Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Here's how an ex-Wallaby believes Pacific Island countries could creatively join Super Rugby revamp

(Photo by Mike Hewitt/Getty Images)

Wallabies great Tim Horan has called for Pacific Island nations to be part of a new-look Super Rugby model, with their teams based out of cities in Australia and New Zealand. The SANZAAR competition looks set to undergo a major revamp from next year, with New Zealand Rugby having announced a wholesale review into every aspect following the outbreak of Covid-19.

ADVERTISEMENT

International travel has been an exorbitant feature of the competition and with many flight paths currently closed off by the coronavirus crisis, there is widespread speculation the teams from South Africa and Argentina will be omitted from an Asia-Pacific model of Super Rugby.

Horan suggested teams from those continents could play in their own conference and potentially meet the best Asia-Pacific teams in a playoff series. The dual World Cup winner told The Breakdown on New Zealand’s Sky TV that Japan would ideally remain involved and eventually the United States should be welcomed.

Video Spacer

RugbyPass brings you Tim Horan’s appearance on The Lockdown, the Sky NZ rugby programme

Video Spacer

RugbyPass brings you Tim Horan’s appearance on The Lockdown, the Sky NZ rugby programme

He also said the Pacific Island teams should finally be given a regular role in a prominent rugby competition, although he accepted they couldn’t be based in their home countries for financial reasons.

“We’ve got to keep supporting them. Whether we potentially have one of them in next year… can you base Tonga in Auckland? Can you base maybe Samoa on the Gold Coast for a period of time? The financial model has to stack up going forward because the broadcast revenue is not going to be there as much as it used to be.”

Horan added it would be important to retain close ties with South Africa and Argentina at Test level. Meanwhile, the man leading New Zealand’s review, lawyer and Blues chairman Don Mackinnon, said a more localised Super competition will be strongly considered, along with the introduction of the Pacific Islands.

He told Newshub the reopening of trans-Tasman travel may prove to be the core element of any competition revamp. “It could be possibly with or without Australia, depending on the (travel) bubble that is being talked about,” Mackinnon said. “A whole lot of issues flow from that, but that’s probably the most obvious immediate change we need to consider.”

ADVERTISEMENT

– AAP 

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 20 minutes ago
'Passionate reunion of France and New Zealand shows Fabien Galthie is wrong to rest his stars'

Where? I remember saying "unders"? The LNR was formed by the FFR, if I said that in a way that meant the 'pro' side of the game didn't have an equal representation/say as the 'amateur' side (FFR remit) that was not my intent.


But also, as it is the governing body, it also has more responsibility. As long as WR looks at FFR as the running body for rugby in France, that 'power' will remain. If the LNR refuses to govern their clubs use of players to enable a request by FFR (from WR) to ensure it's players are able to compete in International rugby takes place they will simply remove their participation. If the players complain to the France's body, either of their health and safety concerns (through playing too many 'minutes' etc) or that they are not allowed to be part in matches of national interest, my understanding is action can be taken against the LNR like it could be any other body/business. I see where you're coming from now re EPCR and the shake up they gave it, yes, that wasn't meant to be a separate statement to say that FFR can threaten them with EPCR expulsion by itself, simply that it would be a strong repercussion for those teams to be removed (no one would want them after the above).


You keep bringing up these other things I cannot understand why. Again, do you think if the LNR were not acting responsibly they would be able to get away with whatever they want (the attitude of these posters saying "they pay the players")? You may deem what theyre doing currently as being irresponsible but most do not. Countries like New Zealand have not even complained about it because they've never had it different, never got things like windfall TV contracts from France, so they can't complain because theyre not missing out on anything. Sure, if the French kept doing things like withholding million dollar game payments, or causing millions of dollars of devaluation in rights, they these things I'm outlining would be taking place. That's not the case currently however, no one here really cares what the French do. It's upto them to sort themselves out if they're not happy. Now, that said, if they did make it obvious to World Rugby that they were never going to send the French side away (like they possibly did stating their intent to exclude 20 targeted players) in July, well then they would simply be given XV fixtures against tier 2 sides during that window and the FFR would need to do things like the 50/50 revenue split to get big teams visiting in Nov.

305 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Tupou Vaa'i gives first impression of 'big unit' Fabian Holland Tupou Vaa'i on 'big unit' Fabian Holland
Search