Super Rugby 2025
-
@gt12 "The three winners of the Qualifying Finals will progress to the Semi-Finals.
They will be joined by the highest-seeded losing team (the ‘lucky loser’), who will drop one seeding for the Semi-Final draw."
The way this reads if the top seed loses they only drop to 2nd so still get a home semi ! .@Daffy-Jaffy said in Super Rugby 2025:
@gt12 "The three winners of the Qualifying Finals will progress to the Semi-Finals.
They will be joined by the highest-seeded losing team (the ‘lucky loser’), who will drop one seeding for the Semi-Final draw."
The way this reads if the top seed loses they only drop to 2nd so still get a home semi ! .why is that necessary? (asking the world, not you @Daffy-Jaffy )....they have seedings already...why do we need to add a second level of complexity?
-
This is the result of setting up a dedicated, independent commission?
@antipodean said in Super Rugby 2025:
This is the result of setting up a dedicated, independent commission?
-
If the number 1 seed loses in the first week, do they also lose their home field advantage? They should do - whoever loses should automatically be the 4th seed.
@gt12 said in Super Rugby 2025:
If the number 1 seed loses in the first week, do they also lose their home field advantage? They should do - whoever loses should automatically be the 4th seed.
I guess it's out of fairness to whomever is seeded second.
i.e. Assuming:
1 loses to 6
2 beats 5
3 beats 4Seeding becomes 2, 1,3,6
Your way - 2 would have to play 1, through no fault of their own.
-
@gt12 said in Super Rugby 2025:
If the number 1 seed loses in the first week, do they also lose their home field advantage? They should do - whoever loses should automatically be the 4th seed.
I guess it's out of fairness to whomever is seeded second.
i.e. Assuming:
1 loses to 6
2 beats 5
3 beats 4Seeding becomes 2, 1,3,6
Your way - 2 would have to play 1, through no fault of their own.
@Chris-B said in Super Rugby 2025:
@gt12 said in Super Rugby 2025:
If the number 1 seed loses in the first week, do they also lose their home field advantage? They should do - whoever loses should automatically be the 4th seed.
I guess it's out of fairness to whomever is seeded second.
i.e. Assuming:
1 loses to 6
2 beats 5
3 beats 4Seeding becomes 2, 1,3,6
Your way - 2 would have to play 1, through no fault of their own.
It was nice of you to highlight how much of a fucking stupid idea this is.
Edit: in that case, they should go down to play 3 away.
-
So ultimately, they've gotten rid of 1 finals match and also added an extra bye round.
What a watered-down half arsed farce of a competition.
NZR won’t ever entertain the thought of a longer season. They only care about high performance metrics that relate to the All Blacks - which show the All Blacks performances have gotten progressively worse each year since they reduced Super Rugby down to 14 matches....
So much for 'high performance'. NZR are a bunch of clueless idiots.
-
How do they determine a lucky loser? If the top seed is knocked out, surely they should get a second bite of the cherry. What a shambles.
@Canes4life said in Super Rugby 2025:
How do they determine a lucky loser? If the top seed is knocked out, surely they should get a second bite of the cherry. What a shambles.
If the top seed is knocked out they would be lucky loser, so would get 2nd bite mate. Lucky loser is the highest ranked loser, so either 1st and 2nd could lose and get second bite. I think that's fair.
Lets face it fellas, I doesn't matter what they do some will be pissed. I much perfer this idea than top 7 qualifying. Hey I would like top 4 , but that would set up wailing too?
-
That is a crazy play off system just adds to more confusion.
It could work out the 3 v 4 play of game could mean nothing.
They have over thought this format.@Chris said in Super Rugby 2025:
That is a crazy play off system just adds to more confusion.
It could work out the 3 v 4 play of game could mean nothing.
They have over thought this format.Wouldn't it mean the loser would play top seed in semis, I think we are trying to hard to rubbish it.
1-6 if won by 6 they get home against lowest qualifier (ie 4 or 3 if 4 win their match)
Same with 2-5. -
@Chris said in Super Rugby 2025:
That is a crazy play off system just adds to more confusion.
It could work out the 3 v 4 play of game could mean nothing.
They have over thought this format.Wouldn't it mean the loser would play top seed in semis, I think we are trying to hard to rubbish it.
1-6 if won by 6 they get home against lowest qualifier (ie 4 or 3 if 4 win their match)
Same with 2-5.@Dan54 said in Super Rugby 2025:
@Chris said in Super Rugby 2025:
That is a crazy play off system just adds to more confusion.
It could work out the 3 v 4 play of game could mean nothing.
They have over thought this format.Wouldn't it mean the loser would play top seed in semis, I think we are trying to hard to rubbish it.
Yes if it was played last both teams may qualify
If top 2 seeds are through so it is a nothing game if that happens you would think they would not play it as the last game. -
@Dan54 said in Super Rugby 2025:
@Chris said in Super Rugby 2025:
That is a crazy play off system just adds to more confusion.
It could work out the 3 v 4 play of game could mean nothing.
They have over thought this format.Wouldn't it mean the loser would play top seed in semis, I think we are trying to hard to rubbish it.
