Sorry, this story is unavailable
Jmangod, hell yes, we need SA.
Sadly everytime we weaken and give in to tha Aussies it dilutes the comp.
12 teams origionally was brilliant with no conference system.
But looking foward, we are likely to have Argie teams, and wouldnt it be wise at that stage to put in a couple of Pacific Island teams, maybe cut it into conference at that stage, bottom half plays off against each other, top half scraps it out???
Posted 04:05 03rd April 2012
do we really need SA in the Super comp?
Do SA really want to be in the super comp? Let face it their game style is the odd one out and they get mullered by the Aussie and Kiwis refs for mot playing the game the way the antipodian do, so why don;t SA come play northern Hem Rugby and we'll send Wales down south, You lot can dance about looking pretty and Sa and the rest of the northern hem can play proper rugby. Job's a good 'un. :)
Posted 11:17 21st February 2012
@ jmangod... only if they want the TV-rights money SA brings in - hell, yes! in other words - by virtue of having roughly double Australasia's population & being time-zone friendly for European pay-TV viewers.
Posted 08:58 14th February 2012
Well its true the [present format is more for the ARU so theres more derby games thus bums on seats.The game has to grow in Oz if super rugby is to survie imo .If 2 world cup wins and its historic rivalry with NZ/ SA cant put it above RL or Rules than something did need to be done in the proffesional era As ive said not really a fan of the conferance system but i understand why it was adopted ..I dont feel that going back to a S12 format is the way forwaed either Why not something simlar to a H/Cup format ie the top 2 sides of a national league/ conferance + 2 wild cards drawn totally at random from those finishing 3rd and 4th in the national conferances in a knockout senerio..Under that format it doesnt matter how many teams are in the national conferance but posistion in said conferance still maters down to 4th as you might get a wild card place.So you keep the derbys and to keep the international flavour alive in the early rounds every team plays a team home and away from the other conferances again drawn at random ie the Crusaders play the Reds and Cheaters the Reds would play the Crusaders and say the Stormers and the Stormers play the Reds and say Hurricanes.This does mean that some teams wont play international games if the conferances are uneven but then thats the price you pay for more derby games
Posted 21:49 13th February 2012
@ GoWalesGo: And how often do you watch Super Rugby..? Because with all that amazing rugby you have in the NH, I can't imagine you get much time to watch the 6 or 7 Super Rugby matches every weekend as well... Especially since most of it is in a different time-zone... And I doubt whether you get up at 6 am to watch a tournament you think is a "farce". So I'd say you don't really know what you're talking about.
@ BillyMutt: Yes, exactly - the current format of Super Rugby is basically designed to favour Australia. So I guess that might be the ground from which SARU argues - "we scratched your back, now you scratch ours". Didn't think of that before, until you just mentioned it...
@ itsamyth: Oh come on... I am a white South African and I don't agree with your lame old regurgetated "facts". Get off your soap box and stop believing everything you read in Die Beeld and Rapport - this is a rugby forum.
@ melkdave: I watched every game of Super Rugby last year and I don't agree with you - the NZ and SA conferences were equally strong last year. The Stormers finished one place above the Crusaders on the overall log and both countries had another team in the top 6 play-offs (Blues and Sharks). The Highlanders were almost as strong as the Bulls and the Cheetahs were very similar to the Chiefs. Both the Lions and Hurricanes were poor, but had a few good wins.
@ BDAUssie: I think it'a bit rich of you to start talking about "fielding championship contenders" and being forced to give into demands... Please explain the Force and Rebels - I believe they were worse than the Cheetahs and Lions (I'll ignore the Brumbies - they were good once upon a time). And also, the whole format as it is at the moment is due to the politics in Australian rugby. Think carefully before you start slinging mud.
Let's all just get our popcorn and see how this unfolds...
Posted 12:50 13th February 2012
Who actually wants this?
This stinks of politics. Incompetent people at the top trying to force their hand - because they are gods gift and it is expected. NZ/OZ welcome to South African business. Currupt, with no common sense what so ever.
Posted 08:48 13th February 2012
The problem here is obvious - the entire structure of domestic rugby in the Southern Hemisphere is crocked.
We do need to move back to a super 12 format, either with 4 teams from each SANZAR region or with 3 each from SANZAR and one from Fiji, one from Samoa and one from Argentina.
A) This will keep the season reasonably short.
B) This will re-invigorate domestic rugby in all these countries, with a place in the Super Rugby competition at stake in addition to the domestic title.
C) If we include teams from Argentina etc there will be more diversity, more global interest etc.
Adding a 16th team is ridiculous. Not only will this skew the balance of the competition, and add cannon fodder to the mix, but there is no way the Kings merit their place.
