robdylan

Super Rugby to lose three teams


Written by Rob Otto (robdylan)

Posted in :Original Content, Super Rugby on 10 Apr 2017 at 09:12
Tagged with : , , , , ,

Well, they say that the problem with a compromise is that nobody really gets what they want – I have to say, though, when it comes to yesterday’s Super Rugby restructuring announcement, there certainly is one party that would be more than happy with the outcome and that’s New Zealand.

First things first, though. Let’s have a look at what exactly was actually announced. SANZAAR have pretty much rolled back the clock to the way the competition used to work with 15 teams in the past, with a few notable exceptions. The New Zealand conference remains unchanged, with all five teams guaranteed participation. One team will be cut from the Australian conference, with the ARU set to decide which it will be in due course. The SunWolves, mysteriously spared the axe despite performance, will move into the Australian conference, arguably a more natural fit for them in therms of travel and time zones.

The big losers – at least on paper – are South Africa, who will need to drop two of their six teams as the unwieldy Africa 1 and 2 conferences are collapsed into a single group, comprising four South African teams and the Argentine Jaguares. The resulting three-conference format will, alas, not return to a full “everyone plays everyone else once” model, with SANZAAR’s insistence on local derbies meaning home and away fixtures against conference rivals and matches against four out of five of the teams in each other conference. Yes, once again we have the bizarre situation where each team will not play every other team in a given year. This new format will come into effect from next year.

Now New Zealand will have got exactly what they wanted here. The competition will become more competitive due to the culling of some weak teams – but crucially, none of those will be from their shores. Furthermore, the expansion of the competition into new territories will not be threatened, since Japan and Argentina have survived the chop. How exactly South Africa and Australia were talked into voting for this I’m not sure, but the writing is well on the wall for both countries and despite some initial pain, I can’t help but feel that this is a sensible move. The Australian conference cannot sustain five strong teams at present, neither can South Africa sustain six.

Now, I have some faith that our Australian friends will find a way to quickly an efficiently cull one of their teams – with smart money being on either the Force or the Rebels. Reality is, I don’t care which one they drop, nor how long it takes them to reach that decision. What I do care about, though, is the uncertainty that has been created in South Africa with this announcement, since our sometimes unique situation makes it very difficult to simply select four franchise teams based on performance alone.

Cast your minds back, if you will, to the interminable wrangling that went on the last time Super Rugby franchise awards were made – and then after that to the botched “premonition/relegation” debacle that followed. I must be honest – I have zero confidence that a quick and sensible “culling” will be made here and the resulting uncertainty about the future of any of the six teams will only serve to drive more of our top players overseas.

I advocated for a Bulls-Lions amalgamation on Twitter yesterday. This was tongue in cheek and intended to stir. The reality is that the only sensible and logical option is to follow the money and persist with the four strongest brands. The Lions, Sharks, Bulls and Stormers are the local teams who have the pedigree – and dare I say the “right” – to participate in Super Rugby and the sooner the Cheetahs and Kings are given the bad news the better. Concessions will have to be made and I’m sure they will, but it’s important to get this tough decicion made – at least in principle – as soon as possible.



