Super Rugby expansion, without argentines franchises?

[Superalexmarket]

As you know, later this year will be defined the inclusion of 3 franchises to SR in 2016. Several reportes always included 1 or even 2 argentines teams; but the NZ Herald said might no have franchise for the UAR.
The 3 teams will be one for Japan, one for the Pacific Islands (Samoa, Tonga and Fiji) and one more for Southafrica. The islanders team will be based in Auckland.
All franchises could recruit Argentine players.

 

[smartcooky]

As you know, later this year will be defined the inclusion of 3 franchises to SR in 2016. Several reportes always included 1 or even 2 argentines teams; but the NZ Herald said might no have franchise for the UAR.
The 3 teams will be one for Japan, one for the Pacific Islands (Samoa, Tonga and Fiji) and one more for Southafrica. The islanders team will be based in Auckland.
All franchises could recruit Argentine players.

I hope this report is wrong.

If SANZAR hope to keep the integrity of The Rugby Championship as being the premier international rugby tournament outside of the World Cup, then I think it is essential for Argentina to participate in Super Rugby. Having one franchise as well as encoraging other Super Rugby teams to sign a few Argentina players is what I would expect as a minimum. I mean how crazy would it be to have a Pacific Islands team and a Japan team in Super Rugby when neither of the Pacific Islands or Japan are involved in The Rugby Championship?

 

[TRF_heineken]

As you know, later this year will be defined the inclusion of 3 franchises to SR in 2016. Several reportes always included 1 or even 2 argentines teams; but the NZ Herald said might no have franchise for the UAR.
The 3 teams will be one for Japan, one for the Pacific Islands (Samoa, Tonga and Fiji) and one more for Southafrica. The islanders team will be based in Auckland.
All franchises could recruit Argentine players.

I read that report too

I hope this report is wrong.

If SANZAR hope to keep the integrity of The Rugby Championship as being the premier international rugby tournament outside of the World Cup, then I think it is essential for Argentina to participate in Super Rugby. Having one franchise as well as encoraging other Super Rugby teams to sign a few Argentina players is what I would expect as a minimum. I mean how crazy would it be to have a Pacific Islands team and a Japan team in Super Rugby when neither of the Pacific Islands or Japan are involved in The Rugby Championship?

I think SANZAR is of the opinion that SR and the RC are 2 seperate tournaments with different goals. Whether it's correct is debatable.

My first question will be: Is there a Professional League in Argentina?
If yes: Then they should be entitled to be part of the expansion ahead of the Pacific Island and Japan franchises.
If no: Then why isn't there a league and why can't the pacific islands and Japan be allowed to have a team in the expanded SR in 2016.

With the provision that other teams may include Argentine players, will assist. But then they should look at something like the quota system. like each team must have at least 2 Argentine players, and 1 must be part of the 22 team each week. that gives you 16 teams, with 2 Argentine players = 32 players = RC squad.

You will have some Argentine players that will remain in NH. Which will just widen their pool, but in all honesty they have to start somewhere. This is just a report with speculation, just like the others before it. How about we wait until they have the meeting and we know for sure what will happen?

 

[smartcooky]

My first question will be: Is there a Professional League in Argentina?
If yes: Then they should be entitled to be part of the expansion ahead of the Pacific Island and Japan franchises.
If no: Then why isn't there a league and why can't the pacific islands and Japan be allowed to have a team in the expanded SR in 2016.

Australia!! There is no fully professional rugby union competition in Australia. Super Rugby IS the only fully pro rugby in Aussie.

Why could Argentina be involved on the same basis?

 

[TRF_heineken]

Australia!! There is no fully professional rugby union competition in Australia. Super Rugby IS the only fully pro rugby in Aussie.

Why could Argentina be involved on the same basis?

fair enough, but like I said, they have to start somewhere, like they did in Oz.

 

[nickdnz]

The NZRU would be crazy or stupid or both to introduce a PI team in Super Rugby based in Auckland. They'd essentially be damaging the Blues franchise for no reason. The game can't expand in the PI's and I doubt they could support two professional teams considering Samoa could barely make it to the RWC. I hope its just the crack-pot, half-arsed poor-guessing NZ Herald doing their thing.

 

[TRF_heineken]

The NZRU would be crazy or stupid or both to introduce a PI team in Super Rugby based in Auckland. They'd essentially be damaging the Blues franchise for no reason. The game can't expand in the PI's and I doubt they could support two professional teams considering Samoa could barely make it to the RWC. I hope its just the crack-pot, half-arsed poor-guessing NZ Herald doing their thing.

