Even after 12 years, time in which the Pumas have beaten the All Blacks three times, the New Zealand public can’t get excited about Argentina being in the Rugby Championship.
After joining the Rugby Championship in 2012, it was initially a hard slog for the Pumas to win games, and even harder for them to win respect.
Partly that’s because New Zealand’s fan base is notoriously hard to impress, and every visiting team in history, even the few who have won tests or even a Series, have felt they never quite had the full respect of their hosts.
But partly it was also because Argentina didn’t consistently produce the sort of rugby required to convince New Zealanders that they were a worthy addition to the Rugby Championship.
For the first eight years of the Rugby Championship, the Pumas only once came close to beating the All Blacks. That was in 2019, when the All Blacks fielded an experimental team in World Cup year and were wobbling a bit before they sneaked home 20-16.
The rest of the games were typically one-sided, while the Pumas were often guilty of playing a grim, conservative brand of rugby where they would advance by inches.
It all changed in 2020, when the Rugby Championship – played without South Africa who decided not to travel due to concerns around Covid – was hosted by Australia, in mid-November.
On neutral territory, and with the sun on their backs, the Pumas produced the best performance in their history to defy the fact their players had been in a hard lockdown for months and beat the All Blacks 24-15.
It was an epic performance, and they followed it up two years later when they found themselves in Christchurch confronting an All Blacks team that made the mistake of not respecting them enough.
Australia’s record is singularly unimpressive and yet in the minds of the Kiwi public, the Wallabies remain a treasured and valued opponent, while the Pumas continue to be seen as second-rate, unworthy, or simply not in the same class.
The Pumas bagged their second win that night, and of course, they have now collected a third win after beating the All Blacks 38-30 in Wellington. They have produced a recent record against New Zealand that is far more impressive than that which the Wallabies have amassed.
Australia have not won a test in New Zealand since 2001 and have only won Rugby Championship fixtures against the All Blacks in World Cup years. The Wallabies grand total of Rugby Championship wins against the All Blacks is in fact just two – with a draw in Sydney 2014.
Australia’s record is singularly unimpressive and yet in the minds of the Kiwi public, the Wallabies remain a treasured and valued opponent, while the Pumas continue to be seen as second-rate, unworthy, or simply not in the same class.
This was confirmed by the 8,000 empty seats in Wellington and another 6,000 empty seats the following week in Auckland.
Welcome back Will Jordan!#AllBlacks #NZLvARG pic.twitter.com/qQ0cK07RMC
— All Blacks (@AllBlacks) August 17, 2024
It’s a strange set of affairs that Argentina have proven their worth in the Rugby Championship and have delivered better results against the All Blacks than Australia, and yet they remain unloved and, as it also appears, unwanted.
When next they will be in New Zealand is hard to know as Southern Hemisphere rugby is potentially going to be dramatically reconfigured between 2026 and 2030 (possibly for longer) and the future of the Rugby Championship in its current guise is precarious to say the least.
New Zealand (and Australia) are about to begin negotiating new broadcast contracts and in a quest to boost income and to make the landscape more fan centric, the former is winding back the clock and returning to the age of the old-fashioned multi-game tour.
When you think about not only the fantastic rivalry between the All Blacks and Springboks but the wider connection around midweek games and the ability to get right around the country, that’s something that brings the country, here and in South Africa, alive.
Mark Robinson, All Blacks Chief Executive
New Zealand and South Africa have agreed that every fourth year they will host reciprocal tours, with the All Blacks set to go to the Republic in 2026 for what will be either a three or four-test series with a handful of midweek matches.
The Boks will come to New Zealand in 2030 and take on a similar itinerary – a year after the British and Irish tour of 2029.
This return to a forgotten age will, so most independent experts believe, generate significant broadcast value. Nostalgia is big business and the rivalry between the All Blacks and Springboks was built on elongated tours that would go on for months.
As NZR chief executive Mark Robinson told the NZ Herald: “When you think about not only the fantastic rivalry between the All Blacks and Springboks but the wider connection around midweek games and the ability to get right around the country, that’s something that brings the country, here and in South Africa, alive. A lot of thought goes into that.
“One-off matches are great but if you can bring an extended period of real excitement, right across the country, they’re moments rugby wants to be involved in. We talk a lot about how we can inspire and unify the country, well, I don’t think you get better moments than those sorts of opportunities to do that.”
But this bi-lateral agreement between New Zealand and South Africa comes at a cost to their two other Sanzaar partners – Australia and Argentina – because in 2026 and 2030, there will be no Rugby Championship.
There won’t be a window for it and the Pumas and Wallabies are in danger of being left high and dry – effectively left without a meaningful test programme every fourth year.
