SANZAR/Super rugby future format
- Thread starter Lindommer
- Start date
- Status
P
PhucNgo
Guest
I blame Lindommer, he started it.
PaarlBok
Rod McCall (65)
Look I'll try my best to give the SA perseption here. Myself want this competition to stay as is but I dunno the way our lot is thinking and I'll try to explain or to put that through. But I am not let posters here telling me TSF they attack the man and after one post they just do the same thing. Then Oom Paarl strip moer and it all end up in a mess.
Back to topic tho, I have done a bit of research on the Bokke coming from the Eastern Cape and Cheetah area. Think this is very important to go back to the roots. Thats the way our lot will look at it. Think if a province in SA have a good structure going, he'll try and hold on to his talent mostly. Those that travelled from their roots is originate because they dont have a rugby academy in place.
So the Spears will have to put that in place before anything. You can shop till you drop but usually those are rolling stones and will move where the money are. If you can keep your schoolboy talent into your academy, they wont move that easy.
OK Grey College's Springbokke since 1992 are:
Top of the list and 16 (Paarl Gim is second with 9)
Helgard Muller, Pieter Muller, Ruben Kruger, Charl Marais, Heinrich F?ls, Naka Drotsk?, Werner Swanepoel, Ollie le Roux, Gerrie Britz, CJ van der Linde, Jannie du Plessis, Bismarck du Plessis, Ruan Pienaar, Adriaan Strauss, Heinrich Br?ssow, Francois Steyn
The bold ones stayed with the Cheetahs and most of them went to the Sharks. Myself always refer to the Sharks as Cheetahs A team. They have their academy running in year two now. They won the Craven Week final two years back with some real talent with the Ebersohn Twins and a very good age group. Give them another year and you start see these youngsters coming through.
Eastern Cape (I add SWD here):
Selborne College:
Keith Andrews, Mark Andrews, Andr? Vos, Brent Russell
Aidelaide Agri
Garry Pagel, Os de Randt & Anton Leonard
Oakdale Agri
Johann Muller, Pedrie Wannenburg & Meyer Bosman
Queens College
Dick Muir, Robbie Kempson & Kaya Malotana
Despatch
Rassie Erasmus & Danie Gerber
St Andrews
Russel Bennett & Ryan Kankowski
Framesby PE
Elandre van den Berg
Grahams College
Hennie le Roux
Grey PE
Luke Watson
Marlow
Willie Meyer
The Eastern Cape have a really strong schools and if I look at the 2008 SA Top 20 Schools :
1. Paarl Gim, Grey College of Bloemfontein
3. Grey High of Port Elizabeth
4. Glenwood
5. Outeniqua
6. Michaelhouse
7. Waterkloof
8. Dr EG Jansen
9. Paul Roos
10. Affies
11. Paarl Boys' High,
12. Framesby
13. Bishops
14. Selborne
15. Voortrekker (Bethlehem)
17. HTS Middelburg
18. Pretoria Boys High
19. KES
20. Monument
Schools which were also on the Top 20 are: Afrikaanse Ho?rskool Kroonstad, Boland Landbou, Dani?l Pienaar,
Die Brandwag, Eldoraigne, Florida, Hugenote of Wellington, Marlow, Noord-Kaap, Oakdale and Schoonspruit of Malmesbury
Bolded once will fall in the Spears area. So the base is already there for them. Its just a matter of hold on to the talent to get them to the top.
Back to topic tho, I have done a bit of research on the Bokke coming from the Eastern Cape and Cheetah area. Think this is very important to go back to the roots. Thats the way our lot will look at it. Think if a province in SA have a good structure going, he'll try and hold on to his talent mostly. Those that travelled from their roots is originate because they dont have a rugby academy in place.
So the Spears will have to put that in place before anything. You can shop till you drop but usually those are rolling stones and will move where the money are. If you can keep your schoolboy talent into your academy, they wont move that easy.
OK Grey College's Springbokke since 1992 are:
Top of the list and 16 (Paarl Gim is second with 9)
Helgard Muller, Pieter Muller, Ruben Kruger, Charl Marais, Heinrich F?ls, Naka Drotsk?, Werner Swanepoel, Ollie le Roux, Gerrie Britz, CJ van der Linde, Jannie du Plessis, Bismarck du Plessis, Ruan Pienaar, Adriaan Strauss, Heinrich Br?ssow, Francois Steyn
The bold ones stayed with the Cheetahs and most of them went to the Sharks. Myself always refer to the Sharks as Cheetahs A team. They have their academy running in year two now. They won the Craven Week final two years back with some real talent with the Ebersohn Twins and a very good age group. Give them another year and you start see these youngsters coming through.