71 Comments

  • Super 10 – “We can make this competition better, let’s make it the Super 12″ – Perfection?
    Super 12 – “We can make more money off of this, let’s make it the Super XIV” – Ok, still a good product
    Super 14 – “The Aussies are complaining that their 16th sport is not getting as much recognition as SA and NZ’s 2nd and 1st national sport, let’s give them an extra team, and a guaranteed playoff spot” – Why?
    Super 15 – “Things are not getting better, viewer numbers are dropping and SA is pissed off because we ‘favor the Aussies’ too much. Let’s give them an extra team to shut them up, and then fuck up their travel schedules even further by sending them to Japan and Argentina. Oh and Aus/NZ get 5 finals spots, SA/Arg/Jap get 3. We’ll just make the logs so confusing that they won’t notice. That seems fair, right?” – Blind SARU, stupid SARU, you got screwed again. (to the tune of Soft Kitty)
    Super 18 – “We are losing money, the South Africans say it’s because we expanded too much. Let’s take 2 teams from them, oh and one from Aus so they can’t say we’re biased. Oh and we’re bringing back that fucked up travel schedule they complained about before, only now they get that AND Argentina.” – I can’t even
    Super 15 2.0 – “Guys, we’re still losing money! Where is the money going?!? Oh, and Singapore still wants a team. So does Canada, Russia, Uruguay . . . I’m sure we could convince Mongolia to join too. Now there’s a plan!” – Exaggerated? Maybe
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Super 29+17 3.2- “So much better now those pesky Saffas have left. Too bad they took all they real money with them. If only we could keep them happy” – Ideally we would withdraw before it gets this bad,
    .
    .
    .
    .
    but SARU

  • Comment 1, posted at 10.04.17 09:34:25 by Die Kriek Reply
    Super Rugby player
     
  • A Super Rugby format split into two divisions with promotion/relegation between divisions still makes sense. Wonder if this was considered at all? We could even have the Griquas or Pumas playing a season of first division SR in such a case.

    There could even be conditions to entry. Unions need to prove they have a certian level of sponsorship before being able to join the competition.

  • Comment 2, posted at 10.04.17 09:50:20 by vanmartin Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    vanmartinAssistant coach
     
  • hahahaha :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

  • Comment 3, posted at 10.04.17 10:11:43 by West Indies Cricket Board Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    West Indies Cricket BoardTeam captain
     
  • @Die Kriek (Comment 1) :

  • Comment 4, posted at 10.04.17 10:11:59 by West Indies Cricket Board Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    West Indies Cricket BoardTeam captain
     
  • @Die Kriek (Comment 1) : Fantastic!

  • Comment 5, posted at 10.04.17 10:12:34 by Pokkel Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Author
    Assistant coach
     
  • @vanmartin (Comment 2) : Read this is SARU’s response to your question:

    Why not two divisions?

    Super Rugby is already the most logistically expensive team sport in the world and to create two divisions would add to that expense while the potential appeal of what could be regarded as a second-rate lower tier of the competition is far from proved.

  • Comment 6, posted at 10.04.17 10:13:20 by Hulk Reply

    HulkSuper Rugby player
     
  • I get filled with despair when contemplating SARU’s decision making process around which teams to remove.

    By no means do I consider the Sharks safe just yet. One thing we can rely on is SARU springing a nonsensical option from way out of left field.

  • Comment 7, posted at 10.04.17 10:23:50 by StevieS Reply
    Author
    StevieSSuper Rugby player
     
  • @StevieS (Comment 7) : kzn rugby doesn’t seem to get along with the powers that be. look at varsity cup. they could cut us out no problem.

  • Comment 8, posted at 10.04.17 10:43:22 by Poisy Reply
    Author
    PoisyTeam captain
     
  • My gut feel is that saru have just reduced sa rugby to junk status

  • Comment 9, posted at 10.04.17 11:03:24 by byron Reply

    byronSuper Rugby player
     
  • @vanmartin (Comment 2) : I dobt it was considered, as, as you said, it makes sense. Surely a 2 pool system with each team playing home and away games and then cross pool semis and a final make the world of sense (to me anyway).

  • Comment 10, posted at 10.04.17 11:16:13 by Salmonoid the Subtle Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Salmonoid the SubtleAssistant coach
     
  • @Die Kriek (Comment 1) : :lol:

  • Comment 11, posted at 10.04.17 11:16:39 by Salmonoid the Subtle Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Salmonoid the SubtleAssistant coach
     
  • Funny enough new Zealand always on the best side of Sanzaar decisions whether it’s disciplinary or administrative. And coincendentaly things are always well engineered in their favour so that they have an easier time making playoffs resulting in better international confidence etc etc. How long will saru and aus still dance to nz tunes? They not only know how to game the system on field but off field as well it seems.

