|
Sports » rec.sport.rugby.union » Questions about South African rugby
| Questions about South African rugby [message #983409] |
Fri, 28 April 2006 10:06 |
|
Hi This a Topic for our SA friends
I’m French and I’m working on a comparative study of the different
national rugby championships of the main rugby nations. (Currie cup in
the case of South Africa)
I’m trying to estimate the importance of the national championship in
each country and to understand how the changes which might have occurred
since rugby became a professional sport were taken, how the fans rate a
win in the national championship compared to a win in their
international club competition (Super 14 in your case), how they feel
about international tests being held the same day as national club games
etc… We see in the southern hemisphere but also now in Ireland or Wales
that a continental tournament involving provinces (Heineken cup in
Europe or Super 14in SH) have got more important than national
tournaments (New Zealand’s NPC, South African’s Currie cup, Irish or
welsh premiership), correct me if I’m wrong.
For example in France the French championship has a long tradition and
is very important for the players and for the fans. The trophy has
always been awarded after a final, which for decades has been played in
Paris, and the trophy being handed to the winning side by the President
of the Republic, showing how important the event is in the French rugby
season. The Heineken cup (European club tournament) is a young
tournament and is highly regarded too, I would say that winning the
Heineken cup is now considered equal to winning the French championship.
I would like to collect as much information as possible about the Currie
cup and Super 14 regarding a few things:
- I think Super 14 (formerly Super 12) is a young tournament (about 10
yrs old). Am I right or was there already a club/province tournament
involving teams from NZ, Australia and Sth Africa before? What has
changed since it appeared? How was the Currie cup rated before that, and
how is it rated now?
- Currie cup is played on a home and away basis, unlike Super 14, but
each team does not face the other 7 teams. Has it always been like this?
Did it change when Super 12 was created? (I think it is much recent so
have there been several changes?) How do the fans feel about that (not
facing all the teams)? (In France from example the fans would deeply
regret not seeing their team play against all the other ones every year)
- By looking at the fixtures, I can see that the Springboks cannot take
part in some Currie cup matches because of international tests being
played at the same time. How do the fans feel about Currie cup games
been played without the international players? Has it always been like
this? Do the Springboks at least play part of the Currie cup with their
provincial teams?
- The Super 14 South African teams’ squads are picked from Currie cup
teams (for example the Stormers are picked from Western Province and
some other teams I believe). Does it mean that a player from the Western
Province who is not part of the Stormer’s squad (and not of the
Springboks’ squad most likely) will only play the ten games of the
Currie cup during the season? If not do the Currie cup provinces take
part in another tournament during the Super 14?
I thank you very much in advance for answering all or part of my questions.
|
|
|
| Re: Questions about South African rugby [message #983413 ] |
Fri, 28 April 2006 11:01 |
|
Roms wrote:
> Hi This a Topic for our SA friends
>
> I’m French and I’m working on a comparative study of the different
> national rugby championships of the main rugby nations. (Currie cup in
> the case of South Africa)
>
> I’m trying to estimate the importance of the national championship in
> each country and to understand how the changes which might have occurred
> since rugby became a professional sport were taken, how the fans rate a
> win in the national championship compared to a win in their
> international club competition (Super 14 in your case), how they feel
> about international tests being held the same day as national club games
> etc… We see in the southern hemisphere but also now in Ireland or Wales
> that a continental tournament involving provinces (Heineken cup in
> Europe or Super 14in SH) have got more important than national
> tournaments (New Zealand’s NPC, South African’s Currie cup, Irish or
> welsh premiership), correct me if I’m wrong.
>
> For example in France the French championship has a long tradition and
> is very important for the players and for the fans. The trophy has
> always been awarded after a final, which for decades has been played in
> Paris, and the trophy being handed to the winning side by the President
> of the Republic, showing how important the event is in the French rugby
> season. The Heineken cup (European club tournament) is a young
> tournament and is highly regarded too, I would say that winning the
> Heineken cup is now considered equal to winning the French championship.
>
> I would like to collect as much information as possible about the Currie
> cup and Super 14 regarding a few things:
>
Firstly you need a little background info
SA has 5 tiers of senior rugby
- Club Rugby
- Vodacom Cup (really B teams and smaller unions)
- Currie Cup - Major provincial sides
- Super 14
- Test Rugby
> - I think Super 14 (formerly Super 12) is a young tournament (about
> 10 yrs old).
Started with Super 10 in 1993. Then became Super 12 now Super 14
> Am I right or was there already a club/province tournament
> involving teams from NZ, Australia and Sth Africa before? What has
> changed since it appeared?
