Sanzar must call SA’s boycott bluff
12 Feb 2012
South Africa’s five existing Super Rugby franchises have threatened to pull out of the competition in 2013 – if six South African teams are not accommodated. MARK KEOHANE says Sanzar needs to call their bluff.
Once again the tail is wagging the dog. Once again Saru’s leadership is being shown as pathetic and without bite.
Oregan Hoskins, the greatest of disappointments as a leader, needs to stand tall and dismiss the threats of the five South African regions. He won’t and the regions will continue to hold the national governing body to ransom, when it should be the other way around.
Rapport newspaper’s sports editor Rudolph Lake wrote of a meeting between the five regions, a meeting sanctioned by Saru, in which they would look at solutions to the Kings’ entry into Super Rugby in 2013. The same regions, whose leadership had unanimously accepted the Kings’ 2013 entry more than two years ago, now feel the need for crisis meetings, in which the only solution is to accommodate six South African teams.
Now comes the threat that all five South African regions will boycott the tournament if they don’t get their own way. Any proper leadership will tell you they have no option but to play in the tournament. If they don’t they are in breach of existing contracts, they lose their primary source of income and they won’t have a region, let alone players.
It makes for a dramatic headline. It sounds spectacular. But there is no way they should even be in a position to make such a demand.
Sanzar’s board members should be laughing at South African administrators who are nothing but an embarrassment with their insular agendas and motives.
On Sunday the City Press sports section was led by an expose of the Golden Lions Rugby Union’s finances. Leading Media24 investigative journalist Jacques Pauw reveals that the Lions liabilities exceeded assets by R46.6 million in 2007, by R49.6 million in 2008, by R63 million in 2009 and by R73 million in 2010. It shows the Lions owing R38 million to Absa for an overdraft facility, R18 million to businessmen Robert Gumede and Ivor Ichikowitz, R14 million to Saru, R5 million to former coach Dick Muir, R6.8 million to the Leopards Rugby Union and R4.5 million to the Pumas Rugby Union.
Who are the Lions to threaten a boycott of the tournament?
Hoskins confirmed to Lake he had received a letter from the five regions with the threat of the boycott and that he was ‘shocked and disappointed’.
Come on, Regan. Show some leadership. You can’t always be shocked and disappointed. Sending the letter to the other nine provinces for input is also not about leadership, but more denial.
If the five ‘traditional’ provinces don’t want to play in Super Rugby, then kick them out and play the next five. Forget about provincial identities and focus on the players. The players will move to where the playing opportunity is.
The five traditional unions, among them the cash-strapped Lions and Cheetahs, have no position of strength when it comes to Super Rugby participation.
The bluff to force an expansion of Super Rugby from 15 to 16 teams and six South African teams should not be tolerated within Sanzar. If SA does not play ball, as per the agreed Sanzar deal and broadcasting arrangement, then Sanzar and the broadcasters should sue Saru and the respective regions/provinces.
What we are seeing here is how administrators in South African rugby have always conducted their business, be it by bullying or bluffing. The threat to withdraw should be a threat from Sanzar to kick them out.
Hoskins, in his time as Saru president, has never made a hard decision to show he is in charge. He has failed transformation and failed at everything that requires a decision and potential confrontation.
Don’t expect this situation to be any different, although I’d like to think those wizards in New Zealand and Australia have slightly more business acumen and a bigger set of balls to tell South Africa’s traditional five to F-off and stop their shenanigans.
Saru should have dealt with who falls out long before they gave the Kings the OK to play in the 2013 tournament. If it is on historical performance then the Lions must go. And if you look at their finances they should have gone ages ago.
307 Comments
12 Feb 2012, 13:01 pm
Deon Dragon Fourie’s hand is broken and he could be out for between 4-6 weeks.
That leaves red-faced knock-on Liebenberg and tiny Ntubeni as the Stormers’ hookers.
And Fourie was probably the most adept fetcher in the squad.
I reckon it’s time Grant 10 became an out-and-out Lions and/or Bulls supporter, instead of just a closet one.
12 Feb 2012, 13:02 pm
Meanwhile how’s this for an exciting new look loose trio:
6) Botha
7) Adonga
8) Stander
Hosh ja!
12 Feb 2012, 13:13 pm
The only way out for SARU is to back down on their promise to admit the Kings to Super rugby in 2013. But that would take balls and no-one in SARU is prepared to take the big decisions.
Sanzar are in contract to Newscorp until the end of 2015. SARU then have time to motivate an expanded Super Rugby format from 2016. Only then should the Kings be admitted to the big league.
This decision was taken by rank amateurs who are clueless about running a professional set-up. To expect the existing 5 franchises to come up with a solution just compounds this.
12 Feb 2012, 13:20 pm
Sell the licenses to big business groups like guma and others.I believe the saffa ones ,in any case,expires at the end of this super season.
12 Feb 2012, 13:30 pm
oh my word…we thought steve tew was a dunce for threatening to boycott the RWC 2015 but these okes take the cake.
12 Feb 2012, 13:33 pm
WIll be interesting to see how current SA franchises compete this year.
Will defs add some spice.
12 Feb 2012, 13:36 pm
great article mark keohane.this going to push rugby loser pu ssy(rl) way over the edge
12 Feb 2012, 13:37 pm
SARU should prepare the Kings for entry into 2015 super rugby. Thereby giving them chance in the Currie and Vodacom cups to get up to speed. Are the Kings playing in any competition as a squadn yet?
12 Feb 2012, 13:38 pm
kevin de klerk should sort out his legacy issues before engaging in threats.
12 Feb 2012, 13:40 pm
The Kings are the only team that will definitely have a place next year, but if they boycott they contradict themselves. Holding all the other unions as ransom
Politics … poly = many / ticks =blood sucking animals
12 Feb 2012, 13:45 pm
That’s right Keo, hold no punches. Expose the pricks responsible for this mighty mess.
12 Feb 2012, 13:48 pm
Aich! Anything that Sheeke’ Watson and his laaitie are a part of somehow causes division and unhappiness.
It was like that in the 80′s and it’s like that now.
12 Feb 2012, 13:49 pm
No this article is incorrect surely?
The big five have issued no threat to sanzar but rather threatened saru with a boycott if their places aren’t guaranteed next year.
Fokkol to do with a sixteenth franchise.
What do saru expect? The existing franchises have player and sponsor agreements in place.
So much for the unanimmous agreement on the kings inclusion lmao.
Cheeky is gonna be dissapointed again keohane you lying spin doctoring dwarf.
12 Feb 2012, 13:51 pm
I read in Daily telegraph that an option was being talked about to expand Super rugby.
It involved an argentine side joining the RSA conference, japanese side Australaian and an American side to the NZ conference.
12 Feb 2012, 13:52 pm
Yup, cannot agree more – call their bluff.
12 Feb 2012, 13:54 pm
No this article is incorrect surely?
The big five have issued no threat to sanzar but rather threatened saru with a boycott if theirk places aren’t guaranteed next year.
Fokkol to do with a sixteenth franchise.
What do saru expect? The existing franchises have player and sponsor agreements in place.
So much for the unanimmous agreement on the kings inclusion lmao.
Cheeky is gonna be dissapointed again keohane you lying spin doctoring dwarf.
12 Feb 2012, 13:58 pm
Keo – you are a ******.
You should know as well as anyone else that a loss of one of the 5 major franchises would be devastating to SA Rugby.
Remember a few years ago when the Bulls were on the verge of being relegated and kicked out of the Currie Cup?
Can you imagine the impact this would have had on SA Rugby?
The exact same is true if we lose the Lions or any of the other provinces. For the record. Of all the franchises I despise the Lions the most, but they represent a major rugby development ground and to say that it is negated by the fact that Pretoria is just up the road is idiotic.
The fact is SARU stuffed up and the unions are right to put their foot down in the face of such shocking leadership.
12 Feb 2012, 14:00 pm
For the record … I called you a re.tard, which is a lot better than some of the language you use, yet your language filter marks my comment with ******.
Hypocrite … or wait, just in case it gets *’ed out … hy.po.crite
12 Feb 2012, 14:00 pm
The feline members of the super franchises should thank their counterparts for standing up for them as chances are that either of them will getbthe wooden spoon.
If the agreement between Saru and the franchises ends at end this year, nothing prevents Saru from changing its franchise requirements surely?
So maybe will see Cheating Stormers, Lion Kings or Gauteng Goggos anyway?
Quite like the idea of 1 franchise in Gauteng with home base at Soccer City, even if only to piss the bullies off
12 Feb 2012, 14:04 pm
@davidv-18: Can still see it in the recent comments section. Gnomeo hasn’t figured that one out yet. Maybe one day when Butch’s smirk leaves
12 Feb 2012, 14:05 pm
The Lions shouldn’t be the team losing out. They have just won the Currie Cup and as the Bulls did about 10 yrs ago a few CC titles and they might start improving in Super Rugby. Confidence will be up and better players would want to play there. A combination of the Sharks and Kings would be a better idea as the Sharks are no great shakes at Super Rugby and that is how they started out anyway.
12 Feb 2012, 14:07 pm
@davidv-18: And the point of the “censor” is also what exactly as you can just add the words together or use grammatica….
12 Feb 2012, 14:07 pm
Mark, you might have gotten the wrong end of the stick here pal.
Who’s to say they weren’t threating to pull out if their places are at stake? It could be between the provinces and SARU, not SARU and SANZAR?
Anyway, I think it’s high time we get some back. New Zealand & Australia have benefited from SA’s involvement. We bring in most of the money, yet share it evenly, and have operated with schedules that have counted against SA teams since 96.
If there is to be an expansion, it has to be Port Elizabeth that has the infrastructure, a team already in place & a support base that only looks like growing if they participate in Super Rugby.
The kiwis are quick to say no, but not long ago they were all over the idea of Hawkes Bay receiving a franchise. It’s just when another SA team gets mentioned, that they reject the idea.
And we produce more talented players then Australia, and have much larger playing numbers… We also bring in FAR MORE supporters… why should they have 5 teams also?
Let’s not forget that Australia & New Zealand want to share gate takings (from ticket sales) with the SA franchises also. Trying to rip us off even further.
12 Feb 2012, 14:08 pm
@Captain Jack-21: Correct me if I’m wrong but methinks Sharks have 2nd best overall record in Super rugby for SA teams?
12 Feb 2012, 14:10 pm
@hendrikp-23:
Share gate takings EVENLY that is.
Must be smoking crack, the lot of them.
Imagine having to share the money you get from ticket sales evenly with the Rebels, or Hurricanes, who barely make 4 figures for attendance.
12 Feb 2012, 14:22 pm
Trupisero. They may have the 2nd best record not sure. But haven’t won it and originally the Sharks and EP shared the franchise. Also pooling their resources would make for a strongr team. The Sharks originally being bigger than EP used this strength to gt most of the games played in Durban. What should happen is that half the games get played in each city and a coach with no loyalty to either should be got and it could work
12 Feb 2012, 14:24 pm
let the kings play all 5 S15 teams, and the team that loses drops away. I can tell you, the kings won’t beat anyone.
12 Feb 2012, 14:26 pm
get your head out of these 5 rugby franchises arses hoskins!rugby in south africa doesn’t belong to these people.stand up and be counted and just replace the five with another set.
12 Feb 2012, 14:29 pm
Mark Keohane’s bias is showing and this article is an emotional outburst to express his anti-Lions feelings. Not a very well thought through bit of gutter journalism with side swipes everywhere but no real substance.
South Africa’s five existing Super Rugby franchises have threatened to pull out of the competition in 2013 – if six South African teams are not accommodated. MARK KEOHANE writes Sanzar needs to call their bluff.
Once again the tail is wagging the dog. Once again SARU’s leadership is being shown as pathetic and without bite.
Oregan Hoskins, the greatest of disappointments as a leader, needs to stand tall and dismiss the threats of the five South African regions. He won’t and the regions will continue to hold the national governing body to ransom, when it should be the other way around.
The Rapport Newspaper’s sports editor Rudolf Lake wrote of a meeting between the five regions, a meeting sanctioned by SARU, in which they would look at solutions to the Kings’ entry into Super Rugby in 2013. The same regions, whose leadership had unanimously accepted the Kings’ 2013 entry more than two years, now feel the need for crisis meetings, in which the only solution is to accommodate six South African teams.
What were the conditions to their acceptance? I am certain that none of them would have accepted suicide at an option, which is what SARU expects – “which one of you five will fall on your sword to make space for a politically motivated inferior region to join Super Rugby?”
Now comes the threat that all five South African regions will boycott the tournament if they don’t get their own way. Any proper leadership will tell you they have no option but to play in the tournament.
Actually they have. Each of these franchises are independent legal entities, and as their franchise agreement apparently expires at the end of 2012 they can set up their own professional body to run their competitions and thereby marginalise SARU. In addition, with 60% of SANZAR media money coming from SA they would have a fair bit of clout.
