Let counsel at the presidents
5 Feb 2006
The investigation into rugby’s bosses must go ahead regardless of the pending national presidential elections, writes Keo, because it will put the game’s leadership under the microscope and not just one individual.
How can an election determine the merits of an investigation into alleged irregularities within the South African Rugby Union leadership? In the last week the majority of reports have suggested that if incumbent SARU president Brian van Rooyen stands down then there won’t be an investigation into the supposedly numerous charges that he faces in the pending investigation into the management of South African rugby.
Whether Van Rooyen is re-elected or Oregan Hoskins proves to be the missionary man should have nothing to do with the investigation. If rugby’s office bearers want to clean up the game, then all of them must be accountable to the stakeholders, which include the sponsors, the investors and the paying public. Rugby is not rotten because of one president and it will not be clean because of one president.
The stink in rugby has been around for a long time and it won’t go away because Van Rooyen wins or loses the election. Van Rooyen was the toast of the South African media two years ago when they looked for a scapegoat in Silas Nkanunu. Now Hoskins is the saviour that is needed to clean up the image. The rugby media’s memory is as good as Richie McCaw’s was when Richard Bands ran over him a season ago. Their accountability is about as obvious as McCaw’s vision was that night in Pretoria.
The mainstream media have already backed their horse. The Sunday Times want Hoskins in because it claims the game needs what Hoskins is, which according to the publication is ‘diplomatic and smooth talking’.
The Rapport wants Hoskins in because it wants Van Rooyen out. The publication whose back page of two years ago asked its readers to drink a glass of champagne to the appointment of Van Rooyen, has for the last year told its readers the man must go.
Both, I believe, miss the point. It is not about Van Rooyen or Hoskins, but about the president’s council that determines the decision-making in South African rugby. It is this president’s council that is under investigation, as much as Van Rooyen.
If there is no investigation into Van Rooyen, then there will be no investigation into the alleged irregular business practice of other members of the president’s council – members who have been nominated for senior positions in the game’s administration.
This is not a time to be selective about the criminal or the crime. Both must be judged accordingly.
The leadership of the game, which includes the leader and all his deputies, must be put in the dock and be put under cross examination. All of them in one room, under one roof and under the same oath. All of them asked to the same questions …
It would be theatre and it would be the only way to separate fact from fiction.
35 Comments
6 Feb 2006, 01:16 am
Ahh dragons I say!
Very true Keo, since the inception of professionalism we have changed head cooks almost as many times as we have coaches but the core stays the same. Until we get a proper clean-out we will stay on this merry-go-round.
Oberholtzer started this but within months of taking over Van changed everything back to the ‘way it was’.
I do not know the answer but what I do know is that it should start at provincial level and work its way up, changing the top brass is not good enough.
6 Feb 2006, 03:24 am
Fellas,
Let me know the Muppit division you signed up to.There are quite a few there and I dont quite know which to choose!
6 Feb 2006, 03:57 am
All these people vying for SARU top offices all just want a turn to slurp some gravy off the gravy train and be bigshots in the public eye for a while.
Everyone queueing up for that job is only in it for himself.
If you believe otherwise, you are bluffing yourself.
6 Feb 2006, 07:04 am
It is always dangerous to generalise but there is an element of truth in the old ways whereby only an ex-springbok could coach the national team. The same logic for administrators would at least solve the gravy-train politician issue and allow someone with rugby at heart to drive the ship.
This scenario may seem shocking to the (succesful) business world but could not provide for administrators that would perform any worse than that of the current circus-clowns.
6 Feb 2006, 07:30 am
100% KEO – BVR received backing from “his boys” to get away with what he did, or so he thinks. They must sink with him. BVR thinks he is bigger than the game & his bad attitude drove away a man like MORNE DU PLESSIS, now here is quality, that will bring crdibility back to SA RUGBY.
It is time that the talented ex players like Morne are brought into the fold & please dont exclude them just because they are white. BEE is not working & nor are the Municipalities — why?
6 Feb 2006, 08:08 am
Keo
Jumping ship so soon , was it not Brain the Lion that was your man???
6 Feb 2006, 08:15 am
Anvil = Muppit League
I agree with Keo on this – until the structure of SA rugby is changed we are going to have a new messiah every two years when the folks who support the next bloke in are not getting their piece of the pie.
