'Super Rugby' 2021
-
@Tim said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
What about 9x8x2x0.5 + 3 = 75?
I'm no mathematician, but this part of the code looked superfluous... "x2x0.5"... So I've taken the liberty of simplifying the equation to "9 x 8 + 3 = 75"
I'm so smart, person, man, camera etc
-
@Godder said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@Yeetyaah That 8 team structure looks ideal. Stuff the 10 team BS, all play all twice has much better competition integrity.
Not going to happen. The Aussies probably won't even agree to 4 teams, there's no way they will agree to only 2 teams.
-
@Bovidae said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
I have no problem basing a PI team in Auckland as it has many advantages over the team being in Suva, for example. The most obvious being the costs required for travel and logistical challenges in the islands. There are also a large number of PI players outside of Auckland, so limiting your player pool to only one city is a stupid move.
The other important point is that if Kanaloa Hawai’i is 100% funding this team then it is similar to Forrest and the Force in Aust. You add a team to your competition at no cost to the home RU. NZR aren't going to ignore that possibility.
Aren't the Blues a PI team based in Auckland? They have always had PI players in there. I'm not really sure who would play for the team. Most PI players in NZ already have contracts with the NZRU so can't just join a new team at the drop of a hat. If you introduced them for next season, they would mostly be Super Rugby rejects and maybe the odd player coming back from overseas.
-
Those 10 team comp options are terrible.
Why can’t they get it through their heads that a simple, logical and non biased comp is what people want to see.Not playing the same teams an equal amount of times was one of the major flaws of the failed Super rugby expansion comps. Fuck. This is going to be a disaster.
-
@akan004 said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@Godder said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@Yeetyaah That 8 team structure looks ideal. Stuff the 10 team BS, all play all twice has much better competition integrity.
Not going to happen. The Aussies probably won't even agree to 4 teams, there's no way they will agree to only 2 teams.
Yes, if NZR are serious about an 8 team option then they need to be looking at three non-Australian teams. Japan, a PI team and someone else. Maybe the Jaguares? All three options are potentially risky in these uncertain COVID times.
-
@Tim said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
What about 9x8x2x0.5 + 3 = 75?
@sumostevenson has got some fab Sauces clearly.
-
@pukunui said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
Those 10 team comp options are terrible.
Why can’t they get it through their heads that a simple, logical and non biased comp is what people want to see.Not playing the same teams an equal amount of times was one of the major flaws of the failed Super rugby expansion comps. Fuck. This is going to be a disaster.
Can't see a 8 team competition being financially viable. A 10 or 12 team competition looks more realistic.
-
@sparky said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@pukunui said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
Those 10 team comp options are terrible.
Why can’t they get it through their heads that a simple, logical and non biased comp is what people want to see.Not playing the same teams an equal amount of times was one of the major flaws of the failed Super rugby expansion comps. Fuck. This is going to be a disaster.
Can't see a 8 team competition being financially viable. A 10 or 12 team competition looks more realistic.
You would think it would have to be viable if they are looking at it as an option.
Some teams playing other teams more often than others is a joke though.
-
@pukunui Rugby Australia rejected a 8 team competition straight away so did the finanicial backers of NZ Rugby. Realistically a 8 team competition would involve NZ giving up a franchise. Not sure Chiefs fans or Highlanders fans would like that much.
-
@sparky said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@pukunui said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
Those 10 team comp options are terrible.
Why can’t they get it through their heads that a simple, logical and non biased comp is what people want to see.Not playing the same teams an equal amount of times was one of the major flaws of the failed Super rugby expansion comps. Fuck. This is going to be a disaster.
Can't see a 8 team competition being financially viable. A 10 or 12 team competition looks more realistic.
Only way an 8 team comp would be viable is with a home & away format 14 regular season games with a bye week attached = 15 week season with 2 weeks added for SF + Grand Final
Start season in March 2021 with Grand Final in Mid June 2021
Moreover the original revamped Super Rugby was to have 14 teams play in a round robin format = 13 games
-
almost punched my comp when i read some teams twice and others once....thats some of the shit people got so annoyed with the conferences, someone will get tot he playoff without playing the saders and (currently) blues twice and the complaining will start
-
@sparky said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@pukunui Rugby Australia rejected a 8 team competition straight away so did the finanicial backers of NZ Rugby. Realistically a 8 team competition would involve NZ giving up a franchise. Not sure Chiefs fans or Highlanders fans would like that much.