If they don’t they are in breach of existing contracts, they lose their primary source of income and they won’t have a region, let alone players.
With the franchise agreements expiring soon they probably won’t be in breach of contract and since they have ALL SA’s top domestic rugby players contracted to them they are in a very powerful position to “go it alone” outside of SARU.
It makes for a dramatic headline. It sounds spectacular, but there is no way they should even be in a position to make such a demand.
SANZAR’s board members should be laughing at South African administrators who are nothing but an embarrassment with their insular agendas and motives.
A bit of sense if you talk about Cheeky Watson and the SARU administrators.
The City Press’s sports section is led by an expose of the Lions Rugby Union finances. Leading Media24 investigative journalist Jacques Pauw reveals that the Lions liabilities exceeded assets by R46.6 million in 2007, by R49.6 million in 2008, by R63 million in 2009 and by R73million in 2010. It shows the Lions owing R38million to ABSA for an overdraft facility, R18million to businessmen Robert Gumede and Ivor Ichikowitz, R14million to SARU, R5million to former coach **** Muir, R6.8million to Leopards Rugby Union and R4.5million to the Pumas Rugby Union.
This is old news and have been laid to rest by the Lions and their investors and their sponsors. While nobody argues that the Lions have debts the position is now said to be under control. And is Mark Keohane so naive to think that the other unions and franchises don’t have debts? Does he really think the other unions and franchises are squeaky clean?
Who are the Lions to threaten a boycott of the tournament?
It is not only the Lions that are threatening a boycott. It is all five franchises. You know, the guys who actually bring in most of the money into SARU and SANZAR? The guys who have contracted most of SA’s top rugby players?
Hoskins confirmed to Lake he had received a letter from the five regions with the threat of the boycott and that he was ‘shocked and disappointed’.
Come on Regan. Show some leadership. You can’t always be shocked and disappointed. Sending the letter to the other nine provinces for input is also not about leadership, but more denial.
If the five ‘traditional’ provinces don’t want to play in Super Rugby, then kick them out and play the next five. Forget about provincial identities and focus on the players. The players will move to where the playing opportunity is.
With all the top players contracted to the five franchises where are you going to get players? And Keohane seem to forget that it is only the three Kings unions that aren’t tied into the franchises. So who will be the next five?
The five traditional unions, among them the cash-strapped Lions and Cheetahs, have no position of strength when it comes to Super Rugby participation.
Again, they are actually in a very strong position. They can actually step out of SARU and go it alone. They have the players, they bring in the money (and money will go where the demand is), they have the companies and organisations set up.
The bluff to force an expansion of Super 15 to 16 teams and six South African teams should not be tolerated within SANZAR. If SA does not play ball, as per the agreed SANZAR deal and broadcasting arrangement, then SANZAR and the broadcasters should sue SARU and the respective regions/provinces.
It’s about not including the Kings at the expense of an existing, stronger franchise. SARU administrators are the ones who didn’t do their homework before promising the Kings a spot. At last something to agree with! SANZAR should tell SARU that they should sort themselves out and not make promises that they cannot keep!
What we are seeing here is how administrators in South African rugby have always conducted their business, be it by bullying or bluffing. The threat to withdraw should be a threat from SANZAR to kick them out.
The fact is that SANZAR wouldn’t want to kick the SA franchises out but I’m sure they would like to get rid of the incompetent SARU administrators. Without the SA money there will be no SANZAR and without the Big Five there will be a lot less media money.
Hoskins, in his time as SARU president, has never made a hard decision to show he is in charge. He has failed transformation and failed at everything that requires a decision and potential confrontation.
Don’t expect this situation to be any different, although I’d like to think those wizards in New Zealand and Australia have slightly more business acumen and a bigger set of balls to tell South Africa’s traditional five to F-off and stop their shenanigans.
With the Kiwi franchises virtually all bankrupt and 60% of SANZAR media income coming from SA they aren’t really in a position to tell anyone to f-off. However SARU’s incompetence and political agendas must be wearing their them down so that they will feel it worth while to explore Japanese and American money for their future. Maybe it is time for the SA unions and franchises to stage a palace revolution in SARU.
The “big five’s shenanigans” comes from SARU’s inability to stand up to Cheeky Watson and his political cronies
SARU should have dealt with who falls out long before they gave the Kings the okay to play in the 2013 tournament.
The only bit of real sense in this diatribe.
If it is on historical performance then the Lions must go. And if you look at their finances they should have gone ages ago.
As opposed to the Kings? Who had to be bailed out, with their respective unions, by SARU? Who have never been a power in SA rugby? Who have done nothing for rugby development in their region in years except whinge about not being in Super Rugby while unions with less have done more?
12 Feb 2012, 14:33 pm
the kings will get a franchise license next year ,so now we only need four more.gumede might be interested in a license.
12 Feb 2012, 14:36 pm
@Baylion-29: YAWWWWWWWWWWWN.if you are not happy with the article then f-off as per keo.
12 Feb 2012, 14:39 pm
@rangerman-13:
That was what I read in the Five Unions’ joint statement,
To me Keo’s posting is clearly to hand a helping hand to SARU to create some uncertainty about the situation by shifting ‘the ownership’ of SARU drive for Sixth team over to the Five Unions, possibly someone in SARU is looking for some face saving?
12 Feb 2012, 14:40 pm
Good Work Babylion. More sense than keo sensationalism
12 Feb 2012, 14:49 pm
Does anyone know what time the 7′s boks are playing against nz?
12 Feb 2012, 14:50 pm
Mark’s companu HSM is Luke’s agent.
Luke is the captain of the Kings.
Luke’s Dad is the head honcho there.
Of course there will be a barrage of articles that defend the Kings right at the expense of one of the other established unions.
But sadly they lose all credibility as a result of the Luke Watson connection.
12 Feb 2012, 14:54 pm
@Baylion-29:
Read half way and it became clear you are a bit naive.
The franchises cannot ‘go at it on their own’, SupeRugby is owned by SANZAR and in SA terms, SA Rugby.
If they pull out, where will they go to? Who will they play?
Any competition has to be sanctioned by the IRB – IRB will only sanction competitions controlled by its member unions (in this case SA Rugby) – if not, they would become a rebel league who will not be allowed to participate in any IRB sanctioned competitions which includes SupeRugby (and our Currie Cup for that matter).
In essence, they will not be allowed to play in SupeRugby, Heineken Cup or even the Currie Cup (or any competition you can basically think of right now).
They will have to form their own controlling body (outside of SA Rugby and the IRB), sell it to sponsors and broadcaster, and start their own international body.
Also keep in mind, any player associated with such a rebel league will also be banned from playing in any IRB sanctioned competition in the world, including the Rugby World Cup.
So two things; the existing franchises/unions do not hold the aces, SA Rugby does. No-one would be interested in seeing 5 rebel SA franchises play among themselves so forget sponsors and broadcast deals.
Players will move to where they get paid, and get exposure – a rebel league offers them none of that.
And as for this united front of all the big 5 boys sticking together? It will only last until one of them gets the boot – after that, the remaining 4 will say; “Sorry but you are on your own, we will not jeopardise our inclusion”
The only reason they are currently seen as a united front is because they are not too sure who is going to be kicked out.
12 Feb 2012, 14:58 pm
this article is disgusting and reflective of the inbred mentality of the journos here. Why support The Kings? A woefully inadequate piece of filth that is only backed because of, you guessed it, more bad politics. The Kings have to date beaten NOBODY not even the two sides you target here. The Lions and the Cheetahs DESERVE to be there. SARU, another bunch of inbred gutter rats, made big talk and thought the Unions will fall in line and merge to accomodate that filth. Sober up, and sober quickly. How you idiots can get employed is beyond me. Such idiocy should never be allowed a voice anywhere.
12 Feb 2012, 15:01 pm
@PissAnt-36: Yip expect to see kickbacks and backroom deals in the next few weeks – the 5 unions with access to the biggest pockets will survive. Bulls, Sharks and Stormers can buy their participation licenses. Lions and FS to fight it out. Lions have the advantage of having a bigger equity partner than the FS.
12 Feb 2012, 15:02 pm
@RL-38:
One thing is for sure, things are about to get very ugly.
12 Feb 2012, 15:03 pm
I am out, later.
12 Feb 2012, 15:06 pm
very good post there pissant…ties in with keo’s opinion..however SARU dug this hole,put the franchises in there and now instead of providing them with the tools to help them get out,they dump some more dirt in there and tell the big 5 “get yourselves outta that place”.poor form SARU
12 Feb 2012, 15:07 pm
@Baylion-29:
It would be very dangerous move to consider in South African reality from the personal security aspect
Remember Skinstaad in 2003? Mitchell in 2010?
That in essence the ‘strength’ of the ancyl drive via SARU, now, it all depends on how the Networks -who sponsor the Super Rugby – will react, there are teams in the competition who are a liability financially but are viable rugby wise such as the Landers, Cheetahs and lately the Lions, the competition’s financial base doesn’t need to be further diluted
12 Feb 2012, 15:14 pm
@Alucard-37:
It’s a simple drive to destabilise the rugby in SA, SARU have no choice in the matterbut to play ball with it
It was expected already after the 1998 trial so SA rugby enjoyed 14 years of reprive.
Seemed like SANZAR will have no choice but to disband eventually
12 Feb 2012, 15:20 pm
Post 42 could have been written by a person domiciled in an asylum for the mentally challenged.
12 Feb 2012, 15:29 pm
To me it seems a scorpion is loose. The poison is in the tial
The Bulls franchise: Bluebulls and Falcons
The Lions franchise: Lions, Leopards and Pumas
The Stormer franchise:WP and Lions
Cheetah franchise: Cheetahs, Griquas and Griffons
The Sharks franhise: Sharks
against
Kings: EP, Border and Eagles
My calculation comes to 11 teams in the tail
12 Feb 2012, 15:31 pm
@dWeePer-45: This post makes no sense
12 Feb 2012, 15:34 pm
@trupisero-24:
Lions won a Super 10 title.
You must feel like a real moron being educated by a Bulls fan……
shampies!!!
12 Feb 2012, 15:35 pm
@clm-28:
Rugby does belong to the people, as in the people that support it above political gain.
12 Feb 2012, 15:41 pm
@Captain Jack-26:
The Sharks do have the 2nd best record but lets follow your logic a little
a) Sure the Sharks were originally grouped with EP -> But then again the Lions have been grouped with both the Cheetahs and the Bulls.
You have not made one reason why the Sharks should lose out (apart from the fact you have an axe to grind)
b) All the forced combos have proven is they don’t work.
I am OK with the
* bottom side gets relegated each year AND
* In meantime we negotiate to be increased to 6 sides after 2015
A threat to boycott is embarrassing to us. We agreed to the dumb conference system.
I am amazed that all 5 teams put them name to such a letter. I would like to see such a letter
What does confuse me is that all unions unanimously approved the addition of the Kings to Superrugby? Why would they do that given that being out would condemn the relegated side to trouble?
Can we see
a) The letter?
b) The unanimous motion that the unions agreed to (including any pre-conditions)
12 Feb 2012, 15:42 pm
49
12 Feb 2012, 15:46 pm
@Rage-41:
Absolutely, this whole **** up starts with SA Rugby and given they are now making it the unions and SANZAR’s problems trying to find a solution smacks of amateurism of the highest order.
12 Feb 2012, 15:48 pm
Keohane’s article is shocking.
It is so clearly agenda driven that it beggars belief.
It is SARU who is in the wrong for forcing a 6th, undeserving franchise into the mix. The existing franchises are the ones who are protecting their contracts, financial viability and existing commitments.
They have been FORCED into this unsavoury situation by SARU and its slavish obedience to the politicians behind the Kings circus.
Mark quite casually suggests destroying all 5 existing franchises if that is what it takes to get the Kings and his client Luke Watson into the big league. He has no regard for the 90% of SA fans who support the existing franchises, and could apparently not give two hoots if those 90% of fans get a raw deal out of this mess, so long as his precious Kings get their bit of the pie.
Keohane, you are just a mecenary, with no principles whatsoever. But then, we all have known that for a long long time, haven’t we.
12 Feb 2012, 15:49 pm
@jondood-47:
The best record does not only equate to titles.
Records include overall places.
BTW – The Super 10 was pre-SANZAR. But fair enough if you count that era
12 Feb 2012, 15:50 pm
I’m still amazed that all 14 unions agreed to the Kings inclusion into Superrugby. Did they vote for their inclusion into a 16 team competition or did they vote for them to replace the last placed team. What are the details of this vote.
Knowing this will clear up all the speculation. My guess is that they voted to include the Kings into a 16 team competition, but SANZAR kicked that idea into touch … and now we have big kak in little SARU.