  • Comment 12, posted at 10.04.17 11:18:32 by coolfusion Reply

    coolfusionSuper Rugby player
     
  • spicy. Rebels and Force both planning on suing the ARU. Popcorn time

  • Comment 13, posted at 10.04.17 11:33:49 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 13) : Think Kings/Cheetahs will follow suite?

  • Comment 14, posted at 10.04.17 11:43:05 by Die Kriek Reply

    Super Rugby player
     
  • The sane way to look at this is that only the best teams should compete.
    Nobody can argue that all the New Zealand teams deserve to be there,I personally would rather watch N.Z derbies than anything else,Saturdays bottom of the New Zealand table Highlanders/Blues being a case in point.
    Only a truly biased blinkered bigot could make a case for losing one of those teams.
    Aussie’s could lose a team but is it Perth or Melbourne,where there is huge potential for growth.Melbourne people are the world’s best live game watchers,Footie/league/soccer/tennis and huge cricket fans.Basket ball ,netball draw huge crowds.If there is an untapped market for rugby its there.
    South Africa are going to loose two teams for the simple fact that nobody goes to the games anymore,simple as that.
    When you look at it in the big scheme of things is the competition going miss the miserable attendance at the Cheetah and Kings games, not fucken likely.

  • Comment 15, posted at 10.04.17 12:05:47 by The hound Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    The houndAssistant coach
     
  • @The hound (Comment 15) : Money isn’t in live attendance anymore though, it’s in broadcast. And every time figures get made public, SA is far and away the biggest money maker in that regard. Losing the Kings and Cheetahs won’t hurt live attendance figures, but will hurt the bottom line much more than losing the Blues would

  • Comment 16, posted at 10.04.17 12:36:18 by Die Kriek Reply

    Super Rugby player
     
  • @Die Kriek (Comment 16) : Definitely money is in TV not attendance. But a live broadcast of a packed and roaring stadium is certainly more entertaining and valuable to broadcasters than anything you see in Bloem. Plus I think the actual live support is a good indication of support levels in general. I read over the weekend Verster saying the Cheetahs are top 3 supported teams in the country or something. No way that is true. No way. I for one, am all for cutting 2 teams. I feel for the Cheetahs (not for the Kings) but in the scheme of things, this is better. Less teams and less mouths to feed, has to mean better depth and more money for the remaining teams.

  • Comment 17, posted at 10.04.17 12:53:37 by West Indies Cricket Board Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    West Indies Cricket BoardTeam captain
     
  • The assumption seems to be that the Kings and Cheetahs are the teams on the chopping block. There is always the possibility that SARU insists that the Kings stay. Stranger things have happened.

  • Comment 18, posted at 10.04.17 13:09:24 by Rienke36 Reply

    Rienke36Under 21 player
     
  • @West Indies Cricket Board (Comment 17) : I’m all for reducing the number of teams, I’m just pissed at the way it’s being done, again!

    I think 4 Super teams is perfect for the country, especially with the number of players leaving for Europe. Problem for me is our teams, 4, 5 or 6, get disadvantaged by the competition. They split the comp into the 2/4 conference system we have today to ‘ease the travel burden’ for SA teams, but then added 2 extra destinations for our teams to travel to, resulting in the type of travel the Sharks had to do last year (4 flights in 5 weeks). Now we are going back to the 3 conference system, but we get to keep Argentina as a ‘home’ destination.

  • Comment 19, posted at 10.04.17 13:09:27 by Die Kriek Reply

    Super Rugby player
     
  • @Hulk (Comment 6) : Thanks for this. The reasoning here is a bit off though. SANZAAR still wants to expand SR rugby (especially into new markets). All the wording in their announcements describes this as a temporary setback/change to the format.

