Sarries can SA initiative
17 Nov 2011
Saracens will not host their European Cup match against Biarritz in Cape Town because of the conflict between the city council and WP Rugby.
Saracens announced the cancellation of their plans of taking the first European Cup fixture to the southern hemisphere on Thursday. This comes after negotiations between the Watford-based club, City of Cape Town and WP Rugby fell through this week.
The orginal plan was to play the match at Cape Town Stadium in Greenpoint, but as the host union, WP forced their hand and demanded that the match be played at Newlands. Saracens attempted to reason with the two parties but a failure to reach an agreement has seen the English Premiership champions cancel the initiative as they’ll now play the match in London.
‘The innovative Saracens were eager to host the first European Cup match ever played outside Europe, to stage a special, spectacular rugby event and to project brilliant images of Cape Town and European rugby around the world,’ said the club’s statement.
‘However, we have no wish to be a catalyst for conflict between the City of Cape Town and the Western Province Rugby Union. Saracens looks forward to playing a competitive match in Cape Town as soon as local circumstances allow.
‘Supporters who have bought tickets in South Africa will be fully refunded by Computicket, and Saracens will engage with UK-based supporters who have already booked air tickets and accommodation, and ensure they are appropriately compensated.’
301 Comments
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 » Show All
18 Nov 2011, 09:11 am
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-89:
You are making this over-political.
At the end of the day the City does not carry much blame here
I have no idea why you express anger at them.
The City
* They believed protocol was followed. OK it wasn’t exactly but they are not rugby types
* The Soccer White Elephant is not the point. Sure mistakes were made but dont forget that was a prev administration
* Its the Citys job to make the best of the Stadium and thats what they are doing
* is bthe Citys job to promote Cape Town. Many Sarries supporters were going to visit. Cancelled trips now.
* A single HC game does not weaken their negotiations
Saracens
* We understand why they want to play at CT Stadium. For them it was CT Stadium or wait
* They botched the protocol a bit. They went to their board and SARU but not to WPRU
WPRU
* Put aside the fact that they have the legal right to refuse CT Stadium as a venue. I acknowledge that BUT
* Whilst they may not have received official letters they knew about the plans some time ago. I had heard about them and I am not involved in rugby. So why not phone Saracens and ask them? Pig headed by them
* They say they have to protect the interests of the clubs and their fans (the people that watch rugby). I am interested to understand how this has protected my interests in any way
18 Nov 2011, 09:12 am
@ufo(ufo)-98: They may well be being petty, I’m no fan of Titus at the best of times, but we are speculating without knowing the facts. As I said, Griffiths could have played the game here regardless. There is nothing preventing him from still doing that.
I’d personally LOVE to see a move from Newlands to CT stadium. No question.
But not as you say with WP being saddled with a loss making asset that will pull them deeper into the hole.
i was really looking forward to seeing the game there too.
I am dissapointed and if the facts come out against WP, then I will be as scathing of them as I am on the fools the greenlighted the stadium to start with.
18 Nov 2011, 09:13 am
@Gunther(gunther)-93:
that he is…
18 Nov 2011, 09:13 am
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-89: hhhmmm, you want every politician in this country held to what they said and did during apartheid?
18 Nov 2011, 09:15 am
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-99: I’ll admit I only have a sketchy take on what happened here, but I understand it was a direct agreement with the city, and that WPRU weren’t approached or involved. But they involved themselves when they invoked some clause that said they had the final say in where any rugby games in Cape Town are held.
18 Nov 2011, 09:18 am
@Biscuit(Biscuit)-101: I know all that, and If i was at the city now i would also be using whatever leverage I had to try and get WP to move there.
We don;t know why WP refused to host the game there. That’s what I’m saying. We need to find out.
If WP move to the stadium for this one game and it’s a huge success then the City will have a much stronger hand in attempting to force WP to move there. After all, it’s what the fans want, isn’t it?
Do you see where I’m coming from?