12 Feb 2012, 15:53 pm
This is the problem when you are a journalist who tries their hand at athlete representation.
Your credibility disappears as fast as capo’s parole.
12 Feb 2012, 15:57 pm
A scorpion is loose. The poison is in the tail
Take this scenario:
Bulls, Lions, WP, Cheetahs and Sharks break away from SARU. They invite Griquas to join them.
By next year the terrestrial TV network in SA will be up and running. SABC then becomes the broadcaster. The get new sponsors for a new competition.
This is indeed a possibility.
Before this will happen SARU will be forced to can the Kings. SARU is in no position to call a bluff.
12 Feb 2012, 16:03 pm
@PissAnt-36: I am not proposing that the franchises go it alone or that it would be a viable option but I am saying it is naive to discount the financial and contractual/legal clout that the current franchises have.
If this situation is allowed to spiral out of control (and it is nearly there) it can only harm SA rugby and I’m sure that not of the franchises would deliberately do that. In fact the only “franchise” that is intent on ruining anyone is the Kings, who expect to be accommodated at the expense of one of the other stronger franchises.
SARU brought this whole situation on us by not addressing the Kings participation pro-actively and now they expect one of the current franchises to volunteer to commit suicide.
12 Feb 2012, 16:07 pm
@Baylion-29: I like what you wrote specially if all of what you say is correct.
Ayway SARU fecked up humongously and the should take responsibility for it, I actually still find it incredible they said what they did without having a plan in place and the telling the unions to sort it out. ….GOBSMACKINGLY FREAKY..
For the Kings i can understand it even if i dont think they are deserving, they want a share of the tv rights money, the sooner the better.
12 Feb 2012, 16:10 pm
Saru should run an ipl franchise system in sa.seeing that the licenses expires at the end of this season they basically have the ball in their court here.make the licenses available to big business.they might want to keep full control over the kings license in terms of transformation purposes.I believe that bog business will jump at the opportunity to hold and operate a rugby franchise.gumede might get one and call it the gauteng bluebirds.the western cape gigolos,the kwazulu Zulu warriors and the freestate ox wagons have a nice ring to it also.
12 Feb 2012, 16:12 pm
@Biscuit-49: What does confuse me is that all unions unanimously approved the addition of the Kings to Superrugby? Why would they do that given that being out would condemn the relegated side to trouble?
Can we see
a) The letter?
b) The unanimous motion that the unions agreed to (including any pre-conditions)
…….I have wondering about that as well, doesnt make sense.
12 Feb 2012, 16:18 pm
Here we go again, the Keo PR machine churning out the media statements, attempting to set the media agenda., for their clients Luke Watson and the useless Kings, the corrupt Eastern Cape.
It will all come to nought, Keo, as the rest of the world, the real world, could not gvive a feck about:
1. the racist Watson family, who, incidentally, have milked the indigenous population dry over many decades and cashed in on them big time
2. the ANC’s social engineering (read racism, equal to Verwoerd’s social engineering)
3. the ANC and SARU’s desire for a team in their supposed heartland.
There’s a real world out there, guys, where merit determines who does what in society. You can play your Mickey Mouse ‘quota’ games within South Africa but remember, beyond your borders, the real world does not give a flaming feck for your racist social engineering.
Which means the Kings are dead. Long decay the Kings…
12 Feb 2012, 16:19 pm
What absolute arrogant, bumbling, ‘verkrampte’, idiots but is that really so unexpected when one considers the shamed and shameful history of S.A. rugby?
This action, plus your so very amusing questions you asked so disingenuously Friday about your SARU, just once again proves how much you all suffer from a cerebral neuropathy which leads to this type of thinking emanating from your numbed ‘brains’.
However, do not look too far for the link as it is all there in the frankness of so much history.
Look at the origins of the ilk of the founders and more of the Afrikaner Broederbond with people such as the Kloppers, Naudes, Du Plessis, V.D. Merwes plus the Malans, Vorsters, Verwoerds, Anton Ruperts, De Beers etc. and compare that to the people that overwhelmingly dominate Saru with names like Versters, Van Zyls, De Klerks, Van Graans etc. all from most of those 16 franchises/unions that make up your Saru.How can you still wonder about such numbed thinking then?
True to form you will be blaming the lone, pale but very puppet-on-a-string Hoskens who probably feels hard done by because he has too much Griqua genes in his makke-up.
12 Feb 2012, 16:27 pm
Are you a lions supporter Joe maher?might just explain the complete tripe you have just posted.
12 Feb 2012, 16:34 pm
It will be stunningly but mostly hilariously ironical if S.A. rugby is again kicked out of international rugby as in reality we do have neo-racist sport still prevailing on the southern tip of the continent of Africa.
What we have witnessed and experienced there since 1994 can not ever be deemed non-racism in sport, surely?
12 Feb 2012, 16:40 pm
@Baylion-57:
The reason franchises have any financial clout is because of their Super Rugby participation, which they do not own.
I have no doubt the threats of litigation will only intensify in the days and weeks to come, but the bottom line is quite simple – franchises cannot bargain with something that is not theirs (franchise licenses).
Agreements with sponsors is between franchises and sponsors, it has nothing to do with SA Rugby. Franchises made these promises to sponsors (exposure in Super Rugby) knowing full well the current license agreement will run its course at the end of 2012.
By the end of this year SA Rugby can basically do whatever they please in setting out the criteria for awarding the licenses in future.
12 Feb 2012, 16:41 pm
How can a union be in debt to the tune of nearly 90 million?
12 Feb 2012, 16:42 pm
And with those SARU shamateur political clowns running the local circus does anyone seriously believe teams from SA are welcomed with open arms in any European competition whatsoever should they break away from current SANZAR alliance?
Okes must be deluded more than I ever thought.
12 Feb 2012, 16:43 pm
@PissAnt-65:
You miss the point.
Do you think this circus is in the interest of the 90% of SA rugby fans who are supporters of the current 5 franchises?
12 Feb 2012, 16:46 pm
Well said pissant.it seems most bloggers on here doesn’t understand the franchise license concept.
12 Feb 2012, 16:52 pm
@Nils-67:
Afrikaner history is just one huge emotional DELUSION, from its inception and eventually to its grave.
It is ever so often exposed to the rest of the cerebral world in acts of this nature, if not in the now well-known and documentd shameful atrocities.
12 Feb 2012, 16:52 pm
Its like when a company is retrenching and instead of using acceptable practices (LIFO,FIFO,etc) to determine who stays and who goes,just leaves the decision up to the self-same affected personnel.This points to poor leadership,lack of accountability,a gravy-train mindset….this would’ve been very funny if it wasn’t so very sad…I’m trying to get a positive view on the matter but someone,somewhere (read Cheetahs or Lions) is going have to take the fall for the Kings…
12 Feb 2012, 16:53 pm
They will just have to become supporters of the new franchises ….if it comes down to that.players will follow the money trail at the end of the day.imagine an ipl auction style event at the end of the 2012 super rugby edition?it will be brilliant.
12 Feb 2012, 16:55 pm
The franchise lisence might not belong to the franchises but the 5 big unions having those lisences do bring in a lot of money for SARU because of all the support that these unions get. ( not sure how saru gets paid for these but surely giving them to well supported strong unions is worth more cash than giving a lisence to a weak poor union). Therefore it makes sense not to take a franchise away from the current holders but to get the Kings up to speed and include them after 2015 when the current format can be changed.
12 Feb 2012, 16:57 pm
What would gouger burger’s base price be?
12 Feb 2012, 16:57 pm
@PissAnt-65: Not quite sure I agree with you PA. The reason the franchises have financial clout is because they have a following. The sponsors follow the supporters and right now I’m quite convinced the fans don’t give a hoot about SARU and SANZAR given their recent performances. I would luv to see the ECAPE have their own super rugby franchise however at the expense of which franchise? All the current franchises have earned the right to be there and their recent performances (last year in particular) have substantiated that right.
12 Feb 2012, 16:58 pm
@Joe Maher-61:
Don’t talk rubbish. Trying to make this a political issue is to just ignore the facts.
The Unions in the Kings franchise are somehow expected to compete with provinces that can attract players due purely to the fact that they can offer S15 opportunities. Is that the argument? If the boot was on the other foot and the Lions, Cheetahs, Bulls etc were left out of a franchise, how many top or emerging players do you think would be willing to sign for them at provincial level?
When the 6 Franchises made their application they were judged on a number of factors, of which only one was the success or strength of the underpinning union. Gate numbers was one as were the financial projections and viability. In this respect, the Lions have failed miserably at fulfilling their commitments.
That apart, the S14/15 is a regional not a provincial competition, and in order for SARU to honour its own constitution, its role is to develop the growth of the game in SA, not just fill the coffers of certain unions or polish their egos, and leaving the region with the largest number of registered rugby players without a franchise is contrary to its aims.
One of the major mistakes SARU made was in allowing the unions to select their own partners; the second was in allowing some of the major unions to brand the franchise almost identically to their own.
12 Feb 2012, 17:01 pm
@bananaboy-75:
Partnering the Lions union with the Bulls as a new regional franchise wouldn’t be dropping anyone out of the competition.
12 Feb 2012, 17:02 pm
@David-76:
If I recall correctly, Heyneke Meyer is on record about 5 years ago stating that the performance of the Super Rugby franchise is boosted significantly if continuity can be built up from that same team participating in the Currie Cup.
Essentially saying that Super Rugby is a provincial and not a regional competition in all but name. The “region” is a myth. The teams are just the Sharks, Bulls, WP playing in a different competition.
The teams that can compete for play-off positions, that is.
12 Feb 2012, 17:04 pm
Read this and thought of you Elliott…
They call the developing world the lazy man’s purview; the sluggishly slothful and languorous prefecture. In this realm people are sleepy, dreamy, torpid, lethargic, and therefore indigent – totally penniless, needy, destitute, poverty-stricken, disfavoured and impoverished.
In this demesne, as they call it, there are hardly any discoveries, inventions and innovations.
Africa is the trailblazer. Some still call it “the dark continent” for the light that flickers under the tunnel is not that of hope, but an approaching train. And because countless keep waiting in the way of the train, millions die and many more remain decapitated by the day.
“It’s amazing how you all sit there and watch yourselves die,” the man next to me said.
“Get up and do something about it.”
Brawny, fully bald-headed, with intense, steely eyes, he was as cold as they come. When I first discovered I was going to spend my New Year’s Eve next to him on a non-stop flight from Los Angeles to Boston, I was angst-ridden. I associate marble-shaven Caucasians with iconoclastic skin-heads, most of who are racist.
“My name is Walter,” he extended his hand as soon as I settled in my seat.
I told him mine.
“Where are you from?” he asked.
“Zambia.”
He smiled, and in those cold eyes I saw an amenable fellow, one of those highbrows who shuttle between Africa and the US
“I spent three years in Zambia in the 1980s,” he continued.
“I wined and dined with Luke Mwananshiku, Willa Mungomba, Dr Siteke Mwale, and many other highly intelligent Zambians.
“I was part of the IMF group that came to rip you guys off. Your government put me in a mansion overlooking a shanty called Kalingalinga. From my patio I saw it all – the rich and the poor, the ailing, the dead, and the healthy.
“I’ve since moved to another group with similar intentions. In the next few months my colleagues and I will be in Lusaka to hypnotise the [President Michael Sata]. I work for the broker who has acquired a chunk of your debt. Your government owes not the World Bank, but us, millions. We’ll be in Lusaka to offer your president millions and fly back with a cheque 20 times greater.”
At midnight we were airborne. The captain wished us a happy 2012 and urged us to watch the fireworks across Los Angeles.
“Isn’t that beautiful,” Walter said, looking down.
“That’s white man’s country,” he said.
“We came here on the Mayflower and turned Indian land into a paradise, now the most powerful nation on Earth. We discovered the bulb, and built this aircraft to fly us to pleasure resorts like Lake Zambia.”
I grinned: “There is no Lake Zambia.”
“That’s what we call your country. You guys are as stagnant as the water in the lake. We come in with our large boats and fish your minerals and wildlife and leave morsels. That’s your staple food, crumbs. The corn meal you eat, that’s crumbs, the small Tilapia fish you call Kapenta is crumbs. We, the Bwanas (whites), take the cat fish. I am the Bwana and you are the Muntu. I get what I want and you get what you deserve, crumbs. That’s what lazy people get – Zambians, Africans, the entire developing world.”
My smile vanished.
“I see you are getting pissed off,” Walter said.
“You are thinking, this Bwana is a racist. That’s how most Zambians respond when I tell them the truth. They go ballistic. Let’s for a moment put skin pigmentations, this black and white ****, aside. Tell me, my friend, what is the difference between you and me?”
“There’s no difference.”
