NZ Rugby hands Sanzaar the red card

Super Rugby shake-up will see us go it alone with focus on bringing in investment partners

Super Rugby and Sanzaar as we know it are officially dead. New Zealand Rugby’s announcement that it is working towards an eight-to-10 team competition from next year immediately excludes South Africa and Argentina from taking part long term, and leaves Australia contemplating how they fit into the new Asia-Pacific landscape.

Although the Rugby Championship remains in place — and the door has been left ajar for a Champions League-style crossover tournament potentially involving teams from Japan, South Africa, Argentina, Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific — Sanzaar’s 25-year partnership will take on a different complexion.

“The reality is that the impact of Covid has been so significant that we’ve had to look at alternatives and a new direction,” New Zealand Rugby chief executive Mark Robinson said.

Following the three-month Aratipu review, New Zealand Rugby has essentially decided to lead its own future; to set up a domestic competition it believes will serve the best interests of the game here, but will be run by a separate entity that will embrace significant private investment.

Sanzaar no longer has any say, or ownership, in whatever this new competition will be called.

“There are a range of different options we’re considering there,” Robinson said.

“We’ve looked at a lot of other professional sports in Australia and around the world to look at ownership models and commissions. They will be the sort of things we’ll be talking in more detail about in the coming weeks.”

From next week, expressions of interest will be sought from Australia and the Pacific to join the five established New Zealand franchises from 2021 and beyond. That includes the Kanaloa Hawaii group backed by the likes of former All Blacks Jerome Kaino and Joe Rokocoko.

Robinson said it was too early to say whether the Pasifika team would be based in Auckland.

We’re very focused that any teams coming into the competition be highly competitive and financially viable. Mark Robinson

Tellingly, New Zealand’s bold move will spark a fight for survival among the five Australian franchises, having just welcomed the Force back into the fold. The new format could include two to four Australian teams.

Robinson said NZR were open to adding more teams to the competition beyond next year if some could not meet the initial criteria.

“We’ve been very clear that we believe Pasifika have the potential to have a role in this competition.

“Australia is also a party we’re interested in working with and we’ve had some preliminary discussions there, too. Conversations with Australia have certainly been constructive and we think they’ll engage in a positive way.”

The message from NZR to Australia — and the Pacific team wanting to be involved — is clear. They must prove their ability to add to the quality Super Rugby Aotearoa has delivered since lockdown, while also bringing value from a financial perspective.

Australia has no broadcast agreement in place, leaving them in a precarious position.

“We’re very focused that any teams coming into the competition be highly competitive and financially viable and they bring value that can attract fans and maintain interest in the competition,” Robinson said.

“We’re committed to the go-to-market approach. We think it will bring forward a lot of people who will want to be involved in what we believe could be the world’s best professional rugby competition.”

Border restrictions and travel challenges imposed by the Covid-19 pandemic effectively leave South Africa’s four teams and Argentina’s Jaguares, who lost last year’s final to the Crusaders, out in the cold.

Breaking away from South Africa is significant. While the time zone and costs associated with travel create barriers, New Zealand has traditionally placed immense value on the experience of venturing to the Republic and regularly engaging with the South African style. The Springboks are, after all, three-time and reigning world champions.

Robinson said he had been in regular contact with his counterparts in both countries.

“We’ve had a number of conversations with them and we want to remain close. Where there’s opportunity to play each other internationally and work together, we remain committed to that partnership. We’re looking at ways outside international rugby we may be able to do that, too. The reality is the impact of Covid has been so significant that we’ve had to look at other alternatives and a new direction.”

New Zealand Rugby clearly feels this is its chance to shape the domestic scene for its benefit.

“We’ve got to make the best of it and be proactive. We see these next six months or so as a critical time.”

Often bravery can look like madness, but in the case of New Zealand deciding to break Super Rugby free from Sanzaar, it’s purely good governance and common sense which has driven the decision.

It’s neither mad nor brave to take one look at Australia and see them as an anchor, waiting to pull Super Rugby under.

Australian rugby is broken. It has no broadcast deal in place for next year and no fan base to support the game. Why would New Zealand, with all that it has going for it, try to drag the carcass of their old foe into Super Rugby next year and hope that miraculously everyone suddenly loves the idea of the Rebels playing the Highlanders on a wet night in Invercargill?

That would be dumb. It would be disastrous and NZR is right to be looking at its lunch plate and telling the Australians it’s no longer willing to share. Not with Australia bringing its meagre rations to the table and then pigging out on what it finds on New Zealand’s plate.

The Australians can be part of Super Rugby Aotearoa, but under New Zealand’s terms, conditions and governance. If their teams can meet the criteria, they can be included.

That makes sense and is the only feasible path the competition can follow in its pursuit of sustainability in this part of the world.

Australia can’t turn up with five mediocre teams, a small pile of cash and expect to help themselves to the superior broadcast deal New Zealand has secured.

No longer can they take a fourpack of Double Brown to the party, stick it in the fridge and glug down gallons of New Zealand’s craft beer.

It wouldn’t be fair to say that Australia has pulled a con job on New Zealand for the past decade but they have recognised that their little brother across the Tasman has an inferiority complex and exploited that.

Little old New Zealand has sent the All Blacks around the world beating everyone up and commanding enormous audiences, broadcast dollars and sponsor interest, and then thought it was the junior partner in the Super Rugby alliance.

No one should be mad at the Aussies, as all they did was see an opportunity and go for it.

New Zealand Rugby should have been stronger — spent fewer man hours convincing themselves they were the little man of the Pacific who needed to be holding someone’s hand to feel safe.

In the past decade, it has bowed to almost every demand made by South Africa and Australia — both of whom have been granted licences to enter more teams, and in the case of the latter, negotiate a bigger slice of the financial pie in the process.

The more those two got, the less they gave and the stronger New Zealand has become. New Zealand sides have won the last five titles, and seven of the last 10 and 17 of the 25 since the business began.

And this deference is all because New Zealand has laboured under the misapprehension that Australia is bringing more to the table — a bigger population and giant economic clout.

But it’s not. That’s a myth, at least as it applies to rugby. Australia does have a powerhouse economy but rugby is not tapping into it.

Rugby is a niche sport in Australia and there might be 25 million people over there, but how many of them are watching rugby every week?

How many of them even care or know what it is and the reason they are having such a torrid time securing a new broadcast deal is exactly because of that — the sport doesn’t rate. It’s right up there with lacrosse and underwater hockey.

The truth is the Australians have lived off New Zealand’s stability and excellence for way too long.

They have been getting more than they have been giving, and even more perversely, they have been able to wield a power that far outweighs their real standing or contribution.

Back when Super Rugby launched, the set-up and distribution of finances better reflected the relative strengths of the three participating nations.

Somehow that got twisted over time and the Australians were able to hoodwink New Zealand and South Africa into paying for them to have the provincial competition they had always craved but couldn’t build on their own.

The final insult in all this was not the debacle of the co-hosting rights around the 2003 World Cup. It was Australia’s brazen vote for Japan and not New Zealand to host the 2011 World Cup.

New Zealand signed off on the Western Force entering Super Rugby in 2006, and a few weeks later, the Australians threw their weight behind Japan’s bid.

The Australians have said they won’t entertain this master-servant relationship but they won’t get a better offer.