All we have is the city saying that they want WPRU to move and to reconsider and all that, we have no detail on the deal they want WP to accept.
18 Nov 2011, 09:20 am
@Transformation(Transformation)-104: Please explain.
What I’m saying is that She’s hardly the voice of reason and consistancy. She may have good points and may even be doing a great job, but people are painting her as the good guy here without knowing the facts.
18 Nov 2011, 09:21 am
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-102:
sure we don’t know the facts… i acknowledge that…
but where i think wp is being petty is with the timing of their announcement…
if they were going to invoke their ‘legal rights’… why didn’t they do so at the get-go…? why wait until now…?
that suggests to me that they were okay with event initially but for some reason have changed their minds…
to me… that’s being petty…
18 Nov 2011, 09:21 am
Expect to see City of Cape Town offer to host a Bledisloe Cup Match
18 Nov 2011, 09:23 am
@Transformation(Transformation)-104: And to answer your question, yes I do. i have to account for my actions, why shouldn’t they??
18 Nov 2011, 09:24 am
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-107:
At face value you are saying she should be judged on her past, presumably because you think she hasn’t moved on.
All the while you have.
18 Nov 2011, 09:27 am
i still feel a straight swap, one stadium for the other, is the way to go…
and the relative value of the two stadiums shouldn’t be the determining factor…
what the cape town public.. and the city… should weigh up… is the relative costs to the city and taxpayers…
the city could tear newlands down and turn it into an office precinct… wpru can build new boxes at CTS at their expense… and recover their money from rugby matches, rock concerts and other events…
no further burden to the city or to the tax payers… the city makes money… wpru makes money…
everyone happy…
18 Nov 2011, 09:28 am
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-107: what was unreasonable & “inconsistant” about her fighting for her rights in the UDF?
18 Nov 2011, 09:28 am
@ufo(ufo)-108: Fair comment, but this was probably used as a bargaining chip with the council. “if we cannot come to mutually acceptable terms we will invoke our right to veto”
They couldn’t, so not the WPRU have to do that, or risk being seen as weak to the city, which given the fact that we both know that they’ll probably move at some stage, is a mouch more valuable “victory” (forWPRU only of course) than the potential backlash of Griffiths saying that he doesn;t want to play at Newlands.
It’s Saracens that has pulled out after all. I understand why, but it wouldn’t surpise me that this is the end result of everyone, including Saracens, SARU,WPRU and the City not going about this properly from day 1.
All 4 parties need to be held accountable. Not just the one that wasn’t quick enough on the draw with their press statement.
18 Nov 2011, 09:31 am
@ufo(ufo)-112:
I assume the Council has a mortgage of some sort that they are trying to deal with.
How does a straight swap of stadia clear that burden?
18 Nov 2011, 09:32 am
@Brads(Brads)-111: WE are ALL judged in life on an accumulation of our action, verbal and otherwise.
I’m not a De Lille hater by the way.
Just a sceptic.
@Transformation(Transformation)-113: I’m judging her by the accumulation of her public actions, including her actions as UDF, ID and DA representatives.
You are picking on the UDF part, because it suits your “struggle justifies all behaviour’ mindset.
18 Nov 2011, 09:36 am
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-106:
OK but you did bring a lot of ancient political history into your comments but lets agree to dump that
Your statement -> If WP move to the stadium for this one game and it’s a huge success then the City will have a much stronger hand in attempting to force WP to move there. After all, it’s what the fans want, isn’t it?
I acknowledge that may be the thinking. If it is I understand why WPRU dont want rugby played at CT Stadium.
Of course we dont know whether its their thinking (they are hardly going to admit it)
Lets assume it is.
If it is then they are going about the negotiations in the wrong way. They have refused to come to the negotiating table. From what I understand the City is willing to spend a fortune on the stadium to accomodate more suites. But for that to happen they have to talk tio the City.
So they decide to be aggressive and intransigent?