Maybe NZ and Aus sides played eachother but SA not involved. Our
isolation would have stopped this anyway
> How was the Currie cup rated before that, and
This will distort your analysis as Super 10 happened at around the same
time as SA was readmitted to world rugby.
Currie Cup was historically HUGELY important. Games between WP and
Northern Transvall were huge (like Test Rugby almost).
SA then got isolated from Test rugby and Currie Cup became even bigger.
We had no Test rugby to watch so the Currie Cup became our Test Rugby.
Even club rugby was big. The 'Springboks' all used to play club rugby
and the big clubs got nice crowds
> how is it rated now?
Club rugby has died. No other way of putting it.
The clubs mostly exist but they have fewer teams.
However youngsters no longer play rugby just because it is fun. If they
don't get a club contract fairly early they tend to drift out oif the
sport. I tjhink this has been echoed in most of the big rugby countries
This makes it very difficult to create a feeder system.
Currie Cup - This is not quite as big as before but the big provinces
want that trophy. (Blue Bulls, Natal Sharks, Golden Lions, Western
Province, Free State Cheetahs - We all want it)
However I cannot say quiote to what extent Super 12/14 devalued it. Our
re-emergence into Test rugby took a bit of the gloss off
But make no mistake when two of the big unions play it is still very
important.
> - Currie cup is played on a home and away basis, unlike Super 14, but
> each team does not face the other 7 teams. Has it always been like this?
Currie Cup has been through many iterations over about 100 years.
There were times when SA included some of the lesser unions into the
tournament (Once it was expanded to 14 unions - a failure in my opinion)
However for the most part it has been on a Home and Away basis
> Did it change when Super 12 was created? (I think it is much recent so
> have there been several changes?) How do the fans feel about that (not
> facing all the teams)? (In France from example the fans would deeply
> regret not seeing their team play against all the other ones every year)
Fans (at the big Unions) unquestionably want Strength vs Strength (i.e.
the Big Six Unions) playing on a Home and Away basis WITH the Springboks
available.
> - By looking at the fixtures, I can see that the Springboks cannot
> take part in some Currie cup matches because of international tests
> being played at the same time. How do the fans feel about Currie cup
> games been played without the international players?
Fans (at the big Unions) unquestionably want Strength vs Strength (i.e.
the Big Six Unions) playing on a Home and Away basis WITH the Springboks
available.
> Has it always been
> like this? Do the Springboks at least play part of the Currie cup with
> their provincial teams?
Fans (at the big Unions) unquestionably want the Springboks available.
> - The Super 14 South African teams’ squads are picked from Currie cup
> teams (for example the Stormers are picked from Western Province and
> some other teams I believe). Does it mean that a player from the Western
> Province who is not part of the Stormer’s squad (and not of the
> Springboks’ squad most likely) will only play the ten games of the
> Currie cup during the season?
>If not do the Currie cup provinces take
> part in another tournament during the Super 14?
No there is the Vodacom Cup that runs paralell to the Super 14. The
Vodacom Cup consists of
- Big Province B teams
- Smaller provinces
It is about 13 dames plus a final (if one makes it)
This year the Vodacom Cup is working well and is starting to act as a
good feeder system into the Currie Cup and Super 14.
>
> I thank you very much in advance for answering all or part of my questions.
Overall it is difficult to blame the demise of club rugby and a slight
drop off of the Currie Cup on any one happening
Overall we play to much rugby and short Test tours
I just love rugby so I would favour (and I am not going to get this in a
100 years)
- No one off Tests
- A return to longer international tours with a 3 to 4 Test series
- No Super 14
- No Tri Nations
- A strength vs. strength Currie Cup played on a home and away basis (10
games per side) - Springboks available. No Currie Cup no selection for
Springboks)
- Re-emergence of Club Rugby can follow
Make no mistake, I love the Tri Nations and I love the Super 14. I would
just prefer it the above way.
For me as a South African rugby supporter the 3 highlights are
- Watching SA play NZ - No matter what happens they are still our most
respected rivals. I cannot see that ever changing
- Watching my beloved Natal Sharks play a Currie Cup game (I live in
Cape Town now but the Sharks will always be my side)
- Attending a local Club game (somewhere close to my house) and just
watching the young talent come through plus some of the old crocks still
showing their stuff
I am not old enough but I have read that HO de Villiers (a great
Springbok and Western Prvince fullback) played club rugby well into his
40s. As he got older he just dropped down to the next lower club side.
He eventually played for the Club 8th side and loved every minute.