    So they’ve already tried stuffing all the teams into one competition complicating logistics and point logs in the process while at the same time watering down the product with unevenly matched games and losing a lot of their audience in the process. But suggest a format that introduces both promotion/relegation and the chance for newer or smaller unions to organically grow and suddenly that’s too complicated and unappealing? They have the potential to introduce entirely new audiences in new time zones without disrupting the product with endless changes. Sometimes I feel the decision-making in SANZAAR glosses over anything that makes too much sense. Typical of any organisation run by administrators instead of visionaries.

  • Comment 20, posted at 10.04.17 13:10:44 by vanmartin Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    vanmartinAssistant coach
     
  • @Rienke36 (Comment 18) : thats my nightmare too

  • Comment 21, posted at 10.04.17 13:17:55 by West Indies Cricket Board Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    West Indies Cricket BoardTeam captain
     
  • @Die Kriek (Comment 19) : Also, a team like the Jaguares have no realistic chance of winning the trophy, ever. They dont have the luxury of playing an away game in Argentina like we play the Bulls in Pretoria. So, if its not a home game its an overseas game. Same with Sunwolves. So whats the point? btw, why is it Sanzar’s responsibility to grow the game in these countries? By the looks of things, we should be trying to grow the game here and especially in Australia. There’s your untapped market right there.

  • Comment 22, posted at 10.04.17 13:28:12 by West Indies Cricket Board Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    West Indies Cricket BoardTeam captain
     
  • And again SARU is accepting the middle finger to rotate on by the Australasians. Now we go back to our 4-5 week tours or some other rubbish like that. It is now about time that we pull the plug on Super Rugby and merge ourselves into the European calender.

  • Comment 23, posted at 10.04.17 13:36:05 by Dunx Reply

    DunxSuper Rugby player
     
  • @West Indies Cricket Board (Comment 22) : replace “growing the game” with “finding additional sources of income” and the motivations start to make more sense.

  • Comment 24, posted at 10.04.17 14:18:59 by vanmartin Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    vanmartinAssistant coach
     
  • @West Indies Cricket Board (Comment 22) : That’s exactly my point, it’s not a fair contest. I was taking it from an SA point of view, but right there you have shown it’s even worse for the Argies.

  • Comment 25, posted at 10.04.17 14:20:25 by Die Kriek Reply

    Super Rugby player
     
  • @Dunx (Comment 23) : Merging with EU will not work from a financial point of view. We are just too poor for them to take us in.

  • Comment 26, posted at 10.04.17 14:23:33 by Die Kriek Reply

    Super Rugby player
     
  • @vanmartin (Comment 24) : ja for sure.

  • Comment 27, posted at 10.04.17 15:14:14 by West Indies Cricket Board Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    West Indies Cricket BoardTeam captain
     
  • @Die Kriek (Comment 25) : oh, how I miss the Super 12..

  • Comment 28, posted at 10.04.17 15:16:49 by West Indies Cricket Board Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    West Indies Cricket BoardTeam captain
     
  • @Die Kriek (Comment 26) : But crowd attendance and quality should help

  • Comment 29, posted at 10.04.17 15:55:27 by Dunx Reply

    DunxSuper Rugby player
     
  • @Dunx (Comment 23) : I find the concept of merging with Europe infantile, why would the Europeans want to include us to fly across the world for their away games, their is absolutely nothing in it for them,

  • Comment 30, posted at 10.04.17 16:12:09 by The hound Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    The houndAssistant coach
     
  • @The hound (Comment 30) : I’m also unclear about the benefits for them and also not sure how we handle the non-simultaneous season.

  • Comment 31, posted at 10.04.17 16:51:37 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • I’m a bit nervous about what SARU will end up doing with this!
    By the way, re: the discussion about the Cheetahs poor attendance…you guys do realise our stadiums are much, much bigger than the Aussie and New Zealand ones? Have a look at the actual attendance figures…the Cheetahs are up there with the best of the New Zealand teams and double almost all the Aussie teams! If two SA teams have to go, I agree the Cheetahs and Kings are the candidates to go…but our live game attendance figures as well as TV viewership figures in SA are comfortably the highest in the competition if the figures that I googled a moment ago are anything to go by.