Maybe their tactic is to wait until the City is more desperate and will therefore cave to easier terms.
A negotiating tactic but the aggressive, refuse to talk approach will win them no friends (not even amongst their own fans).
Many are thinking that WPRU are being silly. If WPRU was at the negotiating table they would come across as more reasonable people trying to work out a solution.
Right now they just look like stubborn, aggressive, immature children
It has hurt their image and its hurt Cape Town’s image.
Not good business
18 Nov 2011, 09:38 am
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-116: now you assume to know my “mindset”?
you’re ill-equipped to grasp my mindset chap, let’s get that out of the way.
is you scepticism reserved for de lille or even for all of the former Nats that are in the DA now?
18 Nov 2011, 09:39 am
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-114: you are saying that people are getting sucked in, and don’t know the facts, and then basing your arguments on things you can’t possibly know.
At the end of the day, WP have the most power in this situation, as they have the right to decide where the game is played. They are, alongside the city, politically invested in this matter. Saracens aren’t, and aren’t interested in playing political games in South Africa or in Cape Town.
Perhaps WP are using this as a bargaining chip in a larger game, a well thought out plan in a wider political game versus the city, or perhaps it was a reaction against the city and an attempt to make some money. We don’t know which one it is, but currently it appears to be a reflex action.
Saracens have been speaking about this game since last season, and talking about hosting the game in Cape Town at the new stadium. Surely WP should have communicated with them about it then, rather than now after tickets have been sold, and people have booked flights from England?
If it is part of a broader political game, the damage it has done to WP rugby administration had better be worth it.
18 Nov 2011, 09:39 am
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-99</a
probably because they make money out of hosting it at Newlands. In this case, the GPS is direct competition for the income.
18 Nov 2011, 09:40 am
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-116:
Fair enough, I don’t have any knowledge of her other than what you have posted.
Which was of course her comment while an active member of the UDF.
If you say she is still consistently anti harmony, I accept that.
18 Nov 2011, 09:41 am
@Brads(Brads)-115:
by turning newlands into an office precinct… selling the development rights or developing it themselves and leasing the office space…
i also believe the national government has to come to the party for that… it was them and fifa who basically insisted the stadium be built in the first place… i know there have been talks about the government helping out all the stadiums… not sure how far they’ve gone though…
18 Nov 2011, 09:43 am
hehehe…
Stormersboy…?
you’ve got your argument now…
wish i could stay and take part but have to run…
cheers all… have a good one…!!
18 Nov 2011, 09:45 am
@Biscuit(Biscuit)-101:
Income from the game at Newlands goes to WPRFU which includes the clubs. It also helps buy and pay players, maintain the stadium etc. That’s why they insisted on Newlands.
18 Nov 2011, 09:47 am
@ufo(ufo)-122:
So you are saying that because of the hubris of the government, the local council and SA Football, Rugby will be the ultimate winner.
Hmmm. I have changed my mind.
WPRU are clever buggers.
18 Nov 2011, 09:50 am
@Biscuit(Biscuit)-117: They are certainly points down on the PR department for sure. They need a more savvy media liason to handle stuff like this.
As i said, we just don’t know. That’s what i’m saying.
Befor we go after the WPRU like some bloggers have been for the last 2 days, lets get the detail. If it turns out that WPRU are indeed being “stubborn, aggressive, immature children” as you say, I’ll be at the front of the queue agreeing with that sentiment.
On the political issue, and if you had read the thread yesterday it may make more sense.
Some bloggers were using the “she’s the mayor for crying out loud, show some respect!!!” tactic to attempt to refute the suggestion that any comments that she may have made in this regard are above reproach and must be seen as the only reasonable stance to take. My post was in anticipation of that same attempted rebuttal.
As a background, i come from a political family in a sense. My great -grandfather was in fact the Mayor of Cape Town, and although he died when I was fairly young, he left a legacy that still lasts today. However he was hadly a perfect man in many respects and him simply holding the office of mayor for a few years hadly makes him so, and it;s within that context that I was positioning the remarks of Patricia De Lille.
