Boks going nowhere soon
16 Aug 2010
MARK KEOHANE writes that the Springboks will never split from Sanzar.
Every second year, when the moans start and the groans become louder and South African rugby’s administrators insecurities are at their most obvious, one of the emotionally vulnerable suits at the South African Rugby Union tells a media mate that South Africa is looking at alternatives to the Sanzar alliance with Australia and New Zealand.
New Zealand and Australia then react, there is a conference call and a statement is then drafted with all three nations telling each other just how important one is to the other, how good each is and how Super Rugby and Tri-Nations are the best rugby competitions in the world.
The Tri-Nations will become the Four Nations (unless someone clever comes up with a tournament name) and Super 14 is Super 15 as of 2011.
Leaving Sanzar is not as easy as it seems. I know because I was among a study group that did a heck of a lot of research into the possibility a couple of years ago. The lack of a global season is the first stumbling block and the Northern Hemisphere would only accommodate South Africa if all the compromise was made by South Africa, whose provincial unions aren’t prepared to change their season to play in the north.
Plans were at an advanced stage a couple of years ago to put together a tournament that would kill off Super rugby, with the top clubs from England, France and South Africa the alternative to Super Rugby. New Zealand and Australia would then play their own competition. The idea never left the boardroom as the Celtic nations insisted on loyalty from the French and English to the concept of the European Cup and, in the case of the latter, other tournaments.
And so it went, at provincial, regional and national level.
The broadcast market in the UK is already saturated with all the other sporting events. South Africa’s administrators live in a dream world when they should be appreciating the dream world that is the Sanzar alliance. Where it always gets complicated, and it is always South Africa threatening to leave, is because we have administrators so decidedly inferior to the New Zealanders and Australians.
Our boys get steamrolled in negotiations and Australian CEO John O’Neill would have a tougher time clubbing a baby seal than he would getting his way in round table talks that add to the strength of Sanzar, even if it comes at the expense of South Africa.
When Saru board member Jan Marais told a journalist that the administration had requested a task team to explore possibilities of alternatives, there was a qualifier. He said that it was an obvious exercise to do a couple of years out from any further broadcast negotiations. Saru president Regan Hoskins added the Sanzar alliance was strong, but that debate would always be robust and because this ‘robust debate’ had been made public did not mean there was any ill-feeling.
Questions have subsequently been asked in Australia and New Zealand as to which way South Africa will jump? There is nowhere to go. South Africa is entrenched in Sanzar and the only reason perception is so strong that South Africa is prejudiced is because of South Africa’s weak leadership and lack of presence at the table.
Stronger administration, with an emphasis on substance and not paranoia, would immediately redress any power imbalance. Quality individuals lead to quality leadership.
Then there’s the broadcast deal. The broadcasters determine the strength of the alliance, and not one of South Africa, Australia or New Zealand is stronger on its own. The one needs the other two to strengthen any broadcast deal.
I have always wanted South Africa to play in the north. There is a time difference of an hour to two, an overnight flight is as hectic as it gets in travel demands and there would be so much more variety playing in Europe than against the same old from Australia and New Zealand.
In theory a move makes so much sense, but practically it is impossible to structure.
In the meantime let’s hope South Africa’s administration gets a stronger because that will at least ensure less of a whipping at the boardroom table, which is all this really is about … South Africa’s pathetic admin boys asking for the bullying to stop and threatening to take the ball home if the Kiwis and Aussies don’t stop calling them ugly names and taking their milk money.
Follow SA Rugby mag on Twitter
117 Comments
Pages: « 1 2 [3] Show All
17 Aug 2010, 06:27 am
@whatever(whatever)-98: how is hore by the way?
17 Aug 2010, 06:30 am
@Kiwisamoan(Kiwisamoan)-100:
Come on kids, play nicely or else you will be send to your rooms…
17 Aug 2010, 06:31 am
@Slartibartfast(Slartibartfast)-102:
I was just trying to make a point and that nob had to pull out the personal attack. Oh well its all good fun at the end of the day.
17 Aug 2010, 06:34 am
@Kiwisamoan(Kiwisamoan)-103:
No it is not! Name calling just opens the door and soon every second post is rubbish, bringing in family members does not help, makes it worse.
17 Aug 2010, 06:34 am
Bottom line is that having the best playing the best is always going to be more compulsive viewing than having the best playing the rest.
