clubs concern SAf rugby supporters? Rabbitting on how SAf makes more money than the other two from TV broadcasting, etc, doesn't really wash when what you've got isn't enough to keep the players you'd like to keep.

The French clubs will always have the most money of any rugby club worldwide, but if a bigger competition in the SH with a commensurate increase in revenue allows our three countries to reduce the leakage of players northwards, I'm all for it. Australians don't expect NZ and SAf will solve our problems competing against league and AFL but we don't expect our SANZAR partners to say "that's your problem, nothing to do with us, fix it yourself". We, in Australia, recognise NZ has some problems on the financial front keeping their three tier domestic competition going, and developing professional rugby to the 15 team SupeRugby level will produce some more income to alleviate that problem. You help us, we help you. Similarly, bringing Argentina into the SH fold can only be good for the development of professional rugby. Are SAf going to bitch about the Argies draining money from the SANZAR pool? They're going to contribute bugger all to our bank accounts. We're all in the same boat in SH rugby, we sink or swim together.

Lindo, Fatprop, Barabarian, no need to try and "convert" me. For now I think it sucks until I can be proven wrong. All the money arguments etc etc are completely valid and even more obvious.

You all make fantastically well presented arguments, each correct in their own right. Given that, it's not an argument for supporters to like the new format. Aussie supporters yes, Saffers not.

I think it's too much meaningless rugby in the name of money. But I will still watch because I am a sad case.

PS Fatprop I find Cheetahs / Lions every bit as uninspring as Ponies / Force.
PPS I will be surprised to see the Bulls stands as full for the second derby unless its a game which determines the outcome of the conference.

 

[PaarlBok]

SAf rugby shouldn't adopt too much of a dog-in-the-manger attitude over the new SupeRugby format: the extra money'll come in handy keeping a few Saffers from going to the NH. At the moment SAf have by far the largest number of expats running around in Europe and Japan, we've even got a few of them here in Oz. Doesn't the prospect of continually losing players to NH clubs concern SAf rugby supporters? Rabbitting on how SAf makes more money than the other two from TV broadcasting, etc, doesn't really wash when what you've got isn't enough to keep the players you'd like to keep.

The French clubs will always have the most money of any rugby club worldwide, but if a bigger competition in the SH with a commensurate increase in revenue allows our three countries to reduce the leakage of players northwards, I'm all for it. Australians don't expect NZ and SAf will solve our problems competing against league and AFL but we don't expect our SANZAR partners to say "that's your problem, nothing to do with us, fix it yourself". We, in Australia, recognise NZ has some problems on the financial front keeping their three tier domestic competition going, and developing professional rugby to the 15 team SupeRugby level will produce some more income to alleviate that problem. You help us, we help you. Similarly, bringing Argentina into the SH fold can only be good for the development of professional rugby. Are SAf going to bitch about the Argies draining money from the SANZAR pool? They're going to contribute bugger all to our bank accounts. We're all in the same boat in SH rugby, we sink or swim together.

SA and France will make a mean competition then? Why did Marinos not think about it.

 

[PaarlBok]

As I've said before anyway, the competition will split into three clear entities with the same teams as the currie cup, itm cup and wherever australia goes, its all structured that way. Particularly when the EP Kings come in for the saffas its only 2 short of the premier division.

Thats where you got it wrong. Griquas and Cheetahs form one franchise. There were lots of maoning and groaning and even court case when Bjorn Basson was sold to the Brutes by Griquas from the Tin Ear S14 franchise. The EP Kings still havent form unitity with SWD and Border as we speak. No way the Leopards nor the Pumas want to form one province with the Lions, nor will Boland join WP as Stormers. In fact Matfield and Snor are planning big things for Boland with high aims once they go in full time. Will never happen.

 

[RugbyFuture]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/international/4554907/Argentineans-on-way-to-Super-Rugby

Argentineans on way to Super Rugby
TOBY ROBSON
Last updated 05:00 19/01/2011

Argentina won't be part of Super rugby's new dawn next month, but new Sanzar boss Greg Peters is an early convert to their future integration.

Peters has barely come up for breath since leaving Wellington and Hurricanes rugby to lead the southern rugby alliance's new head office in Sydney last November.

He has moved house, done the rounds in South Africa and Australia, headed home for Christmas and started planning for a baby daughter due in March.

It's a surprise he's met anyone, but Peters has been getting to know his stakeholders and even managed a trip to South America, where Argentina's passionate administrators won him over.

He's impressed by the country's progress toward their planned entry to the four-nations alongside New Zealand, South Africa and Australia next year and believes they are providing a fascinating case study in the process.

"They are hanging on to the amateur ethos over there and when you look at the membership numbers you can understand why," he said yesterday.

"The guys on the committee/board of the union come in to the office for two or three days a week.

"They fly in from Mendoza or Tucuman or wherever, spend a couple of days a week working on rugby business, totally unpaid. So it's a limited field as to who can be involved, but it's changing."

Peters describes it as a rugby "evolution", rather than the "revolution" that New Zealand rugby underwent when the game turned professional in the mid-1990s.

"They now have a paid general manager who has been appointed, and a commercial manager and high performance people. It's huge changes."

The Belgrano Athletic Club Peters visited had 1400 children and 300 seniors on its playing membership, numbers New Zealand clubs can comparably only dream of in the professional age.

"They are worried about where their clubs will end up and if you think about it, as we are all aware in 1996 we had a revolution in rugby, theirs is an evolution."

Peters believes it will not be long before Argentinian players start to appear in Sanzar's Super rugby competition.

His more immediate task has been appointing Lyndon Bray as Sanzar's new game manager. He will soon add an operations manager and a communications and marketing manager to his growing staff.

