SOUTH African Rugby has rejected the proposed "Pacific solution" that would have seen Australia and New Zealand go it almost alone with a trans-Tasman Super rugby competition, but otherwise is attempting to end the brinksmanship threatening to tear SANZAR apart.
There has been a steady escalation of tension among the three SANZAR partners as the June 30 deadline to present the organisation's proposal to News Corporation ahead of a new broadcast deal has drawn closer, with Australia and South Africa at loggerheads over which country should be awarded the 15th franchise in an expanded Super competition. New Zealand has its own frustrations with South Africa, particularly over the start date of the expanded competition. Australia and New Zealand want the start of the proposed 22-week competition pushed back to late February or March but that would extend Super rugby into August. South Africa, however, has refused to move its second-tier Currie Cup competition to accommodate the proposed 15-team series and even suggested the Super rugby start date should be earlier, not later. Faced with what seemed an implacable South Africa, the two Anzac partners had begun investigating setting up a trans-Tasman competition also involving teams from the South Pacific and Japan to begin in 2011. Only towards the end of this competition would South Africa become involved, with its leading sides playing off against the tops teams in the Australasian conference for the Super rugby title.
But in an exclusive interview with The Australian yesterday, SA Rugby's acting chief Andy Marinos said he had told Australia and New Zealand the trans-Tasman option was not a goer as far as South Africa was concerned. "I don't think playing in a championship final between Australasia and South Africa would be attractive to SA broadcasters or the SA public," Marinos said. That effectively leaves only two courses of action: for South Africa to go it alone, and perhaps play in a European competition; or for the SANZAR partners to cool down and reach a compromise. Somewhat unexpectedly, at least from an Australian perspective, Marinos is advocating the latter, insisting a compromise could be reached on all the major sticking points. Indeed, he even took issue with the suggestion that there was an impasse. "I wouldn't necessarily view it in that dramatic a light," Marinos said. "What we've clearly got is three countries that have very different backyards and very different competition structures that they've been dealing with and it's never easy to get it to sync into one happy format. "The reality is that there is going to have to be some compromise on all fronts to make sure it goes forward."
That said, SA Rugby is sticking to its guns in arguing that the Southern Kings, the designated mixed-race team from the heavily populated Eastern Cape, deserves to be admitted, even though South Africa already has agreed the expansion team will play in the Australian conference to create three five-team conferences. Asked how that would work, Marinos replied: "I don't see it as any different to a Japanese, or Canadian, or for that matter New Zealand team playing in the Australian conference." Significantly, however, he acknowledged the final call would be SANZAR's and that if Australia was just as adamant in support of its candidate city - most likely Melbourne - then cool heads would have to make the decision. "We're educated men," he said. "We can all have entrenched views. But once all the information is sitting on the table, we'll be able to come to a decision."
Marinos said a range of factors from commercial viability to franchise infrastructure would have to be considered but he deliberately shied away from hammering the perceived weakness of the Australian bid, namely that it does not have the playing strength to support a fifth Super rugby team. "It's not our right to comment on Australia's playing strength. We've seen the Western Force come into the competition (in 2006) after there had been a juggling of players within Australia and the Force has gone on to perform really well," he said. "The equal argument could be made about the performances of some of the South African sides in recent years."
While acknowledging that South Africa would not devalue its Currie Cup competition, he rejected media reports yesterday that a recent meeting of SA's principal rugby stakeholders was a virtual council of war. "I chaired that meeting and no journalist interviewed me afterwards," said Marinos, who described the report that South Africa was putting together a rival competition as "fantastic". "South Africa isn't going to be capitulating. But from a South African perspective, we're going to work as hard as we can to reach some real middle ground."