I can dream though
|
|
|
| Re: Questions about South African rugby [message #983443 ] |
Fri, 28 April 2006 14:39 |
|
Dave (SA) wrote:
> Roms wrote:
> > Hi This a Topic for our SA friends
[snip]
> > I would like to collect as much information as possible about the Currie
> > cup and Super 14 regarding a few things:
>
> Firstly you need a little background info
[...]
> Fans (at the big Unions) unquestionably want Strength vs Strength (i.e.
> the Big Six Unions) playing on a Home and Away basis WITH the Springboks
> available.
The first part I would say is probably true for 95% of the fans, but
I'd question the 2nd part. I for one put the National team before my
provincial team and if resting the Springboks is the _only_ way, then
I'm for it. There might be other ways to go about it though.
> I just love rugby so I would favour (and I am not going to get this in a
> 100 years)
>
> - No one off Tests
> - A return to longer international tours with a 3 to 4 Test series
> - No Super 14
I don't mind the Super 14, but would still prefer to go back to a Super
10 with the top 3 teams from the Currie Cup competing each year. Keeps
squads intact and gives more importance to the Currie Cup.
> - No Tri Nations
> - A strength vs. strength Currie Cup played on a home and away basis (10
> games per side) - Springboks available. No Currie Cup no selection for
> Springboks)
> - Re-emergence of Club Rugby can follow
>
> Make no mistake, I love the Tri Nations and I love the Super 14. I would
> just prefer it the above way.
Same. I think you'll find this is a view held by most die hard rugby
fans. Sadly, I don't think we're the people the sponsorship money and
TV deals are aimed at. However, we might find that the expanded Tri
Nations surprises us all and works very well? I doubt it, but you never
know.
> For me as a South African rugby supporter the 3 highlights are
> - Watching SA play NZ - No matter what happens they are still our most
> respected rivals. I cannot see that ever changing
Same, although I would bitterly like to beat England sometime soon.
It's been a miserable 6 years on that front.
All in all a good summary Dave.
|
|
|
| Re: Questions about South African rugby [message #983445 ] |
Fri, 28 April 2006 15:37 |
|
marknewsgroups [at] yahoo.com wrote:
[snip]
> Same. I think you'll find this is a view held by most die hard rugby
> fans. Sadly, I don't think we're the people the sponsorship money and
> TV deals are aimed at. However, we might find that the expanded Tri
> Nations surprises us all and works very well? I doubt it, but you never
> know.
What I don't quite understand, is this seems to be the view held by the
vast majority of fans I know, including on this ng. So if those of us
that hold this view are representative of the wider rugby audience,
which I think is a reasonable conclusion, then exactly who *are* the
people the sponsorship money and TV deals are aimed at?
Richard Bridgman
>
> > For me as a South African rugby supporter the 3 highlights are
> > - Watching SA play NZ - No matter what happens they are still our most
> > respected rivals. I cannot see that ever changing
>
> Same, although I would bitterly like to beat England sometime soon.
> It's been a miserable 6 years on that front.
>
> All in all a good summary Dave.
|
|
|
| Re: Questions about South African rugby [message #983446 ] |
Fri, 28 April 2006 15:39 |
|
<marknewsgroups [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1146227954.989733.263600 [at] g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Dave (SA) wrote:
>> Roms wrote:
>> > Hi This a Topic for our SA friends
>
> [snip]
>
>> > I would like to collect as much information as possible about the
>> > Currie
>> > cup and Super 14 regarding a few things:
>>
>> Firstly you need a little background info
>
> [...]
>
>> Fans (at the big Unions) unquestionably want Strength vs Strength (i.e.
>> the Big Six Unions) playing on a Home and Away basis WITH the Springboks
>> available.
>
> The first part I would say is probably true for 95% of the fans, but
> I'd question the 2nd part. I for one put the National team before my
> provincial team and if resting the Springboks is the _only_ way, then
> I'm for it. There might be other ways to go about it though.
>
>> I just love rugby so I would favour (and I am not going to get this in a
>> 100 years)
>>
>> - No one off Tests
>> - A return to longer international tours with a 3 to 4 Test series
>> - No Super 14
>
> I don't mind the Super 14, but would still prefer to go back to a Super
> 10 with the top 3 teams from the Currie Cup competing each year. Keeps
> squads intact and gives more importance to the Currie Cup.