 

[TOCC]

^^^ the majority of that article is garble... what i found interesting was the very last line:

His more immediate task has been appointing Lyndon Bray as Sanzar's new game manager. He will soon add an operations manager and a communications and marketing manager to his growing staff.

Its a relief to see SANZAR collectively pooling there resources in this role, having a permanent CEO for the competition and a unified approach to marketing could do wanders for the comp...

 

[Set piece magic]

just saw that article which is very interesting. they would have to change format again to accomodate argentina, perhaps still using the conference system, but the top two or three teams from each country "go through" to the next stage, which is a round of either 12 or 8 teams, then they take it down to either 4 or 6 or 8 from there and have finals?

otherwise i see it as being too many games, worn out players ect.

tbh i agree with TOCC and doubt it will happen in the next five to ten years at least

 

[en_force_er]

The only workable options to add Argentina would:

Merging the Aussie/NZ conferences and the Saffa conference with some Argentinian sides and adding the Southern Kings in (and perhaps some North American sides but that's iffy).

OR

Adding in an America's conference featuring some Argentinian sides and perhaps a USA side and a Canadian side. Boston has a decent rugger following and rugger is considered rising in Canada but this is also iffy.

 

[RugbyFuture]

no, third option is just an argentinean conferance. they can support 5

 

[RugbyFuture]

Best leave the north americans to their own development, eventually they would grow together. hopefully with mexico as their italy.

 

[en_force_er]

no, third option is just an argentinean conferance. they can support 5

You really think so? Surely 3 would be pushing it.

There are areas of Argentina that love their Rugby but outside of Buenos Aires they aren't exactly population centers.

 

[barbarian]

The travel issue will be the biggest barrier to Argentian involvement in the S15. Teams bitch enough as it is about travelling to South Africa, I can't imagine what effect a flight to South America would have. Obviously the comp would have to be totally restructured into a conference setup, but even still it makes it fucking hard for all involved.

And RF Argentina cannot support 5 quality professional sides. Either they can supply 5 shithouse sides, or 2 quality sides. I know which I would prefer.

But it is all a pipe dream. It took years to get the Argies into the 3N, and I suggest this is at least 10 years away.

 

[en_force_er]

And RF Argentina cannot support 5 quality professional sides.

Uruguay and Chile both have some reasonable rugby players, surely a couple of players could be squeezed out of each of them.

I think 3 quality Super sides is a realistic goal.

 

[PaarlBok]

Argentina already have a team playing in our Vodacom Competion second year running. Last year they were station in Stellenbosch, this year it will be Potchefstroom. Pretty sure they'll add the Kings with SA lot, the Argies in the Aus conferense and NZ can easily slot in their conferense another team/maybe a PI if they really want to develope rugby in that area. Pretty sure this idea was the main reason why Marinos accepted this S15 concept and the Rebels inclusion. So there you go, S18 on its way in 2012.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

There are probably three different options to include Argentina in Super Rugby.

1.The First is enter a South American conference
2. As above add 3 or even 4 Argentine squads into Super Rugby via a combined SA/Arg conference while merging the Aus/NZ conference's. This would actually be preferable imo. Under the new Super Rugby format there will be a 4 week June Test window. The competition should continue running through this window.
3. Each conference moves to 6 teams with position in each and every squads (18) for at least 4 Argentine player's. That would inject a minimum of 72 Argentines into Super Rugby.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Argentina already have a team playing in our Vodacom Competion second year running. Last year they were station in Stellenbosch, this year it will be Potchefstroom. Pretty sure they'll add the Kings with SA lot, the Argies in the Aus conferense and NZ can easily slot in their conferense another team/maybe a PI if they really want to develope rugby in that area. Pretty sure this idea was the main reason why Marinos accepted this S15 concept and the Rebels inclusion. So there you go, S18 on its way in 2012.

That's more ridiculous than the suggestion that the Kings could have competed in the Aus conference prior to Melbourne being announced as the 15th licence.

 

[liquor box]

I think the best option is to have an american conference. Argentina is only one vote to go with ANZAR at the IRB whereas is you include USA and Canada you are at 3 extra votes and any other countries that would like to join an american conference will soon become allies too.

I would like to see SANZAR and the Americas have more power than the european teams.



I would also like to see 2 from Japan, Tonga, Fiji and Samoa. I dont think it really matters if it is a poorer conference or not as strong, when the fonals come around they will probably get knocked out but at least they are involved.

Is super 25 too many? a final 5 finals system?

 

[MrTimms]

Every time the expansion to more and more conferences is mentioned, I worry just a little. While it would allow Aus to have their own surrogate domestic comp, we would be losing one of the best things about Super Rugby as it stands, the chance to play more often against Saffas and Kiwis. That experience has to be at least as valuable (and IMO, more so) as more games internally?

 

[RugbyFuture]

apart from Buenos Aires, theres tucuman and Cordoba, then two others for fill, im sure Ive posted my map and proposal before.

Argentina may not produce 5 quality teams, but neither does it seem do Australia (force, reds), New Zealand (chiefs, highlanders) or South Africa (cheetahs, lions)

 

[RugbyFuture]

we would be losing one of the best things about Super Rugby as it stands, the chance to play more often against Saffas and Kiwis. That experience has to be at least as valuable (and IMO, more so) as more games internally?

I read somewhere talking about this in a good way, saying it would give way to a greater identity of style of play for all three nations, so they're national teams have more unique gameplay.

 

[MrTimms]

Yeah, that would be good. But you do want to keep the opportunity to play against others. It is all theoretical ATM anyway. Is the extra locals enough for that "national identity" to shine through, or would it take being wholly insular? and then you would risk coming up against opposition thinking you are better/worse than you are, not as many yardsticks.