Super Rugby 2017

From an article on the Fox Sports website about the SANZAAR meeting in London to take place on Friday UK time.

DON’T expect any big announcements when SANZAAR chiefs complete their key meeting about the ailing Super Rugby competition on Friday (Saturday AEDT).

Representatives from the Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and Argentina rugby governing bodies will meet in London to consider detail of several options to fix the ungainly and uneven format which has left many fans disillusioned.

But they won’t be able to announce any decision then.

All will have to report back to their national boards and also consult the other stakeholders involved before changes can be confirmed.

Deputy chairman Brett Robinson is representing the Australian Rugby Union at the meeting, where one option will be culling some of the 18 teams, including one Australian side, possibly the Western Force, Brumbies or Melbourne Rebels.

Super Rugby’s current woes stem from the disastrous move to a lopsided four-conference format as the addition of the Kings from South Africa, Sunwolves from Japan and Jaguares from Argentina expanded the competition from 15 teams to 18.


Bizarrely it meant some teams from South Africa could make the playoffs without facing any of the five teams from the powerhouse New Zealand conference.

There is little doubt change is needed.

The questions are in what form and when.

It’s understood the ARU’s preference would be for a combined Australia and New Zealand conference which would keep all five Australian teams, while the South Africans would be involved at the playoffs stage.

It would provide Australian fans with popular derbies and trans-Tasman clashes while losing the largely-unwatched matches in South Africa played in the early hours of Australian time.

How realistic that is, is far less clear.

New Zealand prizes its rugby relationship and competition with great traditional foe South Africa.


When to make change is a big issue to be considered.

Do the decision-makers risk alienating fans further and cop more team financial losses by hanging on until the current broadcasting deal expires at the end of the 2020 season?

Or do they seek approval, including from broadcasters, to make changes as early as next season?

http://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/d...e/news-story/0132d4a047633fc82ed265ddbdc6e7cd

Nothing surprising about that article as far as i'm concerned. Either way things need to change. Can't have a competition where four teams miss the Australian sides each year and four teams miss the New Zealand sides each year during the regular season. Alongside the word ''unwatched,'' you could put poorly attended when South African sides play in Australia.
 
Oh feck! Nothing makes me spew more than losing to Kiwi teams. Reds didn't deserve to win that anyway. No points in the second half, failing to hang on to a 20-7 lead is just not good enough.
 
From an article on the Fox Sports website about the SANZAAR meeting in London to take place on Friday UK time.

DON’T expect any big announcements when SANZAAR chiefs complete their key meeting about the ailing Super Rugby competition on Friday (Saturday AEDT).

Representatives from the Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and Argentina rugby governing bodies will meet in London to consider detail of several options to fix the ungainly and uneven format which has left many fans disillusioned.

But they won’t be able to announce any decision then.

All will have to report back to their national boards and also consult the other stakeholders involved before changes can be confirmed.

Deputy chairman Brett Robinson is representing the Australian Rugby Union at the meeting, where one option will be culling some of the 18 teams, including one Australian side, possibly the Western Force, Brumbies or Melbourne Rebels.

Super Rugby’s current woes stem from the disastrous move to a lopsided four-conference format as the addition of the Kings from South Africa, Sunwolves from Japan and Jaguares from Argentina expanded the competition from 15 teams to 18.


Bizarrely it meant some teams from South Africa could make the playoffs without facing any of the five teams from the powerhouse New Zealand conference.

There is little doubt change is needed.

The questions are in what form and when.

It’s understood the ARU’s preference would be for a combined Australia and New Zealand conference which would keep all five Australian teams, while the South Africans would be involved at the playoffs stage.

It would provide Australian fans with popular derbies and trans-Tasman clashes while losing the largely-unwatched matches in South Africa played in the early hours of Australian time.

How realistic that is, is far less clear.

New Zealand prizes its rugby relationship and competition with great traditional foe South Africa.


When to make change is a big issue to be considered.

Do the decision-makers risk alienating fans further and cop more team financial losses by hanging on until the current broadcasting deal expires at the end of the 2020 season?

Or do they seek approval, including from broadcasters, to make changes as early as next season?

http://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/d...e/news-story/0132d4a047633fc82ed265ddbdc6e7cd

Nothing surprising about that article as far as i'm concerned. Either way things need to change. Can't have a competition where four teams miss the Australian sides each year and four teams miss the New Zealand sides each year during the regular season. Alongside the word ''unwatched,'' you could put poorly attended when South African sides play in Australia.
I think both the Australian and S.A. sides wouldn't really mind if they didn't play each other. There is no proper rivalry there.

Both want to play against New Zealand sides though. That and test matches against the All Blacks are what both really look forward to.
 
I think both the Australian and S.A. sides wouldn't really mind if they didn't play each other. There is no proper rivalry there.

Both want to play against New Zealand sides though. That and test matches against the All Blacks are what both really look forward to.

Summed up nicely. Since South Africa's return to test rugby there have been some excellent test matches between the Aus and RSA but the rivalry, the excitement for the matches just isn't there. Not to mention two classic World Cup games that went right down to the wire. The last World Cup final was very close to being between Australia and South Africa and it's no certainty a great rivalry would have ensued. There's a fanstastic rivalry in cricket between Aus and RSA mind you, just not on the rugby field.

In 1992 when South Africa returned to test rugby, Australia and New Zealand played the Springboks in South Africa. Naas Botha summed it up when he said, "The Australians say they're the world champions, we all know they're the world champions, but for a South African the ultimate is to play the All Blacks". When South Africa were world champions, the Wallabies would have felt the same as Naas Botha, just in reverse.
 
Sharks 37 Waratahs 14 in another very dissapointimg result for Australian teams against overseas teams. 1 win 3 losses in games vs South African teams, 0 wins from 4 games against New Zealand teams paints an ugly picture.
 
Is it just me or are the Aussie derbies hard to watch? I'd say 8/9 out of every 10 Kiwi derbies are excellent, the South African derbies are generally pretty good too. The Aussie derbies though, well, they tend to leave a lot desired in terms of quality and entertainment.
 
Johan Ackerman has admitted been approached by Gloucestershire and that he is considering taking it.
Massive blow to the Lions that, especially mid-season.

The Gloucester job won't have the political strings attached that a job in South Africa would have but is it one worth taking? Ackerman is on a good thing with the Lions.
 
The Gloucester job won't have the political strings attached that a job in South Africa would have but is it one worth taking? Ackerman is on a good thing with the Lions.
I saw the interview and the fact that he addresses the issue and doesnt completely rule it out makes me think that he is seriously considering it.

The money will also be very good.

Heynecke Meyer got the big job after working in the Aviva premiership, so that might be part of his thinking. Go there for a number of years and come back years later.

However Alister Coetzee will embarrass himself further this year so I think the Springbok job could be up for grabs next year.
 
The Johan Ackermann speculation didn't prove too disruptive for Lions after they beat the Reds 44-14. A Quade Cooper red card early in the second half didn't help but the damage was on its way to being done.