  • Comment 32, posted at 10.04.17 17:17:13 by pastorshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    pastorsharkCoach
     
  • The attraction for Europe is having top quality southern hemisphere teams play in their comp. Better for tv, more money. And even though it’s a 10 hour flight the time difference is negligible. Overnight flight, no jetlag. But it will never happen. Many other obstacles in the way.

  • Comment 33, posted at 10.04.17 17:28:41 by McLovin Reply

    McLovinAssistant coach
     
  • It’s ridiculous that members of Sanzaar need to make sacrifices whilst non-members (yes, sunwolves we’re talking to you) get a free ride. Really the teams cut should be 1 sa, 1 oz and the sunwolves. This whole Sanzaar being responsible to expand the game is world rugby’s issue. These administrators need to start considering the product they’re trying to sell and not their back pocket.

    If we continue to reduce the quality of SR further, sa may as well pull out and for lack of a better phrase make the currie cup great again. We’ll in time find a partner who would be interested in partnering with us to make a new tough tournament. Yes it may make us weaker not playing NZ teams all the time but it will also make them weaker.

  • Comment 34, posted at 10.04.17 17:37:08 by Hulk Reply

    HulkSuper Rugby player
     
  • Let’s be honest, SARU brought their financial dilemmas on themselves. I have never saw the logic in having six (6) SA teams in the competition. That being said, considering logistics, the Lions and Bulls should join their franchises and maybe the Kings and the Cheetahs.

    Personally I would say, to add some spice back into Currie Cup – The top four (4) teams in the Currie cup should be rewarded with a Super Rugby spot! The powers to be would however never agree to this….

  • Comment 35, posted at 10.04.17 17:55:50 by BluffShark Reply

    BluffSharkUnder 21 player
     
  • @Hulk (Comment 34) : keeping the sunwolves and argies in the competition is the reason the travel expenses are so high

  • Comment 36, posted at 10.04.17 20:31:08 by byron Reply

    byronSuper Rugby player
     
  • Must admit possibly losing Cheetahs is sad!!! Very glad we decided to go to Blom to watch Cheetahs Sharks game as it could be the last Super rugby game they play for a while!!!

  • Comment 37, posted at 10.04.17 22:52:13 by JD Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Author
    JDAssistant coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 31) : I’m sure I heard stories of a possible global season after the 2019 world cup!?!?

  • Comment 38, posted at 10.04.17 22:54:38 by JD Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Author
    JDAssistant coach
     
  • Quality rugby draws crowds, as well as grudge matches drawing crowds.

    Streamers vs Bulls, Sharks vs lions – those are huge games, and CC rugby does not do these derbies justice.

    Sad for the cheetahs, but they’ve just never been able to quite cement themselves as a genuine SR trophy contender.

    The biggest trick for saru is to ensure the best 4 players in a position is playing rugby, and not stuck at the same union ( or worse, playing voda..Err Supersport challenge).

    Can Saru create a system whereby the best players are ensured of game time? I sure hope so.

  • Comment 39, posted at 11.04.17 06:16:55 by FireTheLooser Reply

    Assistant coach
     
  • @JD (Comment 38) : All they’re doing is moving the June test window to July to accommodate a continuous Super Rugby season. The various competition calendars won’t necessarily be adjusted

  • Comment 40, posted at 11.04.17 08:01:28 by Baylion Reply

    BaylionSuper Rugby player
     
  • What the fans should demand is a competition where the best teams playing on an even playing field decide who is ultimately the best team.
    Anything that doesn’t fit that bill should be unacceptable.
    Teams and players who are the beneficiaries of any kind of tokenism or convoluted favoritism,if they have any kind of conscience have a huge disadvantage because they know that there achievements are undeserving and hollow.
    The reason we watch sport is to celebrate champions,not to pander to social conscience.
    Super rugby should be the competition where only the 10,12, or 15, best teams compete and if they all come from New Zealand so be it.

