This allows the stronger teams from the weaker countries to get easy points, while those from the strongest nation, currently NZ, batter each other earning points in harder games.
Don't get me wrong. The 2011 champions, the Reds, were a good side, brilliant, brave and fast. But, they had an easy road to the championship.
Last year, all five New Zealand teams finished in the top 10; three Australian teams (the Force, Brumbies, Rebels) and two South African teams (the Cheetahs and Lions) finished in the bottom five.
The Reds, who won the round robin, earned 40 per cent of all their points (27 of 66) in eight games against teams in the bottom five.
The Stormers, who finished second, accumulated 49.2 per cent of all their points (31 of 63) playing seven games against teams in the bottom five.
Because no New Zealand teams finished lower than tenth, the Crusaders played just three games against teams in the bottom five for 22 per cent of their points (14 of 61).
Put another way, against top-10 teams, the Reds earned 60 per cent of all their points (39 of 66) in eight games; the Stormers 51 per cent (32 of 63) in nine games; and the Crusaders 77 per cent (47 of 61) in 13 games. Had the Crusaders played and beaten the Hurricanes in the game cancelled because of the earthquake, fully 80 per cent of their points would have come against the top 10.
Crucially, the difference in securing a home semifinal and final was just five points. points against the bottom two teams (the Lions and Rebels), the Stormers 13 points, but in a cruel anomaly, the Crusaders did not play either of the bottom two teams.
After the Welsh influence on the World Cup draw that saw Samoa disadvantaged, one might ask who put the Super 15 draw together.
Fans might ask why the NZRFU has agreed to this format. Quite simply they have bowed to pressure from the other Sanzar unions, Australia and South Africa, who want guaranteed finals places regardless of which are the best teams.
Moreover, mixed finals mean more television revenue.
This also has a bearing on the financial debacle at the Otago Rugby Football Union. With each Super 15 team playing eight instead of four domestic games, there are 18 round-robin Super 15 and ITM Cup games per region, and potentially 23 if regional teams make it to the final.
Previously, there were just 13 under the old round-robin formats and 17 if teams made the finals. Throw in an increasing number of All Blacks games and over-exposure is killing the provinces.
A likely outcome is more provincial unions going to the wall. Ultimately that will undermine the core of New Zealand's rugby strength - the NPC (now ITM Cup) - the envy of other rugby-playing countries for several decades.
Money is a reality; and in mitigation it could be that what we are seeing is a transfer of strength from broad-based semi-urban unions to the brown powerhouses of South Auckland, Wellington and other places where props reach 130kg before the age of 21.
A return to the simple round-robin formula for Super 15 - each team playing all other teams once - would be fairer and prevent the kind of easy walk the Reds had in 2011. It would also address the over-exposure issue by reducing Super 15 round-robin games from 16 to 14, and ease the pressure on ITM unions chasing attendance by reducing the number of Super 15 domestic games by four.
If continuing the Super 15 playing structure produces another season where the best New Zealand teams are significantly disadvantaged, then our fan base could be expected to lose interest. Fans cannot go through the turnstiles ad infinitum. They are people, not dollars. The spirit of sport is about a level playing field where only the best rise to the top.
Rawiri Taonui is adjunct professor of indigenous studies at AUT.