Eastern Cape (I add SWD here):
Selborne College:
Keith Andrews, Mark Andrews, Andr? Vos, Brent Russell
Aidelaide Agri
Garry Pagel, Os de Randt & Anton Leonard
Oakdale Agri
Johann Muller, Pedrie Wannenburg & Meyer Bosman
Queens College
Dick Muir, Robbie Kempson & Kaya Malotana
Despatch
Rassie Erasmus & Danie Gerber
St Andrews
Russel Bennett & Ryan Kankowski
Framesby PE
Elandre van den Berg
Grahams College
Hennie le Roux
Grey PE
Luke Watson
Marlow
Willie Meyer
The Eastern Cape have a really strong schools and if I look at the 2008 SA Top 20 Schools :
1. Paarl Gim, Grey College of Bloemfontein
3. Grey High of Port Elizabeth
4. Glenwood
5. Outeniqua
6. Michaelhouse
7. Waterkloof
8. Dr EG Jansen
9. Paul Roos
10. Affies
11. Paarl Boys' High,
12. Framesby
13. Bishops
14. Selborne
15. Voortrekker (Bethlehem)
17. HTS Middelburg
18. Pretoria Boys High
19. KES
20. Monument
Schools which were also on the Top 20 are: Afrikaanse Ho?rskool Kroonstad, Boland Landbou, Dani?l Pienaar,
Die Brandwag, Eldoraigne, Florida, Hugenote of Wellington, Marlow, Noord-Kaap, Oakdale and Schoonspruit of Malmesbury
Bolded once will fall in the Spears area. So the base is already there for them. Its just a matter of hold on to the talent to get them to the top.
Even Hugh Bladen said it is a stupid idea last night, you guys just don't have the depth.
He said the "Elephants" are playing in the Vodaphone cup and they appear to be the core of the "6th" side. The Elephants are getting 40 shipped against them by second string sides.
He said the "Elephants" are playing in the Vodaphone cup and they appear to be the core of the "6th" side. The Elephants are getting 40 shipped against them by second string sides.
Blue
Andrew Slack (58)
fatprop said:
Apparently they reckon that quality players will flock to the franchise which I suppose would be based in Port Elizabeth. I don't think so.
Not only is the EC team crap, their admnbistrators are totally incompetent. The EP rugby union has been bankrupt for years.
O'Neill looks even more like a tool suggesting they drop a northern franchise and give it to the EP one. Shows how ignorant he is. Making a statement like that shjows a complete ignorance of the power structure in SA rugbny, which I would have thought he'd have a grip on by now.
As for his argument of too many franchises too close together in SA, I'd like to hear why he then thinks another Sydney franchise could make sense. He seems to consider Sydney as one possible location.
When you talk a bit of shit, people tend to brush it off. However, O'Neill is dragging a wheelbarrow full around with him. I think Australai can win the battle for the 5th but don't need these charades from O'Neill. It smacks of one-upmanship (sp)
Blue
Andrew Slack (58)
PaarlBok said:
That's interesting but a player's origin is totally irrelevant in the modern era. It applies to all sports. The idea of a franchise holding on to local talent becomes a 100% cmmercial issue in a professional sport. If they can pay, and create an environment where players want to be, they will go there. The problem is that Bloemfontein is a place that a lot of people just want to get out of. It's a shithole. If a kid from Bloem gets a call from cape Town he is goneski.
Yes the Free State and EC schools have produced lots of good talent, but who really moulded them into great players? The Western Cape, Natal, Pretoria and to a an extent the Lions through their develpopment structures. It is the status quo. A new franchise wonlt suddently have Kankowski and Russel breaking down the door.
The Cheetahs having a fracnchise has made no difference in four years. They have got worse and I fear will get worse yet. There are maybe five or six players that a Sharks team or Bulls team would take on board.
