I put up a blog of the ERCC final yesterday.
http://goo.gl/855wG1
A few punters here derided the standard of the competition and scoffed at the selection of someone like Ali Williams as man-of-the match, in "Discussion".
It thought the rugby was of a high standard.
.
I don't want to get into the comments thread in your review, Lee -- those are people/names I don't even recognize, and the comments seemed short-sighted. But one of the big differences I've noticed between Super Rugby and the European club sides this season is defense, which seems to be more of a concern in the northern hemisphere. That means you won't always get the all-singing, all-dancing, all-scoring rugby Aussie fans demand. Super Rugby teams, particularly centers and wingers, are finding gaps, space, and holes that would often be shut down in most NH league games. (But that might also speak to how the breakdown and offsides line are being refereed.)
Besides, it's just a bit ludicrous to compare a European Cup final -- or any final -- to week-in week-out club competition as a measure of quality. Since the
Heineken Champions Cup is more of a step between league and Test rugby, you'd expect to see more attacking plays being shut down before they get rolling. And finals aren't about flash, they're about winning. Bonus points mean nothing at that point.
But I don't think comparing Super Rugby to the Champions Cup is the right comparison, since the Champions Cup is almost knock-out rugby from the start. For a more fair comparison, you have to take Super Rugby against the northern hemisphere league competitions, which broadens the pool considerably.
And on average, I think it's hard to compare 15 Super Rugby teams to the 38 across the three northern competitions -- you're going to get more extremes in quality, especially since they play more games in the northern hemisphere. The 15 Super Rugby sides play 18 rounds before the playoffs, and that's it. The Premiership and PRO12 play 22 rounds before the playoffs, while the TOP 14 play almost a third more with 26 rounds (gah!), and the teams that qualify for the Champions or Challenge Cup play another 5 rounds on top of that.
So in one season, an English or PRO12 team that qualifies for a European competition play one-and-a-half Super Rugby seasons. Teams like Clermont and Toulon, who made the European finals, are playing well more than that, and if either team makes the TOP 14 finals, then they're close to playing twice as many games as they do in Super Rugby -- 37 games in a season.
With that many more teams and that many more games, you're just going to get a broader range in quality across their respective campaigns. Maybe the NH could take a lesson from that. On the other hand, maybe once Super Rugby expands enough they'll introduce a Champions Cup-type element across the conferences (but I hope not, since that would likely bite into player fitness for Test rugby).