It was!!

Here's the article courtesy of Sport24:

New Zealand's Super Rugby coaches are pushing for a team of Pacific island players to be included in the southern hemisphere competition when it expands in 2016, a report said on Wednesday.

The team, based in Auckland, would be part of an 18-team competition under a proposal from the head coaches of New Zealand's five existing Super Rugby teams, the New Zealand Herald reported.

It said the competition would also include a Japanese team and South Africa's Kings and Lions.

The Herald said Argentina would not have a team in the proposed competition but clubs would be allowed to sign Argentine players.

The proposal would be a major boost for Pacific nations such as Samoa, Fiji and Tonga, who struggle to retain players because of poor infrastructure and lack of meaningful competition.

Basing the team in Auckland would provide a ready-made player pool and fan base, due to the city's large Pacific population, the report said.

The SANZAR countries - South Africa, New Zealand and Australia - are looking to expand the Super Rugby tournament when the current broadcast deal expires at the end of 2015.

The move is being driven by South Africa's insistence that they field six teams, rather than the current five entered by all three countries.

http://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/Pacific-S15-team-mooted-20131002

 

[nickdnz]

It was!!

Here's the article courtesy of Sport24:

http://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/Pacific-S15-team-mooted-20131002

Yeah - I've seen it in a few sources - just incredibly stupid if true.

 

[RyotoTheDragon]

Awesome news, hope it strengthens the PI teams.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Yeah - I've seen it in a few sources - just incredibly stupid if true.

yeah, I think it's a bit of boredom by the Journos. They don't have much to contribute, so they then go and sensationalise something. Meanwhile all that it does is to **** people off, and create animosity which isn't suppose to be there in the first place.

Here's an idea, how about the journos actually go, and find factual stories, and then report it, instead of writing this kak!

 

[The_Wol]

The islanders team to win the competition for the first 5 years after their inclusion.

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

I would assume each of the SANZAR countries can decide who they want in 1 spot? As I'd assume we are keeping this conference system? SA would surely add the Kings. Who NZ and Aus might decide to add is an open question.

If we scrap the conference system that opens up a lot of possibilities.

It would be great to include Argentine teams but I am worried about the travel factor. As is with the RC and SR is tough enough how tough is it gonna be to if there is travel to Arg involved as well!? Unless the Arg team(s) are based in SA or we split into 2 conferences; SA and Arg and Aus and NZ with some complicated interconference matches or we simply say SA/Arg conference top 3 vs NZ/Aus top 5 play QF, SF and a final.

Well, a lot depends on what the motivations are and where the priorities lie. SA's motivation is clear enough and is mainly a political one. I would expect money would determine the rest..

 

[Folau Tank]

Well, Ever since 2012 SANZAR linking with the Argentine Rugby Union , I think that rugby has expanded in Argentina more than previous years and too expand the Rugby in Argentina more, The Super Rugby should add approximately 4-5 new Argentine Teams and then Rugby would have more fans then Argentine Basketball but it would never beat the game of soccer. Also I think that they should add another 2 Australian teams to the Super Rugby e.g.. Western Sydney and Northern Queensland just like the A-League. NOTE: That the game is getting more popular in areas such as the Pacific Islands, Argentina and Italy.

 

[nickdnz]

Well, Ever since 2012 SANZAR linking with the Argentine Rugby Union , I think that rugby has expanded in Argentina more than previous years and too expand the Rugby in Argentina more, The Super Rugby should add approximately 4-5 new Argentine Teams and then Rugby would have more fans then Argentine Basketball but it would never beat the game of soccer. Also I think that they should add another 2 Australian teams to the Super Rugby e.g.. Western Sydney and Northern Queensland just like the A-League. NOTE: That the game is getting more popular in areas such as the Pacific Islands, Argentina and Italy.

Australia can't support the five teams they have - financially or talent wise.

 

[steblin]

Australia can't support the five teams they have - financially or talent wise.

This.

And I think Argentina should definatley be included in the Super expansion, but with so many of their players abroad 1 team to start, no way 4-5.

 

[The Jones Boy]

And I think Argentina should definatley be included in the Super expansion, but with so many of their players abroad 1 team to start, no way 4-5.

+1
Common sense would tell us that a Super Rugby Franchise in Argentina would be a great boon to the overall competition just the one team to kick off with would be critical so the players can get used to the rigours of travelling and the constant expectation of a quality standard of play as every opponent will ask questions of them home or away.

