An idea I need some help on

[BLR]

Now, I have posted this on another forum so some of you may have seen this but anyway, I have done what I do best, theorise, about the future of Super rugby to suit all parties. Now basically I think that perhaps it is good to go back to the club way of things as essentially this is the heart of Union and some (in New Zealand in particular) have not quite liked the provincial way of doing things as it can merge two mortal enemies. So my idea is below, adding a first division with is super rugby and a second division which is the provincial competition with a relegation system added to keep the competition fresh. Super rugby stays as is but there is no longer franchises with the clubs in South Africa and New Zealand being seperated with the clubs over East in Australia being groups together in provinces based on where they are situated. The non-Sanzar nations would at first be added to the second division and they could work thier way up. The lowest placed team in each SANZAR nation would be relegated and the winner of division two would be promoted, and this would be doubled if the Non-Sanzar nations were added to the various provinical competitions.

So before my various breakdowns, division one has 6 teams per nation, 18 in total who play each other. Division two is simply a provincial competition that play in thier own country, unless down the track a cup could be added similar to an FA cup which contains all divisions. This integration could hopefully bring back the tribalism of the game while keeping an adequate strenght in the quality of rugby as the top tier teams would buy the best players yet still allow for some players to play for a club in a lower division simply because they love the team....anyway...any changes?

South Africa
Division one
Natal, Free State, Golden Lions, Blue Bulls, Western Province, Griquas(They came sixth in the Currie Cup last year)

Division Two
Leopards, Pumas, Border Bulldogs, Mighty Elephants, Griffons, Boland Cavaliers, Eagles, Falcons

Maybe some teams from Namibia would be good to add as well into division two so as to make up more numbers.

New Zealand
Division One
Otago, Auckland, Waikato, Wellington, Canterbury, Hawkes Bay (because of their position in last years NPC)

Division Two
Bay of Plenty, Counties Manukau, Manawatu, North Harbour, Northland , Southland, Taranaki,
Tasman.

The Heartland Championship could perhaps be added into division two or kept as a division three for another level into the relegation system.

Australia
Division One
1. Perth
2. South Brisbane (South’s, Sunnybank, University)
3. Canberra
4. Sydney (Sydney University, Eastern Suburbs)
5. West Sydney (Parramatta, Penrith, West Harbour)
6. Gold Coast.

Division Two
1.Central Coast (Manly, Warringah, Newcastle, Central Coast)
2. Melbourne (Made up of the Australian Shield team)
3. Adelaide (Made up of the Australian Shield team)
4. Hobart (Made up of the Australian Shield team)
5. North Queensland (Made up of all the clubs north of Brisbane and Sunshine Coast)
6. North Sydney (Gordon, Northern Suburbs, Eastwood)
7. Country Queensland (Made up of the Australian Shield team and country clubs)
8. West Brisbane (West’s and surrounding clubs)
9. East Brisbane (East’s and surrounding clubs)
10. North Brisbane (Brothers, GPS, North’s)
11. South Sydney (Randwick and surrounding areas)
12. Country NSW (Made up of Australian shield team and country clubs)
13. Northern (or Southern) NSW (made up of the clubs in the North or south of the state.)
14. Darwin (Australian Shield team)

[James]

In top end sport I don't think relegation ever really works. The amount of money and players lost from spending a year in the wilderness is just too much. It just ends up being a revolving door between the worst of one league and the best of the other where neither team is at the right depth and neither team can get any form of stability. In this situation imagine if the Force were relegated. Would they ever be able to get back into the upper levels?

That aside I think its a great idea.

[NTT]

In top end sport I don't think relegation ever really works. The amount of money and players lost from spending a year in the wilderness is just too much. It just ends up being a revolving door between the worst of one league and the best of the other where neither team is at the right depth and neither team can get any form of stability. In this situation imagine if the Force were relegated. Would they ever be able to get back into the upper levels?

That aside I think its a great idea.

is it a good idea or a bad idea make up your mind james

i would be happy to see the extended season idea floating around become reality

your competition idea is way too complicated to become reality BLR, super14 needs tinkering not a rebuild.

[BLR]

I am trying to keep it simple, I have already written out a draft of what we need....relegation works in the English Premier League and let's be honest, that is where we all want to be....

My idea is difficult to get into play but the way people have been talking about it that is where we want the difference to come from as it seems that maybe we are the only ones thinking about it...and if that is the came either people are alright with the way everything is run atm or there is not enought fun....

The last sentece is from whoever I was with btw....it is fun...

But how does the NSW and QLD provinces work? That's what I really care about...chook?

[James]

is it a good idea or a bad idea make up your mind james

Ahhh I don't know. I suppose the first time I read it I didn't consider the part about relegation central to the rest of it.

