RugbyRebels

As I suspected the Chiefs have more travelling than any other NZ team

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CbZyzflUMAA ... name=large

My heart bleeds for you.

Airlines must make a mint out of this comp.

The Sunwolves could probably make a business case for leasing a jet for the duration and having an inhouse flight crew. Like Iron Maiden.

Jaguares is a shadow Pumas side, isn't it? It should be ok.

By the way this thread has taken off, you can tell how successful the expansion to 18 teams has been. Obviously the fans have come to grips with the easy to understand group/conference system. In particular, there is broad acceptance of the complete opaque and non-transparent way in which inter-group fixtures have been arranged.

I probably couldn't put it better than this http://www.espnscrum.com/super-rugby-20 ... 87389.html

Anyway, whinging won't help so let's just get on with it. The opening weekend's fixtures (predicted winners in bold:

Blues v Highlanders (NZ conf) - defending champs will be pushed by Tana's team but the JK hangover is not fully cleared yet.

Brumbies v Hurricanes (inter-conf, ANZ group) - Canes will start strongly, with all wheels firmly attached for now...

Cheetahs v Jaguares (inter-conf, Africa Group) - Shadow Pumas will be fired up and keen to make a statement in their first match.

Sunwolves v Lions (inter-conf, Africa Group) - with so many household names on both sides, this one is harder to pick than a broken nose, nah actually its a bunch of nobodies wasting everyone's time. I'm going Lions simply because they appear to be a functioning entity. Mind you the combination of an SA team on the road and a new team keen to make a mark could see me wrong. Zero fucks given though.

Crusaders v Chiefs (NZ Conf) - Crusaders were well off the pace in warm-ups.

Waratahs v Reds (AUS conf) - More class in the home team

Force v Rebels (AUS conf) - Who needs Le Crunch or El Classico when Australian rugby can serve up this annual feast? ZFG.

Kings v Sharks (Africa 2 conf) - I know that South Africans are used to playing well despite administrative shambles but the Kings have set a new mark for ineptness, going broke before they even set foot back in the comp. I have a morbid curiosity as to just how bad they will be.

Stormers v Bulls (Africa 1 conf) - Stormers are probably still the best SA has to offer

Lizard wrote:Jaguares is a shadow Pumas side, isn't it? It should be ok.

I think the Jags will be ok, and may well reach their target of the playoffs on debut. The Sunwolves, on the other hand, may struggle badly. I personally think they shouldn't even be there.

rowan wrote:

Lizard wrote:Jaguares is a shadow Pumas side, isn't it? It should be ok.

I think the Jags will be ok, and may well reach their target of the playoffs on debut. The Sunwolves, on the other hand, may struggle badly. I personally think they shouldn't even be there.

I agree completely. I'm not sure what level of pay or other inducements the players have been offered but they've put together a good side. Being the only home-based, professional team is probably a big draw card. Internationally, the Pumas operate at a different level to Japan, are already in a SANZAAR tournament, and have some experience of fielding a domestic side in international comps through the Pampas XV. Putting aside geographical considerations (which still cause me concern), an Argentinean side is a logical expansion step.

Japan, on the other hand, are competing on their home turf with some of the best funded clubs in the world. I'm no expert, but presumably the corporate backers of the Japanese clubs are not massively overwhelmed with a desire to do what is best for the national game (other than importing Tongans and Kiwi loose forwards on 3+ year contracts). Even the full Japanese national team would struggle over the Super Rugby season. Plainly there are some Japanese players of the required standard (Tanaka, Leitch etc) but few have signed on. The Sunwolves (AFAIK) have 9 players with Super Rugby experience, 3 of them seem to have come out of the Aussie dispensation scheme* but with very limited game time (i.e. 0 caps or 1 or 2 sub appearances only). Captain Horie is the only ethnically Japanese player to have been signed on true merit for Super Rugby, having been picked up by the Rebels out of New Zealand provincial rugby. The other 5 are journeymen of varying degrees - Moli showed some potential for the Blues but didn't apply himself, Leonardi has played everywhere but only got regular game time in Edinburgh, Quirk apparently has 38 caps for the Reds over several years, Tusi Pisi is OK, and Viloen is at least very experienced but probably peaked as a Springbok dirt-tracker last decade.


