RugbyRebels

When the Australian team can go 0 - 40 against New Zealand teams and still get a home quarter final each year you can see the issue. They don't need to try and beat the kiwi teams. If the competition structure rewards failure you might as well fail.

Interesting comment on the Zimbo Rugby Forum:

David Lord one of the most respected rugby writers in our hemisphere has come up with an interesting idea for creating a rugby revolution in the southern hemisphere.

In this article he states that SA rugby should just go north and SANZAAR to be ditched to create an ANZAAP partnership with Australia, NZ, Japan, Argentina and the Pacific nations. Lord also states that "World Rugby will order all overseas players from those nations to return home, and in return will subsidise all five nations for five years so no player will lose out financially".

I fully agree that the only way forward for Sanzaar with Super Rugby is to have a complete revolution of professional rugby in the Southern hemisphere. Its interesting that Lord mentions the involvement of World Rugby because i have also stated that the assistance of World Rugby would be very useful in any revolution. But the very sad unfortunate thing is that World Rugby will not cooperate in helping the Southern Hemisphere with its wishes in changing the professional game there and they have even stated that themselves.

What World Rugby wants through the influence of the northern unions of the big 3 leagues Aviva Premiership, Pro 14 and French Rugby is rugby fans from the south and beyond engaging more with the European clubs and brands similar to soccer where you have a large foreign fan base that follows the EPL, La Liga, Champion League etc. Such an approach could in fact cause a devastating affect to Southern hemisphere professional rugby.

If any revolution was to happen it would be nice if this can be extended to accommodate some interests of nations like Zim, Kenya, Uganda etc. You might have seen todays results between the Zim Presidents XV and Blue Bulls u19s. However this was a disappointing result take in mind that Namibia playing in the Superport Challenge with their local players have been beyond woeful. Yes come Africa Gold Cup they are going to get a few of their big guns and so will we but i dont think that will drastically increase both of our standards. Even though last year we had a disappointing campaign we still gave Namibia a tough game and even came close to winning.

The bottomline line is that whoever qualifies for the World Cup will be in a almighty tough group with the All Blacks and Springboks and i question if anyone of us other African nations will be able to be competitive enough to avoid heavy losses. This is where World Rugby comes in. If they want to maintain the integrity of the World Cup they need to make sure that we all have the right preparation with access to all our professionals playing abroad as well as other areas of support that can help us lift our standards and capitalize on the growing popularity that the game is having in our schools.

https://www.theroar.com.au/2018/05/19/t ... emisphere/

Sounds a bit pie-in-the-sky like the WRC concept clearly was in 1995.

Agree. The SA/Australasia split idea is hardly original, and there is no reason on earth World Rugby would 'oblige' Southern Hemisphere players to return home. The Kiwis have actually done a very good job of hanging on to the bulk of theirs, though not all, obviously, and one of the main reasons for that is the money South African involvement brings to the table.

His make-up of a post-SA exodus Super Rugby comp is almost word-for-word what I'd written earlier in this thread. Content-stealing bastard.

And considering that you've got Geoff Parling appearing in Super Rugby for the Rebels at the moment, my suggestion of SANZAR using established links like the NZRU/Harlequins one to lure over some European players who've got a few miles on the clock like Robshaw or Roberts is far more possible and plausible than his proposals about World Rugby financing it.

I think the current format is a good one and it seems the competition has already begun to improve. So they should just stick with three 5-team conferences for the next decade or so, and allow the fans to get used to it. That's not to say that teams shouldn't change, if necessary. I've said before I think a good solution to this would be to allow NZ, SA & Australia to decide for themselves which 5 teams will compete in their respective conferences. For example, if Australia wanted to bring back the Force and ditch the Sunwolves at some time in the future, that should be their decision to make. Similarly, if the SARFU decided they'd rather have the Cheetahs than the Stormers or Jags, so be it. Eventually, though it may be a decade or two, I'd like to see South America given its own conference, creating a Super 20 in which the four conference winners would host the four runners-up in the 1/4s. Argentina would obviously be the official host of a 4th conference and could decide which South American teams to include.

I kept telling them. Best solution was to merge the Brumbies and the Rebels. Great players with great stadiums. That was a no brainer. It's actually a plausible driving distance between Melbourne & Canbeera (660km of state highway/6 1/2 hours). Let the Force be with us because they were there before the Rebels, had not disgraced themselves, had the third biggest rugby community in the country to draw from, and were so far away from every other team it was the only chance for the fans to see a game. Did they listen? Nah! & now the Brumbies are talking about going bust for lack of fans . . .

https://www.rugby.com.au/news/2018/05/2 ... ies-crowds