If SARU had one brain cell between them they'd just introduce relegation and promotion to the SA division (which would not interfere with the other SANZAR countries), and might make the Currie Cup more interesting.
But not, why move with a sensible relegation/promotion format which works brilliantly in European rugby and football? Rather just stick with a bloated bunch of half-fit pigs sucking at the teats of the Murdoch empire.
This is exactly why NH rugby will overtake the Southern Hemisphere in the next 5 years. Not that we'll notice, since we'll have long since stopped attending both Super Rugby and domestic games.
Thanks for killing SH rugby, SANZAR, SARU and Super Rugby!
Posted 08:01 13th February 2012
I hope the SANZAR partners from NZ and SA dont cave to this farcical muscling by SARU. SANZAR spent all of 2010 weighing up tenders from prospective new teams and deciding on the shape and format that would best serve the competition until 2016 and now SARU come out and basically plan on shoving a number South African team down our throats because they feel politically it is the right thing for SARU. It's appauling!
South Africa has never fielded 5 genuine finals contenders in a Super season, why would anyone believe they could field 6? Even New Zealand, which last year had the toughest pool, will have two teams this year that wont be serious title contenders (Canes and Highlanders).
SARU should have made the tough decision and told the Cheetahs and Lions that they would be forced to merge or die. A Cats team would actually have been quite a formidable outfit (with depth) and would be a treat for Super fans, as opposed to this bulldust the SARU are trying to dish up to us
Posted 00:04 13th February 2012
I must admit im not a fan of the conferance system as the only competative coferance atm is the NZ one.Both the SA and Australian conferances are weak in camparision and have only 2 teams atm .So the usual suspects again this year Reds orTahs from OZ and Bulls or Sharks from SA against the Crusaders and another NZ team in the semis So predictable now isnt it
Posted 23:03 12th February 2012
No matter how poor they might be (not even Currie Cup material), I can still see the NZ and Aus media fawning over the Kings no matter what. They will be the darling SA team in their eyes. If you are a black/brown SA rugby player you are cool and 'IN', Afrikaans and white then you are on the opposite end of the prejudice scale. Man, it is unbelievable how a 9% minority population is being subjected to legalised racial policies in a so-called democracy....in 2012 some 20 years after the end of Apartheid. How the western media continues to remain silent on what is REALLY happening in SA is beyond understanding. The Kings fiasco is just a small sample of the wider racialy-based social engineering well under way under the ANC government. And please don't tell me it is justified. In SA a minority is under attack on all fronts but yet in the civilised world, everything is done to protect minorities. 800 000 Afrikaners are now very poor, many homeless but they are neglected by the government just because they are white. Silence. Strange world we live in.
Posted 22:53 12th February 2012
The problem is that the Kings have already started contracting players... very difficult situation SARU find themselves in.
Posted 22:26 12th February 2012
I agree the Super 15 is a farce. Domestic leagues with a Playoff/Heineken Cup style comp is better
Posted 20:26 12th February 2012
And as I predicted the Rapport was RAPPORTing rubish... once again. Seriously - who still buys that paper..? It's fiction. BAD fiction...
@ jmanngod: Do you think you don't..? All you'll be without SA is a glorified ITM Cup - instead of teams like Tarenaki you just have the Brumbies... That sounds exciting.
Back to the (new version of the) article:
So let me get this straight - the SA franchises are giving their "full support" to the inclusion of the Kings... but also making it clear that there is no way any of them are dropping out... So basically the only possible solution is for SANZAR to expand the competion - which they are not allowed to do and have already said they won't do...
...This is going to get interesting!
Posted 19:29 12th February 2012
Cant say if true im surprised SARU have shown for years they are buffoons..Yes it would be nice to have a super francise in that part of SA .But they way they have gone about it is to say the least is totally incompentant to the ningth degree.The only promise they should have made is when super rugby nexts expands then the KINGS would be included.I echo calls for the SARU board to be fired enmass.There is no way the Australian and NZ unions are going to allow an expansion of super rugby atm
Posted 15:01 12th February 2012
If this is true... WOW.
But then again, it was reported in Rapport - which is like The News of the World... They also claimed that Francois Steyn is gay and that Alistair Coetzee has been confirmed as the next coach...
So I'll wait until a reliable source confirms this.
Posted 13:49 12th February 2012
A Sth African franchise has only won the Super Rugby Tournament 3 times out of 16. All three coming from just one franchise (Bulls).
Consistently they've had the majority of their teams in the bottom of the table.
Sth Africa does not deserve an extra team in the competition.
Posted 13:43 12th February 2012
they aint got the balls..
Posted 13:06 12th February 2012