If SANZAR hope to keep the integrity of The Rugby Championship as being the premier international rugby tournament outside of the World Cup, then I think it is essential for Argentina to participate in Super Rugby.

I disagree entirely.
Whatever happens the RC is going to remain the stand out competition after the World Cup because it contains the three strongest contenders in the world and Argentina who are no slouches. It also boasts a rigorous travel schedule because of the home and away format so there is no doubt as to who should be the winner every year.
The 6 Nations has breaks in the schedule when the teams can travel most of the games by coach, WtF, it's not home and away each year so you never know who could be the winner when one team has an off day or a ref has a bad game. Those aspects can never even out with a return game. Its good fun but as a competition it's a bit of a joke. The bizarre scheduling means the winner MUST come out of the gates with a win. If you lose your first game then you're unlikely to have a chance to win the competition. If you do drop a game it's likely to be decided by goal difference because there simply isn't enough games to get a separation. The rugby championship has a higher calibre of teams stretched with travelling and it offers more games than the 6 Nations.
Argentina getting a super XV team or not has no bearing on that cookie.

Yes it would be great to see Argentina getting a Super XV franchise and it would strengthen the RC in time to come, but if they don't get one in the near future its not going to make the RC any weaker as a competition or increase the quality of the 6 Nations.
The RC will be just fine thank you as the premier International rugby tournament after the WC.

 

[smartcooky]

The bizarre scheduling means the winner MUST come out of the gates with a win. If you lose your first game then you're unlikely to have a chance to win the competition.

I doubted this, but I checked, and you are right.

In the 14 years the 6N has been running, only two teams have lost their first game and gone on to win it, France in 2006 and Wales in 2013. Then we have to go all the way back to 1996 (when it was the 5N) before it happens again, with England losing to France in their opening match before going on to with the Championship.

 

[The Jones Boy]

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
I'm old, I'll take charity...

 

[flying tiger]

The Southern Hemisphere's rugby controlling body, SANZAR, will consider a radical proposal to run Super Rugby along the lines of America's NFL, splitting the competition into four conferences with less travel for most of the teams.

The proposal was presented to the South African board's executive committee and still has a long way to go before it becomes the new format of the competition. However, the proposal is currently being discussed by all three participating nations with a possible report back to SANZAR in the next few months.



Plans for change
Four conferences - Africa 1 and 2, Australia and New Zealand
Australia and New Zealand would each consist of their five current Super Rugby franchises

The two African conferences would have four teams each. The five current Super Rugby franchises plus Southern Kings would be South Africa's compliment with Argentina providing a seventh franchise

The eighth franchise is still to be decided, but it could either be another South African team, an African franchise, or even a European franchise team such as Italy

According to the proposal, teams would then play a double round against each other within their conferences, ie home and away

They would also play a single round against their neighbouring conference - ie, the Africa franchises would play each other, while Australia would play the New Zealand franchises

The competition would also add international spice with West and East facing each other, ie Africa 1 would play New Zealand teams while Africa 2 would face Australian teams and be swopped around every year

No agreement has yet been reached on how the new format should look after 2015 when the current contract ends, but gone is the idea of an 18-team format that involved three franchises of six teams and little involvement from Japan and USA.

What has been deemed important in the new proposal is the inclusion of an Argentine franchise, as well as less travelling, while keeping the same cross-continent games that have been a highlight for the competition.

Under the new proposal, SANZAR will split Super Rugby into two major conferences - East and West, as is done in American Football. These two conferences will then be split into two again: Africa featuring in two and Australia and New Zealand one each.

After completing a round-robin aspect of the conferences, the conferences would have a knockout phase starting with quarter-finals. The final overall would then be played between the Africa winner and the Australian/New Zealand winner.

The proposals still have to be accepted by each country but are now on the table. If accepted, SANZAR will then have a mandate to discuss further with the broadcast partners and negotiate a new five-year contract for Super Rugby.

Even if this new proposal is complicated, it would mean a win-win situation for all franchises as they would still have the huge derby matches as well as the international flavour.

The reduced travel would cut costs for the teams involved, a number of which are in financial trouble, as well as making the overall package more appealing to television.

 

[nickdnz]

Sounds ****.

Once again more home darbies which are already done to death - and punish a strong conference. It's convoluted and frankly boring. South African teams would have a picnic to get to the final comparred to NZ or Australia.

Hate it.