Yes if it was played last both teams may qualify
If top 2 seeds are through so it is a nothing game if that happens you would think they would not play it as the last game.@Chris said in Super Rugby 2025:
@Dan54 said in Super Rugby 2025:
@Chris said in Super Rugby 2025:
That is a crazy play off system just adds to more confusion.
It could work out the 3 v 4 play of game could mean nothing.
They have over thought this format.Wouldn't it mean the loser would play top seed in semis, I think we are trying to hard to rubbish it.
Yes if it was played last both teams may qualify
If top 2 seeds are through so it is a nothing game if that happens you would think they would not play it as the last game.Mate thats not right, I just edited my above post, they are playing for who they play next week if top seeds have qualified. Add to that almost always the lowest knockout is played first!
-
@Chris said in Super Rugby 2025:
@Dan54 said in Super Rugby 2025:
@Chris said in Super Rugby 2025:
That is a crazy play off system just adds to more confusion.
It could work out the 3 v 4 play of game could mean nothing.
They have over thought this format.Wouldn't it mean the loser would play top seed in semis, I think we are trying to hard to rubbish it.
Yes if it was played last both teams may qualify
If top 2 seeds are through so it is a nothing game if that happens you would think they would not play it as the last game.Mate thats not right, I just edited my above post, they are playing for who they play next week if top seeds have qualified. Add to that almost always the lowest knockout is played first!
@Dan54 said in Super Rugby 2025:
@Chris said in Super Rugby 2025:
@Dan54 said in Super Rugby 2025:
@Chris said in Super Rugby 2025:
That is a crazy play off system just adds to more confusion.
It could work out the 3 v 4 play of game could mean nothing.
They have over thought this format.Wouldn't it mean the loser would play top seed in semis, I think we are trying to hard to rubbish it.
Yes if it was played last both teams may qualify
If top 2 seeds are through so it is a nothing game if that happens you would think they would not play it as the last game.Mate thats not right, I just edited my above post, they are playing for who they play next week if top seeds have qualified. Add to that almost always the lowest knockout is played first!
Ok that makes more sense.
-
Same old format, except now there's more bye-round weeks for everyone.
All teams play an uneven amount of games against half of the teams.
Refuse to have an open player market like other leagues do.
This competition will be gone in 5 years time.
-
Same old format, except now there's more bye-round weeks for everyone.
All teams play an uneven amount of games against half of the teams.
Refuse to have an open player market like other leagues do.
This competition will be gone in 5 years time.
@darylmitchell said in Super Rugby 2025:
Same old format, except now there's more bye-round weeks for everyone.
All teams play an uneven amount of games against half of the teams.
Refuse to have an open player market like other leagues do.
This competition will be gone in 5 years time.
Not sure why there is not an open market, players can play wherever they want.
A lot of comps play uneven matches etc. Doesn't comps like NRL play some teams twice but not all? Not sure I don't watch it, but seem to recall same moans there when I lived in Aus.
-
So are things not so rosy in the URC? SA might be without a home up north soon.
-
So are things not so rosy in the URC? SA might be without a home up north soon.
@Bovidae said in Super Rugby 2025:
So are things not so rosy in the URC? SA might be without a home up north soon.
Nice to read that things are not rosy for them up there, and that the locals might turf them out in time
-
As @Nepia tell us every 5 minutes but is right at the same time, if the South Africans wanted to play in Super Rugby, they would.
-
So are things not so rosy in the URC? SA might be without a home up north soon.
@Bovidae said in Super Rugby 2025:
So are things not so rosy in the URC? SA might be without a home up north soon.
All bullshit
-
The more I think about the new playoff & lucky loser concept the more I think it doesn't suck.
It's 100 times better than the current format of 8 out of 12 make the playoffs.
Also, others have said if the #1 seed loses to #6 then they are still guaranteed to get through, so why wouldn't they put out a weakened team? Well if #1 did lose then they drop to a lower seed # and could therefore lose home advantage if they make end up making the final.
The higher up the table you finish the more chance you get to get a second chance.
At first I thought it was a terrible concept, but I'm coming around to it.
They probably should have given it a better name though, like 2nd chance. -
The more I think about the new playoff & lucky loser concept the more I think it doesn't suck.
It's 100 times better than the current format of 8 out of 12 make the playoffs.
Also, others have said if the #1 seed loses to #6 then they are still guaranteed to get through, so why wouldn't they put out a weakened team? Well if #1 did lose then they drop to a lower seed # and could therefore lose home advantage if they make end up making the final.
The higher up the table you finish the more chance you get to get a second chance.
At first I thought it was a terrible concept, but I'm coming around to it.
They probably should have given it a better name though, like 2nd chance.@WestieFella Glad you thought it through mate. As I said I quite like it, maybe not perfect, but better than what we got.
I know I say I prefer straight top 4 finals, but we have to be realistic, clubs/comp want/need to keep as many fans/people engaged with comp as long as possible.
Even the talk of longer comp full 2 rounds etc? Once again I would like, but not a lot of comps have it (unfortunately) and perhaps leave people wanting more than having too much? Don't know but I will enjoy what we have anyway.