And with the Rugby Championship typically truncated to just one round in World Cup years – (although the later start to the 2027 tournament in Australia may enable it to be played in full) – Argentina and Australia are facing genuine challenges to piece together the test programmes they will need to compete effectively in the proposed Nations Championship that is likely to begin in July 2026.
The Pumas and Wallabies will each host three different Six Nations sides in July 2026, and then play the other three in the North in November.
But how they fill in their time between these two blocs is currently unknown, although Robinson has said discussion remain ongoing in search of a solution.
If the Rugby Championship is not played in 2026 or 2030, what value will it deliver to fans and by extension, broadcasters?
“It [the proposed touring schedule] potentially has some impact around the nature of what a traditional Rugby Championship looks like, so how do we work through with all the partners involved to make sure something like that can be additive for all the teams across the Sanzaar joint venture?
“It’s definitely something that’s on the radar. There’s a bit more work to do at this stage.”
It is believed these discussions are focused on working out whether to persevere with the Rugby Championship at all.
If the Rugby Championship is not played in 2026 or 2030, what value will it deliver to fans and by extension, broadcasters?
And that is a huge question for New Zealand to answer because they need the next five years to provide the All Blacks with a meaningful and robust high-performance schedule, but one that also delivers improved commercial returns from broadcast and sponsorship income.
Inbound and outbound tours with the Springboks will be high value properties for which broadcasters around the world will likely be willing to pay a premium, but New Zealand is selling its rights for the next five years and a watered-down Rugby Championship may not be something that TV executives are willing to stick a lot of money into, and hence the overall package may not deliver the desired financial lift.
The alternative to playing the Rugby Championship would be to double down on the touring concept and commit to it entirely – build long-tour itineraries every year that include Argentina and Australia, and Japan, Fiji and the Pacific Islands.
The issue with this would be determining its broadcast appeal because the Australian TV market may not be excited by a programme that does not annually feature the All Blacks.
The Australians say that the Bledisloe is their biggest rugby event outside of the World Cup and Lions tours and a commercial winner for them that they can’t afford to see reduced in importance or regularity.
In 2026 and 2030 there will be limited available weekends to fit in the Bledisloe if NZR remains committed, which it likely will, to playing an offshore test in Japan, USA or other venues en route to playing in the Nations Championship.
But in 2026 and 2030 there will be limited available weekends to fit in the Bledisloe if NZR remains committed, which it likely will, to playing an offshore test in Japan, USA or other venues en route to playing in the Nations Championship.
In those years, the option may be to play an Anzac Day test, but that will come with innumerable problems around player release in the middle of Super Rugby.
The future for international rugby in the Southern Hemisphere is murky, and it does seem badly timed that the Pumas, having shown they are a credible and real threat, are being treated as if they are there to make up the numbers.
Notoriously snobby, or "lacking in rugby intelligence", you mean.
This Argentinian team started turning heads and changing mindsets when they became the the top dog coming out of the west, the African conferences, in Super Rugby. Those results haven't, probably not even after last Saturday, permeated through the general (All Black following) rugby population on NZs grief phases, towards acceptance, yet.
South Africa's raising standards has certainly added more value to the TRC than its had in over a decade. Argentina have regularly beating South Africa and Australia, and perhaps all it would take for them to unlock their potential globally would be some booming home games and or series. I'm talking filling out 60 thousand seater stadiums winning tour deciders against France etc, they cant really be seen as the best team of the trailing bunch until their own population treats them like that. That is only fair. They need to ramp up their own profile similar to how Drua has done in Fiji. Obviously NZ is not immune to that and apathetic 30k crowds wont cut it either.
It doesn't sound like TRC is canned at all in 2026 and 2030, they are still trying to decide what it will be instead though? A ANZAC type SOO series during the SR seems like the most straight forward way to run things full stop.
NZ rugby is difficult to understand, in one hand they want to develop the game in the international scene, but they keep isolating themselves with their unilateral decisions in Sanzaar. Let's face it they ditched Jaguares and the South Africans from Super Rugby, they are constantly trying to ditch Aussie Teams as well, and now the ditched (with ZA) Aussie and Argentina from the Rugby Championship. Is like watching a parasite eat it own head. Argentina is regularly ranked 6 in the world and yet you get the feeling that's not enough, they only want to play the best 4 teams in the world thinking that's going to grow the game somehow.
NZR haven't made any unilateral decisions for SANZAAR, they would like to, but they don't have that level of faith, home or abroad.
Jaguares, and Argentina, clearly stated they could not stop their players from accepting contracts overseas when it was not known when COVID would allow competitions to resume. So they told their players to go and that they essentially wouldn't be able to make a team for immediate purposes. You are confusing NZR sorting out it's own local boarder competition for the following COVID year. I think it was like June they could first across to Australia, where SA had already been in discussion/agreed to join the URC by then.
