THE fate of Super rugby hinges on the outcome of a SANZAR summit in Dublin in a fortnight, after Australia and New Zealand yesterday warned they would proceed with an alternate 10-team trans-Tasman series if their impasse with South Africa could not be resolved...

The two countries made what could be their last meaningful gesture of reconciliation to South Africa when they acknowledged SA Rugby's concerns about continuing to play Super rugby during the June inbound Tests, by proposing byes be scheduled so no side played more than two matches during that month without their Test players.

But, clearly, Australia and New Zealand have reached exasperation point with South Africa's policy since last November of backflipping on agreed positions and then demanding more and more concessions in order to shore up its Currie Cup competition against any encroachment by the proposed Super 15 competition.

Australian Rugby Union chief executive John O'Neill avoided referring to the May 14 meeting as D-Day in the troubled history of the southern hemisphere rugby alliance, but he made it clear he had run out of wriggle room.

O'Neil said the ARU board had authorised him to only approve what he described as the Sandton 1 agreement, a slightly scaled down version of what the three SANZAR partners initially had approved in Perth in July last year, which would have seen the Super 14 expanded to a Super 15 played over 22 weeks. "I have no mandate to go any further than that," O'Neill said.

Last month, however, South Africa returned to the table with what O'Neill terms Sandton 2, which proposes a staggered start to the competition, with South Africa kicking off its round of derbies in February, followed two weeks later by the corresponding matches in the Australian and New Zealand conferences.

South Africa then plans to suspend Super rugby during the June inbound Tests, allowing Australia and New Zealand, who plan to stage midweek Tests against the northern hemisphere sides while continuing with Super 15 matches on weekend, to catch up.

"These conditions are not acceptable to Australia and New Zealand," O'Neill said.

The ARU boss accused his South African counterpart, Andy Marinos, of attempting to isolate Australia with his claim it was Australia that had requested the suspension of a SANZAR team that had been working to find an expansion model acceptable to all three partners before the June 30 deadline, when the organisation must present its proposal to prospective broadcasters.

In fact, O'Neill said, he and his Kiwi counterpart Steve Tew had written to Marinos simultaneously saying there was no point in holding further meetings if South Africa continued to shift the goalposts.

"I don't think they (South Africa) want to leave the joint venture," O'Neill said. "They just want the joint venture conducted on their terms. That has been the pattern of behaviour. There is a lot of brinkmanship in it."

So much so that if South Africa refuses to accept that Super rugby is the pre-eminent competition -- ahead of its own domestic Currie Cup -- then Australia and New Zealand will not hesitate to invoke what O'Neill believes is a viable plan B -- a two-round trans-Tasman competition initially involving five teams from each country, possibly to be expanded to a 12-team series with the subsequent addition of two Japan-based franchises.

"We didn't start all this with a trans-Tasman option but it's a functional option and (broadcasters) find it quite attractive," he said.

Such a competition would be time zone-friendly and would also make possible a return to family-friendly Saturday afternoon scheduling.

So strained is the three-way relationship that South Africa has even suggested that alternative proposals be put before broadcasters, allowing them to make up their own minds -- a suggestion O'Neill dismissed out of hand. "We won't be putting multiple options in front of broadcasters. We'd make fools of ourselves," he said.

Ironically, while the old Anzac partners are at war with South Africa over the inter-provincial Super rugby concept, the three SANZAR nations are adamant there will be no disruption, come what may, to the annual Tri-Nations series involving the Wallabies, All Blacks and Springboks.

Indeed, once they get past the initial awkward moments in Dublin, the three countries will discuss a timetable for the admission of the Argentina Pumas to the southern hemisphere series.

The ARU, indeed, has flagged it will push for the immediate implementation of the revised laws that will come into effect in the southern hemisphere from January 1 next year.

Rather than switch backwards and forwards from one set of laws to another, the ARU is proposing that the downgraded ELVs -- which do not allow mauls to be collapsed by defending teams and also return to the old set of sanctions -- be approved by the IRB in Dublin and be implemented from the start of Australia's international season on June 6.

Meanwhile, the ARU has scored a significant breakthrough in the tough economic climate by securing Castrol as a major sponsor for two years.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...015656,00.html