Australia is seen as a significant commercial growth opportunity for rugby. Last year’s bumper British and Irish Lions series that effectively saved Rugby Australia is evidence that major rugby events can generate serious returns.
An Anzac test will cash in by cutting through the overarching NRL and AFL popularity in the Australian market with an elite, compelling rugby proposition.
Attention in Super Rugby Pacific will build in the weeks leading into the Anzac test by promoting selection storylines. And it is hoped those eyeballs will then flow back to greater intrigue in the competition.
Blues fullback Zarn Sullivan scores against the Crusaders. Photo / SmartFrame
Con: Disruption
No matter which way you spin it, removing up to the best 60 players from any competition devalues its brand and appeal. Sandwiching an Anzac test in April could translate to All Blacks and Wallabies missing two weeks of Super Rugby Pacific, unless a full bye week is worked into the schedule.
A competition that already features rest-and-rotation stipulations on its leading players can’t afford to further weaken its star allure. Sure, promoting players from the wider squad to plug headline holes will enhance development and strengthen depth – but that isn’t going to help anyone sell tickets.
There’s also the risk that Super teams could lose some of their most influential figures to long term injury.
If Super Rugby Pacific continues to run the same week as the Anzac test, something must be done differently. Afternoon kickoffs and taking the game to smaller regions could work better than empty stadiums in traditional centres.
Ultimately, the message an Anzac test sends is that Super Rugby needs test rugby to sell the sport.
While the concept has received support from Super teams in both countries, the devil will be in the player load management and potential stand-down period details.
The NRL often welcomes key players backing up from State of Origin to play two games in one week. Rugby union won’t allow that heightened injury risk, which dictates the Super clubs will pay the price.
Stripping Super teams of their best talent in the middle of the season could improve the competition’s lack of jeopardy by forcing mass changes, but that short-term window won’t reflect the overall picture.
Pro: Improved World Cup readiness
At this stage, the Anzac test is proposed for every two years – those involving World Cups and British and Irish Lions tours. Dave Rennie’s appointment as All Blacks head coach and New Zealand Rugby’s change of leadership, with Steve Lancaster rubber-stamped as the fulltime chief executive, has been pivotal in altering previous resistance to the fixture.
Rennie is in favour as it will allow him more preparation time with the All Blacks before next year’s World Cup in Australia. An April hit-out will give Rennie hands-on time with his squad and a live match of substance and significance to lay the foundations for the rest of the year – rather than brief mini-camps and fleeting visits to Super teams.
Con: Bledisloe fatigue
Do we really need three Bledisloe Cup tests in one year? The All Blacks have enjoyed a stranglehold on the coveted Bledisloe for the last 23 years. It’s not arrogance, therefore, to suggest that a third test next year is likely to be a dead rubber.
Next year’s Anzac test is expected to be staged in Australia but no matter where the third match is held, it could be a hard sell if the All Blacks have already locked away the Bledisloe for another season.
Three tests against the Wallabies can’t be pitched as premium content. Not in the current landscape. To maintain interest, the onus is squarely on the Wallabies to win the first Anzac test in their all-too-familiar push to wrestle the Bledisloe back to Australia for the first time since 2003.
Cam Roigard (left) and Simon Parker celebrate retaining the Bledisloe Cup last year. Photo / Dean Purcell
Pro: Marking Anzac Day
It’s not about glorifying war, but rugby has a rich history and connection to the armed services. Super Rugby has often missed a trick by failing to maximise long weekends or cater to family friendly kickoff times.
An Anzac test between the All Blacks and Wallabies has the potential to be a special occasion, one that stirs emotions and promotes a way to honour those who fought for both countries.
The caveat here is the Anzac test must always be staged in New Zealand or Australia. Taking this match offshore to maximise revenue and attempting to commemorate Anzac Day does not wash.
Con: Risking Super Round success
Super Rugby Pacific just savoured its most successful weekend in decades with three days of sell-out crowds flocking to the Super Round in Christchurch. Now that event appears set for immediate alterations.
Maybe it won’t prove a major upheaval, but the Super Round cannot feasibly be staged in the same window next year, with the Anzac test about to supersede it.
To replicate Super Round’s success, it must be held on a long weekend to allow fans to travel. That leaves Easter (late March) and King’s Birthday (early June) as alternative windows.
Neither weekend, though, is positioned as well to captivate attention and build momentum into the playoffs. Messing with a revived, marquee event is yet another example of Super Rugby’s standing and its constant need to compromise.
Liam Napier is a Senior Sports Journalist and Rugby Correspondent for the New Zealand Herald. He is a co-host of the Rugby Direct podcast.