“Absolutely none,” he said.
“Scientists in the Human Genome Project have proved that. It took 13 years to determine the complete sequence of the three billion DNA subunits. After they were all done it was clear that 99.9% nucleotide bases were exactly the same in you and me. We are the same people. All white, Asian, Latino, and black people on this aircraft are the same. And yet I feel superior,” he said.
“Don’t blame it on slavery, like African-Americans do, or colonialism, or a psychological impact or stigmatisation. Don’t give me the brainwash poppycock. Give me a better answer.”
He continued: “Excuse what I am about to say. Please do not take offence.”
I prepared for the worst.
“You, my friend, flying with me and all your kind are lazy. When you rest your head on the pillow you don’t dream big. You and other so-called African intellectuals are lazy, each one of you. It is you, and not those poor, starving people, who is the reason Africa is in such a deplorable state.
” Poor and uneducated Africans are the most hard-working people on Earth. I saw them in Lusaka markets and on the streets selling merchandise. I saw them toiling in villages. I saw women crushing stones to sell and I wept. I said to myself, where are the Zambian intellectuals? Are Zambian engineers so imperceptive they can’t invent a stone crusher, or a filter to purify well water for poor villagers? Are you telling me that after 37 years of independence your university school of engineering has not produced a scientist or an engineer who can make simple machines for mass use? What’s the school there for?
“Do you know where I found your intellectuals? They were in bars, quaffing. They were at the Lusaka Golf Club, Lusaka Central Club, Lusaka Playhouse, and Lusaka Flying Club. I saw alcoholic graduates. Zambian intellectuals work from eight to five and spend the evening drinking. We don’t. We reserve the evening for brainstorming.
“And you flying to Boston and all you Zambians in the Diaspora are just as lazy and apathetic. You don’t care about your country and yet your own parents, brothers and sisters are in villages, all of them living in squalor. Many have died or are dying of neglect by you. They are dying of Aids because you cannot come up with your own cure.
“You are here, calling yourselves graduates, researchers and scientists and are fast at articulating your credentials once asked. Oh, I have a PhD in this and that – PhD my foot.”
I was deflated.
“Wake up you all,” Walter exclaimed, attracting the attention of nearby passengers.
“You should be busy lifting ideas, formulae, recipes, and diagrams from US manufacturing factories and sending them to your own factories. All those research findings and dissertation papers you compile should be your country’s treasure. Why do you think the Asians are a force to reckon with? They stole our ideas and turned them into their own. Look at Japan, China, India. Just look at them.”
He paused.
“The Bwana has spoken,” he said, and grinned.
“As long as you are dependent on my plane, I shall feel superior and you shall remain inferior. The Chinese, Japanese, Indians, even Latinos are a notch better. You Africans are at the bottom of the totem pole.”
He tempered his voice.
“Get over this white skin syndrome and begin to feel confident. Become innovative and make your own stuff.”
At 8am the plane touched down in Boston.
Walter reached for my hand.
“I know I was too strong, but I don’t give it a damn. I have been to Zambia and have seen too much poverty.”
He pulled out a piece of paper and scribbled something.
“Here, read this. It was written by a friend.”
He had written only the title: “Lords of Poverty.”
Ruwe is a US-based Zambian media practitioner and author. This is an edited version of an article that appeared online and has since gone viral
http://www.timeslive.co.za/opinion/commentary/2012/01/30/the-big-read-you-lazy-intellectuals
12 Feb 2012, 17:04 pm
@Tacitus-68:
90%? One franchise will lose out, not all 5. Also, do you know how much unions make (financially) thanks to their fans (gate takings and merchandise) in comparison to the money they get from broadcast deals SA Rugby makes? Don’t think I am missing any point.
@bananaboy-75:
Sponsors are in it for one thing, exposure, in Super Rugby they get it.
12 Feb 2012, 17:05 pm
@David-76:
What in S.A. ,even in sport, is not a political issue?
Look at the names of the four founder members of the Afrikaner Broederbond an then look at the names of the majority presidents of the franchises/unions that comprise Sa rugby.
Seems you have been too long away from Norwich.
12 Feb 2012, 17:06 pm
@Captain Jack-73: Well you are right. I doubt very much that the EC contributes anything to the existence of professional rugby in SA. I am talking about supporting Supersport or any of the other sponsors. Hell I’ll be amazed if there are 20,000 Supersport subscribers in that poor and hopelessly corrupt region. I can tell you one thing, I will not contribute to professional rugby if they allow the Kings in just to drop another union. Yes I can save 600 bucks a month if SARU does not fix their mess
12 Feb 2012, 17:09 pm
Trust keohane to ruin a pleasant sunday afternoon
12 Feb 2012, 17:13 pm
@Dawn-83: Typical!
12 Feb 2012, 17:13 pm
@PissAnt-80:
But with this move, the 5 existing franchises have made it about all 5, not just about the weakest one.
And do you really think DHL will get as much benefit from sponsoring the Kings as the Stormers?
I beg to disagree.
12 Feb 2012, 17:16 pm
Indeed Guns. Am gonna watch the ever cute but oh so hapless scotties.
12 Feb 2012, 17:16 pm
@Tacitus-78:
That might be true as an observation, but over the years the Aussies with a much smaller player base have been successful without a domestic competition to provide continuity.
My point is that having a Franchise or being part of one, allows provinces to attract players that a non franchise union can’t. Look at how Griquas has become a stepping stone for the Cheetahs, and Boland for the Stormers.
12 Feb 2012, 17:19 pm
@ET.-81:
I’m saying that leaving any political accusations aside, the Kings deserve a franchise for various reasons that are not political.
12 Feb 2012, 17:19 pm
Jockbok.
You killing me here.
I can’t read all that.
12 Feb 2012, 17:20 pm
Baylion your article is of world class.maybe you should apply for Marks position.
12 Feb 2012, 17:20 pm
No more Evans, poor Dawn..
12 Feb 2012, 17:21 pm
@Dawn-86:
We’ll win this one Dawn.
12 Feb 2012, 17:22 pm
Well, the truth has now come out. There was no boycott. Keo, as usual, jumping in headfirst to pre-emptively try and “set the media agenda” as an earlier poster described it, to serve his client.
What remains true, is that the 5 franchises were unanimous in their position. They aren’t going to let the weakest one just become the victim of the politicians.
12 Feb 2012, 17:22 pm
Ja, there goes Evans why am I still watching.
12 Feb 2012, 17:22 pm
@Tacitus-85:
So, are you inferring that when the franchises come up for renewal, the 5 existing ones should refuse to take part in a selection process that allowed them to be awarded one in the first place?
12 Feb 2012, 17:23 pm
Cape Town – South Africa’s five Super Rugby franchises have not threatened to boycott the competition, the South African Rugby Union (SARU) confirmed on Sunday.
A newspaper report alleged that the boycott threat was a part of a letter from the five franchises to SARU president, Oregan Hoskins.
“No threat of a boycott was made,” said Jurie Roux, CEO of SARU. “But the franchises have made it plain that the only option to them is the expansion of Vodacom Super Rugby.
“They also pledged their support for the Kings’ inclusion in 2013 as well as for SARU’s efforts to persuade SANZAR to include a sixth South African franchise.”
The letter reads:
“After lengthy discussions between the franchises, we unanimously decided that it is imperative:
• That such inclusion will benefit South African rugby in general;
• That none of the existing franchises shall be prejudiced by such inclusion in any way whatsoever;
• That none of the existing franchises shall be eliminated from the tournament in 2013 or at any stage thereafter as a result of the inclusion of the Kings;
• That SARU as custodian of the South African leg of the tournament will ensure that the Kings are included without prejudice to any of the existing franchises.
“The existing franchises will endeavour to provide all necessary assistance and support to SARU in its negotiations with SANZAR to ensure the inclusion of six South African franchises in 2013 onwards.”
Roux said that SARU would continue discussions with its SANZAR partners around participation in the 2013 tournament.
A decision on the mechanism by which South Africa’s entrants in Super Rugby in 2013 would be identified was postponed in January. A special General Council meeting delayed the decision until the Annual General Meeting of SARU on March 31 to allow time for further discussions with SANZAR.
12 Feb 2012, 17:23 pm
Wales looking better at the mo JockBok
12 Feb 2012, 17:24 pm
The big blonde ain’t bad though
12 Feb 2012, 17:26 pm
So that’s that.
Keohane you nwata.
12 Feb 2012, 17:26 pm
@Dawn-89:
It’s worth a read. Very thought provoking and makes you think of Elliott shouting at everyone in Africa from his comfy pad in Philly. Here’s a snippet….
“And you flying to Boston and all you Zambians in the Diaspora are just as lazy and apathetic. You don’t care about your country and yet your own parents, brothers and sisters are in villages, all of them living in squalor. Many have died or are dying of neglect by you. They are dying of Aids because you cannot come up with your own cure. “You are here, calling yourselves graduates, researchers and scientists and are fast at articulating your credentials once asked. Oh, I have a PhD in this and that – PhD my foot.”
12 Feb 2012, 17:26 pm
David is absolutely correct.the licenses should never have gone to the unions.
12 Feb 2012, 17:28 pm
@RL-82:
And that’s where SS have screwed the market. You can only get S15 rugby if you buy the most expensive bouquet. That really pisses me of, with all the other junk that comes with it.
12 Feb 2012, 17:28 pm
@David-88:
No!
It should be :
for all political accusations, the Kings deserve a franchise
Is there aa region in S.A. that has for generations now been more messed up by the Broederbond influences on diseased policies?
” It matters not how strait the gate,
How ‘charred with ‘destiny’ the scroll,
I am the master of my fate:
I am the captain of my soul.”
12 Feb 2012, 17:28 pm
Ignore extraball.
Life’s too short.
12 Feb 2012, 17:28 pm
Off topic but Ive been wondering: KEO why dont you get Earl Rose to join the HSM stable? He comes ready-made with the same characteristics as Luke W…previously disadvantaged,controversial,totally overrated,even with the same type of bossy father (oh and a King to boot)
12 Feb 2012, 17:29 pm
Is heyneke Meyer now the alpha and omega of saffa rugby?just asking because this Tacitus oke seems to think so.
12 Feb 2012, 17:30 pm
12 Feb 2012, 17:31 pm
@Tacitus-85:
As I said before, this united front you are seeing will only last as long as the moment one of them gets booted. The remaining four will not give two ***** about the one left in the dark.
12 Feb 2012, 17:31 pm
Dawn the big blonde guy is a Zimbo. Another export to european national team from southern africa
12 Feb 2012, 17:32 pm
Why do my scotties look so tired.
12 Feb 2012, 17:32 pm
@Dawn-104:
Since Keo doesn’t provide an ignore function like other – more sophisticated – forums do, I use a built in ignore function. Basically it means simply scrolling down to the next post as soon as the name at the top of a post reads E.T. or allblacksaregods, etc.
12 Feb 2012, 17:33 pm
@Tacitus-93:
The boycott story comes from Rudolph Lake in the Rapport, not Keo.
12 Feb 2012, 17:33 pm
@Captain Jack-97:
Nah, I’m confident on this one Jacko.
Wales need a bump down to earth and unfashionable Scotland are the ones to do it. Sure, we don’t get the victories and that’s where everyone looks, but the scoreboard doesn’t tell the whole story. We’ve been dominating and defending well for 2 years, just a problem getting over the try line. But they way Wales play, the gaps will open today.
So, while everyone thinks Scotland are shiite, we’ll nip in and give them a blooody nose.
Stay tuned
12 Feb 2012, 17:33 pm
Is there anybody in the know as to which of the franchises will lose their lisence if any?
12 Feb 2012, 17:34 pm
Wow. Nou het ek iets geleer.
12 Feb 2012, 17:35 pm
@Captain Jack-109:
Richie Gray is a bigger blonde guy than Denton.
And he’s Scottish.
12 Feb 2012, 17:35 pm
Tacitus wise as ever.
12 Feb 2012, 17:36 pm
Another childless slurper does not know how to wisely use those sort after haploid cells.
Just as well with the prevalent smoking and drinking being to the fore.
A life is really saved and that is always a positive.
12 Feb 2012, 17:37 pm
Indeed. I’m talking about richie gray.
12 Feb 2012, 17:39 pm
No need to get upset with me tacitus.Meyer can’t decide how saru’s licenses should be run.
12 Feb 2012, 17:39 pm
Ah Jock forgot about Richie Gray. Anyway hope you right shouting for the Scots too
12 Feb 2012, 17:41 pm
@Captain Jack-114:
I suspect SARU are hoping that they’ll frighten the participating unions into forming 5 new franchises, as happened when the Cats dissolved. How the Sharks have got away with going it alone and pocketing all the revenue, instead of sharing it with a feeder union is beyond me.
