The Champions Cup has lost its spark; but South African’s could be the saviour
The Heineken Champions Cup returned last weekend in tandem with the first snow of British winter. With temperatures dropping to near Baltic levels, supporters, albeit in smaller numbers than usual, still gathered to witness a brilliant opening round of matches. Champions La Rochelle demolished Northampton, Sale slaughtered Ulster in Salford and Saracens triumphed over Edinburgh, the Scots unable to spoil their return to the top tier.
Yes, European rugby was back. Yet, it wasn’t just Europe’s anymore. With South African franchises included for the first time, there was a new feel to the competition. Harlequins and Lyon were the first to travel to the far balmier southern hemisphere, both returning bruised and empty handed.
Predictably, plenty of ire has been directed towards the presence of the Stormers, the Sharks and the Bulls, their involvement framed by traditionalists as a dilution and devaluation of a once-great competition. Their narrative implies that the South African sides, with all their dour non-European brutalism, will somehow devalue the spirit and character of the competition.
Logistical and economic concerns are understandable. However I simply cannot subscribe to the notion that it’s a travesty we no longer have an exclusively European competition.
The argument is absurdly anachronistic. It’s rooted in a belief that the Champions Cup has some distinctly European character to it, and furthermore that that character is fundamental to what makes it valuable.
Sure, it’s been a competition contested only by European teams, the honour of being crowned the best on the continent certainly a title worth chasing. But that has never been the true source of the tournament’s majesty, the reason it’s been so revered.
When Rob Howley snuck a famous victory for London Wasps over Heineken Cup giants Toulouse in 2004, what was so tantalising was less the crown they won and more the narrative of how they won it.
Two-time champions Toulouse, vying to become the first side to win the tournament a third time, were toppled in the dying moments after an inexplicable moment of madness from fullback Clément Poitrenaud. A last-minute victory from nowhere, snatched quite literally from under their noses. It was the incumbent versus the revolutionaries, the establishment versus the nouveau arrivé.
It is these kind of stories that sport so often provides that are the true value of this competition, stories that rugby ought not to confine to arbitrary, imagined borders.
Traditionalists are right that the extra-continental newcomers are not intertwined into our rugby psyche in the same way European clubs are. Matches between the likes France and England are rivalries that are historically rooted in such a way that they transcend the field of play, a contest between Wasps and Toulouse a microcosm of these Anglo-French tussles.
But what is also true is that these sporting connections are not metaphysical or inherent but rather have grown organically out of years of competition with each other, nurtured and cultivated over the years.
So what’s to say that the Stormers or the Bulls could not similarly grow into a new arm of an even greater rugby eco-system? It’s important to remember at this point that the tournament itself is less than 30 years old; even in that relatively short time great rivalries have become an established feature.
It cannot be denied that the addition of South African sides adds so much in terms of rugby value. In last season’s inaugural United Rugby Championship, the final was an all-South African affair, the Bulls overcoming the royalty of Leinster on their way to face the Stormers.
There was a reason for that. Northern hemisphere clubs rarely encounter the ferocious physical battles that are a hallmark of South African rugby, something they were unable to handle in the moments that mattered. Having them as part of this competition only increases the breadth and diversity of rugby on show, enhancing the tournament as a whole.
This would also be of huge benefit to the international game. Remember the 2019 World Cup Final, when an England side who had just annihilated New Zealand were themselves dominated through the thousand cuts of South Africa. Familiarity with that style and how to combat it can only further benefit the northern hemisphere in their growing pre-eminence.
To entirely dismiss South African sides at face value is nothing but reactionary protectionism, an affection towards nostalgia and tradition that overlooks how the Champions Cup has been on the decline for the best part of a decade. The incoherent two pool structure, the absence of back-to-back home and away legs and the constraining of the pool stages to just four weekends are all factors that have robbed the tournament of its spark.
In a competition in dire need of rejuvenation, we ought not to view their inclusion as an invasion but an essential catalyst to a new and more embracing rugby landscape.
Read next: From names to Big Games – what Harlequins Women want for their shirts