  • Comment 41, posted at 11.04.17 08:32:13 by The hound Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    The houndAssistant coach
     
  • Check out these stats http://www.theroar.com.au/2012/07/19/super-rugby-viewership-breakdown/ I know it’s old but there is a good chance SA still leads in amount of viewership since money rules this competition why isn’t SARU more assertive. They all seem to bow to NZ whims. What will NZ do if they don’t always get their way join Euro leagues boycott the rest of the southern hemisphere. SARU and AE has no compelling reason NOT to grow a pair.

  • Comment 42, posted at 11.04.17 08:56:58 by coolfusion Reply

    coolfusionSuper Rugby player
     
  • @coolfusion (Comment 42) : Meant to be ARU. I’m sure AE has already grown a pair, ask his opposing centres.

  • Comment 43, posted at 11.04.17 08:59:05 by coolfusion Reply

    coolfusionSuper Rugby player
     
  • @The hound (Comment 41) : That system has 5 NZ teams, 4 SA teams, 3 Ozzie teams and 1 Arg team.

    Super 13 would be the real deal.

  • Comment 44, posted at 11.04.17 09:11:41 by FireTheLooser Reply

    Assistant coach
     
  • Or how about 4 nz 4 sa 4 aus include Namibia and second players from our 2 relegated teams to them. I.e bulls and kings for the series (or not) Then you can fit japan into the nz conference argentina into the aus conference and Namibia into the sa conference

  • Comment 45, posted at 11.04.17 09:24:23 by coolfusion Reply

    coolfusionSuper Rugby player
     
  • @coolfusion (Comment 45) : You would be helping Namibia get better and we have another pool (small pool) from which we can fish.

  • Comment 46, posted at 11.04.17 09:26:07 by coolfusion Reply

    coolfusionSuper Rugby player
     
  • @FireTheLooser (Comment 44) : Eish don’t like 13,plus you’d have one team spare every week, go back to Super 12,and every year bottom two teams have to face an elimination/promotion with the next best four teams decided on a regional basis.

  • Comment 47, posted at 11.04.17 09:27:51 by The hound Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    The houndAssistant coach
     
  • @The hound (Comment 47) : Give SA a fifth academy team. Follow the Blitzbok 7′s academy template, and build those players up for either of the four unions or Bok rugby.

  • Comment 48, posted at 11.04.17 09:34:18 by FireTheLooser Reply

    Assistant coach
     
  • I have an idea, but I need to think it through a bit more

  • Comment 49, posted at 11.04.17 09:58:28 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @coolfusion (Comment 46) : Pulling in Namibia wouldn’t bring in enough of the green stuff mate, they want money, not good ideas :roll:

    And apparently the Australians don’t want us to be part of SR.

    I liked how Dave Rennie backed us the other day: “…the only ones saying there should be an Australasian competition are the Australians..” Here’s the full article: http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/super-rugby/91260875/chiefs-coach-dave-rennie-says-no-trade-secrets-have-been-shared-with-the-bulls

    As things look this year it would be better to kick the guys from Down Under out of SR.

  • Comment 50, posted at 11.04.17 10:04:31 by Quintin Reply

    QuintinSuper Rugby player
     
  • I’ve posted my idea below before on here and other sites, I was really hoping that it would gain some traction after Tank Lanning used it in one of his articles…but it didn’t :(

    http://www.sport24.co.za/Columnists/TankLanning/franchise-or-province-20160922

    I would suggest splitting the competition into three Tiers (Premiership, Championship and Development) with 8 teams in each division. This would require six new teams to join the Development Division (North America, Pacific Islands, Asia, Europe, South America, NEwhere)

    Essentially each team would play the others in the same division (home and away) and the end of the season, the top 4 of the Premiership would contest the Semi’s and then Grand Final. The same weekend as the Semi Finals The bottom three would play promotion/relegation matches between the top three of the Championship.