12 Feb 2012, 17:41 pm
@ET.-118:
‘Sort’ after?
Brilliant.
12 Feb 2012, 17:42 pm
Jock knows my taste!
12 Feb 2012, 17:43 pm
Carol is at this game.
12 Feb 2012, 17:44 pm
@PissAnt-112:
I know. I read it there before Keo did his little tapdance on the issue.
The point is, Keo is awefully quick out of the blocks to villify all 5 existing franchises who are rightly protecting their existence, rather than the guys who caused the problem.
His agenda is clear. A more fairminded journalist would simply have written that it is unreasonable to include the Kings at this juncture, when they cannot even win the B-league of the Currie Cup.
12 Feb 2012, 17:45 pm
I can’t help but remember how this was when things started and the EPRU had a franchise (shared rightfully so with the Sharks as it was based on the historic performance over the recent past in the CC) but stuffed it up, sold their own region down the river and now want everyone to pretend that it never happened.
Decisions have consequences.
Live with it.
12 Feb 2012, 17:47 pm
@stormersboy-127:
Exactly.
12 Feb 2012, 17:47 pm
David don’t see how thats a viable plan. There are no unions that could really join. Bulls and Lions are closest but I suspect that supporters wouldn’t transfer provincial loyalties to a combination team if that were the case. I support the Bulls and wouldn’t take kindly to supporting a Lions-Bulls team. That is why I think a Sharks Kings combination is about the best solution.
12 Feb 2012, 17:49 pm
I find it amusing that some normally astute posters seem to think that fans would mindlessly transfer their allegiance to wherever their favourite players went.
As if a Man U fan would start supporting Arsenal if half the Man U players were bought by Arsenal.
Not gonna happen.
12 Feb 2012, 17:50 pm
@Tacitus-126:
What right have they got to protect their Super Rugby existence? It’s not theirs to begin with!
12 Feb 2012, 17:52 pm
Out of interest, what do those in favour if the Kings’ inclusion – like Pissant – expect will happen with rugby in the Lions region if the Lions lose spot in Super Rugby?
Will it just die out? Would this be a good thing for SA rugby?
12 Feb 2012, 17:53 pm
The licenses belong to saru and if you have to destroy the existing franchises Hoskins you just destroy them.big business will gleefully snap up those licenses and the players will naturally follows.you have the chance to destroy the old order of saffa rugby Mr.Hoskins,so don’t bottle it.
12 Feb 2012, 17:55 pm
I can’t help but feel that the REAL issue in this entire Kings saga is not the inclusion into superrugby but their 3 year untouchable period?
A franchise can go without superrugby for a season but definately not a 3 year period.It’s all very vague what happens in the second year? Does the side that has missed out on 1 year of superrugby automatically regain their inclusion at the expense of possibly one of the genuine franchise powerhouses(bulls/storemrs/sharks) just because the Kings are untouchable?
12 Feb 2012, 17:57 pm
Huge endorsement for 6 Nations rugby this weeks Scotland – Wales game, same as last weeks Wales – Ireland encounter.
NH rugby has certainly come of age and the standard of refereeing by the French ref is greatly superior to the stop start garbage we been witness to in our domestic games this season thus far.
Huge handling and continuity proficiency especially by Scotland who deserved to beat England last week and on first half effort this week deserve to be ahead of Wales this game thus far.
12 Feb 2012, 18:00 pm
@Tacitus-130: Precisely. Take Sadie for example. The Bulls supporters think he’s amazing and the next big thing at 13 because (a) Heyneke said so, and (b) he moved to the Bulls. If he’s stayed with WP many would be disputing this on these very forums. On the other side you have the WP supporters saying that he’s not all that, and it’s too soon to tell.
If he’d stayed in the Cape the situation would be totally the opposite.
That’s provincialism for you. And rightfully so.
If WP go down I would not be paying to see a Kings game just because Brock the Rock is playing for them. Or Aplon, or De Jong, or all of them.
12 Feb 2012, 18:02 pm
@PissAnt-108:
That goes without saying, nevertheless it worth mentioning it for the sake of the wanabees’ here who live in denial.
The ancyl knows that too
12 Feb 2012, 18:02 pm
I hope they sell tickets to the SARU AGM on 31 March or at least let Supersport televise it.
We might still see rugby administation become a contact sport.
There’s going to be a murder on the dance floor.
12 Feb 2012, 18:02 pm
If SARU owns the franchises, then they should create an opportunity for applications for the franchises at the end of this season. Give criteria, such as past performances, quality of squad, financial position, etc. and give the five best applications a franchise. Do this ever 3-5 years, and have a transparent and organised system.
The problem is that SARU have shown their incompetence, yet again, and are causing so much instability within South African rugby. The majority of the current Super 15 teams will have players contracted for this season and next, if not longer, and will have their financial projections, sponsorship deals etc. based on playing in the Super 15 in 2013. Replacing one of the current teams with the Kings in 2013 could result in the financial implosion of the union replaced, and result in them losing a number of their sponsorships and players.
What is happening at the moment is foolish and detrimental to South African rugby.
12 Feb 2012, 18:03 pm
Try Time!
12 Feb 2012, 18:03 pm
Let’s get brutally honest here.
30% of SA rugby supporters are Bulls fans
25% are Sharks fans
20% are Stormers fans
Maybe 10% are Lions fans
and maybe 10% are Cheetahs fans.
Give or take about 5% for each estimate, but the point is, these fans make up 90% of SA rugby fans, and they are perfectly happy with a situation where the current franchises have a right to playing in Super Rugby.
So SARU is willing to shake all of this up just to accommodate the portion of the remaining 10% – maybe 2% of the total – that happen to support the Kings?
Ridiculous.
12 Feb 2012, 18:04 pm
@Tacitus-132:
Wait let me get this right…
You are basically asking me what will happen to the Lions (or any union) if they find themselves in the situation of the Kings currently (no Super Rugby hand outs)?
So it’s okay for the Kings with far superior club and player numbers to ‘die off’ but not the Lions?
The logic astounds me.
12 Feb 2012, 18:07 pm
Implosion time.
12 Feb 2012, 18:07 pm
You have to be an idiot to fowl like that, what a twat.
Again Scotts pissed another game down the *****er..
12 Feb 2012, 18:08 pm
@PissAnt-142:
I was waiting for that. The Kings entitlement syndrome rearing its head again. Read my post 141 for the reason why the status quo should remain.
12 Feb 2012, 18:08 pm
PissAnt th Kings have nothing, therefore have nothing to lose. The current 5 unions will have spent money on players etc expecting there to be income from playing S15. No S15 and the money already spent won’t be coming coming in thereby ruining or potentially ruining a union. Not quite the same as the Kings situation.
12 Feb 2012, 18:09 pm
@Tacitus-132:
I don’t think that Griquas supporters refuse to back the Cheetahs. The franchise should establish its own regional identity as a combination of its member unions.
I realise that this may be a difficult concept to accept from someone who supports the Bulls first and the Boks second, but it’s not a difficult adjustment to make.
12 Feb 2012, 18:09 pm
@PissAnt-142: I think what Tacitus is trying to say is, and I agree with him on this point, is not that the Kings should be excluded, but that they should not be unilaterally included at the expense of one of the existing franchises.
This stuff up is all on SARU in my opinion.
They should have negotiated this with SANZAR years ago.
The kings had a chance to bid for a spot, and lost on a fair vote.
Now they just want to push to the front of the queue.
And that’s wrong. Any discussions around who must go will always be with that immutable fact overshadowing all else.
12 Feb 2012, 18:10 pm
12 Feb 2012, 18:11 pm
The Leopards don’t get 1 player extra due to theoretically being part of a Super franchises. Yet they make it into the Currie Cup premier division. Same with the Pumas.
Until the Kings are able to beat them, they are a waste of all of our debating time.
12 Feb 2012, 18:12 pm
Aother one bites the dust!
The hills are alive with their sound of muzak.
12 Feb 2012, 18:12 pm
@PissAnt-131:
sorry, but you are very ignorant to the responsibilities the unions have to their players and the lengh of planning and investment involved.these unions recruit and nurture young sa rugby players from the ages of 18 years old with the hope that with the correct enviroment and training provided some of these youngsters will be superrugby ready in 5 years time. To suddenly turn off the lights next january is not a viable nor responsible solution in the grander scheme of things in my opinion.
Ironically, that is exactly the spears argument withregards to their inclusion and initial 3 season grace period. They need time to build and nurture a superrugby franchise.
the real solution withregards to superrugby is to include all 6 franchises, expand the superrugby format to 18 teams and radically change the playing format.Personally, I would like to see a champions league like playing schedule with pools,seeded teams leading to knockout format home and away with a pre-allocated final.
To me, timing and lack of planning is the real problem now and for that the blame can be laid squarely ar saru’s feet. this should have been disscussed 3 seasons ago with sanzar, and when i say disscussed……I mean we (SA) would need to get exactly what we want or have the bollocks to withdraw entirely from sanzar and buggeroff to play heineken cup.
12 Feb 2012, 18:14 pm
Thats the Game
12 Feb 2012, 18:14 pm
Uh oh!
12 Feb 2012, 18:15 pm
difference between Wales and Scotland is when Wales get into the strike zone they invariably score, contrast to Scotland who make a huge song and dance getting within range of scoring and then they invariably don’t.
I guess they call it possessing killer instinct.
12 Feb 2012, 18:15 pm
@Captain Jack-146:
Seeing as the franchise agreements end next year, they shouldn’t offer contracts based on that assumption of automatic renewal. Remember that the unions contract players, knowing that SARU will subsidise their salaries when they play for the Franchise.
12 Feb 2012, 18:16 pm
I say again.
Let me coach these scots for just ONE game.
12 Feb 2012, 18:17 pm
All over rover good night nurse!
12 Feb 2012, 18:19 pm
@David-156:
well David, you can’t have it both ways. if the franchises didn’t offer players decent lengh (2-4 year contracts), do you think they would be staying in SA to be playing for Currie cup salaries?
no way hose….they’d all be playing overseas
12 Feb 2012, 18:19 pm
Halfpenny!
12 Feb 2012, 18:20 pm
@Brigadier Van Zyl-159:
Exactly.
12 Feb 2012, 18:20 pm
@Tacitus-145:
Your post at 141 is sucking figures out of your thumb and assuming you know what every single rugby fan wants.
The ‘Kings entitlement syndrome’? What about the Lions/Bulls/Cheetahs/Sharks/WP ‘entitlement syndromes’? What do you base that on? In Super Rugby and professional rugby’s infancy the ‘smaller, insignificant’ unions handed out beatings to the so-called big 5 regularly up and till the point where automatic, continuous Super Rugby entrenchment (of the big 5) made it impossible for them to compete financially.
Your previous question about the Lions and where they might find themselves seem to suggest you agree that without SR participation any union will struggle to survive or find themselves in the position the Kings find themself in right now.
THAT suggests you are 100% right about an entitlement syndrome, what you however base this justified entitlement on is where we differ completely.
12 Feb 2012, 18:20 pm
Gahhhh
12 Feb 2012, 18:20 pm
Jock thats about it unfortunately.
Scots should look at getting Mallet if he doesn’t end up at the poms
12 Feb 2012, 18:22 pm
Wales at their devastating best despite all the grouses.
12 Feb 2012, 18:23 pm
@PissAnt-162:
I base it on real market research. Which I think you are quite familiar with.
12 Feb 2012, 18:23 pm
You all see how gorge rory lamont is!
12 Feb 2012, 18:24 pm
@Captain Jack-164:
Yep, another game of whatif.
Oh noooooooooooooooooooooooooo, wtf nowwwwww
12 Feb 2012, 18:25 pm
2nd weekend, 2nd disallowed try
12 Feb 2012, 18:26 pm
Who cares if they lose they look good doing it.
And that was a try.
12 Feb 2012, 18:27 pm
high drama in the scot/wales game!
12 Feb 2012, 18:27 pm
Real market research ?give us the sources or should we just accept that you are talking ****?
12 Feb 2012, 18:27 pm
@stormersboy-148:
SB, you’re a businessman. If you had an office in PTA that was one of your best producers and another in Jhb that was a financial nightmare and constantly at the bottom of the pile, what would you do if given the opportunity to chose between retaining both offices in Gauteng or opening another in a market where the potential client base was much bigger? I know what I would do.
12 Feb 2012, 18:27 pm
@Captain Jack-146:
Again, so its okay to ruin the Eastern Cape unions but not the Lions or Cheetahs? With Super Rugby participation what has these two unions achieved in the last 5 years?
Did they build rugby empires with all that money and resources? Or did they fail every single year to make any impact in Super Rugby using their resources to achieve some success in a worthless Currie Cup competition?
Just what entitlement do they have?
@stormersboy-148:
So let them bid again when the franchise licenses comes up for grabs at the end of this year and let’s see how it goes?
