What is the perfect format?

Michael Marnewick, formerly of the Natal Sharks' media department, has agreed to become a guest columnist in the Rugby365 stable. In his first column he take a critical look at the merits of a "strength-versus-strength" Currie Cup system, as opposed to the 14-team format that gives more teams and players opportunities to take part.

Unable to sleep ahead of the first Test between New Zealand and the British & Irish Lions, we took a historical look at the date of June 25 and drew some pretty flimsy conclusions...

So, is the current Currie Cup format so bad?  Does it lower the quality of rugby?  Does it detract from a tradition of provincial rivalry that we all hold so dear?

There has been a lot of talk about the relative merits (more demerits) of the current setup which pits all 14 unions against each other, with the "minnows" getting their way and having a go against the big Unions, with traditionalists bemoaning the lowering of standards.

Given the format that includes all teams in the first round (or qualifying round), with the top eight going into the competition proper, I feel (coming from a big union like the Sharks) that it isn't necessary such a bad thing.

Firstly, it gives the smaller unions a cash injection from the attraction of home games against the likes of Western Province, Lions, Bulls, Cheetahs and Sharks.

Secondly it gives a lot more players the opportunity to play in the "premier league" of rugby.

Each big team is gong to unearth a potential star in the early rounds while their Springboks are away on national duty, and for the early rounds, while the big teams are bereft of their big names, it does tend to level the playing fields a little.

Just last year, the Sharks lost to the Pumas, and the Cheetahs to the Eagles, and within this format there have been countless other upsets.

Of course, there are the odd 70-pointers, which only go to prove that SA Rugby should be looking after the smaller Unions a little better.

Just as the IRB has the aim of taking the game to the smaller countries (hence the argument for Japan being awarded the 2011 Rugby World Cup), so South African rugby would be all the stronger if there was more equity between the teams, if the competition was such that we would be competitive in the Super 12.

After all, the Currie Cup is the platform to build a successful Super 12 side. Given the results in the latter tournament, with the odd exception of a few semi-finals and two Finals (both by the Sharks), South Africa haven't exactly set the competition alight.

Coaches should be using the Currie Cup to build for the Super 12.  Some might disagree and call the Currie Cup the premier competition, but that's only because a South African team will always win.

Given the nature of the international feel of Super 12 rugby, there can be no doubt in my mind that we should be better prepared, and if that means blooding youngsters to find the cream of the crop in the early stages, and then battling it out with our traditional rivals in the latter stages, so be it.  At least every team has had the opportunity to play.

Do you agree/disagree with Michael? Let us know your view!