*Aussie franchises were permitted and encouraged to sign Japanese players ahead of the Japanese franchise joining the comp

cashead wrote:The Chiefs have replaced Nepo Laulala and Michell Karpik with a couple of Steelers.

Karpik is replaced with Sam Henwood, who apparently impressed at flanker for Counties, and had been doing some club rugby in Portugal, so his fitness isn't too bad.

Replacing Laualala is Hiroshi Yamashita, who has 49 test caps for Japan to his name at tighthead prop. He stands at 1.83m and tips the scales at 120kgs, and will fly in from Kobe.

Gee, our front row is going to look pretty green...

'canes caned, despite two brumbie yellows. Looked like a strong team too- any view?

Was only paying half attention to the match, but looked like they were continuing the Piri Weepu and Julian Seavea tradition of turning up fat, lazy and not very interested in doing much. Fluffing around with a pointless "documentary" in the pre-season probably didn't help much either.

cashead wrote:Save us Super Rugby. Save us from shitty NH rugby.

Tries, glorious tries.

I'm glad I caught the two matches this morning to balance out my chi ahead of this evening's Wales game and the other Blues kicking everything on Sunday.

Tre wrote:

cashead wrote:Save us Super Rugby. Save us from shitty NH rugby.

Tries, glorious tries.

I'm glad I caught the two matches this morning to balance out my chi ahead of this evening's Wales game and the other Blues kicking everything on Sunday.

The quality of rugby in Super Rugby was so much higher than anything we've seen so far in the 6N. Thank christ for it.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Tre wrote:

cashead wrote:Save us Super Rugby. Save us from shitty NH rugby.

Tries, glorious tries.

I'm glad I caught the two matches this morning to balance out my chi ahead of this evening's Wales game and the other Blues kicking everything on Sunday.

The quality of rugby in Super Rugby was so much higher than anything we've seen so far in the 6N. Thank christ for it.

I've wanted to say that since last night but thought I'd get roasted for suggesting it. Why has NH rugby gone backwards?

Len wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Tre wrote:
Tries, glorious tries.

I'm glad I caught the two matches this morning to balance out my chi ahead of this evening's Wales game and the other Blues kicking everything on Sunday.

The quality of rugby in Super Rugby was so much higher than anything we've seen so far in the 6N. Thank christ for it.

I've wanted to say that since last night but thought I'd get roasted for suggesting it. Why has NH rugby gone backwards?

It hasn't. It just hasn't moved forwards. I think it's probably the first time that Super Rugby has started stronger than the 6N. It's support and skill levels that make the big difference.

I've been banging the drum for some time saying that Super Rugby was very strong, even in the days it was being decried as basketball rugby. It's only a couple of years ago that people were still saying on the EMB that it wasn't real rugby and defence was optional whilst i was trying to point out that it was the strength of the attack, not the weakness of defence that led to large scores.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Len wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote: The quality of rugby in Super Rugby was so much higher than anything we've seen so far in the 6N. Thank christ for it.

I've wanted to say that since last night but thought I'd get roasted for suggesting it. Why has NH rugby gone backwards?

It hasn't. It just hasn't moved forwards. I think it's probably the first time that Super Rugby has started stronger than the 6N. It's support and skill levels that make the big difference.

I've been banging the drum for some time saying that Super Rugby was very strong, even in the days it was being decried as basketball rugby. It's only a couple of years ago that people were still saying on the EMB that it wasn't real rugby and defence was optional whilst i was trying to point out that it was the strength of the attack, not the weakness of defence that led to large scores.

It's weird that you get labelled as some kind of hipster for getting up at 6.30 to watch it.

Tre wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Len wrote:
I've wanted to say that since last night but thought I'd get roasted for suggesting it. Why has NH rugby gone backwards?

It hasn't. It just hasn't moved forwards. I think it's probably the first time that Super Rugby has started stronger than the 6N. It's support and skill levels that make the big difference.

I've been banging the drum for some time saying that Super Rugby was very strong, even in the days it was being decried as basketball rugby. It's only a couple of years ago that people were still saying on the EMB that it wasn't real rugby and defence was optional whilst i was trying to point out that it was the strength of the attack, not the weakness of defence that led to large scores.

It's weird that you get labelled as some kind of hipster for getting up at 6.30 to watch it.

