A stars position can't be defined as being south of somewhere. South exists as a logical construct of our magnetic poles. Once you lose that you have no relative measure to work with. The same is possibly true of time.
But the trouble with the South Pole and Shuttlecock metaphors is that you assume those objects are literally everything; all matter. If you define the Universe as Everything there is (seen and unseen; where what we see is the "Observable Universe") there is no outside location from which to observe it in entirety.
That's where the analogy really breaks down, but I guess it's still a useful thought experiment so long as you realize the limits to the domain.
There can still be an unobservable (to us) universe outside ours.
If you assume the universe started N billion years ago, there is an event horizon expanding at the speed of light that fit this definition of an "observable universe" for us while allowing for an infinite number of equal universes, some of which are partially shared with ours.
