The sublime and the disappointingly familiar crashed head-on over semi-final weekend, illustrating all that is great and all that is ailing Super Rugby.

An excellent contest in Wellington seemed to pack an awful lot into eighty minutes; mostly to the delight of Chiefs’ fans, as their side showed remarkable skill and tenacity to overcome the favoured Hurricanes, 30-19.

Just like last week against the Reds, the Chiefs flew out of the blocks; Emoni Narawa making like Colin Meads in his heyday, avoiding taking the ball into contact, twice showing and going one-handed, before dishing off to Samipeni Finau to finish.

When a fluky rebound opened up a second try for Cortez Ratima, the home side had been thrown out of kilter; even if TJ Perenara – not for the first time in head-to-head contests with referee Angus Gardner – slotted himself into the role of referee advisor, to ensure an advantage call went his way.

The Hurricanes did well to steady at 17-7 although looked to have fallen further behind when Ratima, running the central support channel, crossed again. TMO Brett Cronan saved their bacon, however, correctly picking out Finau for collecting Perenara high as he launched a clearing kick.

Upon his return from the bin, Finau was again in Cronan’s sights, ruled to have scraped his toenail on the grass, a split-second before tipping the ball back inside for another Chiefs’ try.

Watch every match of Super Rugby Pacific ad-free, live & on demand on the Home of Rugby, Stan Sport

It was the third of three tries rubbed out by the officials, on what was a busy night for them. None of those decisions were controversial in themselves, although it did seem inexplicable how, later on, Cronan didn’t call on Gardner to sit Perenara down for making head contact in an upright tackle on Wallace Sititi.

The second half saw the Hurricanes finally show more patience and continuity, closing the gap to 20-14, but their error rate remained far too high. Costliest was Josh Moorby dropping the ball over the line in the act of scoring; that was until Brett Cameron popped a short ball straight into the hands of Sititi, who raced fast enough and far enough to where the ball was freed for Daniel Rona to – unlike Moorby – stay low and stay strong, to score.

With Damian McKenzie oblivious to the difficult overhead conditions and kicking like a dream, 30-14 was now out of reach for the Hurricanes. Billy Proctor’s late try was a good one, but a case of far too little, too late.

So good and so consistent over the season, the Hurricanes will wonder why their touch deserted them at the business end. There were signs of it last week, as the Rebels’ physicality and intent harried them into a series of errors. The difference this time was that the Chiefs had the firepower to make them pay for their mistakes.

Clearly, the Hurricanes missed the punch of Xavier Numia on the carry, but it would be wrong to scratch too deeply. This result was less about their failings and much more about a resurgent Chiefs’ team having rediscovered their strike power then digging in defensively in the darker moments, around Luke Jacobson and Tupou Vaa’i.

They’ll need all of that and more in next week’s final, with talented hooker Tyrone Thompson now emerging as a key figure. Samisoni Taukei’aho looks to have no hope of getting up, while his replacement Bradley Slater bravely battled away on one arm and one leg, before a head injury eventually finished him off.

Also starting hot were the Blues, posting four tries in the first quarter, as the Brumbies seemed to freeze, repeatedly inviting the Blues into their 22. The Blues were like kids at an amusement park ride, eagerly waiting in line for their turn to pick and carry the ball forward, and no matter that things levelled out later, making a final score of 34-20, the contest had long been decided.

There’s nothing too flashy or innovative about the Blues; this is a team that knows its strengths, and provides clarity to the players around the game plan and their individual roles in playing to them.

It’s a strategy that requires a power source, the energy provided this week by hooker Ricky Riccitelli. It’s not being too unkind to tag Riccitelli a ‘middle-grade’ New Zealand rake, yet by comparison to Australia’s top hookers, Riccitelli’s work-rate, dynamism and power stand him out.

Two weeks ago, Blues fans were aghast when a late Chiefs try ‘stole’ a home final away from them, and sent it to Wellington. Now, the price of the Chiefs making the final themselves is to gift the hosting back to the Blues.

That feels like a good outcome for both sides, and a mouth-watering battle of contrasting tactics and skill sets awaits.

For all of their advancements this year – Tom Wright’s commanding form at fullback, Noah Lolesio’s consistent high performance and the emergence of Charlie Cale – this was the second time the Brumbies were found wanting at Eden Park.

That the Brumbies remain demonstrably Australia’s most consistent and best-performed franchise year-on-year, yet are still some distance off New Zealand’s best when the heat is turned up in play-off matches, only serves to amplify the angst of Australian fans, and fuel discontent towards Super Rugby.