My wife thinks i'm slightly mental, but for other people on message boards not to get it is indeed weird.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Tre wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote: It hasn't. It just hasn't moved forwards. I think it's probably the first time that Super Rugby has started stronger than the 6N. It's support and skill levels that make the big difference.

I've been banging the drum for some time saying that Super Rugby was very strong, even in the days it was being decried as basketball rugby. It's only a couple of years ago that people were still saying on the EMB that it wasn't real rugby and defence was optional whilst i was trying to point out that it was the strength of the attack, not the weakness of defence that led to large scores.

It's weird that you get labelled as some kind of hipster for getting up at 6.30 to watch it.

My wife thinks i'm slightly mental, but for other people on message boards not to get it is indeed weird.

"I'll get up with the kids" worked for me for a while!

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Len wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote: The quality of rugby in Super Rugby was so much higher than anything we've seen so far in the 6N. Thank christ for it.

I've wanted to say that since last night but thought I'd get roasted for suggesting it. Why has NH rugby gone backwards?

It hasn't. It just hasn't moved forwards. I think it's probably the first time that Super Rugby has started stronger than the 6N. It's support and skill levels that make the big difference.

I've been banging the drum for some time saying that Super Rugby was very strong, even in the days it was being decried as basketball rugby. It's only a couple of years ago that people were still saying on the EMB that it wasn't real rugby and defence was optional whilst i was trying to point out that it was the strength of the attack, not the weakness of defence that led to large scores.

...what, Beef and APR? That's like taking heed of Nigel Farage.

Banquo wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Len wrote:
I've wanted to say that since last night but thought I'd get roasted for suggesting it. Why has NH rugby gone backwards?

It hasn't. It just hasn't moved forwards. I think it's probably the first time that Super Rugby has started stronger than the 6N. It's support and skill levels that make the big difference.

I've been banging the drum for some time saying that Super Rugby was very strong, even in the days it was being decried as basketball rugby. It's only a couple of years ago that people were still saying on the EMB that it wasn't real rugby and defence was optional whilst i was trying to point out that it was the strength of the attack, not the weakness of defence that led to large scores.

...what, Beef and APR? That's like taking heed of Nigel Farage.

Sadly not just them.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote: It hasn't. It just hasn't moved forwards. I think it's probably the first time that Super Rugby has started stronger than the 6N. It's support and skill levels that make the big difference.

I've been banging the drum for some time saying that Super Rugby was very strong, even in the days it was being decried as basketball rugby. It's only a couple of years ago that people were still saying on the EMB that it wasn't real rugby and defence was optional whilst i was trying to point out that it was the strength of the attack, not the weakness of defence that led to large scores.

...what, Beef and APR? That's like taking heed of Nigel Farage.

Sadly not just them.

rilly....ah well. Can't think of any now, who were naysayers then

Coincidence?

The Highlanders have been dealt a double injury blow early in the Super Rugby season.

The defending champions, who lost their opening match 33- 31 against the Blues at Eden Park, will have to do without Waisake Naholo and Fumiaki Tanaka for at least the next month, or longer due to injury.

The All Black Naholo, who made a miracle recovery to make the World Cup squad in 2015, sustained a new fracture to the same leg that he injured during his test debut.

The injury occurred late in the game against the Blues and the fracture was confirmed by X-ray.

"While this is very unfortunate for Waisake, the positive news is that this injury is not as bad as his last fracture," said team doctor Greg Macleod.

"He is already managing well and it's expected his rehab will take six to eight weeks."

...

Naholo will not be returning to Fiji for treatment as he did last year, his rehabilitation will be under the guidance of Highlanders team doctor Macleod.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/7742 ... ng-his-leg

Blues were always going to be better off without JK. Great player but fairly unsuccessful throughout his coaching career.

Canes blew their golden opportunity last season and their embarrassing status as the only New Zealand team never to have won the title looks set to continue - probably for eternity.

Jaguares showed that they belong in this competition and will be a force to be reckoned with. Not surprising, of course, given the strength of Argentine rugby and the fact they only have one team.

Sunwolves' defeat was unsurprising, and although the scoreline may not have been so bad, I think they'll be in for a few good thrashings this season, especially when they come up against Australasian opposition.

