Outgoing Sanzar boss Greg Peters tells Gregor Paul that Rugby Championship nations should open eligibility to pick players across all Super Rugby franchises to help stop the player drain.
Eligibility rules that allow players to head offshore but still play in the Rugby Championship are slowly killing Super Rugby.
Departing Sanzar chief executive Greg Peters is leaving the Southern Hemisphere game in better shape than he found it, but he would urge his successor to work with the respective national unions to keep the best players in the region.
The big-ticket items are rock solid. A new five-year broadcast deal has been agreed and the inside word is the financial uplift is significant.
The Pumas have been successfully embedded into the Rugby Championship and the Super competition will welcome teams from South Africa, Argentina and Japan next year and open the game to a whole new level of corporate sponsorship.
Appointed in 2010, Peters has given Sanzar a collective vision and strategic plan that, while not without risk, is at least one with unanimous support and legacy opportunity.
But taking Super Rugby to Argentina and Japan is not the big worry at the moment. The bigger threat and, therefore, top priority for the new broom is the battle to keep the best players in the Southern Hemisphere.
All that stands between Super Rugby and disaster is New Zealand's stance on refusing to select overseas-based players for the All Blacks.
If they rescinded that, watch Super Rugby spiral down the plug-hole surprisingly quickly. Gurgle, gurgle, gone - and the All Blacks won't be far behind.
South Africa are already losing a worryingly high number of players to Europe and Japan and now the Wallabies have loosened their selection eligibility, they may suffer the same fate.
In the past few weeks, Springboks Bismarck du Plessis and his brother Jannie and Francois Hougaard have announced they will be playing offshore after the World Cup.
Duane Vermeulen has been linked with Toulon and not many are hopeful he'll stay in Cape Town.
There is an obvious parallel to draw between Vermeulen and Brodie Retallick. Both were short- listed for World Player of the Year in 2014 and both are viewed as critical, long-term international players.
Retallick has committed to stay in New Zealand for another four years because he wanted to play test football, so had no choice.
Vermeulen has, in one respect, an easier decision to make - he can sign with Toulon and continue to play for the Springboks.
The same choices were open to the Du Plessis brothers, Hougaard, Bryan Habana, Morne Steyn, Ruan Pienaar, Francois Louw, Guthro Steenkamp and Fourie du Preez. All of them chose to go and, while the Boks haven't suffered as a result, South Africa's Super Rugby franchises have.
There hasn't been a South African winner for five years and this year all five of their teams have been mediocre at best.
"You can see the impact that [Springbok selection criteria] has had," says Peters, who is leaving Sanzar after five years to head up the new Super Rugby side in Argentina. "They have large numbers of players offshore and, while they have got a factory line of talent, the goal has still got to be to have the best players in Super Rugby.
"The Southern Hemisphere is never going to compete with the money in France, and nor it should because that would see money being taken out of the grassroots. But we must be doing something right at Super Rugby as we con- tinue to have the No 1 and No 2 international sides and the third-best [Australia] on and off. We don't want to lose that and maybe the solution is for [test] selection criteria to become more flexible and look to keep players in the Southern Hemisphere."
Australian's eligibility rules mean Bordeaux-bound Adam Ashley-Cooper can still play for the Wallabies. Photo / Getty Images
It's an intriguing idea. Imagine if New Zealand, South Africa, Australia, Argentina and Japan agreed to impose the same test selection criteria that they would select any eligible player contracted to any Super Rugby team. Go to Europe and that is it - no dice. But play in Super Rugby, be it an Argentine at the Chiefs or an All Black at the Waratahs, and that's fine.
Without change, Super Rugby is going to struggle to maintain its standards. The competition sells itself on the speed and intensity of the rugby, the inclusion of the world's best players and the ferociousness of every game.
It's those factors which also preserve the respective qualities of the All Blacks, Springboks and Wallabies and, in time, now they have a Super Rugby presence, the Pumas.
New Zealand, at this point, have no desire to change anything.