The good players are buggering off. I agree with Hugh Bladen. SA should have three franchises.
mark_s
Chilla Wilson (44)
Sanzar was only ever a marriage of convenience that was a defensive move by the ARU, NZRU and SARU in 1995 to avoid losing the top 50+ players from each country to other competitions. It was slapped together in a relatively short amount of time without any real long term planning. In some ways it is surprising that we have lasted this long without any major disagreements. The challenge Sanzar is now facing is that its largest revenue source is up for renewal, and all signs are that the offer price will be down on the current terms. So Sanzar has agreed to expand the competition (assumedly at no reduction in quality) and possibly rejig is structure in order to provide more content to the pay TV overlords, with the hope that this will be enough to justify the maintaining the current terms (or maybe even a small increase).
Personally, I think all three unions are kidding themselves if they believe their country currently has sufficient spare quality players to justify an extra super team. The evidence will be overwhelmingly against each and every one of them, particularly the two most vocal unions (ARU and SARU). At best and ignoring logistics, the spare players of all three nations could be combined to possibly make a competitive 15th team. I can?t see this happening, so either the players from the 15th team will largely have to come from somewhere else or we are looking at a further reduction in the quality in super rugby. The latter will undermine the whole point of expanding the competition in the first place as it is unlikely to lead to more $ from pay TV.
So where else can the new players come from? Aus has a large rugby league competition but history has shown that skill sets are too different for players to quickly adapt from one code to the other. Can?t see any answer there in the short term. Maybe something there in the long term but Sanzar is unlikely to be that long sighted and in any event, there are too many agendas within Aus rugby for it to ever be that strategic. None of this would be any help with the Pauy TV issue, as they want good players now, not in 5, 10 or 15 years time.
Otherwise, we have to look OS. There are some decent players running around in Japan and there are loads of players in the NH. You need serious extra $ to get any of them to come to super rugby as these players are all on good dough now. Again, this is self defeating - the 15th team is supposed is intended to keep revenue at about its current levels but you need extra revenue to justify these extra costs.
Another option is to reduce the current costs in order to get by with lower pay TV money. The ARU has already done this, but only to a very small extent compared to what would be needed. The problem with this is that the most significant costs are player's salaries and reducing them will increase the risk of them disappearing off into a competition Europe or Japan.
The only way I can see a 15th team working is if it brings a new market (and a whole bunch of new subscribers) to the Pay TV overlords. This pretty much means that the team can't be based in Aus, NZ or SA. Anyone know of a country with a latent and unsatisfied appetite for rugby but with a large and wealthy population?
I am coming to the view that the 15th team is a dud idea and should be scrapped. We do need to get more bang out of the S14 though, otherwise it will have to be pay cuts for the players. That only leaves rijigging the competition. A second round would easily do the trick, but would clash too much with other competitions and burn out the players too much.
Maybe a middle ground is to break the comp in two pools. You play all the teams in your pool home and away each year, but only play the teams in the other pool either home or away. That gives an extra 6 week of super rugby a year. Teams would need to be allocated to pools based on seeding and geography.
Another option would be to expand the finals series to 6 teams but keep the same current comp. That adds an extra 1-2 weeks of super rugby. I don?t see this as being attractive to pay TV and is also likely to result in some horrendous travel during the finals.
There is clearly no easy answer here but hopefully someone can think up some better options than the above. The 3 unions are going to need to work in a very collaborative manner to find a solution that works both in the short and long term. All will need to be respectful of the other two?s individual circumstances, but all three will need to be prepared to be flexible in certain areas.
It wouldn?t surprise me if one or more member unions chose to opt out at some stage. I personally think this would be a significant mistake as I don?t think any of the unions can prosper on their own (note I use the word prosper rather than survive to deliberately draw a difference between the two as rugby union will survive in all 3 countries regardless of what happens) and I don?t see any other competitions out there with their arms wide open to welcome the SARU, ARU or NZRU into its existing competition.
Personally, I think all three unions are kidding themselves if they believe their country currently has sufficient spare quality players to justify an extra super team. The evidence will be overwhelmingly against each and every one of them, particularly the two most vocal unions (ARU and SARU). At best and ignoring logistics, the spare players of all three nations could be combined to possibly make a competitive 15th team. I can?t see this happening, so either the players from the 15th team will largely have to come from somewhere else or we are looking at a further reduction in the quality in super rugby. The latter will undermine the whole point of expanding the competition in the first place as it is unlikely to lead to more $ from pay TV.