Interesting article on the Sunwolves. I agree with it for the most part:

By Patrick Johnston

SINGAPORE (Reuters) - The Sunwolves entry into Super Rugby is unlikely to grow the game around Asia, according to the sport's new rights owner in the region who believes showcasing more local action online will have a greater impact.

The Tokyo-based franchise, who will also play matches in Singapore, begun the Southern Hemisphere competition with a 26-13 home defeat by South Africa's Lions on Saturday after a tumultuous pre-season trying to assemble a team.

The expansion into Asia is expected to increase the revenues of tournament organisers SANZAAR but New Zealander Tim Martin, who has scooped up the rights to show Super Rugby matches in 23 Asian countries, wondered what else a Japanese entrant brought.

"I don't think the Sunwolves will do a huge amount for Asian rugby," he told Reuters in an interview in Singapore this week after securing the rights deal.

"I think they will do a lot for Japanese rugby but they won't do a lot for Malaysian rugby. I don't see how those dots join."

Martin, a former advertising executive, made waves when his Coliseum Sports Media snapped up the rights to show English Premier League soccer matches in New Zealand using his online platform in 2013.

He took a bold leap then for a fledgling start-up - albeit backed by a U.S.-based billionaire - but believed Japan would have been better off taking a conservative approach to growing the game after the World Cup win over South Africa last year.

"Why leap into Super Rugby, which is the hardest, most competitive rugby competition in the world?

"The Sunwolves could be a disaster, I hope not and I don't think they will be but they could. Nobody wants to watch a team get whipped."

As well as showing the Sunwolves and Super Rugby around Asian countries, he also bagged Rugby Championship matches, European internationals and domestic action from England, France, South Africa and New Zealand among others.

He admitted the $14.99 a month subscription could prove too costly outside the expat heavy markets of Hong Kong and Singapore and did not expect many people in Myanmar or Bangladesh to subscribe and watch the English league final.

But he said his online model meant no increased cost for running matches in multiple countries and opened doors to the inquisitive few in Bhutan and beyond.

He believed adding local rugby to his portfolio would help attract audiences and showcase a pathway to the elite, adding he also planned to make some All Black internationals free to view.

"I think we have to make rugby bigger in Malaysia and Singapore and Korea and I think that's about getting younger people in to it and access to more content and all that stuff," he said.

With rugby's inclusion in the Olympics this year, the sport is tipped for big growth in playing numbers.

Martin said the number of Asian unions had doubled to 32 in the last 10 years and that there were 400,000 registered players in Asia - outside of Japan.

"I reckon rugby in the region can become a significant thing. It's right on the cusp."

He said he wanted to eventually grow from 23 countries to 200, leaving the traditional sports bases like New Zealand and England alone and showing rugby online to new audiences around the world where television companies have overlooked the game.

Asia, though, with its young, tech-obsessed population that could easily access his platform was first priority. He said New Zealand and the bigger unions had failed to maximize their name by selling individual rights in different markets like he has.

"There are a whole bunch of fragmented unions. Its chaotic, we think there is a role for an aggregate," he said.

"It will help turbo charge the game's growth."

Meanwhile, they drew 19K to their home debut, well short of capacity. Interestingly, they're using a 27K stadium in Tokyo, but a 55K venue in Singers. It's going to be fascinating to see what sort of crowd they draw for their "home games" in the latter stadium.

Sounds like bad luck for the Sunwolves today, and perhaps they will be more competitive than I had anticipated. But I understand the crowd was only 8,000 in Singapore's 55K stadium. That's got to be a concern. If they can't do better than that this year, the Sunwolves should just play all their games in Tokyo and try to build up a bit of a fan culture there.

On another note, I was thinking about this today and it seems to me Super Rugby could be just a step away from splitting in two. There could be a Pacific Championship with separate Australian and NZ conferences, with Japan added to the former and perhaps a Pacific Islands team added to the latter. And there could be an Atlantic Championship comprising six SA teams and two Argentina franchises in two groups of four. Note: These would be two entirely separate competitions. If the respective winners wanted to meet in a sort of 'Champions League' finale, that would be fine. But for all intents and purposes we would have two separate tournaments, one to determine the Pacific champions, the other to determine the South Atlantic champions. Who knows, a few more decades down the line it could break up even further, with separate Asian and South American competitions getting underway...