@Tacitus-150:
That is because the Lions still owe them over 6-million.
12 Feb 2012, 18:30 pm
@PissAnt-174:
Well exactly, so WITHOUT that R6m from the Lions, they still outperformed the Kings, despite the Kings being based in a Metropole, with 1.3m residents?
12 Feb 2012, 18:30 pm
Scot forwards had too many mars bars
12 Feb 2012, 18:31 pm
@PissAnt-174:
Eastern Cape rugby ruined itself during the 90′s. Now they are reaping the consequences of that.
12 Feb 2012, 18:31 pm
@PissAnt-162: I think that someone is sucking numbers out of thin air if they expect anyone to believe that the EC has more clubs and players than anywhere else in the country. I suspect that what is happening is that rural villages assemble 22 youngsters, calling themselves a club … running around some dirt patch on a Saturday afternoon, in an effort to please the elders. Seriously can anyone verify the existence of these clubs that the EC boast?
12 Feb 2012, 18:31 pm
@Brigadier Van Zyl-159:
That’s why we should look at central contracting. SARU currently subsidises the players S15 salary, as it is.
12 Feb 2012, 18:32 pm
Keep going Tac. Some gravitas is needed here to counter my nervous blathering.
12 Feb 2012, 18:34 pm
Are allblacksareknobs and capo related?
They both like to repeat the same thing over and over.
It’s like their tiny brains can only cope with one thought at a time.
As for “comfortably dumb” khakiballs in filly.
“Sort after”?
Lobotomised gibbon.
12 Feb 2012, 18:34 pm
PA what I am saying is that everybody should get a franchis lisence and that saru should backtrack on entry for the KIngs in 2013 and let them in in 2015 or they should use SA financial superiority to force sanzar into accepting another team. Or Combine the Sharks and KIngs for a few years and in 2015 let the Kings go it alone. That way nobody loses out. The Kings could do with a few more years to get their structures right and do some player developement because they are terrible at the mo.
12 Feb 2012, 18:35 pm
Slowmo is the best thing ever in rugby
12 Feb 2012, 18:36 pm
@Tacitus-175: well actually the Pumas also owe the Lions some money. So after the you owe me this and I owe you that is balanced the Lions may end up paying the Pumas nothing … still the Pumas were able to compete in the premier division and moer the Kings in the promotion relegation match.
12 Feb 2012, 18:37 pm
@RL-178:
Well of course. Did anyone ever think it was anything different?
In Jo’burg a guy works full day, travels through traffic and still has the passion to go to club practice at night. His wife provides food for the club get together, and the entire family sacrifice their Saturdays to spend it at the rugby field.
That’s a rugby club in Gauteng.
In the Eastern Cape, 15 unemployed 20-somethings run around a dusty pitch, playing against 15 other unemployed barefoot guys, and this is now a rugby club.
Yet, when the Kings get formed, they are gonna buy the 30 year old Joburg guy to come and play in PE, and those 30 villagers from the Transkei hills will remain a number used to inflate the Kings’ justification for existence.
12 Feb 2012, 18:37 pm
@Brigadier Van Zyl-152:
And again I must say it is a case of everyone is equal some just more equal than others it seems.
Why should only the big 5 unions be allowed to identify, recruit and develop players from 18 years old and invest in them thanks to the money and security they receive through Super Rugby participation?
The only thing Super Rugby participation guaranteed for unions like the Lions and Cheetahs in the last decade was that they would be competitive at Currie Cup level.
So what exactly is the criteria for this entitlement the Lions and Cheetahs enjoy because it sure as hell is not success at Super Rugby.
@Tacitus-166:
Surely you cannot be that naive.
Where did this market research take place? How was this audited? Did they go to shopping malls in JHB, PTA, DBN, Bloem, and CPT and asked shoppers who they support?
12 Feb 2012, 18:38 pm
@David-179:
no, unfortunately I do not see that being a viable solution in Sa. when does a player actually become a centrally contracted player?
do the unions stop all their youth developement polocies?
Do the bulls for instance, contract a young player…have him come through all the youth group structures only for SARU to decide that he should play for the Kings this superseason.
what ****.
superrugby is where the franchises reap their return on years of player investment. As we see some franchises(lions,wp) are poor at this part of the senario and other just can’t compete financially to keep their best developed (see cheetahs)
12 Feb 2012, 18:42 pm
@Tacitus-177:
Of and what has the Lions done in the last 6 years? Have you seen their audited financials?
@RL-178:
All unions are listed on the SA Rugby website, contacts to each union is also available from there – it can easily be verified.
@Tacitus-185:
That is the most ignorant **** I have ever read from you.
12 Feb 2012, 18:42 pm
@PissAnt-186:
Yes. Because one supporter in a Cape Town shopping mall is worth 50 barefoot guys in a tribal village in the Ciskei, cause that supporter will actually pay for a season ticket and buy a supporters jersey.
Besides, I doubt the 50 guys in the rural village have heard of EP, but they sure as hell have heard of the Bulls or Sharks.
12 Feb 2012, 18:42 pm
I believe that you are a clown and have never made a rugby related comment on this forum.
12 Feb 2012, 18:43 pm
@Captain Jack-182:
What we see right now, is the result of a bunch of amateurs trying to run a professional game.
12 Feb 2012, 18:44 pm
@Brigadier Van Zyl-152:
If SARU were to really show some gumption they would approach Sanzar as soon as possible to come up with a clear-cut workable solution in which to expand Super Rugby from 2016 onwards. And i’m not just talking about the Kings inclusion here. Let them expand the format to a Super 18 – as you said – from 2016 with the inclusion of the Kings, an Argentinian team and a Japanese team or New Zealand team, for example.
If SARU really had their ducks in a row they would have pushed for the Kings inclusion into Super rugby from last year already which was year 1 of a new 5 year agreement with Sanzar. Whether they like it or not SARU will have to live with the current Super 15 format until 2015.
So 2016 it will be for any expansion of the Super Rugby. SARU, sorry for you.
12 Feb 2012, 18:45 pm
@PissAnt-186:
look, i agree, any union needs time to develope….but the only real solution is to expand to 6 franchises.
historically, ep is the kakkest of the kak and have only themselves to blame for being so kak. you know better than I the infighting and polotics that went on in the 3 EC unions for year after year.
what is that old saying “ownership is 9/10ths of the law.”
the cheetahs and lions currently own a franchise, expect them to fight tooth and nail, i would
12 Feb 2012, 18:46 pm
” What is the most sort after item on eBay?”
It is referred to as Americanese, does-not-know-what-it-takes-to-be-a-daddy
‘Probeer mielies op jou nakende hol, ten minste’
Now everyone knows why you are the king of groin/crotch..
Most noise least pertinent action, always a truism
12 Feb 2012, 18:47 pm
Snooze time for you Tacitus.you have totally lost your mind and reason to debate on this forum this evening .
12 Feb 2012, 18:47 pm
Ai tog
12 Feb 2012, 18:48 pm
@Tacitus-189:
Really?
Correct me if I am wrong here…
Are you basically telling me rugby is still the elitist, racist sport it was under pre-1992 era where 15 barefoot passionate supporters of the game running around on dusty fields using any object they can find to use as a ball has as much say as 1 elitist city dweller?
Really?
12 Feb 2012, 18:49 pm
Surely after 15 years of professionalism there should be enough professional experience in sa rugby now so that we can get rid of the old amateur way of conducting these discussions and making the right decisions regarding this kind of thing. How did saru think that they would get the Kings into the S15. Surely when the decision was made there was a plan as to how this would eb achieved. Therefore they should have had a while to sort this out instead of leaving it til the last and creating all this panic
12 Feb 2012, 18:49 pm
@Tacitus-185:
And you don’t believe that happens in the EC? Or are you just referring to white players and clubs that you’re familiar with?
Besides, how many of the current Bulls squad are not from the BB area?
12 Feb 2012, 18:49 pm
I feel for my scotties
12 Feb 2012, 18:50 pm
The thread below this one clarifies a lot.
The idea of a boycott is emphatically denied. Apparently what they did say was that expansion was the only option
So Keo went all emotional on this one.
I am at a loss why the franchises would support one of them going down?
I quote
‘After lengthy discussions between the franchises, we unanimously decided that it is imperative:
* That such inclusion will benefit South African rugby in general;
* That none of the existing franchises shall be prejudiced by such inclusion in any way whatsoever;
* That none of the existing franchises shall be eliminated from the tournament in 2013 or at any stage thereafter as a result of the inclusion of the Kings;
* That Saru as custodian of the South African leg of the tournament will ensure that the Kings are included without prejudice to any of the existing franchises.
‘The existing franchises will endeavour to provide all necessary assistance and support to Saru in its negotiations with Sanzar to ensure the inclusion of six South African franchises in 2013 onwards.’
12 Feb 2012, 18:50 pm
Sort after.
What a quirp.
Numbnuts.
12 Feb 2012, 18:51 pm
@Captain Jack-198:
No Jack, there was no plan. SA Rugby does not believe in planning.
12 Feb 2012, 18:55 pm
@PissAnt-197: no,what i think he is saying is that,he (andI), as a bonafide ticket and jersey buying,dstv paying south african rugby supporter should have a more significant say in what happens in SA rugby as a defacto shareholder.
regrettably we do live in a capatalistic world and until we stop using money to pay bills nothing will change that.
12 Feb 2012, 18:55 pm
Get of the ox-wagon Tacitus and become part of the real South Africa.Your boertjie mentality will get you nowhere buddy.
12 Feb 2012, 18:56 pm
@PissAnt-197:
Elitist yes. Racist no.
Nothing wrong with being elitist.
Being a rugby supporter doesn’t come freely to me. I have to pay a DSTV subscription of R650 per month. I have to pay for attending matches – much more than it costs a soccer supporter – and my supporter’s kit costs me a pretty penny each year.
If my son wants to participate in rugby one day, his kit will cost a lot of money, as will the medical bills of the inevitable injuries he will suffer, as well as the proper nutrition and supplements he will need to endure the rigours of a physical rugby match.
School tours will cost thousands of bucks as will fund raising events for the school lapa next to the rugby field, or the extra coach the school wants to employ to make the team more competitive.
Point is, blacks will soon be the richest segment of SA society, and if they are willing to pay for their kids to participate in a sport that’s their passion, then great.
And if the government wishes to spend taxpayer’s money on supplying all these barefoot guys in the hills with everything my kid gets at my own expense, then fair enough. It’s better than wasting it on submarines and space age jet fighters we don’t have pilots of fuel for.
But the fact remains, rugby is expense to participate in and to support. That’s reality. Deal with it.
So if a franchise wants to be succssful, it nees afluent supporters, not just poor guys who carry them in their hearts. That’s half of PE’s problem. It’s a poor, working class town. And half the guys that attend Kings games probably get discounted or free entry just to fill the stadium.
12 Feb 2012, 18:58 pm
Still awaiting a rugby-related comment from the clown.
12 Feb 2012, 19:00 pm
@the artist formerly known as gunther-202:
Second time in the same thread 8)
It’s an alter of truth thing.
12 Feb 2012, 19:03 pm
@Brigadier Van Zyl-187:
In the NZ system, the franchises declare a squad of, I think it’s 26 players, and the NZRU has the right to select the other four from different provinces who are not included in a declared S15 squad, if they believe that a squad needs strengthening in certain areas or there’s a player they’d like to see more of. This prevents a franchise from sitting with a wealth of players in one position which another franchise could use. The player has the right to refuse or move back to his contracting union after the S15.
This is done for the benefit of NZ rugby.
12 Feb 2012, 19:03 pm
Sout Africa will only be for the better when the likes of Tacitus die off…fact.
12 Feb 2012, 19:05 pm
@David-209:
And in Aus? France? England? If the Force spend $4m to buy Mat Gitaeu, who is he contracted to?
12 Feb 2012, 19:06 pm
@Tacitus-206:
Pleae explain who buys all those season tickets at Ellis Park?
12 Feb 2012, 19:07 pm
Jockie the thing with comfortably numbnuts is that he is to stupid to quit whilst he is behind.
As for halfblacksaregods he is about to tell us that super rugby licences are owned by Saru again.
In case we missed him stating the obvious on the previous five occasions.
Poor poodlenaaier.
12 Feb 2012, 19:07 pm
@David-212:
Hehe. I’m not a Lions supporter, so I don’t have to answer that!
12 Feb 2012, 19:10 pm
@Dawn-200:
One day Dawn, one day they shall win another game!
(See when they due to play Italy)
12 Feb 2012, 19:10 pm
@Brigadier Van Zyl-204:
Brig, it is your right to support any team you want, but if you want to support a team that did not only failed to get the results on the field in Super Rugby but also failed dismally as an organisation and company financially then you have little right to demand their continued existence in a professional league or competition like Super Rugby.