So where else can the new players come from? Aus has a large rugby league competition but history has shown that skill sets are too different for players to quickly adapt from one code to the other. Can?t see any answer there in the short term. Maybe something there in the long term but Sanzar is unlikely to be that long sighted and in any event, there are too many agendas within Aus rugby for it to ever be that strategic. None of this would be any help with the Pauy TV issue, as they want good players now, not in 5, 10 or 15 years time.
Otherwise, we have to look OS. There are some decent players running around in Japan and there are loads of players in the NH. You need serious extra $ to get any of them to come to super rugby as these players are all on good dough now. Again, this is self defeating - the 15th team is supposed is intended to keep revenue at about its current levels but you need extra revenue to justify these extra costs.
Another option is to reduce the current costs in order to get by with lower pay TV money. The ARU has already done this, but only to a very small extent compared to what would be needed. The problem with this is that the most significant costs are player's salaries and reducing them will increase the risk of them disappearing off into a competition Europe or Japan.
The only way I can see a 15th team working is if it brings a new market (and a whole bunch of new subscribers) to the Pay TV overlords. This pretty much means that the team can't be based in Aus, NZ or SA. Anyone know of a country with a latent and unsatisfied appetite for rugby but with a large and wealthy population?
I am coming to the view that the 15th team is a dud idea and should be scrapped. We do need to get more bang out of the S14 though, otherwise it will have to be pay cuts for the players. That only leaves rijigging the competition. A second round would easily do the trick, but would clash too much with other competitions and burn out the players too much.
Maybe a middle ground is to break the comp in two pools. You play all the teams in your pool home and away each year, but only play the teams in the other pool either home or away. That gives an extra 6 week of super rugby a year. Teams would need to be allocated to pools based on seeding and geography.
Another option would be to expand the finals series to 6 teams but keep the same current comp. That adds an extra 1-2 weeks of super rugby. I don?t see this as being attractive to pay TV and is also likely to result in some horrendous travel during the finals.
There is clearly no easy answer here but hopefully someone can think up some better options than the above. The 3 unions are going to need to work in a very collaborative manner to find a solution that works both in the short and long term. All will need to be respectful of the other two?s individual circumstances, but all three will need to be prepared to be flexible in certain areas.
It wouldn?t surprise me if one or more member unions chose to opt out at some stage. I personally think this would be a significant mistake as I don?t think any of the unions can prosper on their own (note I use the word prosper rather than survive to deliberately draw a difference between the two as rugby union will survive in all 3 countries regardless of what happens) and I don?t see any other competitions out there with their arms wide open to welcome the SARU, ARU or NZRU into its existing competition.
Biffo
Ken Catchpole (46)
mark_s said:
I do. Japan.
[/quote]
Maybe a middle ground is to break the comp in two pools. You play all the teams in your pool home and away each year, but only play the teams in the other pool either home or away. That gives an extra 6 week of super rugby a year. Teams would need to be allocated to pools based on seeding and geography.[/quote]
Please keep up. SANZAR has already to agreed to a better version of this - three "conferences", based in each of RSA, NZ and Australia, home and away within the conference, home OR away with other conference teams.
[/quote]Another option would be to expand the finals series to 6 teams ..... but keep the same current comp.[/quote]
Guess what? The first part, but not the second, is in the SANZAR proposals already.
You don't have enough depth to run 5 competitive Super 14 teams let alone 6.PaarlBok said:
And how is adding the Mighty Elephants, a team who regularly come middle to bottom of the 2nd division Currie Cup to play Super 14 in an Australian conference the answer?
PaarlBok
Rod McCall (65)
OK Blue so we agree that the EC and Cheetahs have the schoolboy base to work from and I also agree with Hugh Bladen (altho I dont rate him at all as a knowledable rugby person, looks more then a drunk falling off hotel balconies) , Fatty and you that we dont want the extra team. BUT that is as it is at the current moment.Blue said:
I also rate Heyneke Meyer (flippen interesting to listen to his views now on SS). Look what he did with the Bulls. Not long ago the same lot write them off. The only thing he did is to create the right structure. Rumours have it that he'll be the first person Cheeky Watson will appoint if they get the S14 franchise.