18 Nov 2011, 09:53 am
The more than meets the eye is likely to be a power struggle WITHIN the union.
SAIL flexing their muscles.
Get ready for a rumble in the mahogany jungle.
Tobie Titus is ready for the rough stuff he’s already taken his teef out.
18 Nov 2011, 09:54 am
@Transformation(Transformation)-118: Well you seem to assume plenty when responding to my posts, so allow me the same level of ignorance as far as your mindset is concerned as you have as far as mine is concerned.
18 Nov 2011, 09:55 am
@ufo(ufo)-112:
Hey, that was my suggestion, yesterday.
Seriously, though, the City will never recoup the cost, whilst it will continue to incur further losses in maintenance for the next few years. It makes sense to do the swap and write off the loss rather than increasing it.
18 Nov 2011, 09:55 am
Couple of issues at work here.
WP has a mandate (and rightly so) to protect their interests, that of their stakeholders and investors. This not only ensures the game is run professionally but also that there is control instead of anarchy.
However, this would imply that the interests they want to protect directly affects their stakeholders and investors – meaning funds entrusted to WP Rugby by these individuals or groups is used to get a positive return on their investment. WP will use these investments to broker deals, bid for opportunities that might come around to bring their investors ‘what they pay for’.
To engage in bid processes costs money and resources (those of your investors), and once you do that (spent money or resources on something) you assume an entitlement or ownership of some sort in whatever you engage in (if you pay for something you either own it or hope to own it).
So for me the question really is; does WP rugby, or has WP rugby engaged any of the parties involved in any way to assume what would then rightfully be some form of ownership?
My information suggests not.
This whole project was driven from the start by Saracens – they spent time, resources and money to investigate, negotiate, and ultimately get the consent from their own bosses (ERC), the big bosses (IRB) and the bosses of the country they planned to visit (SARU). So for all intent and purposes the ‘owners’ of this project or bid is firstly Saracens.
Upon news that they have successfully negotiated with all relevant parties, they released a statement naming Cape Town as their city of choice.
Once this was made public, the City of Cape Town recognised an opportunity and informed Saracens that they would love to host the event if they so desired (bidding for hosting rights).
WP – up to this point nothing.
Consulting their (Saracens) stake holders they also announced Cape Town Stadium would be their venue of choice. When the news was made public (just over a week ago) their CEO announced that they would like to play in CTS but also stated twice, on record, the decision had to be ratified by WP Rugby (who at this point have not engaged with anyone on the matter).
Given the ‘relationship’ between WP Rugby and Sarries, their CEO eluded to the fact that this would merely be a matter of course or rubberstamping.
Then, and with their first engagement in this whole saga (which has been publicised since June this year) WP released a statement saying its Newlands or nothing. In response, Sarries said they would engage with all parties and let everyone know of the outcome. City of Cape Town invited WP Rugby to engage them in talks to find an amicable solution as this is an historic event.
As we all now know, Saracens then called the whole thing off.
Now one would assume that the ‘talks’ that occurred led to a stalemate which resulted in this thing being called off. What is interesting is that Titus from WP admitted they have not talked to anyone and given the City’s comments a couple of days ago: “How can WP Rugby suspend talks (on this and the long term negotiations) if they have not even started yet?” – they did not plan to talk to anyone in any event. This after Titus quite publicly (and embarrassingly) was quoted in the media as saying there is no formal relationship with Saracens at all which given the context it was said in and his attitude in saying it – must have pissed Sarries off especially given how they came to WP’s aid in the last 12 months with loan players.
So two things bother me here.
Firstly, WP’s inability or plain unwillingness to talk to anyone (including Sarries) taking a ‘my way or the highway’ attitude. They are making enemies where they should be making friends.
Secondly, how WP claim to act in the interest of their stakeholders yet they have done nothing to take ownership or responsibility in bringing their stakeholders world class events – and when there was a possibility to still rescue the situation, flatly refusing to engage anyone on the matter.
