Naas slams Sarpa hypocrisy
16 Mar 2006
The SA Players Association is using Saru’s own money to fight the national body, according to former Bok flyhalf Naas Botha.
Botha criticised Sarpa for their role in organising the Springboks’ warm-up match against the World XV on 3 June at Ellis Park.
“Sarpa wants the game to generate funds,” he said on Boots & All. “As far as I’m concerned the members should run the organisation themselves.
“You can’t go to Saru and ask them for their players and a stadium, and then use the profit you generate to fight them a few weeks later. It just doesn’t make sense!”
Botha also questioned the value of playing against a World XV that quite clearly wouldn’t be the best team on the planet.
“How can you call it a World XV when you don’t have the best players from New Zealand and Australia there?” he asked.
Naas makes a good point. Judging by their first few ‘signings’ the World XV appears to be more of a Pensioners XV.
Former Wallaby winger Joe Roff is busy securing his retirement fund in Japan, ex-All Black scrumhalf Justin Marshall recently joined the Leeds Tykes, while flyhalf Carlos Spencer and winger Bruce Reihana are with the Northampton Saints. Throw in Saracens prop Cobus Visagie, who last played for the Boks in 2003, and you have a team unlikely to challenge John Smit’s men.
At the moment, the only current Test players expected to play are French flank Olivier Magne and utility back Thomas Castaignede – both of whom have been in and out of the national side in recent years. Bok discard Brent Russell may also get a run against his countrymen.
32 Comments
16 Mar 2006, 20:30 pm
It is sad that Naas is so uninformed. Clearly he has no knowledge how professional sport works.
The player associations of England, Wales, NZ, France and Australia get funding from their national rugby bodies.
Similar funding models are also found in cricket, baseball, basketball and american football.
What Naas does not understand is that disputes will always come into being but need to be resolved as quick as possible as it could have negative effects on the playing field where the players need to enternain the paying supporters.
This costs money as top class legal experts are untilised in the dispute process. Naas should make the effort to find out from SARPA how the funds will be used. He will be suprised that most of it will be used to improve the well being of the players.
This will include career advice for life after rugby, computer and financial skills, transformation workshops, training of provincial representatives etc.
Some money will be allocated for legal fees and if you stand for nothing you will fall for anything!!!
The players generate their own funds for SARPA with this match and at the same time will play entertaining rugby that is not always possible in the normal run of test rugby.
Jake White will have the luxury to experiment and give freedom to players which should result in very entertaining rugby.
I would rather watch a World XV playing the Boks than watching the Boks beat Uruaguy by 60 plus points.
Unfortunately NZ and Australia will be preparing for their internationals and will not release their top players for this match.
However the players that will play in the World XV have all got excellent test experience which will benefit the younger players that will play in the Bok side.
It is sad that Naas can not see the benefit of this match and he should be better informed before making wild statements.
16 Mar 2006, 20:32 pm
And that Hennie Le Roux is an *******(literally)
He feigned injury a few years back when he was playing for the Cat’s, They were playing the Auckland Blues overseas at the time, turns out there was nothing wrong with him. Now this same character parks on tv ratting other peoples play. Pah.
17 Mar 2006, 02:34 am
The Players Association is like a trade union. It’s ludicrous to imagine that the various national unions should give money to keep a players’ association solvent! It like asking the boss of a company to pay the union dues of the workers.
The professional rugby players are all fabulously wealthy, highly-paid workers. If these cash-flush players cannot spare enough dosh to keep their own Players’ Association in business to fight for their own cause, then they are saying that they really don’t need such a body and that it has no right to exist. It should fold up its tent and vanish. And too bad if Hennie le Roux is then out of a job.
17 Mar 2006, 02:35 am
“…transformation workshops…”
Who need **** like this?
17 Mar 2006, 07:32 am
BLUE CAP
you have got proof. can you remember where, what match, etc. like to find out more.
17 Mar 2006, 07:42 am
I think playerpower = hennie le roux.
This should create a bit of tension in the supersport studio when both hennie & naas is there
17 Mar 2006, 08:02 am
hierdie ding is vir ‘n dom ou soos ek maar lekker deurmekaar.
17 Mar 2006, 08:14 am
Good point Naas , i am with you on this.
17 Mar 2006, 08:23 am
Why don’t Naas go and play for the “Pensioners XV” to prove his point…Hy sal defnitief sy naam gat maak…
17 Mar 2006, 08:38 am
HAHAHA!! Me thinks so as well…lawrence…
Its cool to know players/coaches/administrators come on here..