The current SARU management seem to want/need to drag their SANZAR partners into their internal domestic politics. The current relationship is ‘damaged’ because the NZRU objected to PDiV suggesting that they were conspiring with the RFU, refs etc to somehow cheat their way to beating the Bok’s. The ARU looked at it objectively and agreed that type of behaviour is unacceptable for a senior representative of one of the partners, and should be dealt with according to the AGREED sanzar process. The head of SARU then calls this a ‘declaration of war’ to the press. Is this even remotely sensible behaviour, or is it just an attempt to move SA fans attention away from deficiencies in the current SARU/BOK management set-up? Lets see what new utterances we get if the Boks lose another game on saturday. It would be nice to hear a ‘well done to the opposition’ if they win, without another new theory about how SA get cheated. Most of the fans seem able to say it when it is due, so why can’t the management.
17 Aug 2010, 06:36 am
@Kiwisamoan(Kiwisamoan)-101:
Yeah mate, at least I know who mine is, you fu kwit!
17 Aug 2010, 06:38 am
@aliboy(aliboy)-105:
The “well dones” last year were few and far between mate……….
17 Aug 2010, 06:41 am
@whatever(whatever)-106: hahahaha ok Slartibartfas right thats enough rubbish. End of the day I don’t think it will be in anyones best interest if they split. I think its just been a bad year for the boks and people are just talking it up besides its another 5 years away, a lot can change during that time.
17 Aug 2010, 06:41 am
@whatever(whatever)-106:
Kom Boet, move on.
17 Aug 2010, 06:44 am
@Slartibartfast(Slartibartfast)-109:
Par mense op hierdie blog is net hoenernaaiers……
17 Aug 2010, 06:46 am
@whatever(whatever)-110:
Is ok, hulle val kom oor twaalf maande, dan lag ons lekker.
17 Aug 2010, 06:50 am
@Slartibartfast(Slartibartfast)-111:
ja swaer
17 Aug 2010, 07:13 am
@whatever(whatever)-107: Did G Henry come out and say that SARU were conspiring to cheat, or that the Bok’s had the referees in their pockets? Did anyone else from the NZRU or ARU management make statements like those? Fans will always be fans and accuse the opposition of illegal tactics and blah, blah, blah, but when the senior representatives of a national body openly accuse the opposition of conspiring with the refs etc to cheat it is a quite different level of statement.
The Boks played smart rugby in 2009. It was cleverly worked out and excellently executed. But, it wasn’t the type of rugby that grabs the hearts and minds of Kiwi and Aus supporters so they moaned about it rather than appreciating it. If the Boks had run the opposition off their feet with ball in hand, they would have been given more credit by the Aus & NZ fans. Doesn’t mean that the Bok’s didn’t do the right thing, just means that it wasn’t grabbing hearts and minds in Aus and NZ. On the other hand I would expect that the English supporters would have found it thrilling to watch.
17 Aug 2010, 07:28 am
@aliboy(aliboy)-113:
Who scored the most tries in 2009?
17 Aug 2010, 07:35 am
Aliboy,
South Africans are a bit simple, too simple for them even to be accused of nobbling the refs. NZ kakked themselves after 2009 to the extent that P O’ Bumchum was brought on board. Remember how he scampered like a whipped cur to beg forgiveness for the refereeing from his AB masters after the Italy game that NZ won? That not cheating?
Of course it isn’t; it’s the “professional game”, “gamesmanship” etc and until SA wakes up and plays it, we’ll continue to have patchy results.
17 Aug 2010, 07:55 am
I don’t know, but I assume from the question that the answer is the Boks. It doesn’t change the fact however that the style of play, although well thought out and executed, didn’t appeal to the Aus/NZ public, and this was reflected in the views/moans/attendances of the fans.
When the best option for attack is to give the football to the opposition (probably for the first time in the history of the game), there is a real mindset change required for the fans to appreciate the game, and all that happened in Aus/NZ is that the fans decided they weren’t enjoying watching the game as much as they used to. The Bok fans of course celebrated getting the wins, and so they should have because they played to the rules extremely well. They also called some of the Aus/NZ fans moaners etc, and fair enough because it was true. The team that plays best to the rules, conditions, and ref applicable for the game usually deserves and gets the win.
There are not too many Bok fans even on this forum however that seem to be actively calling for the rules to be revised back to the 2009 rules, so I assume that they too are enjoying the spectacle of more ball in hand rugby, even if their team is still adapting to the revised game plan they probably require.
17 Aug 2010, 10:07 am
@whatever(whatever)-114:
SA scored 1 more try than NZ,sooooooooo?
@husky(husky)-115:
SA been playing the profeesional game along time now,no one else gives the refs gold watches,now thats professionalism
Pages: « 1 2 [3] Show All
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.