Predictably, calls to kill off Super Rugby have ramped up again, and it is fair to say that, this time around, they feel weightier and more broadly supported on both sides of the Tasman, than ever before.

But as ever, the chorus of voices knowing what it doesn’t want, dwarf those able to articulate what they do want, and who can rationally explain how a better outcome for rugby in Australia and New Zealand – individually and regionally – can be achieved.

On the surface, it seems simple enough. Deliver more of Saturday’s epic semi-final and Super Rugby can live on as one of the world’s elite rugby competitions. More of Friday’s trans-Tasman mismatches, and it’s a case of last person out, switch off the lights.

Of course, it’s never that simple. For years Super Rugby, despite its imbalances and imperfections, has maintained an elevated performance standard. Further, matches in Fiji are invariably exciting and extremely competitive.

Failings have been less about the product and much more about a confounding inability to promote and sell the sizzle.

Undeniably, there continues to be a narrowing of the performance gap between Australia and New Zealand. From zero Australian wins in 2017, to two wins in 2021, and six in 2023, this year, ten matches were won by Australian sides against New Zealand opposition.

Yes, it was ‘situation normal’ when it came to finals, but the trend is set; a combination of New Zealand sides starting to feel the sting of overseas departures and, in Australia, the gradual flushing out and replacement of a generation where the system never produced enough genuinely elite players and coaches.

But it seems that the mob has moved well beyond accepting gradual improvements, or indicators that home viewership paints a picture far less dire than match-day attendances might suggest. There is neither the patience nor the money any more, to play a long game.

As ever, the solution hinges, not on short-term austerity measures, or a new competition model, or Australia and New Zealand separating from each other, but on the ability of those charged with running the game in both countries, to map out and articulate a cohesive strategy for the sport, and to deliver it.

What does high-performance rugby look like? For the Wallabies and the All Blacks? And, if those teams remain the priority, how is it possible to devise and deliver a professional franchise or club competition that adequately serves the national team interest AND works effectively as a stand-alone competition? Commercially and holistically?

How is it possible to ensure Australia’s best players play, not only more rugby, but more rugby together? Data from Gain Line Analytics consistently highlights the inherent advantages New Zealand franchises hold over their Australian counterparts, due to the flow-on imbalances that impinge on cohesion.

The same now applies for women’s high-performance rugby; what is Australia doing to ensure the same mistakes aren’t being repeated?

If the answer is to exit Super Rugby altogether and have Australian players compete in a ten-team, second-tier competition, what does this actually look like and what is the purpose?

If it is to compete on a professional level with players from New Zealand and elsewhere, how can ten teams possibly deliver the playing, coaching, support and infrastructure capability that five teams, now four, currently can’t? And how will this be bankrolled and then sustainably financed?

If the answer is ‘it doesn’t matter, to hell with the rest of the world, let’s replicate the domestic models of the AFL and NRL, so we can have an Aussie winner every week, then play State of Origin, and bring the Wallabies home every now and then’, then why not let there be an honest and frank conversation about what all that actually means?

Are the respective Australia and New Zealand rugby boards set up with the necessary blend of rugby and commercial expertise to deliver on a winning strategy for rugby? Are the respective governance structures suited to delivering simultaneously in the high-performance professional space and in community/amateur rugby?

This is the current battleground in New Zealand and a pressure point that, despite a mild skirmish at Rugby Australia’s recent AGM, will also need to be resolved in Australia, sooner than later.

In the meantime, professional rugby in Australia in its existing framework, withers before our eyes. People who dismiss the loss of Carter Gordon as insignificant – because a first-year Test newbie, playing behind a losing pack, without an experienced mentor in the squad, with a motley coaching group headed by a man already on a plane to Japan, should always be able to deliver a World Cup – need to realise that they are part of the problem.

They should instead be demanding of Rugby Australia half a dozen Carter Gordons, and a strategy in place to produce and develop all of them.

Instead, rugby has lost a talented, hard-working, still-developing young player; all because he cared deeply for and invested himself fully in the program he was a part of, and the coaches and teammates he was connected to, a whole lot more than Rugby Australia did.

Whatever the structural outcome is for rugby in the region, administrators in Australia and New Zealand must foster a solution that is the antithesis of what Super Rugby has become in recent years, and properly connect the game with the hearts and souls of players and fans.