    In fact I would say that 8th place in the Premiership is relegated and replaced by 1st place in the Championship. 7th place in the Premiership should play a promotion/relegation match at the home of the 2nd place in the Championship. 6th place in the Premiership should play a promotion/relegation match at their Home against 3rd place in the Championship. The bottom three of the Championship, would do the same with the top three of the Development division. The bottom of the Development division can play any new teams that wanted to join the tournament after going through a tender process (?)

    This way the need to tap into new markets is built into the format, while still maintaining the Quality vs Quality aspect that fans are crying out for. Giving teams that are lower on the log something to play for would also add to the excitement/viewership numbers.?

  • Comment 51, posted at 11.04.17 10:21:58 by andredewaal Reply
    Valued Sharksworld Supporter Friend of Sharksworld
    Currie Cup player
     
  • @FireTheLooser (Comment 48) : In fact, saru should create an academy team either way, for both supersport trophy as well as cc….Prove that they can lead the way with innovative rugby….Sadly, that team should have been lead by Rassie and his team.

  • Comment 52, posted at 11.04.17 10:32:35 by FireTheLooser Reply

    Assistant coach
     
  • I can’t believe people want the Lions and Bulls to merge just to accommodate the Kings . Back in 2013 when the Lions were kicked out of Super Rugby nobody wanted to assist the Lions and we had to fight our way to the top. Merging with the Cheetahs also wont work because the Cats was the reason the Lions went from a Powerhouse in the 90′s to nothing because we had to carry the Cheetahs financially back then, our player resources where thinned out and the logistics of playing in Johannesburg and Bloemfontein was a disaster from the start. The solution is clear. The 2 bottom teams should go and that is at the moment the Bulls and Kings. PS to this day the Kings could not beat any SA opposition so why would you want to protect them.

  • Comment 53, posted at 11.04.17 10:56:42 by Mutley Reply
    Author
    MutleyTeam captain
     
  • @Mutley (Comment 53) : Exactly that way you increase the prestige of competing, use the Currie Cup to determine the top 4.

  • Comment 54, posted at 11.04.17 11:24:42 by The hound Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    The houndAssistant coach
     
  • @JD (Comment 38) : Yep, I read Brendan Venter mention it (a global season) in an article where he was punting SA teams to get out of SuperRugby and look for our salvation in Europe.

  • Comment 55, posted at 11.04.17 11:47:14 by Salmonoid the Subtle Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Salmonoid the SubtleAssistant coach
     
  • @Mutley (Comment 53) : I believe we need to look at more than just a single season to determine which team needs to be dropped. Dropping the bulls would be bad for our rugby (unless it has the same effect on the bulls as it had on the Lions).

    I cannot foresee the cheetahs ever becoming a genuine SR title contender, unless they make serious budgetary changes.

    If you can’t afford to pay premier players, then you can’t afford to compete in a premier competition.

  • Comment 56, posted at 11.04.17 11:50:05 by FireTheLooser Reply

    Assistant coach
     
  • @FireTheLooser (Comment 56) : The only fair way to do it is on current form,top four to play.
    History is meaningless.

  • Comment 57, posted at 11.04.17 12:23:43 by The hound Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    The houndAssistant coach
     
  • @The hound (Comment 54) : the problem with using CC to determine the 4 teams is that these days the CC team and SR team of a franchise differ way too much. Players are lost to the boks and japan, so it isn’t an indication of the form of a team.

  • Comment 58, posted at 11.04.17 12:55:47 by HeinF Reply

    HeinFTeam captain
     
  • @HeinF (Comment 58) : It would revitalize the completion totally if it were for Super rugby places, also with a tighter format we would only play each other once in Super Rugby ,Teams would also put more effort into retaining their players.