6 Feb 2006, 08:26 am
so they want to sweep it under the carpet, again! there must be some interesting stuff….
6 Feb 2006, 08:40 am
keo i agree to some extent.
however i am just concerned that according to the report, some of the decisions were apparently made WITHOUT the approval or knowledge of the board, hence the whole markgraaf report.
but i do agree that brian cannot be solely responsible for the **** that happened in our rugby, there are many individuals involved here and hopefully this investigation will expose them.
i just wish they would get the hell on with it!!!!!
6 Feb 2006, 08:43 am
board = council
6 Feb 2006, 08:48 am
I before e except after c Ig c’mon man basics!
Keo is spot on with what he says but I am a great believer in chopping the head off the dragon first. Then again in boxing they say take the body and the head will fall. I don’t know it is all so confusing!!!
6 Feb 2006, 09:15 am
Keo is right, but not because he has noble reasons and want the right things.
It is because he doesn’t want all the stink to sit on just BVR, he wants the stink to spread, read Markgraaff.
That is all fine Keo, the problem however is that all the stink is on BVR.
Keo and his whole little bullshit book with the Quentin Davids afair is all bullshit. Davids is a **** bag and made up stories, it was easy to blame Cronje.
Keo, it’s a new year and you are just as full of **** as always
6 Feb 2006, 09:29 am
How is this for complete ****!? Is it already April 1 in SA? How can they even think this, what about the television rights?
Now we will see how the 1st world show these idiots that they have no time for these ‘Africa Games’
Spears vanjaar nog in Super 14
Feb 06 2006 12:22:04:507AM – (SA)
Michael Green
Druk artikel
E-pos storie aan ‘n vriend
PORT ELIZABETH. – Die Southern Spears se rugbyspan, versterk deur ’n klompie Springbokke, kan op dramatiese wyse reeds vanjaar in die Super 14-reeks speel.
Dié scenario is gister deur mnr. Tony McKeever, uitvoerende amptenaar van die Spears, beskryf as ’n “werklikheid wat nie afgelag kan word nie�.
Volgens hom is die druk op die Suid-Afrikaanse Rugbyunie (Saru) om daadwerklik op te tree om te verseker dat SA Rugby se presidentsraadsbesluit van verlede jaar eerbiedig word.
“Die presidentsraad het besluit die Spears speel in 2007 in die Super 14-reeks in die plek van die plaaslike bedryfsregspan wat vanjaar die swakste vaar.
“Dit is verregaande dat die uitvoerende amptenare van die ander vyf bedryfsreghouers – die Bulle, Katte, Stormers, Cheetahs en Haaie – soos wat hulle verlede week aangedui het, dié besluit wil verander,� het McKeever gesê.
Hy het gesê al die plaaslike bedryfsregte moet voor Vrydag die huidige reeks-ooreenkoms met Sanzar en die kompetisie- en die uitsaaiborg onderteken.
Indien dit nie gedoen word nie, bestaan die gevaar glo dat dié drie instansies miljoene rande kan eis van SA Rugby.
“Ek glo SA Rugby sal op sy beurt met alle mag neerkom op die bedryfsreghouer wat hom in só ’n posisie plaas en dit geldelik vernietig,� het McKeever gesê.
“Die Spears is gereed om môre ’n ooreenkoms met SA Rugby te onderteken.
“Ons het vyf scenario’s vir SA Rugby geskets, waarvolgens die Spears in die plek van enige van die vyf plaaslike bedryfsregte aan vanjaar se Super14-reeks sal deelneem.�
McKeever het gesê SA Rugby en die nasionale afrigter, mnr. Jake White, het die reg om tot agt van ’n bedryfsreghouer se Springbokke te onttrek en by ’n ander streek te plaas. “Só kan die Springbokke van die bedryfsreg wat nie die huidige ooreenkoms onderteken soos wat dit verlede jaar deur die presidentsraad goedgekeur is nie, dadelik na die Spears oorgeplaas word.
“Die Spears sal dan in die plek van die rebel-bedryfsreg aan vanjaar se Super 14-reeks deelneem,� het McKeever gesê.
Volgens hom is dit onmoontlik dat die Spears enige alternatiewe voorstel van promosie-relegasie sal aanvaar.
“Almal het verlede jaar se besluite goedgekeur, maar nou wil party unies skielik dinge verander,� het McKeever gesê.
