Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
International Test Matches
Northern Hemisphere vs Southern Hemisphere?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="smartcooky" data-source="post: 393775" data-attributes="member: 20605"><p>OK, I'll bite on this one. </p><p></p><p>I take issue with comparisons like this because they cannot be easily made. All you can really say is that Super Rugby is <em>different</em> from Heineken Cup. </p><p></p><p>IMO, Heineken Cup does suffer from a couple of fundamental flaws.</p><p></p><p>1. Its format is fragmented. It's spread unevenly throughout the year, so it tends to lose momentum. I think it would be better off being played in a single nine-week stretch right after the Six Nations, with the Premiership, Top 14 and Magners Leagues all being played before the Six Nations.</p><p></p><p>2. Unlike Super Rugby, all of the best players from the nations involved do not participate. Some of the top players play in the European Challenge Cup in any given year because their teams didn't qualify.</p><p></p><p>3. The six-pools-of-four format means that, unlike Super Rugby (except for this year) every team doesn't play every other team. This means a lot of really good teams might not meet. Unfortunately, there is nothing much can be done about that without reducing the number of teams because there simply isn't enough time in the season to do anything else.</p><p></p><p>On the other hand, it does have what I consider to be one superior attribute; qualification. For me, this is the big one. I love the idea that teams have to earn the right to play in the European Championship, rather than do what we do, which is grant them the right. I would far rather see the teams in Super Rugby qualify for their positions rather than just be automatically there every year. I think the top five ITM Cup teams should be the qualifiers for NZ, and the top five Currie Cup teams from South Africa, Those teams could then draft additional players from the other teams to bring them up to strength. I don't know what the Australians would do though, since Ol' Possum-head axed their National Championship.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="smartcooky, post: 393775, member: 20605"] OK, I'll bite on this one. I take issue with comparisons like this because they cannot be easily made. All you can really say is that Super Rugby is [I]different[/I] from Heineken Cup. IMO, Heineken Cup does suffer from a couple of fundamental flaws. 1. Its format is fragmented. It's spread unevenly throughout the year, so it tends to lose momentum. I think it would be better off being played in a single nine-week stretch right after the Six Nations, with the Premiership, Top 14 and Magners Leagues all being played before the Six Nations. 2. Unlike Super Rugby, all of the best players from the nations involved do not participate. Some of the top players play in the European Challenge Cup in any given year because their teams didn't qualify. 3. The six-pools-of-four format means that, unlike Super Rugby (except for this year) every team doesn't play every other team. This means a lot of really good teams might not meet. Unfortunately, there is nothing much can be done about that without reducing the number of teams because there simply isn't enough time in the season to do anything else. On the other hand, it does have what I consider to be one superior attribute; qualification. For me, this is the big one. I love the idea that teams have to earn the right to play in the European Championship, rather than do what we do, which is grant them the right. I would far rather see the teams in Super Rugby qualify for their positions rather than just be automatically there every year. I think the top five ITM Cup teams should be the qualifiers for NZ, and the top five Currie Cup teams from South Africa, Those teams could then draft additional players from the other teams to bring them up to strength. I don't know what the Australians would do though, since Ol' Possum-head axed their National Championship. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
International Test Matches
Northern Hemisphere vs Southern Hemisphere?
Top