>
I couldn't agree more. The alternative, i.e. what's coming this season, is
the Springboks being excused Currie Cup duty and the whole competition being
devalued to a level slightly above Vodacom Cup. No-one wants this, but it
will go ahead as the administrators promote their fancy ideas such as the 5
franchises and the unholy fuck up that is the Spears. The result is a
dilution of talent to such an extent that many sides are forced to blood
their youngsters in the S14 rather than the Currie Cup. Look at the
youngsters in the Stormers side, laregely inexperienced and untested at any
level let alone the highest. Sure the future looks good, but at the risk of
writing off a season or two when the relegation aspect is still around, is
it worth it? It would not surprise me one bit to see the Spears in the S14
in another season or two.
And of course, to cap it all, TV revenue is the reason for the expansion.
And what do they do? They show many of the SA teams tour games on a Friday
evening, otherwise known as Friday morning if you are in SA, when every
bugger is at work.
There's still a long way to go in SA rugby before a good compromise is
reached, but the more they tinker with it the further they get from where
they should be, somewhere between where we were before and where we are now.
The seasons are long and seemingly never ending, so it's natural to talk of
leaving out the Springboks when it just keeps getting longer. What we need
to do is shorten things a bit and condense things a little. A strength vs.
strength Currie Cup with the Vodacom Cup season running at the same time
with those games played as a curtain raiser. I agree too with a Super 10
with the top 3 PROVINCES qualifying from the Currie Cup every year as it
seems the franchises are struggling to compete and the monster is out of
control. Is there a way back for the Cats, for example? It's going to be
tough and it's going to be in the international spotlight with untried S14
players next year. But if the Lions missed out on a top 3 spot, they'd have
to fight to win it back at Currie Cup level, and go into a S10 with a squad
of players familiar with each other who'd fought together to regain their
place. Quite a different prospect altogether. This will strengthen SA rugby,
the Currie cup will prosper, and players will have a route to the S14 that
is being closed quickly.
Lengthening the 3N is also a step in the wrong direction. Sure, as a fan
it's great, but it really is robbing Peter to pay Paul when the Boks are
missing the Currie cup to play in it. Can't it just stay a home and away, 4
matches each, at the end of the domestic season?
So in conclusion, for a top player, strength vs. strength Currie Cup
drastically cuts the number of games played. A return to Super 10 drops the
number of games played, and keeping the 3N down to playing each other home
and away will cut the number of games no being played this year.
Sounds better than the at-present, overlapping, rambling over-long
competitions which just leave the players knackered and the fans complacent.
Less is more in this case I'd say.
Spizz
Spizz
|
|
|
| Re: Questions about South African rugby [message #983454 ] |
Fri, 28 April 2006 16:42 |
|
Unfortunately, in France as in the rest of the world, they are aimed at
poeple still not wathcing and loving rugby, in order to bring more
people to the games to make more money etc...
I consider myself as a die hard fan just like Dave or you and I deeply
regret that...
Richard Bridgman a écrit :
> marknewsgroups [at] yahoo.com wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> Same. I think you'll find this is a view held by most die hard rugby
>> fans. Sadly, I don't think we're the people the sponsorship money and
>> TV deals are aimed at. However, we might find that the expanded Tri
>> Nations surprises us all and works very well? I doubt it, but you never
>> know.
>
> What I don't quite understand, is this seems to be the view held by the
> vast majority of fans I know, including on this ng. So if those of us
> that hold this view are representative of the wider rugby audience,
> which I think is a reasonable conclusion, then exactly who *are* the
> people the sponsorship money and TV deals are aimed at?
>
> Richard Bridgman
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>> For me as a South African rugby supporter the 3 highlights are
>>> - Watching SA play NZ - No matter what happens they are still our most
>>> respected rivals. I cannot see that ever changing
>> Same, although I would bitterly like to beat England sometime soon.
>> It's been a miserable 6 years on that front.
>>
>> All in all a good summary Dave.
>
|
|
|
| Re: Questions about South African rugby [message #983459 ] |
Fri, 28 April 2006 17:34 |
|
Roms wrote:
> Unfortunately, in France as in the rest of the world, they are aimed at
> poeple still not wathcing and loving rugby, in order to bring more
> people to the games to make more money etc...
>
> I consider myself as a die hard fan just like Dave or you and I deeply
> regret that...
>
Actually getting people to the grounds to watch more games is not their
top objective.
All they care about is
- Maximising the number of people that watch on TV.
- The more good games the more people watch.
- Lots of adverts per match X lots of matches = LOTS of advertising revenue
|
|
|
Gehe zu:
aktuelle Zeit: Thu Jan 8 16:16:45 CET 2009
Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0.15002 Sekunden |