“Dis nie reg dat ander bedryfsregte dink hulle kan ons kop onder die water hou nie,� het McKeever bygevoeg.
Mnr. Johan Prinsloo, SA Rugby se uitvoerende hoof, het voor die naweek daarop gesinspeel dat die deelnemers-ooreenkoms wel later onderteken kan word.
“Dit is nie asof iemand van Tafelberg gaan spring as die ooreenkoms laat onderteken word nie,� het Prinsloo aan Liam del Carme gesê.
Hy het voorts bevestig dat slegs SA Rugby se presidentsraad die besluit kan omkeer dat die Spears outomaties vir die Super 14-reeks kwalifiseer.
6 Feb 2006, 09:40 am
The saying ‘A fish rots from the head’ comes to mind … just remember that SA Rugby has been rotten for much longer than just the past 2 years – even before we were readmitted to international rugby it was run by ‘the mafia’ with secret handshakes.
6 Feb 2006, 09:47 am
………And when Hoskins steps out of line, then what?
Why can’t the SARU board control any of the past presidents? It is crazy that the SARU President cannot be controled. Surely we need to adjust the control mechanisms of the president before we elect the future presedent?
6 Feb 2006, 09:47 am
Spears are a comedy show. Hobo, old boy, my view on this one has been consistent. Put them all in the dock, under oath and in the same room and then we will see what is fact and fiction.
6 Feb 2006, 09:56 am
Actually wactching the Presidents Council is more like watching Egoli or East Enders … just not as much ***!
6 Feb 2006, 10:06 am
Couldn’t agree more, Keo.
Stick them all in the dock.
If 5 or 6 fall, then so be it.
Nobody could have been a Lone Bull if others had carried out their role properly. There are inherent checks and balances. If there aren’t, there should be.
6 Feb 2006, 10:12 am
jissie maar the spears are playing hard ball…
6 Feb 2006, 10:19 am
Ahh dragons I say!
Very true Keo, since the inception of professionalism we have changed head cooks almost as many times as we have coaches but the core stays the same. Until we get a proper clean-out we will stay on this merry-go-round.
Oberholtzer started this but within months of taking over Van changed everything back to the ‘way it was’.
I do not know the answer but what I do know is that it should start at provincial level and work its way up, changing the top brass is not good enough.
Comment by Koos : February 6, 2006 @ 1:16 am
Agree fully Koos
6 Feb 2006, 10:21 am
It time to clean the whole house
but there surely is no place for BvR- no matter what spinning being applied
Bring on the investigation-
agree with Ras on post 18
A BETTER GAME FOR ALL!!!!
6 Feb 2006, 10:22 am
Hoskins to be the “BROOM”, not the messaih who can turn into “vinnige vingers”
6 Feb 2006, 10:33 am
JUSM
It maybe hard- but they are playing with themselves
The agreement of 8 June 2006 will be enforced eventually- this is just to show the SEC upstarts that their unwillingness to accept the original SARU decision can also be detrimental to them
Tony Mckeever is unhappy because the “guarantee” that he promised to the sponsors is not so guaranteed anymore-
In the end- the Spears will play in 2007- for the same reason thet the so- called “AGREEMENT” was agreed to, on 8 June 2006.
Back then- the BIG FOUR “knew” it was the Cheetahs going down in 2007, and they could easily make that agreement, now they are not so sure anymore.
They are scared- therefore new plans must be made
Lot a **** this- again Spears will play S214 in 2007
I just think that Tony Mckeever and his cheerleaders should not say how would the Free State feel if this was happening to them
Tony, The Central Unions were rated as no 2 in the official process, a process that the SEC did not take to court- instead the SEC applied Political muscle behind the scenes to obtain the “AGREEMENT”
I do not have any sympathy for this situation- because it was born out of a mess-
pity for the power players- and back stabbers that the Cheetahs are strong where it matters
On the ******* pitch!!!!!
A BETTER GAME FOR ALL!!!!
6 Feb 2006, 11:05 am
Anyone watch the Scotland France game?
Let’s talk the game for a change and leave the fish-rots-from-the-head stuff for some other time WHEN THERE’S NOTHING ELSE GOING ON for Pete’s sake.
6 Feb 2006, 12:59 pm
Fair point Dawn.
The Scots caught the Frogs on the right day for a wippin !
