Back 
1
SANZAAR distance themselves from 'speculation' surrounding major changes to Super Rugby format
By Online Editors
SANZAAR have moved to shut down speculation surrounding major changes to the structure of Super Rugby.
ADVERTISEMENT
It has been widely reported that SANZAAR bosses were considering a new Trans-Tasman tournament between the New Zealand and Australian teams, shutting South Africa rugby out of the competition.
Speculation intensified over the weekend, which has resulted in SANZAAR releasing a statement in order to “publicly correct the misleading information” regarding the future of Super Rugby.
However, the statement stopped short of ruling out temporary change to Super Rugby as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Super Rugby is set to ditch the current conference format in favour of a 14-team round robin tournament from next season, but there is still much uncertainty regarding the future of the tournament beyond that.
In a statement, SANZAAR confirmed that broadcasters have already been sold a 14-team Super Rugby cross-border tournament, but admitted changes could be introduced to that format as a result of COVID-19.
SANZAAR also confirmed that the knock-on effect of COVID-19 could result in “a strong domestic focus” when Super Rugby eventually returns.
ADVERTISEMENT
“SANZAAR would like to publicly correct the misleading information and speculation regarding suggestions in various media articles over the weekend about the future structure of SANZAAR and indeed tournament formats for Super Rugby,” a SANZAAR statement read.
“Whilst it is acknowledged that the impact of COVID-19 has presently brought unprecedented change to the world of rugby as we have known it, any changes to the Super Rugby structure this year and into the future are matters that are currently being discussed in detail by all the joint-venture, national union stakeholders: Argentina, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa.
“The stakeholders are all committed to the joint-venture through to 2030 and once consensus is agreed upon by all the stakeholders it will then be communicated by the SANZAAR Board.
“With respect to 2020, it is likely that once the green light is given to commence the playing of rugby matches in the various stakeholder territories, that a revised Super Rugby competition format will be implemented.
ADVERTISEMENT
“In all likelihood, this will mean a strong domestic focus in each territory given the travel, border and government restrictions that we believe we will have to adhere to. SANZAAR will in due course make the appropriate announcements on the restart of rugby matches.
New Zealand Rugby chairman Brent Impey fears for the future of southern hemisphere rugby.https://t.co/L3NSuJRV35
— RugbyPass (@RugbyPass) May 4, 2020
“As to the future competition structures in 2021 and beyond, SANZAAR has already sold to broadcasters a 14-team Super Rugby cross-border tournament format as well as the four-team Rugby Championship, within the stakeholder core markets.
“Again where any changes to these competitions is required, as a consequence of any ongoing affects of the COVID-19 pandemic, these will be decided upon by the SANZAAR board.”
“Having spoken with my SANZAAR Board members I can confirm that none of the suggested models or structures that have been commented on recently, such as stand-alone Trans-Tasman formats, have been agreed by any of the SANZAAR unions individually or collectively,” SANZAAR CEO, Andy Marinos, added.
“All such reports are merely speculative and have no basis to them.”
“This is not to say that we are not having realistic discussions on what may have to eventuate should COVID-19 restrictions continue beyond 2020.
“We are presently looking in detail at various competition formats but any agreed format will include teams from all four stakeholder national unions. Due to uncertainty over what various government restrictions, if any, may look like next year including international travel, no date has been set yet as to when a decision will be made on 2021 and beyond.
“A major consideration is that we also have an obligation to discuss any contingencies with our broadcaster partners in the first instance after which we will make public comment.”
Latest Comments
listen to the comments on here - half of the stuff here is abuse - if someone were to talk about ‘you’ the way ‘you’ talk about others would you take it? Farrell is a top man, diligent and hard working. Whether you like his personality or not is immaterial. Talk about vitriol? Listen to it pouring out on here. There is no longer any perspective. People like Farrell are sitting targets for faceless morons with no talent simply spewing hate at every target that doesn’t fit their narrow minded world. What a shame the rugby world has such patronage. Then again, just human beings, I guess…
Go to commentsWhile there is absolute merit in the argument that Robertson should demonstrate a clear break from the Crusaders, I am not in agreement that Savea should be made captain. Certainly, Savea can captain the ABs that’s not the issue - but is he a good captain. He does interact with the Ref well, and he certainly has the respect of the team. However, on many occasions because he gets so involved in the game, his decision-making is suspect. There are countless examples where his “gung-ho” leadership has cost the ABs - the final RWC23 is one, decisions not to kick goals or set up drop goal was farcical. But this was the same in the 101st test against the Boks, where Ardie consistently turned down kicks at goal to go for the driving maul try - we lost by two points. Then there was the case in the dying minutes vs. England when Ardie called for TJ to do a chip kick instead of go deep; England recovered the ball and scored, effecting a comeback of 21 points in the last 8 minutes of the game to draw game. Ardie is not a great #8, he makes do, but he would be so much better at #7 - Scott Barrett clearly has brain-farts when he plays, but he is the type of Buck Shelford character I believe the ABs now need to lead - We need to build back our power play
Go to comments