"Right now, the player market is incredibly competitive. It's that time of the four-year cycle," New Zealand Rugby chief executive Steve Tew said. "We had quite a long discussion about it around the board table and have no intentions of changing that policy but we're constantly reviewing what we're doing and, if circumstances change, we'd be foolish not to think about it. But right now, our policy is the policy and that's the end of it."
The thing is, though, events over the next 6-18 months are likely to change and the pressure will mount for them to reconsider.
If South Africa and Australia can't deliver competitive Super Rugby teams, the incentive for New Zealanders to stay in New Zealand will lessen.
Why hang around to play in a second-rate competition? And will the All Blacks retain their competitive edge if Super Rugby isn't testing their players? Peters' idea isn't so ridiculous - it's possibly a necessary evil.
The other potential incendiary component Peters leaves behind is Australia - the whole kit and caboodle. Sanzar have done all they can to guide the game across the Tasman.
The Rebels have enjoyed strong and sensible guidance from Sanzar, and Peters is leaving the ultimate parting gift - the improved broadcast deal.
But it's not exaggerating to say the game in Australia is on the brink. Financially, they are in a big hole. The Waratahs are hanging in there, the Brumbies not quite, the Rebels less so again and the other two are definitely teams 14 and 15.
The Wallabies have slipped to No 6 in the world and their recent decision to open selection to offshore Australians with 60 caps reeks of desperation.
If they bomb at the World Cup, entirely possible given the competitiveness of their pool, it could be a decade or longer before the game can haul itself remotely close to where it was in the 1990s.
Toulon wing Bryan Habana still plays for South Africa. Photo / Getty Images
"There is no doubt we need Australia to be strong in the Sanzar world," says Peters. "They have been through a rough period these last few years where they just didn't have any money. They have a good strategic plan, they just haven't had the means to invest in it these past three or four years.
"The improved broadcast deal will help but there is no quick fix. It might take years before the next generation comes through."
It might take even longer if the Wallabies disappear without trace in England. Having lived in Australia for the past five years, Peters has become aware of the intensity of the sporting market where there are 20 professional rugby, league, AFL and football teams in Sydney alone.
As much as Sanzar need a strong Australia, Australia need a strong Wallabies team and their change in eligibility criteria - overseas players with 60 test caps and who held an ARU contract for seven years can now be picked - is high risk. Inevitably, it will see players take off in their prime and deny Super Rugby teams the bedrock of experience they need.
And just as inevitably, it will prove to be the first step towards opening up selection to all Australians offshore.
"I think it's a bit ridiculous to put a number on this sort of thing," Rebels captain Scott Higginbotham said. "They're at a point where they're letting blokes play overseas and then come back, like Bernard Foley.
"To then put a limit on your 60 caps or years signed with the ARU, it's a bit of a waste of time. You've already said to Foley and those guys you can come back and play so you should just open it up to everyone."
What each nation do
NEW ZEALAND
Have a blanket, categoric, non-negotiable ruling that only players contracted to the New Zealand Rugby Union can be picked for the All Blacks. There are no exceptions, but there are two previous examples - Sonny Bill Williams and Luke McAlister - who were granted permission to be picked for the All Blacks despite not playing in the preceding domestic competition.
ENGLAND Have previously picked French-based players but currently don't allow it. However, there is an 'in exceptional circumstances' clause which gives coach Stuart Lancaster the right to pick whoever he likes as long as he can make a case to justify it.
SOUTH AFRICA Are able to pick players based offshore - a policy they felt they had no choice but to implement given the number of Springboks leaving. Significant numbers of their World Cup squad are likely to be contracted to foreign clubs: Bryan Habana, Francois Louw, Morne Steyn and Ruan Pienaar.
AUSTRALIA Have loosened their stance to open eligibility to offshore players who have seven years' test experience and 60 caps - effectively meaning that long servers will be able to have their cake and eat it.
FRANCE, IRELAND AND WALES Pick players regardless of where they play their club rugby.
