Play nzherald.co.nz's rugby Pick the Score competition - go to: pickthescore.nzherald.co.nz
KEY POINTS:
This time last year, the best brains in rugby were working round the clock to hatch a plan to give the sport back its mojo.
Viewing figures for Super 14 were nose-diving, public interest was waning and everyone in Sanzar agreed their competitions had to change dramatically, preferably by 2010.
At last, the executives had taken the blinkers off, they were seeing the big picture and talking about new markets, about conferences, about more local derbies and longer playoffs.
There was this overwhelming sense that rugby was going somewhere new and exciting. And now, a year later, the grand plan is stuck in the mud.
Relations among the three nations have soured - or at least those with South Africa have, after they effectively refused to back the proposal to extend the playoffs in this year's competition.
Self-interest, the long-standing bane of the Sanzar alliance, has not been put to bed as everyone hoped. The picture has been further complicated by the South Africans having sold the broadcast rights from 2011 for the Currie Cup and in-bound tests.
With that deal already in place - believed to be worth a hefty US$90m - South Africa are not prepared to agree to any expanded Super Rugby format that will run over the top of the Currie Cup.
Australia, without their own provincial competition, are determined to expand Super Rugby into a 20-week-plus format while New Zealand, the champions of player welfare, want a March start to afford a longer off-season.
Someone is going to have to compromise, as a new, extended competition can't start in March, go for 20 weeks-plus and be finished before the start of the Currie Cup.
There is also plenty of debate to be had as to whether the new competition should run through the June tests or stop for a three-week break.
Arguing about the playoffs and the imposition of South Africa's Currie Cup deal has killed any hope of fast-tracking broadcast renegotiations in time for 2010.
The tired old 14-team round-robin and semifinal format that was failing so badly in 2007 and 2008, is what we are stuck with for another two years.
There will be no new entrants, no clever twisting of the fixtures to spice things up. New Zealand's franchises won't be able to directly contract players, there will be no attempts to sign a few foreign stars and promote freer movement of labour between competing countries.
Argentina will not be welcomed into the Tri Nations nor the Pacific Islands for at least another two years.
Can rugby survive another two years like this? What damage will be inflicted by persevering with a set-up that everyone agreed had to be changed as quickly as possible?
The current arrangement is failing to engage fans and just as importantly, players. More New Zealanders are now playing professionally overseas than at home. There is no doubt the exodus is partly driven by the apathy about the Super 14 and Tri Nations.
Crowd numbers were down across the country last season. Even the Hurricanes, historically the best-supported franchise, saw a significant decline in attendances. What is most worrying for franchise bosses, is that they can't see how they can arrest the slide.
Serving up the same-old, same-old is not going to bring the crowds rushing back. Most franchises are expecting 2009 to be just as tough, if not tougher than 2008 as the discretionary spending power of most families is under intense pressure.
It's a nightmare scenario - the global economy is melting down, sapping consumer confidence and rugby is entering the most insanely difficult fight for entertainment dollars with a tired old product.
When relief, in the form of a rejuvenated competition next year was in sight, there was a good deal more optimism about the future.
Now there is concern on all fronts.
Long-time All Black and Super 14 sponsor, Ford, have only renewed their commitment for this year, signalling an exit in 2010.
They have already announced they plan not to renew their Wallaby sponsorship, as have Vodafone.
Rebel Sport, which is part of the Briscoe Group, is, like all retailers, forecasting a bleak year. It would be canny to assume they will not renew their Super 14 sponsorship when it expires this year.
All this is bad enough yet by no means the biggest concern. Driving out an improved offer for the broadcast rights is the main focus for Sanzar right now.
Everyone understands that to win corporate and spectator dollars, Sanzar has to have a jazzy new product in 2011. But the broadcast deal has to be strong enough to support new teams and an expanded format.
If, as has been proposed, a 15th team is to be launched in Australia, more money has to be fed into the broadcast pot. News Corporation, the only potential buyer of the rights, recently announced a US$5.1bn annual loss.
The economics might not stack up which means there is the possibility of staying with 14 teams in 2011 and being lumbered with an ugly format where there are only four teams in the Australian conference but five in both New Zealand's and South Africa's.
It should not be underestimated, either, just how hard it will be to launch a new format in a World Cup year, especially as New Zealand will be hosting.
So many of the problems Sanzar now faces could have been alleviated had the alliance been united in the second half of last year. Months were lost by quarrelling over this year's playoffs and, to be fair to New Zealand and Australia, South Africa made life impossible.
The South Africans agreed with the proposal to extend this year's playoffs to six teams, except they wanted to do it on a conference basis, giving them guaranteed representation even if all of their teams finished outside the top six.
It was an utterly daft idea and now all three countries might have to pay the price of South Africa's idiocy.