SA were in a similar boat were the union could not cope with having it's players leave South Africa (didn't join Argentina and NZ in Australia), so took the first available option where those barriers were going to be removed (though I'm not sure if it was initially successful and they stayed at home anyway). In the end I think they made the right call, as even after only having started playing late 2021 (essentially the same season as SR 22') in europe and their decision to leave SR in 2020/21 backfired, I'm not sure they would have been able to fly into NZ the following year anyway.
SR Transtasman could have easily been SR Trinations if SA wanted to bring their teams to Australia having stuck it out and waited on COVID. You might be telling some truth if you said it was a mutually agreeable solution however.
The Rugby Championship no longer seems viable in any way especially with these planned tours. Perhaps it can be seen as a once in 4 years event rather than an annual one. Australia and Argentina are being left behind and to be honest they dont deserve it. Long tours between Southern Hemisphere sides makes sense between SA and NZ but other tours make littsle sense like an Argie tour of NZ which wont put bums on seats so going to tours only is probably not the best idea. Is it better to host Argentina or Australia for a long tour or better to have a Rugby Championship? The Rugby Championship could honestly be great but the timezones and travel make it hard to grow and also the fact that the unions are seperated after the Rugby Championship means there is less and less connection for the fans. The Six Nations has grown while The Rugby Championship has faltered. SANZAAR has dropped the ball and looks less and less relevant as an organization. Southern Hemisphere rugby is divided and not united and SA may look increasingly North to fulfil their ambitions. Dont be surprised if SA moves to leave TRC and go to the six nations. The big problem with that has always been that if they move to 6N then they will not give rest to their best players and have an unsustainable calendar with no rest weeks. Without TRC they will have that entire period to rest players and may decide to fill that period with just 3 test matches from another Southern team allowing their players to rest for the other 5 weeks before the start of the URC. These tours would also give their URC sides a bit of match practise against an international team from down south. This would align their calendar North and allow them to have their best franchise players available for the entire franchise season. Its the perfect solution for SA and its why they are in favour of these ideas as well. It is paving the way for their ultimate ambition to Sync their calendar with the North and complete their move there.
Yes its very strange they don't know what they're doing with it. I guess it could be waiting on the broadcasters?
I disagree with your general premise though. I think the old 3 match tours of England, Ireland, and France, have all been very successful in NZ in the past, and I have no reason to expect the regions wouldn't really enjoy them playing a Provincial Union or SR side either. It's disingenuous to pick out single nations like Argentina or the Islands to try and ridicule that concept.
South Africa for instance would fully embrace a tour from Argentina I would believe, and Argentina, from the Wallabies. RA are not getting any broadcasting money now anyway, so you can't really see things get any worse their. The issue with the concepts are just the isolationist mind sets of Australians and New Zealanders. Those are as they are though, so I can't fault you for considering those aspects.
Your following points are a bit confusing, as indeed they have already tried to move into the 6N, and that would have given them a better holiday window. Was that critique on the premise that they would still be in TRC when joining the 6N? I think I follow you point though, as even if only once (other nations could visit other years though) every four years, if the season started with a tour of the All Blacks that would be a really cool way for the URC sides to build into a seas. It would of course be terrible for the Springboks however, so I'm not really sure how keen the locals would be for that one. Great idea for the neutral fan though 👍
I do love the Argys, and this might be a tad rich given the ABs rollercoaster we've been riding for a while, but I think it's their lack of consistency that perhaps make it feel like a fluke when they win. I'm NOT suggesting that's what the first game was or that's the case for any of their other wins. In game one they played really well and deserved to win. But perhaps their second game performance supports my argument. France is like that, too. Currently they're an awesome team but not really known for consistently playing to their potential in the past. In contrast, we have Ireland who have historically been easy beats but have transformed into being a consistent threat. As a side note: I think the empty seats at the ABs games is reflective of the horrible economic climate we're currently in and the relentless job chopping going on.
Well even the All Blacks struggle with that high level consistency (sorry don't think I caught the 'tad rich' meaning first time reading) so it wouldn't be the biggest slight on them if it was. TBH that is kinda how I viewed their RWC performances as well. Though I think they definitely don't suit a wet weather game and got unlucky there.
Wasn't Eden Park's crowd more to do with the weather, it was a sell-out but they said in the commentary that thousands of people hadn't come to take their seat?
edit: and that naturally an emotional people! I think that has a factory in consistency, maybe very small though.
I'm a Kiwi who loves Argentinian rugby, when they're on song they play beautiful rugby. Also, generally Kiwis respect good rugby even if they lose.
I don’t know, Gregor, ask Pichot. He has all the answers to Argentina rugby needs.