I am trying to keep it simple, I have already written out a draft of what we need....relegation works in the English Premier League and let's be honest, that is where we all want to be....

But does relegation work in the Premier League? Do you have any idea how much money is lost with relegation between the top level and the next tier it bankrupts clubs.

[GIGS20]

I am trying to keep it simple, I have already written out a draft of what we need....relegation works in the English Premier League and let's be honest, that is where we all want to be....

My idea is difficult to get into play but the way people have been talking about it that is where we want the difference to come from as it seems that maybe we are the only ones thinking about it...and if that is the came either people are alright with the way everything is run atm or there is not enought fun....

The last sentece is from whoever I was with btw....it is fun...

But how does the NSW and QLD provinces work? That's what I really care about...chook?

I don't think relegation will work because we aren't watching the English Premier League. Our games won't draw a crowd when certain teams play, such as v highlanders, it won't get a huge crowd, in EPL most teams would sell out most games, there's the difference.

I think the issue (mainly in NZ and SA, and to a lesser extent Oz) is that the provinces don't represent the whole nation's rugby contingent. They have selected five unions from a much larger group. The unions that miss out are annoyed and lose a heap of revenue and staff, making it difficult or impossible for them to mount any challenge to enter the market if there ever was an opportunity.

I'd propose the creation of overarching "super unions" in certain situations, probably based upon current successes and some sensible forecasting. Since the Chiefs have issues with crowds, and have pretty variable performance, why not separate the Chiefs from Waikato...I've seen lots of press about people who are passionate supporters of rugby in the Chiefs selection pool who refuse to support the chiefs because their club is a passionate rival of Waikato...this is stupid! Why not create a separate provincial union which has a new name which has board members from the feeders equally represented on it's board?

Then the players (and the fans) will support this union better, just like the AllBlacks (plenty of support but no cup!)

[Burgs]

The main difference between making it work in Europe and making work in the Southern Hemisphere is distances.
I watched a match in Worcester with friends and they reckon they would get to at least five away venues by train during the season.
To achieve the same just in Australia would mean a full blown InnForcers Tour every time.
I love the idea of more Rugby but I'm not sure there is any viable way of achieving it.
Perhaps with an ARC the top two from the three SANZAR Provincial Comps and the top Club from Argentina and the Pacific Islands could play for SH Club Champions or the like.

An indication of how far Union needs to catch up, in at least the media's eye, is I noticed yesterday Fox is going to start showing the League Under 20's Club comp, we don't even have an Under 20's comp to show!

[BLR]

GIGS: EPL doesn't sell out THAT many games, only the really big teams do, or if there is a derby, which would also be the case over here. But in rugby terms look at the game up north, semi final of the Heineken cup had Toulouse v London Irish in a very empty Twickenham, this game would sell out any stadium if between similar teams and on a similar importance down here...yet they seem to cope with thier complex competitions...

All Southland people I have spoken to don't support the Highlanders, that's the main problem with Super rugby in its current form, much like the ARC was arranged with the wrong teams grouped together...it could just be an issue of re-shuffling the teams but when thinking of the future why not make it a future which has everything in it? I mean, doesn't the English Rugby Premiership have a relegation system, and the game is booming up there..

Anyway, it'll never happen.

[James]

BLR the game is definitely booming in a financial sense but a lot of people are finding the EPL is starting to become far too boring and predictable. The same four teams always make the final four in Man U, Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool. I read an article today saying of the 33 clubs that have ever been in the EPL only something like 7 have ever made the final 4. How boring would that be? The other teams are really only just there to make up the numbers.

This is what I'd do: Taking Burgs' most excellent point about traveling distances I'd cut South Africa out of the competition. Hell Jake White always used to say he wished that SA wasn't in the Super 14. We'd start a new closer competition with 12 teams the current 4 from Australia, Japan, Fiji, Tonga, Samoa and 4 from New Zealand. I checked the internet and its something like 9 hours to fly from Japan to Sydney and roughly the same time zone whereas it was something like 18 between JoBurg and Sydney. But to cut travel down a bit more perhaps Japan could play a 'home' game or two in Melbourne or somewhere in NZ. We could see how that goes for a couple of years. If the Oz and NZ teams proved too good for the other 4 teams we could always either a) include more Oz and NZ teams to thin the talent or b) play it while we have Tri-Nations on so the top 5 or 6 players from the Oz and NZ teams won't be there.

To fulfill the need for something variable and different each year we could have some form of knock-out competition with say 16 teams- the teams already mentioned and maybe 4 South African ones. Or if not them then 2 from Argentina and the US and the Canadian teams. Each year the draw would be a bit different.