@Tacitus-206:
And my above comment basically applies to your post too. The Lions (and lesser extent Cheetahs since their split as the Cats) were gifted Super Rugby entrenchment and failed to deliver.
Arguing for their continued participation is supporting mediocrity and amateurism in rugby in this country of the highest order.
12 Feb 2012, 19:10 pm
@Tacitus-211:
England and France are different, they don’t have a regional competition, only clubs. I believe that Australia also centrally contracts and the Franchise provides the top up. I could be wrong, though.
12 Feb 2012, 19:12 pm
@PissAnt-216:
So what is your argument? That the Kings should be given a shot, and if they don’t perform, be relegated again? Or will different rules apply to them?
12 Feb 2012, 19:14 pm
It seems the clown is infatuated with allblacksaregods.still awaiting a rugby-related comment from you clown.
12 Feb 2012, 19:15 pm
@PissAnt-216:
Also, why the Kings, and not the Griquas, who are the next best team after the big 5? Or Boland, who actually have more quality clubs than the Eastern Cape in its entirety?
On what basis do the Kings deserve it above all the teams that rank above them in the Currie Cup?
12 Feb 2012, 19:15 pm
@PissAnt-174: mmm. Don’t get all reasonable on me
This is not the place for it.
In principal, what you says makes sense. However to spring this on a Union when the season has basically already started is highly irresponsible.
I just can’t get behind it.
By all means include the Kings, but not at someone’s expense on such short notice.
If there was to be a relegation system this should have been planned for over the past 2 or 3 years to give the Unions an adequate chance at making preperations.
12 Feb 2012, 19:16 pm
@David-209: I’m not sure I care for that system, proper pro run sporting entities would not want to get involved in some ad-hoc player share jumble sale.
That is not to say that they are opposed to loaning players out….as does happen as well.
12 Feb 2012, 19:18 pm
*principle. Seems it’s infectious.
12 Feb 2012, 19:18 pm
PA isn’t it more amateurish to give the Kings a go when they clearly are not better than the current sa s15 teams. As clearly seen in their performances in the cc 2nd div.
12 Feb 2012, 19:18 pm
@the artist formerly known as gunther-213:
It’s really quite fun how Elliott thinks he’s being clever, but because he has the intelligence of an ant, you only need to sit back and watch him catch himself out.
12 Feb 2012, 19:19 pm
@PissAnt-216:
excuse me, but all the ep unions that would form the kings are also completely incompetent and have at one or other time in the past few seasons been bankrupt bailed out etc,,,,,are they not?
do not use the lions financial woes as reason to include the kings, they have zilch moral ground to build a case financially.
12 Feb 2012, 19:21 pm
@Brigadier Van Zyl-222:
I reckon that NZs performance over the years at S15 and Test level proves how successful the system is compared to ours.
12 Feb 2012, 19:25 pm
@Brigadier Van Zyl-226:
Why is a combination of the Bulls and Lions in a franchise less acceptable than the Bulls or Lions partnering with their existing franchise partners?
12 Feb 2012, 19:26 pm
@PissAnt-216: some will say that it is because of the Cats union that the Lions and FS are in the position they are in – ruined. They were doing just fine on their own until SARU stuffed up just because their entitled little Stellenbosch darlings got relegated and had to miss out a year of superrugby.
The SARU pricks created the unworkable franchises and the same SARU pricks allowed the corrupt EC to extract money from the guppies denying their own clubs superrugby involvement.
To me the solution is easy, let the top 5 Currie cup teams qualify for superrugby.
12 Feb 2012, 19:28 pm
Is that all you can muster?
Still not a counter to Americanism.
Is it too a situation akin to your daddy ain’t(another Americanism) your daddy.
Does that make it a case of like father like son?
Enjoy.
Even a wintry sun is more pleasurable than your stale breath.
12 Feb 2012, 19:28 pm
@allblacksaregods-210:
Hey, I’d recognise that kind of racist hate talk anywhere.
It is Capo.
12 Feb 2012, 19:29 pm
@Tacitus-218: @Tacitus-220:
Answer to that is simple, regional franchises.
The reason (and theory) for implementing a regional franchise structure instead of a union based structure is great – but typically SA Rugby they fluffed this up as-well.
A union based structure is limited – any union can only contract so many players – and how do we decide who the best 5 unions are? The Currie Cup?
A union for example only has a direct base of about 500 players (as an example), franchise system gives a franchise access to the cream of double, if not triple that.
I have maintained for a long time now, SA given simply its resources in numbers should dominate world rugby, yet we insist on limiting ourselves thanks to stupid amateurism and ego.
12 Feb 2012, 19:31 pm
@stormersboy-221:
It is a royal mess yes, and I agree, totally unfair to all involved. But we have also now faced this situation since 2006.
In the end I am blaming SA Rugby, not the unions – they are all victims of a dickless organisation.
12 Feb 2012, 19:34 pm
@PissAnt-232:
I think you underestimate the traditional support that is tied directly to the big 5 unions in SA. this support is not so easily transferrable to a Central Stags or Eastern Antelope franchise as you seem to believe.
If the holistic picture is taken into account, the current 5 franchises make sense for many reasons beyond just where they end up on the Currie Cup log.
SA provinces have Man U like support in terms of its passion and the fervour it generates. In many cases, it exceeds the support for the national team.
It makes sense to build on these existing strengths, rather than trying to break it down to reshape the SA Rugby landscape for some intangible theoretical benefit.
12 Feb 2012, 19:36 pm
@RL-229:
Rubbish, it was Louis Luyt who created the Cats under the illusion that the combination would make it the strongest SA Franchise. He was right for a while.
12 Feb 2012, 19:36 pm
Indeed.
Out on parole with another stolen phone.
Will the rozzers catch him before his airtime runs out.
And meanwhile comfortably dumb is wondering who his daddy is.
Hardly suprising.
Who could blame the poor goat for farking off sharpish when he saw that he’d spawned the duiwel.
12 Feb 2012, 19:36 pm
Say what you will about Hoskins, he is by far a better president than that clown Van Rooyen! What a disaster that was!
12 Feb 2012, 19:39 pm
@Captain Jack-224:
Take Super Rugby away from any current franchise (read Big 5) and they will compete in the CC 1st division within 12 months.
@Brigadier Van Zyl-226:
Same as above, apples and pears. Kings (whole Eastern Cape) never had a franchise of their own like the Lions or Cheetahs, so how can you say they will fail?
They have failed not being part of the SR gravy train (sitting ugly in CC 1st division), by I will bet my house so will every single union if their franchise license had to be revoked.
@RL-229:
The most success they achieve in Super Rugby was as the Cats – but in essence I agree, this nightmare has been created by SARU’s incompetence.
12 Feb 2012, 19:39 pm
@David-235@David-235: rubbish! He was THE SARU prick.
12 Feb 2012, 19:40 pm
@Jeez-237:
Not just a clown, but also a crook.
12 Feb 2012, 19:42 pm
@RL-239:
Also president of the Lions, so don’t blame it on Stellenbosch and WP.
12 Feb 2012, 19:44 pm
@Tacitus-234:
I have personally sat in an empty Loftus and Ellis Park when their teams were utter *****, which suggests to me people support winning teams, nothing more.
And the ‘theory’ or argument for a proper regional franchise system far outweighs that of a limited union based approach – but then again that means adopting a professional rugby model instead of the current amateur rubbish.
12 Feb 2012, 19:49 pm
@David-241:
NOOOOOOOOO
12 Feb 2012, 19:51 pm
@PissAnt-242:
You’re flogging a dead horse. Tacitus idea of a regional franchise is the Boks with 22 Bulls in the team.
12 Feb 2012, 19:54 pm
@RL-243:
YESSSSSSSSSS
Seriously, Luyt chose the Cats merger in the belief that they’d be the strongest SA franchise.
12 Feb 2012, 19:56 pm
in a world where efficiency, profitability and sustainability are supposedly worshipped one wonders how the Lions franchise (not the GLRU) has managed to get its licence renewed when it owes the licence owner – SARU – R18 million.
A number of bloggers here like to go on about BEE, entitlement & tenders, it seems like Gumede & the Lions would’ve been a match made in heaven when it comes to the little issue of competence.
Does anyone know how much Jake White Winning Ways was paid for ‘consulting’ for the GLRU?
12 Feb 2012, 19:58 pm
Nog altyd?
12 Feb 2012, 19:58 pm
@David-244: hahahahaha
12 Feb 2012, 19:59 pm
Look, lets never lose sight of the fact that SA rugby comes first, before the provinces.
12 Feb 2012, 20:00 pm
@Transformation-246:
No idea, but I believe he insisted on cold hard cash since he isn’t mentioned as someone being owed money!
12 Feb 2012, 20:01 pm
Where is transformation.
12 Feb 2012, 20:02 pm
@David-244:
Ja neh – nothing wrong with passion for your team, its what makes us strong.
12 Feb 2012, 20:03 pm
Oops sorry
12 Feb 2012, 20:04 pm
@the artist formerly known as gunther-213:
Ekstralong Balsack and Allblacksaregods are one and the same guy, albeit the only two we know, of a lot of extra people living in ET’s head
12 Feb 2012, 20:04 pm
@Transformation-246: according to other sauces the debt owed to SARU was settled in 2010 so those numbers quoted may be wrong or right …. depending on which sauces you like.
12 Feb 2012, 20:04 pm
@PissAnt-232:
regional franchises twak.
a nz franchise has won 1 of the past 5 years of superrugby.
sure, it took a lot longer for sa sides to come up to speed but the sharks, bulls and recently stormers are top half if not top 6 sides now.
12 Feb 2012, 20:07 pm
Haha the real hero here is **** Muir. How he deserved his millions is a million dollar question!
12 Feb 2012, 20:07 pm
@Brigadier Van Zyl-256:
And what has it done for their rugby as a collective? How has their model assisted their national coach and the All Blacks given their limited player numbers and being at the arsed end of the world?
12 Feb 2012, 20:07 pm
@PissAnt-242:
Yes. So the question is, how many Lions fans are sitting at home rather than filling Ellis Park due to the Lions bad management over the last few years.
And now compare that to the number of PAYING bums on seats that the Kings will be able to draw to the Nelson Mandela Bay stadium, should they become successful.
Then compare the total revenue that is being lost and we will be able to calculate which of the two franchises makes the most sense, from a purely commercial perspective.
I reckon the Kings could consistently get maybe 25000 people to a Super Rugby game, once they are up and running and have big name players. Maybe even 30 000. But those 30 000 will probably be paying about 50% of the ticket price that a Lions fan would pay, if he went to Soccer City – which can probably draw 40 000 fans weekly, if the Lions were performing to their potential.
So that’s 30 000 x say R60 for the Kings compared to 40 000 x R120 for the Lions.
And that’s simply due to the higher disposable income and larger group of high earners in Jo’burg than in PE.
Financially, it makes more sense to sort out the mess in the Lions management, than to give the Kings free entry into Super Rugby.
12 Feb 2012, 20:10 pm
“Blacks will soon be the richest segment of SA society”
And in the same comment you preach that we should deal with reality. Your posts are increasingly obnoxious and narrow minded and this takes the cake. How can you live in a country and know nothing of what goes on? Or are you not capable of understanding simple logic? Tell me, if all yobs are yips and all yaks are yobs does that make all yips yaks?
The richest INDIVIDUALS in SA may well soon be “blacks”, whether that is currently the case I very much doubt. If you take that to mean that “blacks” will soon be the richest segment of society as a collective how do you respond to the fact that the poorest INDIVIDUALS in SA are, always have been and probably always will be “blacks”? Does that make them simultaneously the poorest segment of society? Get your head out of your backside. Race in this country is a side issue and if people like you continue to dispute that then yours bigoted beliefs will become self-fulfilling prophecies.
12 Feb 2012, 20:14 pm
@PissAnt-238:
sorry, but you can’t put a unions history and repetative mismanagement down to superrugby inclusion.There are always examples of sides playing well above themselves.
the bulls have won the most cc titles even though I think they were the last union to form long before superrubgy ever started. Even going back to 1998 the bulls beat the bok-laden wp in the cc final?
and in 2005 the cheetahs beat the bok laden bulls?
How did the EP do, did they even win a title in their history?
holy cow, even griqua-land west won CC titles?
my point is that superrugby inclusion is no gaurentee to success on the field or success financially.
12 Feb 2012, 20:17 pm
Amazing how all the arguements in here scream emotions , yet not one really offers a solution?
A simple fact is if the KIngs played Super rugby next year they would be the laughing stock of Rugby, Not because they are clowns but because they are just so far off the pace it is scary.