Is that acting in the interest of their stakeholders? Not a chance.
I have for years alluded to the incompetence in some quarters within this union – today, just perhaps, the public will see this too.
18 Nov 2011, 09:56 am
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-116:
hahahahha.
you don’t understand the struggle dynamic.
silly man.
A huge amount of angst could have been saved had the people who built these white elephants consulted EVERYBODY before they built them.
Instead of arrogantly assuming that they would just fall into line.
18 Nov 2011, 09:58 am
@Brads(Brads)-121: Again, like Transie, you are focussing purely on the UDF part of my post.
Read it again, i spoke of more than just that. It’s an accumulation of actions which suggest that she has shown herself to be inconsistant and therefore is not the paragon of absolute truth that some were making her out to be.
She’s a politician after all, and that in itself should be enough to cast serious doubt on anything she says.
18 Nov 2011, 10:01 am
This would never have happened in Durban. Rugby should be the winner in the end no matter which stadium gets it.
Those Capetonians mincing around like gaylords wanting everything their own way is typical.
18 Nov 2011, 10:01 am
This is just plain nastiness from WP. They are purposely trying to prevent the City from making this stadium work for the tax payer. Fark them. They are dangerously getting close to me hating them more than the Sharks.
18 Nov 2011, 10:02 am
Diary of an AB fan – day 26 as world champions..
I see the Nh club sides have cancelled their game in SA… bwahahaha This only ever adds weight to the whole furphy of SA moving its rugby up to the NH… if you cant accomodate two club teams how on earth are you going to accomodate involvement on a regular basis in the NH comps?
this AB fan is laughing so hard at the sheer incompetence of SA Rugby…
and i bet many administrators and “money men” in the Nh will see this as yet another reason why SA rugby wont be asked to join the NH leagues..
even us kiwis and Aussies know how difficult it is trying to deal with SA rugby, so much so that their incompetence is dismissed by “SA Supporters” as conspiracy..
what a laugh…
18 Nov 2011, 10:02 am
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-132:
UDF…ugly domestic fight.
18 Nov 2011, 10:03 am
@PissAnt(PissAnt)-130: I imagine when Saracens allowed Schalk Britz to play for WP during the Super 15 this year, they would have thought it could be the beginning of a relationship between WP and Saracens.
This game, and WP’s consent to the game, would have further extended this relationship, a relationship which could have benefited WP in a number of different ways, far beyond any money that WP would have made by hosting it at Newlands.
It appears to have been a distinct lack of foresight and insight from WP as they now walk about without anything, souring relationships between them and Saracens, and them and the city.
18 Nov 2011, 10:04 am
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-132:
I was perfectly fair in my reply, and actually accepted your views because I didn’t have any knowledge of the woman at all.
If any re-reading is required….
18 Nov 2011, 10:05 am
@WOLFMAN21(WOLFMAN21)-137:
Firstly WP is stupid for making the City of CT an enemy – and has now arguably made a rugby enemy (with strong SA ties) in Sarries.
Secondly, I cannot see this as acting in the best interest of the people they say they do.
18 Nov 2011, 10:07 am
@PissAnt(PissAnt)-130: Thanks for that elaboration. That does put the affair in some context.
i must ask this though, in terms of your post above, am I correct in comcluding that WPRU were not consulted at the beginning of this process? That the initial talks were between the City and Saracens?
If this is true, then really those 2 parties are equally at fault in not clearing up the WPRU’s stance in this matter sooner? You implied that Saracens “assumed” that WP would be behind it without checking until much later when the announcements had been made and it had all progressed some way down the track? If that is true then i would expect Anton R to give Eddie G as big a smack as Tobie T deserves (just for being Tobie T)
I agree that the WPRU have made huge blunder after huge blunder over the years, and that this would be entirely within character.