17 Mar 2006, 08:57 am
ag come on! Naas didn’t critisize it. he just said it doesn’t make sense. Everybody in the studio agreed with him.
and come to think of it, sarpa is propably the only trade union where the employer and not the employee contribute to its funds.
I’m a employer as well, and there is no way that i will contribute to my enployees trade union.
what the F@#$
17 Mar 2006, 09:18 am
Green Blood,
It was a newspaper article at the time, where the team doc, shortly after the match stated that there was nothing wrong with him, I’ll see if I can’t scratch it up somewhere. What pissed us off at the time was that the team was really trying and he promptly stuck it to them.
I never thought I’d say this, but for once I agree with tackler.
17 Mar 2006, 09:19 am
Charlie
Naas will drop kick you.
17 Mar 2006, 09:22 am
LOA, I agree, It figures that playerpower is at least one of them at SARPa. I saw another post by him yesterday on basically the same lines. And I’ve never seen one by him before.
Give me Naas anyday.
17 Mar 2006, 09:33 am
Playerpower makes some valid points and the issues withregards to educating players for life after rugby is admirable.
I must also secong Tacklers question……what the hell is a transformation workshop?
Also, if rugby players are mature enough to demand million rand salaries,etc…..surely they are mature enough to organize themselves? They are afterall old enough to drive Mercs, own coffeeshops and houses,etc.
I’m all for looking after our assets/players in the game but I’m also all for our players growing up a little and taking accountability.
If I where SARU, the only way I would have afforded such generosity to the SARPU would be if they could gaurentee better results from my workers/players. And like unions in every avenue of business…..they are never able to do this.
If I where Hoskins, starting fresh and with a clean slate….I’d finance SARPA for the next 5 years.I’d however want to see results for my money.I’d want to see better proffessional ettiquette from our players and better results on the field.(Likewise,the general coaching structure and Director of rugby would be responsible for the technical aspects of coaching). I’d want the players to be held accountable for their own fitness/eating habits off field and weighed regularly with fines and possible dismissal for continued offenders…….backed by the Union.
Being a players union is fine, but if me, the employer(SARU) am subsidizing the entire shebang…….it is my union as well and I’d want to know what they plan on doing when productivity is low,results are poor and morale is wavering.
17 Mar 2006, 09:40 am
Blue cap
please do. and if a player pulls the same ‘fake’, he should be disciplined by SARPA.
17 Mar 2006, 09:45 am
Well said STP.
17 Mar 2006, 09:48 am
“Transformation workshop”???
Bwaaahahahaha!
17 Mar 2006, 09:48 am
STP,
Goeie voorstel!
17 Mar 2006, 09:51 am
If I were Hoskins I’d not give ONE CENT to SARPA from day one.
I, Hoskins, am the employer.
They, SARPA, are the workers.
Let the workers finance their own hallelujah chorus.
17 Mar 2006, 10:10 am
Do take note that the players are funding their association themselves. The players via SARPA give SA Rugby 30% of the revenue of this match.
So the employer actual gets money from the employees! The players would rather play in one match than have to participate in 20 golf days and dinners to generate funding for SARPA.
A few years ago NUMSA build a mercedes benz for Nelson Mandela by working overtime at the mercedes plant in East Londen. This is a similar principle. There is no cost to SA Rugby for the Boks to play in this match.
In the past these warm up matches actually costed SA Rugby money because people do not want to pay top dollar to watch teams like Samoa and Uruguay.
Naas’s reaction is also now better understood as the Falcons where he is a director is being taken to arbitration by SARPA for non payment of the SA 7′s captain salary for 6 months whilst he was injured. The Falcons also terminated the contract of two other players in an unfair manner and this is being challenged by SARPA.
17 Mar 2006, 10:13 am
playerpower, your’e a insider??
17 Mar 2006, 10:24 am
If the trade union is dumb enough to want to pay the boss 30% of the rugby test gate, there is no concomitant duty on the boss to be equally thick enough to funnel a cent of their income stream through to that union.
17 Mar 2006, 10:43 am
Playerpower,
can you give us some facts withregards to the Falcons stance at the minute.
Why don’t they feel they should pay?
Also…..the players “technically” may be funding themselves as they are “technically” working for free that day.
