Former All Black captain Taine Randell is against the idea of South Africa getting six Super Rugby teams.
A scheduled meeting of SANZAR’s Executive Committee took place in Sydney last Thursday where the future of Super Rugby was among the agenda items.
Sport24
SANZAR CEO Greg Peters confirmed that the preferred model likely to be adopted involves six teams from South Africa and a new team from Argentina.
However, Randell believes South Africa lacks the depth to warrant a sixth team in Super Rugby.
In his regular column on the stuff.co.nz website, Randell wrote:
“First of all, the South Africans. Having taken the wooden spoon in 13 of the 18 years Super Rugby has existed, South Africa has no right to another team.
“Already their talent depth has proved to be too shallow with five teams. Adding another will only stretch that further.
“And let’s not forget that the Springboks continue to rely heavily on selecting players who ply their trade offshore, collecting big money contracts in Britain, France and Japan.
“We will expect the Southern Kings to return to the mix in 2016. They finished last in their one-off season last year only to be replaced by the Lions who have had a long history of struggles. Nothing will change there,” wrote Randell.
Randell does support the idea of getting Argentina involved but says they should have two franchises in an 18-team competition.
“Rather than 17 teams, I believe a Super 18 might be a better way to go and if we are going to hold out a helping hand to Argentina, then perhaps we should have offered them two teams.”
Was he always such a knob and I just missed it?
He makes a good point.
Wooden spoon 13 out of 18 highlights a point. For all the lack of depth in aus this stat highlights how easy the RSA conference is.
2 @ Loosehead:
I tend to agree.
I also agree with him.
Our problem in SA is we don’t distinguish between quality and quantity.
It’s easy to say we have so many professional players, but being paid to play and being a true professional are not always the same thing.
We believe we have the most and very best junior players, yet we don’t win the junior WC every year do we?
What will we say if only the Sharks make the top 6 this year? Judging on these first two weeks so far, the Sharks, Crusaders, Chiefs, Waratahs and Reds look good to take maybe 5 spots.
Can one of our other 4 remaining teams keep the Brumbies or Highlanders or Blues from taking the last spot in the top 6?
Only the Sharks have an excellent starting XV with equally good reserve depth, and that’s only because they contracted prudently and got the best off field structures. Too many of our other sides have some very dubious players in the starting line up and not real quality depth when the injuries start coming.
Had the Kings been given a spot in place on the Rebels a few years ago (as it rightly should have been the case) things would have been very different today…
The problem is emphasised by picking overseas players.
Playing 6 teams will be disastrous for our Rugby in the long term.
@ Gena_ZA:
Things would have been different. RSA would have taken more wooden spoons!
I have to agree with Taine Randell. Our current franchises can not keep up with injuries and keeping players based locally due to the STUPID bok contracting system.
We currently have so many players in France and Japan that can all still play for the Boks due to their Bok contracts.
It was mentioned in a earlier comment that the Sharks have the best quality starting 15 and most reserve depth and I have to agree. The Stormers and the Bulls barely have a proper starting 15 not even mentioning reserves. The Cheetahs and Lions are playing with heart but one or 2 injuries in crucial positions like no 10(Boshoff) and it will be season over.
The Sharks will finish no lower than 3rd over all and are our best bet for this season. Without long term injuries the Lions and Cheetahs could maybe finish top 10 but nowhere near top 6.
The Bulls and Stormers are going to finish very close to the bottom of the log overall.
So now we get team no 6. So we will see reserve player moving to that team purely for game more game time, and sit with 6 average teams with no reserve depth what so ever.
Only 1 and a half round is finished and we already predict the complete log
The Kings was a fresh air in SA Rugby.
Give credit
1. They only got permission to play late in 2012
2. They came into the player market after all good players was grabbed
3. They played a good game, that added value to the SA Conference
4. Their budget was small and could not offer big long contracts
But
They played like a team (take note Bulls and Stormers)
They had good coaching staff
@ Timothy Bornman:
100%. If anything we need to be down-scaling the comp, with 3, maximum 4 teams playing off in a Heineken Cup style format each year. The top performing CC teams get to through each year.
Also the selection of overseas Boks is a great concern for me, we should be following the NZ model. Locals only. Let them go for the payday at the end of their careers like the Kiwis
Ag BS mr Randell. If you use that logic then Oz should only field 2, maybe 3 teams and NZ also only 2 teams. You should ask if the inclusion of another SA team would generate more money. We need to find a way to compete with the euro and yen.
I reckon each conference have their own tournaments and top three play against the top 3 from the other conferences. With no loaning of players between teams.
@ Wallabie.:
IMO they should try to get teams from England, France or Japan involved. If they want to keep the highest quality, they need to keep the best players and for that they need the most money.
14 @ Wallabie.:
Howzit Walla, How you doing mate? Hope well.
The thing is here in SA we really don’t want to be playing each other twice in SR and Currie Cup. So hope somehow they can go back to the old format where we only play each other once. Also just a semi final and final. It worked back then and will again.
Users Online
Total 133 users including 0 member, 133 guests, 0 bot online
Most users ever online were 3735, on 31 August 2022 @ 6:23 pm
No Counter as from 31 October 2009: 41,338,746 Page Impressions
_