6 Feb 2006, 13:40 pm
Agree with Oranje Orakel
The Spears will play in 2007 for the same reason that the cheetahs could not be stripped of their s14 status for 2006 after they were awarded it despite the protestations of the goverment etc , The spears were promised a s14 side in 2007 they went out and organised sponsors like the aussie kit sponsor ISC, Radio Algoa .. with the view that they would be playing s14 in 2007. So unless Sarfu and the other farts want lawsuits to be coming out of their backsides they will have to give them the s14 opportunity they were promised.
The other unions dont really have that strong a legal case because they agreed to the terms albeit not contractually when they accepted their s14 positions for 2006 and secondly the official decision at the moment is that the spears are in for 2007 they just wont have enough time to overturn the decision before the end of the year.
I think they know it the reason they are making so much public noise about lawsuits are because they are hoping that the public pressure will cause the spears to cave and agree to a playoffs etc. I think mckeever and co are playing this one intelligently thus far let them fight it via the courts if they want to.
6 Feb 2006, 13:41 pm
That’s it. I’ve had it. I’m off to Planet Rugby chat.
6 Feb 2006, 13:44 pm
Heheheh Dawn
Shame man. You chose the wrong thread
This is typical of the Frogs.
Next they’ll go to Twickers and utterly crush the Poms.
The Pakistan of world rugby.
From the sublime to the ridiculous.
6 Feb 2006, 14:06 pm
Wouldn’t it be nice if the best 5 South African teams could play in the Super 14 each year. As decided by where they finished in the Currie Cup of the previous year.
The Kiwis / Aussies invented the regional franchise concept for their teams and we imitated them, because everything from overseas is obviously better. But it has never suited the SA rugby culture, as shown most by the Cats. We should just field our 5 best teams and if there are any superstars left out for a season they could then be drafted, or the esay ride they would get in the Voda Cup might be just what the doctor ordered.
Is it just me or does this not seem logical ? The whole esatern cape rugby structure seems to be shaky. Is it really possible to build a stable regional franchise on a shaky foundation.
There has already been infighting between the unions and the franchise about who gets the use of the players when the Spears are not actually playing. The unions want the players for Voda Cup and the Spears esp de Villiers wants to keep them in training camp for their next game against Kenya.
But will common sense ever prevail ? I suppose not.
6 Feb 2006, 15:06 pm
sounds about right, having the correct structure to ensure transparancy and accountability. Dont think the sunday times is amiss either about having an individual who is personable and articulate; he is after all the figurehead of SA rugby.
Apart from criticism, any workable suggestions? Perhaps an independent watch-dog? Perhaps a professional accounting house to advise and manage the financials thereby avoiding fatcat salaries?
6 Feb 2006, 15:46 pm
DavidSp
This site has dried up like my mother’s washing on a hot day!!!!
The number of stories about the upcoming S14, I can count on my one hand. There’s no excitement generated, no gees, no nothing. All we get is boardroom eavesdropping and speculation.
I for one am excited about the weekend when once again my boys come out to play. I mean … we get ONE new story a day !!!!
Oops. I almost forgot. Gotta go out and get The Voice. Dina’s story awaits !!!!
6 Feb 2006, 16:26 pm
Yawn….
Another one of these boring “arties”… A week before the Super14 and this is all that is happening??? Hell, then at least tell us what is happening with ‘Pret’!!
6 Feb 2006, 16:43 pm
Oops…there are other stories dated 6/2. Sorry boys!
6 Feb 2006, 16:48 pm
BVR should stay. Look at the onfield results as well as the trransparency in rugby now.Tri-nations,U21,U19,sevens. It is not run by the broederbond or like the broederbond anymore. The agenda against BVR is because he refuses to be a Ya Baas to outside influences. Just think back how it was before BVR took over. Then you had your “respectable” morne and riaan achieving f$%&-all except taking shitloads of money.SA Rugby was the laughing stockof the world-remember twickers and 53-3? These were the okes involved with streauli staaldraad.If i remember keo was also involved then.So perhaps keo could tell us why more wasnt achieved then!!
6 Feb 2006, 17:07 pm
Keo, I don’t think you read the Sunday Times article fully if you think it missed the point you just made. The journalist in that article pointed out how difficult Hoskins’ priority job would be: Removing power from the people that just voted him in, ie. The President’s Council.
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.