Thing is, i don’t belive that this game can easily be seperated from the greater picture of WPRU moving to CT Stadium, and within that context the negotiations (or lack thereof) take on a different hue.
18 Nov 2011, 10:07 am
@PissAnt(PissAnt)-139:
SAIL will either sell their share or try and increase it a boot everybody out.
18 Nov 2011, 10:07 am
@rossoneri(rossoneri)-134:
Really!
Do we know why the WPRU backed out or are we making assumptions?
18 Nov 2011, 10:09 am
@Gunther(gunther)-131: Ed Zachery. I obviously don’t.
18 Nov 2011, 10:09 am
@PissAnt(PissAnt)-139: Very narrow minded, short term and foolish approach from WP.
It has been clear that Saracens want to host this game in Cape Town for a good 4 or 5 months, and only now, after tickets have been sold do WP decide to get involved.
Once again, SA rugby administration is shocking.
18 Nov 2011, 10:12 am
@poppa69(poppa69)-135:
Hello poppa
Another day starts I see with flaying the collective hides of the locals for an intro.
18 Nov 2011, 10:15 am
@rossoneri(rossoneri)-134: count me in
I will become KINGS FAN….
With King Luke as captain I will find my spritual home.
18 Nov 2011, 10:17 am
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-132: your last para is rather odd…..
I know loads of poiticians…..some of whom have made huge sacrifices for this country….
Not all are bad….
18 Nov 2011, 10:17 am
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-140:
As Griffiths said; WP Rugby knew about this in June already. When Sarries announced they received the all clear from all authorities – the only party that engaged them was CTS.
In announcing their ‘preferred’ choice of venue (it is after all their project of which they are the only party investing anything into making this a reality) according to their stakeholders they made it clear that it has to be ratified by WP Rugby first.
Couple of issues I have here.
WP has NEVER engaged anyone. Not at any stage did they inform Sarries that they would rather prefer them hosting it at Newlands (for their stakeholders sake) or tried to make any deal of any form.
They wait till all the work has been done (by Sarries) and then just release a statement saying Newlands or nothing – a statement Sarries did not even know about until a SA radio sports commentator phoned them and asked them for comment!
Sarries, as well as the COCT was well aware WP rugby had to ratify this. COCT threw their name in a hat and invited WP to chat to them which would have seen a historic match played in CPT, tourist revenue, broadcasted to 11 European countries via Sky etc etc etc (THAT was the COCT main interest in this event – a boost for the city itself).
Sarries, after WP’s statement said they would chat to WP – it was revealed by Titus himself they did not talk to Sarries and given his earlier comment about Sarries and their unwillingness to chat to COCT it is safe to assume WP is simply not interested in talking to anyone.
I am just happy I am not a suite owner or season ticket holder at Newlands – because I would have been pissed at this outcome.
18 Nov 2011, 10:18 am
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-126: you are being grossly disingenuous now any comments about “respect for the cape town mayor” were made against comments like these:
“She could run around, shouting ‘djou ma se p0#$’, and ‘ik gaan djou lem’, ranting and raving like someone that has drank too much methylated spirits – but in the end, that’s all she can do.”
“I am just mentioning that unless De Lille has some form of rights to Newlands, she can dance around, baring her gums and that’s about it. People will just look at her like the mad woman she is.”
“She was mos the leader of the PAC wasn’t she ? Wasn’t the PAC listed by the CIA as a terrorist organisation ?”
and NOT regarding anything she said in her letter regarding the WP/CT stadium/ Saracens issue. if you feel the above comments were proper that’s another issue but don’t try to play useless mind games here.
18 Nov 2011, 10:19 am
@WOLFMAN21(WOLFMAN21)-144:
Is that the reason?
Or is it like McDonalds getting a little miffed when someone down the road starts selling burgers as big mac’s and tells the local franchise, stop bitching, we will pay you a cut, but only what we think you should get.
From what has been posted here today, WPRU has some sort of charter where they own the sport in Western Province.
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 » Show All
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.