Mitre 10 Cup - news, injuries etc



  • @Machpants Thanks for that.

    I have given them some excellent and robust feedback on their incompetence surrounding the organization of the competition for the Ranfurly Shield as well.



  • @Chris-B I gave plenty of feedback too, mainly about ignoring idiots talking about how hard done by Tasman are for Shield challenges.



  • @Machpants Hmm, the videos didn't work for me in Chrome, but do in Firefox. They were posted on the ABs account, so I assume the survey comes from them as well?



  • Okay, so summarised:

    New structure: all 14 teams play 10 other teams in one single table. The teams ranked 1-4 after the regular season play semi-finals and a final for the Rugby Cup and the teams ranked 5 - 8 play semi-finals and a final for the Championship Cup.

    The consequence of this is that - unlike now - the teams ranked 9 - 14 are done after the regular season. Very often, those teams will be the same provinces, although rankings may differ. For how that works out, I'll use Hawke's Bay as an example.

    Under the current structure, the Bay finished 3rd in the Championship division in 2018 and qualified for the semi-finals of that division and only lost by one point. With a bit more luck, we could have played the final and go for silverware.
    Under the new structure, we would have finished in 10th place, so season over and no (semi-)finals to play and not competing for a cup.

    Realistically speaking, some provinces will very rarely play for silverware under the new structure. That will mainly affect - to varying degrees - Otago, Hawke's Bay, Northland, BOP, Manawatu and Southland, unless they somehow manage to climb up the ladder like - for example - Tasman did a few years ago and stay in that top 8.

    Supporters of the top provinces probably won't have a problem with that, but imagine your team missing out almost every year.



  • @Stargazer like the blues? 😜

    Really that's pro sport, and I don't have a problem with the worst teams being at the bottom, rather than some participation cup. When the division were properly split it made sense, now with cross play, it doesn't imo. I suppose you could go full Monty and have almost everyone in, like the sevens, which I would be happy with



  • @Machpants If all provinces, big and small, had an equal chance of finishing 1 - 8, I'd have no problem with it, because rankings could change every year. But in a competition where a reasonably identical group of smaller provinces risk ending up in the bottom 6 of the competition each and every year, I think there should be an opportunity to play for some kind of trophy for them as well. They could, indeed, do that similar to sevens, with the 9 - 12 ranked teams playing for a 3rd Cup, Bowl or Plate of some sort.



  • Counties signing





  • @Stargazer I quite like that idea would make a lot of sense and teams that miss out on the top 4 have another chance for silverware.



  • I like the single table structure but NOT the prospect of an uneven draw where everyone doesn't play everyone. That is the worst aspect of Super Rugby when it went to the conference system and why people turned off it.
    The 'less strong' provinces in particular have ebbs and flows in their strength through the years and some will get a hard draw in the very year they peak. Vice versa an average team could get into finals due to a favourable draw in comparison to rivals.



  • A full round robin is possible, but then you wouldn't have play offs, just table positions



  • Why not divide into two conferences with the top four teams from each going on to a finals series?



  • @gt12 said in Mitre 10 Cup - news, injuries etc:

    Why not divide into two conferences with the top four teams from each going on to a finals series?

    i like that much better than the current format where you play for points against a team in another competition entirely, that never made sense to me.

    Reading Stargazer's post below, from my perspective, the entire competition is to see who plays (and in the main, loses to) Canterbury every year. The rest doesn't really mean all that much. When a losing record will get you a Div 2 semi final, is that really a good sporting competition?



  • @mariner4life Not sure what you mean with "losing record" here.

    from my perspective, the entire competition is to see who plays (and in the main, loses to) Canterbury every year. The rest doesn't really mean all that much.

    Then you just don't care about provincial rugby. To me, every game that my team plays matters.



  • @Stargazer said in Mitre 10 Cup - news, injuries etc:

    @mariner4life Not sure what you mean with "losing record" here.

    Theoretically you could make a semi by losing more games than you have won in a season.



  • @Hooroo said in Mitre 10 Cup - news, injuries etc:

    @Stargazer said in Mitre 10 Cup - news, injuries etc:

    @mariner4life Not sure what you mean with "losing record" here.

    Theoretically you could make a semi by losing more games than you have won in a season.

    nice edit Stargazer, check wiki did you?

    And it's not theoretically, it happens every year. 4-6 will generally get you a Div 2 semi final. 3 years ago BOP made it with 3-7. What kind of shit sporting competition allows a team that won less than half the number of games it lost play post-season?

    Don't tell me what i care about. I care about BOP games more than any other level of rugby. In fact the overly-regular BOP fuck up loss pisses me off more than any other sporting result.

    However that's not what you were talking about, you were talking about engagement with a competition. When the same team plays the final every year, and wins 3 out of every 4, is that really a competition that captures the excitement? note i said competition, not individual games by the union you support.



  • @Hooroo Of last year's four Championship semi-finalists, that only applied to Northland.

    But frankly, I don't care. If the comp consists of a higher and a lower division, cross-over games distort the points table.

    I only like the cross-over games for the entertainment factor, if the games are reasonably close. If the lower division team gets absolutely butchered, that's just not fun anymore.



  • @mariner4life said in Mitre 10 Cup - news, injuries etc:

    Don't tell me what i care about. I care about BOP games more than any other level of rugby. In fact the overly-regular BOP fuck up loss pisses me off more than any other sporting result.

    Sorry, you seem to separate the competition as a whole from individual matches of your team. You only seem to care about the latter. I don't separate competition from individual games of my team, and that's why I watch each and every game (except the odd Southland game). Obviously, more emotion is attached to my team's games, but all the other games affect their position on the table and, therefore, matter to me as well.

    However that's not what you were talking about, you were talking about engagement with a competition. When the same team plays the final every year, and wins 3 out of every 4, is that really a competition that captures the excitement? note i said competition, not individual games by the union you support.

    The same team playing the final every year is only something happening in the Premiership Division; not in the Championship Division, which I was most concerned about. Also, what happens at the top of the Premiership Division is not going to change in the new structure. If Canterbury, or Auckland, or Wellington or Tasman have dominated the Premiership Dvision (semi)finals the last few years, they're likely to do the same in a single table competition.


Log in to reply