But,isn’t it SARU who gives them permission to play,provides a Stadium,medical service,parking attendants,etc,etc,etc….
A test match is not just a case of the players showing up is it?
17 Mar 2006, 10:46 am
The “Charity” part of the entire senario is actually being provided by SARU. The players would be playing that Saterday regardless if it was for charity or an official test match?
17 Mar 2006, 11:02 am
St. Petersburgbok,
Unfortunately the manner in which the affected Falcons players were dealt with is not in line with the applicable labour legislation. The CEO of the Falcons who dealt with these cases has since left under a dark cloud.
During the latter part of 2005 the Falcons ran into massive cash flow problems and the players only got paid in December for their November salaries. SARPA played a big role in ensuring this was sorted out with an advance form SA Rugby.
It appears the Falcons looked at every opportunity to save money.
SARPA gave the the Falcons ample opporunity to rectify their mistakes but to no avail.
Therefore these disputes had to be escalated and a third party will now decide if they acted fairly.
There is no cost to SA Rugby for this match. SARPA pays Ellis Park for the hire of the stadium, marketing, security, etc.
You are right a match of this magnatuded takes a lot of effort and time to organise and luckily the cost for all of this is covered by the match income. After all the costs are paid the nett profit is spilt 70 / 30 with SA Rugby.
17 Mar 2006, 11:10 am
I have to agree with tackler today. why should the employer fund the employees union? it makes no sense at all.
17 Mar 2006, 11:32 am
Playerpower:
“Computer and fiancial skills, transformation workshops, training of provincial representatives..”
How on earth are you going to teach those skills to our players ? Most of them cannot even do their current job, to play rugby, properly !
Week after week, month after month, year after year they are taught: Catch the ball, pass the ball, make a tackle. Do you think our players could muster this ? No way ! If it takes sooo long just to drill basic rugby principles into them, how long is it going to take to drill computer and financial skills into the Cats and Stormers teams ?
17 Mar 2006, 11:52 am
I dont think SARPA are using SARU money at all.
Firstly, the stadium is not owned by SARU but by the provincial union concerned. They are paid out of the gate for the match. The fee is a std fee for all games, wheather the stadium is full or not. SARPA will enter into negotiations with the province for use of the stadium. NO SARU INVOLVEMENT AT ALL.
Secondly all the test players are members of SARU and SARPA as are all proffesional players in SA. It is obvious that SARPA will ask SARU if the players may play… The fact that SARPA packaged the game as a bok preperation game of higher quality that Uruguay for example and that SARU agreed to it is a credit to both oprganisations.
The question you need to ask is if SARU are paying the match fees of the boks? I dont think so which is why no test caps are being given. Common sense.
Lastly it is also my opinion that the fees of the world 15 are being paid from proceeds from the game and that the boks if they are not going to waive their fees in the intrests of all proffesional players in SA will also be paid a match fee by SARPA and not SARU.
So, where is the alleged SARU financial involvment?
17 Mar 2006, 14:17 pm
think there are a couple of insiders on this who know far more than most of us but the teaching aspect is well summed up by the writer who said that if the players cant learn or be taught the basics what and how are they going to know about computers etc
17 Mar 2006, 15:08 pm
Big fan of Naas but as the first comment pointed out he doesn’t understand how industrial relations work.
It is important that any union has the right to generate funds in order to help their members.
When COSATU, NUM etc or ASLEF, RMT, UNISON in the UK need to generate money or meet, they have the cooperation of their employers. Plus believe me, these unions are far more radical in their struggle against the nasty ‘landowner capatalists class’.
I’m also dissapointed is some of the comments above. A lot of the problems we have in SA Rugby (particularly players playing too much) has a lot to do with our players have no say in the running of the game.
We are also at unique point in the games evolution where most of the administrators are players from the ameteur era, so they have an inherent mistrust (some may say dislike) of the modern professional player!
Keo is a big fan of Rian Oberholzer but he should have sorted it out when he was in charge (Mallett would never have been fired) and several arseholes who made an appearance in the running of our game wouldn’t have appeared either!
18 Mar 2006, 01:42 am
SA rugby players ought to have as much say in the running of the game as they can get.
But they must NOT expect their employers to PAY for their campaign.
They are marvellously wealthy wage-earners. They ought to pay for their campaigns out of their own pockets. And when they DO stump up their own hard-earned cash, they have a right to expect that it will not be wasted on complete rubbish like “transformation workshops” and sundry other such nonsense.
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.