  • Comment 59, posted at 11.04.17 13:00:48 by The hound Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    The houndAssistant coach
     
  • @The hound (Comment 59) : I am all for it to make the CC more prestigeous again. I always look forward to it, but even if the teams are able to stop their guys from going to japan, they have no choice about loosing their boks. Can you imagine the outrage of a team that has 5 or more boks doing duty ending 5th (like we did,although we did not loose as many boks) and missing out on SR? Let’s just drop the bulls and be done with it rather :mrgreen:

  • Comment 60, posted at 11.04.17 13:29:22 by HeinF Reply

    HeinFTeam captain
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 49) : … Said no SA rugby administrator. Ever.

  • Comment 61, posted at 11.04.17 13:50:59 by Karl Reply

    KarlUnder 21 player
     
  • @HeinF (Comment 60) : If there were less teams in the Super Rugby competion and we only played local teams once, the tournament would be shorter and we could play the Currie Cup before the test season.

  • Comment 62, posted at 11.04.17 13:56:09 by The hound Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    The houndAssistant coach
     
  • I have a further bitch at the moron who represents the Sharks on the Super rugby committee.
    Easter week end, prime Durban holiday time, town is full and guess what once again there is no Sharks game.
    What a wasted opportunity for a big crowd.
    You know at the beginning of the season that there are certain prime weekends, and none more prime than the Easter weekend.
    What an opportunity to play the Lions at home with all the Vaalies down for the weekend.
    Who ever our rep is on the fixtures committee he should resign.

  • Comment 63, posted at 11.04.17 14:05:47 by The hound Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    The houndAssistant coach
     
  • @The hound (Comment 63) : wish you hadnt said that. Didnt even think about it, now it burns my balls. Morons

  • Comment 64, posted at 11.04.17 14:23:29 by West Indies Cricket Board Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    West Indies Cricket BoardTeam captain
     
  • @The hound (Comment 63) : That rep would probably be an organiser of the Kearsney Easter rugby festival as well.

  • Comment 65, posted at 11.04.17 14:27:20 by Salmonoid the Subtle Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Salmonoid the SubtleAssistant coach
     
  • @Salmonoid the Subtle (Comment 65) : What a light globe moment, you are a crafty little bugger,makes perfect sense now.

  • Comment 66, posted at 11.04.17 15:16:19 by The hound Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    The houndAssistant coach
     
  • :idea: :mrgreen:

  • Comment 67, posted at 11.04.17 15:50:30 by Salmonoid the Subtle Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Salmonoid the SubtleAssistant coach
     
  • @The hound (Comment 63) : @West Indies Cricket Board (Comment 64) : Ja must say it’s the perfect weekend for rugby in Durbs being school holidays and Easter. Then again I don’t think it’s easy with 18 teams in 5 countries arranging the fixtures to make sense for each and every team!
    Taking the time of year out of the equation think the timing of the break is good for the Sharks after three really hard games and just before the quick trip to Argentina. Perfect time for the players to refresh.

  • Comment 68, posted at 11.04.17 17:46:00 by JD Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Author
    JDAssistant coach
     
  • @JD (Comment 68) : You do realize its round 8 and we have had 3 home games, and one was against the Kings,the guys in the management box at K.P. really have the fans interest at heart.

  • Comment 69, posted at 11.04.17 20:25:59 by The hound Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    The houndAssistant coach
     
  • Makes you wonder how they plan to get attendance up if they don’t book matches

  • Comment 70, posted at 12.04.17 17:18:31 by coolfusion Reply

    coolfusionSuper Rugby player
     
  • @coolfusion (Comment 70) : And for the country with higher viewing stats than the others. I read in 2016 only 30% of nz watch rugby and not avidly?

  • Comment 71, posted at 12.04.17 17:20:57 by coolfusion Reply

    coolfusionSuper Rugby player
     

Add Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.