Who are they? The illuminati?
-
@Kiwiwomble 100%. But the decisions get made on the back of committees interested in money, without seeing that money comes from good clear structure and great rugby.
Structural failures are more common than they should be. See also 1999 RWC where there were five pools of four to find 8 quarterfinalists. I mean, really?
-
@hydro11 said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
Aren't the Blues a PI team based in Auckland? They have always had PI players in there. I'm not really sure who would play for the team. Most PI players in NZ already have contracts with the NZRU so can't just join a new team at the drop of a hat. If you introduced them for next season, they would mostly be Super Rugby rejects and maybe the odd player coming back from overseas.
There are PI players in all 5 NZ teams, particularly those in the NI. Kanaloa Hawai’i must be confident that could find enough players of SR quality. That could be fringe SR players from NZ and Aust, current SR players who are off contract and want more regular playing time, PI-based players (e.g., Fijian Drua) and some players from Europe and Japan. The key will be whether they can offer a competitive salary relative to the other countries, but the owners will have connections and some pull with PI players.
-
@Yeetyaah said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
Supposed "leak"
Because they are trying to have competition completed before the incoming July tours, it means the professsional domestic season is too short to compete with the NH salaries, let alone the differences in population and hence TV deals.
14 weeks plus 2 week finals. 16 weeks. (Maybe in future, they will be looking to work is some weeks of a champions league
In the NH: (using England example) 22 weeks regular season + 2 weeks finals + 6 weeks European cup pool, + 2 weeks 1/4 final home and away + 2 weeks semi and final. 34 weeks. For France, 38 weeks, add 4 more weeks as a 14 team league.
I am not advocating a 34 week season, where in NH pro season continues (clashes) with test weekends. But we need to find somewhere in the middle.
-
"If you remember back to Super 12, it was the best against the best, the best players playing against each other.
“And over a period of time that has been diluted because of players moving overseas, number of teams increasing and it's lost that really competitive edge.
"I think the task for each country is to make sure their domestic league is the best against the best and highest level of competition, and if you can do that, fans will come and watch it."
-
Here's my attempt at a fantasy calendar. Longer than 14 weeks Super Rugby, but still no clashing with test windows.
10 team domestic professional comp, integrated into a champions league (either SH or Pan-Pacific depending on politics and alignments).
Giving 20 weeks domestic pro rugby, 2 weeks pro champions league. Obviously room to grow the SH Champions League or Pacific Champions League into an 8 or 16 team comp if viable.- Play first round.
- Break for champions league and June test window.
- Recommence with last 9 rounds and finals.
- Then Rugby Championship.
- SH season over in 7 months.
- Tour in November for 8th month of pro rugby.
Integrate amateur national club comp and NPC into quiet times in calendar for pay-TV content purposes.
-
They're absolute barking mad lunatic fucking muppets if they think there'd be buy-in to a comp with a non symmetrical structure such as those two 10 team options.
I agree with all those saying B and C are shit options. The problem with ten teams is it's neither here nor there as a competition. Eight gives you the ability to play the double round robin, but we're not going to get 8 teams including Australian involvement. Lord knows how we get to 8 teams sans Australia by February next year. Hawaii, Japan and Argentina? They're dreamin'.
Realistically, the best chance of a ten team comp is one involving just the Australasian sides, and Option B looks like the one that'd see a double round of derbies (the Union would want to maximize those opportunities for sure) and games between each trans- Ta$man opponent. I can't see option C being seriously considered and if it was it would be even more imbalanced and more off-putting. I never want to see a comp again where not all teams play each other evenly. It's a contrivance and I'd be gone for good.
So, they want a 14-15 week regular season. Eight teams isn't going to happen. 10 creates a contrived finals series. 12 gives us a full - albeit fairly brief - round robin, and I'm not sure how you get to 12 anyway. 14 teams gives you 13 rounds plus byes, and you can play around with a six team finals series. How do we get to 14 teams? Gee, I wonder how we possibly create a 14 team rugby competition in New Zealand when international involvement is not guaranteed, or might just be too difficult to arrange??
-
