Super 14 quality has to match growth

It's with a smug little smile that the Sanzar suits talk about their expanded Super empire. Once there were 10, then there were 12 and now there are 14 teams in the Southern Hemisphere's cross-border provincial competition. Bigger is absolutely better according to those running the game.

Maybe they are right. But there are plenty of rugby fans that can't muster enthusiasm at the thought of yet more games against disinterested South African opponents.

And there was plenty of groaning when this year's schedule was released, confirming that rugby would be in full swing while the cricketers were just getting their eye in.

The suits have taken a measured risk by trying to fix a tournament that wasn't broke. Everyone understands that the expansion came about to help Rupert Murdoch fill more airtime. Everyone understands that Murdoch's broadcast dollars keep the players in the style to which they have become accustomed.

But not everyone understands the logic of giving Australia and South Africa an extra team each. Neither country had a totally compelling case for more representation. That wasn't, however, going to stop Australia and South Africa pressing their claim in the boardroom.

The expansion came after almost two years of negotiation between the three Sanzar countries and executives from Murdoch's Newscorp.

It happened not only because it was a means of increasing the value of the broadcast rights but also because the very future of the alliance would have been under threat if neither South Africa nor Australia got what they wanted.

South Africa, in particular, was making threatening noises about breaking away and aligning with Europe. And if there were more teams to be created, Australia wasn't going to miss out.

Both countries had to be appeased and now the Super 14 must be a commercial success if it is to continue beyond 2011, when the broadcast deal comes up for renewal.

How strong the appetite for more Super-something rugby will be in five years is hard to assess. Even if Newscorp and the rugby public are still keen for more, the suits might have other plans.

New Zealand Rugby Union chief executive Chris Moller said the South Africans were closer to going their own way in 2005 than anyone realises. Being in the same time zone as Europe will always tempt them to look for opportunity in that region.

As for New Zealand, he said there is no denying the competition has been good for the country. But the strained relationship with Australia has to be sorted if Sanzar is to remain a working entity.

The Australian Rugby Union voted for Japan's and not New Zealand's bid to host the 2011 World Cup, and that according to Moller is a major problem.

"I don't think the relationship has broken down completely. There has been telephone contact and there would've been a face-to-face meeting last week until the weather intervened and closed the airport. If we are going to have a Sanzar partnership then we have to have a working relationship again. There is a divide still because we have had no face-to-face meeting. What such a meeting will do, only time will tell.

"In the meantime, we have important competitions to run so there is no point shooting ourselves in the foot," said Moller.

The hope is that both parties will be able to move on to a more stable footing so that when 2011 approaches they still have a chance of keeping the alliance together.

All three parties will be more inclined to persevere if the Western Force and Cheetahs can somehow have phenomenal debut seasons, knock over more teams than they should and then sustain their form.

Yet, even if the Force and Cheetahs do enjoy early success, no one at Sanzar should smile too smugly.

The expansion from 12 to 14 teams has greatly changed the dynamic of the competition. With 12 teams it had effectively been a sprint. Sluggish starts could be fatal. It meant there were few dead games.

Now there will be more of a leisurely feel, with teams a few more games away from a crisis. Paying spectators can be more selective.

But the big change comes in the subtle shift away from this being a tournament about the strongest team. Now it's about the strongest squad.

New Zealand franchises have never really embraced the rotation concept. There might have been the odd game - usually against whichever South African team was deemed to be the worst - where fringe players got a run. The extra two games and the request from All Black selectors to rest front-line test players will force new faces into the fray.

If it boils down to who has the most strength in depth, it's probably best to forget about the South Africans and Australians.

Their individual franchises have good starting line-ups but the quality gets a bit dubious beyond that.

The Blues and Hurricanes look to have the most depth with the Crusaders likely to surprise with the quality of their lesser-known names.

But with so many unknowns in this year's competition, it is a dangerous business making predictions. The only thing that can be said for sure is that it will take time for players, coaches and punters to get used to the new format.

There are reasons to be sceptical but the Sanzar bosses are urging for minds to be kept open. They are understandably keen for this new competition to be embraced.

It will require a lot of spectacular rugby for their enthusiasm to become infectious.

- HERALD ON SUNDAY