As far as the Cheetahs and academies goes. You know the Bulls and Sharks have theirs first up and running. The Cheetahs will bear their fruits through this, just given enough time. You see in the Varsity Cup the two southern uni's at the top. Maties sure tap on the WP Academy and already Paarwater mentioned , he just waiting for the Varsity Cup to finish to tap that resources for WP's Vodacup side. They are one year in front of the Cheetahs.
You say the players travel, I dont totally agree there. Senior players like Fourie du Preez, Matfield (he tried and was back in a instant), Schalk Burger & Jean de Villiers make the heart of their franchises and they wont even go to other SA provinces. Thats just the way it is with our lot.
I think we lose the most players to the NH and at the moment our franchise is doing better then in previous years. Lots and lots of young players goes , coming through our schoolboy structure and leave because they simply havent get the oppertunity to play at the top level.
Biffo
Ken Catchpole (46)
PaarlBok said:
We have about 15 years' records to test who travels well and who doesn't. Of the South Africans, the Sharks travel well, the rest don't. No need to argue the point, the record is there.
Over the years, all Australian teams have better records in RSA than any South African team has in Australia.
Time for another "I don't care about the statistics, the facts are .."
The Cheetahs are, at face value, the worst ever provincial travellers within RSA, NZ and Australia - 18 starts for 18 losses is very hard to beat. Who are the second, third and fourth worst travellers? I'm not telling, but they all come from the same country.
There is no disguising the reality that the Cheetahs are a disgrace to S14, being far from competitive. They should be removed at the end of Round 14 this year.
PaarlBok
Rod McCall (65)
If you want to live in history. For some strange reason you havent include my Stormers team. Remember 2008? Go watch their record, no Aussie team beat them. :nta:
You can calle the Cheetahs a disgrace to the S14 at the moment , the Reds are not far behind then. ???
Myself tend to look to the future, the heading is about the format for the future, isnt it?
You can calle the Cheetahs a disgrace to the S14 at the moment , the Reds are not far behind then. ???
Myself tend to look to the future, the heading is about the format for the future, isnt it?
PaarlBok
Rod McCall (65)
You know,the amount of arrogance and kak you come and sprout here about the Cheetahs is just fucking laughable.Biffo said:The Cheetahs are, at face value, the worst ever provincial travellers within RSA, NZ and Australia - 18 starts for 18 losses is very hard to beat. Who are the second, third and fourth worst travellers? I'm not telling, but they all come from the same country.
There is no disguising the reality that the Cheetahs are a disgrace to S14, being far from competitive. They should be removed at the end of Round 14 this year.
Go look at the logs you arsehole since the Cheetahs played S14 rugby
2006
Cheetahs 10th with 27 points
Reds 12th with 22 points
Force 14th with 12 points
2007
Cheetahs 11th with 22 points
Reds 14th with 11 points
The Cheetahs have double their points
2008
Reds 12th with 18 points
Cheetahs 13th with 13 points
Cheetahs total 62 points average 20.6
Reds total 51 points average 17
Pretty good suggestion, took out first the Reds before you touch the Cheetahs and keep on dreaming. :angryfire:
Biffo
Ken Catchpole (46)
PaarlBok said:You know,the amount of arrogance and kak you come and sprout here about the Cheetahs is just fucking laughable.Biffo said:The Cheetahs are, at face value, the worst ever provincial travellers within RSA, NZ and Australia - 18 starts for 18 losses is very hard to beat. Who are the second, third and fourth worst travellers? I'm not telling, but they all come from the same country.
There is no disguising the reality that the Cheetahs are a disgrace to S14, being far from competitive. They should be removed at the end of Round 14 this year.
Go look at the logs you arsehole since the Cheetahs played S14 rugby
2006
Cheetahs 10th with 27 points
Reds 12th with 22 points
Force 14th with 12 points
2007
Cheetahs 11th with 22 points
Reds 14th with 11 points
The Cheetahs have double their points
2008
Reds 12th with 18 points
Cheetahs 13th with 13 points
Cheetahs total 62 points average 20.6
Reds total 51 points average 17
Pretty good suggestion, took out first the Reds before you touch the Cheetahs and keep on dreaming. :angryfire:
/quote]
You can chuck as many temper tantrums as you like. That won't change any facts.
I have not opined on whether any other team has a worse overall record than the Cheaters.
More kitchen items to be hurled at me?
- Status