I know we all discussed this about 2 years ago already, yet till now wer have seen nothing from SARU to plan their way into Sper Rugby, We have seen the KIngs just start to gain a little momentum just to fall apart again as is the case now. YES THE KINGS WILL NOT BEAT ANY OF THE 5 SR UNIONS.
Now surely the Kings being guarenteed a sspot in Super Rugby by SARU should be guided and assisted at lower levels first? If systems and Finances are in place then surely knowing the future plans they should be playing VC in Super Rugby time and then CC? And if their player base is good enough over about a 3 year period they could maybe have been close to being ready , and even if they came last would atleast be some kind of oposition?
Right now however there still is no plans to rectify this, no plan for their inclusion at all accept stupid promises that can only lead to harming SA Rugby that already is close to being the laughing stock of world rugby.
Yes, the KIngs region deserve to be in Super rugby as all other provinces do get some form of representation, the EC does not, but for heavens sakeafter their long poor history of late , surely 1 million times more effort and thought should have gone into this???
And right now the Kings are going nowhere fast as all they see is a guarentee in terms of entry, but in terms of being realistic competitors? they are 5 years behind, and then only will they get their if they play in the bigger leagues.
12 Feb 2012, 20:18 pm
@PissAnt-258:
I agree, their national coach benifits the most but I am of a different line of thought withregards to rugby’s future.
I see superrugby/heineken cup being the pre-eminent rugby to watch much like footballs champions league with internationals being relegated to worldcups and something to resemble the european cup.
12 Feb 2012, 20:23 pm
@Tacitus-259: the bigger question to ask is how many Lion supporters jumped ship to support the Bullies. I can tell you many many thousands – just waiting to jump ship back to their local union. Personally those fair-weather Lions can keep their blue supporter jerseys. They are not needed or missed.
12 Feb 2012, 20:33 pm
@RL-264:
What about their money?
12 Feb 2012, 20:33 pm
@Tacitus-259:
You are again comparing have’s with have not’s.
Why compare the a fan base of a team that has been entrenched in Super Rugby for years to one that has not? My counter for that would be quite simple, take the Lions out of Super Rugby for 5 years and look what happens to their support base.
Alternatively, forget about Super Rugby participation completely and consider tangible factors.
For instance:
* How many clubs, and therefore supporters and reach does each franchise potentially have?
* What is their GDP in relation to their population density? (potential market)
* How many schools, colleges and universities do they represent?
Perhaps that is a much better way to approach this debate?
12 Feb 2012, 20:39 pm
@Brigadier Van Zyl-256: this still doesnt justify letting the kings in or letting SA have a 6th team
sure SA sides are getting better on one end of the table but look at the teams on the other end. with Cheetahs and Lions finishing in the bottom 5
12 Feb 2012, 20:41 pm
@Brigadier Van Zyl-261:
No it’s not (Super Rugby inclusion being a guarantee of success) but it should be shouldn’t it?
So why is everyone so scared to give the Kings a shot? I mean all in sundry believe they will fail don’t they? So let them prove everyone right?
Or are some folks scared they might just be proven wrong???
12 Feb 2012, 20:44 pm
Anycase, been fun but its enough from me for one day.
Have a good evening folks.
12 Feb 2012, 20:48 pm
given that the opening paragraph of this article has been proven as bullshit, why should we believe what was written subsequently?
12 Feb 2012, 20:53 pm
I for one am very grateful that rugby has not gone the way of that shambles of a sport, football. At least in rugby, playing for your country is still the pinnacle.
And most rugby fans worldwide would agree. SA’s provincialism is one of the major reasons why SA – with all their playing numbers and potential – perennially underachieve when the likes of NZ and Aus overachieve.
Down with provincialism. Up with the Boks.
12 Feb 2012, 21:01 pm
SARU can hand out the franchises to whoever they want in 2013, but all the players are contracted by the unions
Nothing prevents the unions from negotiating a series on their own, they can do a breakaway Kerry Packer type series
How would SARU keep up their end of the bargain with SANZAR if they don’t have any first rate players?
Do you think Newscorp would still pay the coin they do to see Cheeky’s Kings and four others lose with cricket scores week after week?
12 Feb 2012, 21:18 pm
pissant
is a
political
yes man
12 Feb 2012, 21:21 pm
@victoriabok-272:
Everything prevents the Unions from breaking away. The IRB would disown them and the players. None would be eligible for Test rugby or any other rugby competition.
Do you think the players would stay with rogue unions? They’d just move to a new recognised Franchise and union.
12 Feb 2012, 21:23 pm
Johannesburg – Golden Lions rugby is hopelessly insolvent.
This despite on Thursday announcing a three-year multimillion-rand sponsorship deal from property firm Redefine.
A 140-page forensic report compiled by accounting firm KPMG last year, and other documents in the possession of City Press, paint a dismal picture of the Golden Lions and its marketing and managing company, Ellis Park Stadium (Pty) Ltd (EPS).
The report shows that Golden Lions rugby nearly lost its most prized asset – Ellis Park (Coca-Cola Park) – and the company managing Ellis Park was so mismanaged that it had exposed its directors to possible criminal prosecution.
The last financial report (2010) shows that its total liabilities exceeded its assets by R73 million.
According to the documents and a reliable source close to the developments, Golden Lions rugby owes different parties about R90 million.
This is far less than their total income of around R44 million from the SARU-SuperSport television rights and stadium naming rights from Coca-Cola.
The money is shared with Ellis Park World of Sport (EPWOS), the Ellis Park stadium management joint venture that also incorporates Johannesburg Stadium and the Standard Bank Arena.
The union reportedly makes about R400 000 per home game (13 games per season) on gate takings. This depends on SuperRugby/Currie Cup match attendances, which average about 15 000 before match expenses, including EPWOS’s share.
All suites income goes to EPWOS.
There is a huge shortfall to cover players salaries and the operations budget of about R90 million per annum.
Another disturbing revelation was the disparity between the salaries of black and white players in the Golden Lions.
Springbok Butch James earned over R3 million for the 2011 season in contrast to flyhalf and Currie Cup final man of the match Elton Jantjies’s less than R500 000.
The KPMG report also raises questions about the deal brokered in 2007, where EPS entered into agreement with Orlando Pirates and a little-known empowerment company, Inza.
The deal gave Pirates and Inza 51% of EPWOS, leaving EPS with 49%.
Inza is said to have been brought in by Kevin de Klerk as BEE partners before he became Golden Lions president.
The KPMG forensic report makes serious reservations about the EPWOS deal. It states the company didn’t have a VAT number nor complied with PAYE, income tax nor did it operate the necessary company bank account since inception in 2007.
Instead, it used the EPS bank account and VAT number to bill clients, which was illegal according to the Companies Act and also exposed its directors to criminal investigation.
Furthermore, rugby revenues had been passed through to EPWOS, leaving EPS/Lions exposed to undeclared tax and liabilities.
The report also points out that Pirates had played very few of their games at Ellis Park, contrary to the shareholders agreement.
EPWOS had a staff complement of 40, with CEO Paul Appalsamy earning R1 million a year.
None of the three EPWOS general managers identified by KPMG seemed to be properly qualified for the positions they hold. The general manager of operations was a former paramedic and fire instructor, it said.
EPWOS has never declared any profit or paid dividends.
The union’s financial affairs were also brought under the spotlight by the high court liquidation application filed by Guma-TAC (Gumede and Ichikowitz) in a lawsuit where they claim R11 million from the Lions for money loaned to pay players’ salaries in December 2010 and January 2011.
In an earlier (January 2012) media statement, Guma-TAC stated that “had the Lions failed to pay the players’ salaries over this period, it would have led to the breach of players’ contracts, which would have led to an exodus of key players, if not all. Furthermore, the loans enabled the Lions to sign top international players, such as Butch James and Lionel Mapoe, and to pay the 24 amateur feeder clubs their grants. Without Gumede and Ichikowitz money, the Lions would not have won the Currie Cup.”
They said the union borrowed the money to pay the salaries of players after they signed a conditional deal in 2010 that they would purchase a 49.9% stake in the rugby franchise, which heralded a new dawn for the Lions and rugby transformation.
The deal fell apart towards the middle of last year.
Ichikowitz and Gumede claim the EPWOS deal was a bad business one for the Lions as it resulted in EPS ceding control of an asset and its income.
EPWOS made a loss of R14 million in 2008 and showed a profit of R10 million in 2010 – thanks to the 2010 Soccer World Cup – although the amount paid by FiIFA was the subject of a dispute. The Golden Lions won last year’s Currie Cup and are now about to embark on their 2012 Super Rugby campaign.
Announcing the three-year sponsorship deal this week, De Klerk said: “We project to be cash flush in months – we are not saying we are not – but this has gone a long way in alleviating the situation at the Lions.”
He did not respond to any questions about the KPMG forensic report or allegations of bankruptcy by Gumede and Ichikowitz, but claimed in other media interviews this week that the pair were behind a media campaign against the club.
Neither Gumede nor Ichikowitz would comment this week.
12 Feb 2012, 21:25 pm
This girl in True Grit has a lotta lip! I like it!
12 Feb 2012, 21:27 pm
@victoriabok-272: howzit pietertjie.
12 Feb 2012, 21:43 pm
@David-274: let it go bro ,it’s like fighting with yourself.
12 Feb 2012, 21:45 pm
Fark we struggling in Vegas.
12 Feb 2012, 21:45 pm
@clm-277:
Byt my, doos
12 Feb 2012, 21:46 pm
@clm-278:
You’re right, it’s pointless arguing with someone who hasn’t a clue about what he’s talking about.
12 Feb 2012, 21:47 pm
@Jeraldjay-279:
What’s the score?
12 Feb 2012, 21:49 pm
@David-282:
15-0 with 4:30 to go.
12 Feb 2012, 21:51 pm
the blitzies are messing up big time
12 Feb 2012, 21:52 pm
20-0 with 1:30 to go.
12 Feb 2012, 21:55 pm
@Jeraldjay-285:
Oh sh*t!
12 Feb 2012, 21:55 pm
at last a try,albeit a consolation one.20-7 to the kiwis
12 Feb 2012, 21:56 pm
Final score, AB’s 20 – SA 7.
12 Feb 2012, 21:59 pm
pathetic display by a pathetic bunch of individuals, ****** “blitzbokke” my arse.
watching cecil afrika and branco d smallfry try and goose step every player is simply excrutiating.
paul treu for bok backline coach? bwaaahaaa, the okes he trains dont even have the requiste skills for sevens.
fkken waste of time.
p.s. thes boys look sh i t scared, they must not waste my time in future.
12 Feb 2012, 22:00 pm
@Jeraldjay-288: Mistake orgy form the Saffas. Afrika the only one trying his arse off.
12 Feb 2012, 22:03 pm
Well tackler will be pleased
12 Feb 2012, 22:06 pm
@Tuna-290:
I’m sick and tired of loosing to the AB’s, irrespective of it being 7′s.
12 Feb 2012, 22:11 pm
@Jeraldjay-292:
I hope you don’t mind me correcting your english, but the word is “losing”, with one “o”.
12 Feb 2012, 22:14 pm
@David-293:
Thanks. Its late and I’m pissed off.:lol:
12 Feb 2012, 22:17 pm
@Tuna-290: j throwing intercept passes and refusing to look for the offoad.
looked like a bunch of glory hunters to me tonight, not one looked to put his fellows into space.
seriosly poor and embarrassing imo, maybe they have accepted mediocrity?
12 Feb 2012, 22:20 pm
@Jeraldjay-294:
Cheers everyone.
12 Feb 2012, 22:28 pm
@rangerman-289: feeling better now?
12 Feb 2012, 22:48 pm
You shouldn’t take Sevens so seriously. Stick to your strengths, and you’ll be a happier person.
Same applies to SA rugby. A game without lineouts, mauls, and a lot of forward play and kicking simply doesn’t suit us. You’re in for lots more heartache if you continue to want to dominate the world in basketball style Sevens rugby.
13 Feb 2012, 01:02 am
Face facts — Solly and Cheeky’s rag-tag EP crowd couldn’t beat an egg. And with only 5 players-of-colour in their losing Vodacup team squad of 22 ( compared with 10/22 for the winners, Boland, they do nothing for so-called “transformation” either.
13 Feb 2012, 08:02 am
Off season fun and the sparring between Tac and PA illustrates SA’s problem quite well. Tac is all Bulls and the big unions, keep the power, even to the detriment of SA rugby while PA seems to suggest a “transformation” where the government (SARU) despite being useless and corrupt holds the power. Surely the answer is a middle ground; actually fewer, stronger well run franchises then SARU runs academies and development properly, feeding players through the CC into SR. The Tac route leads to English soccer – strong clubs, second rate national team. “Transformation” leads to corruption and second rate everything.
Finally I think rugby in SA is dying, albeit slowly. PA sneers at Tac’s estimates but doesn’t provide real numbers. They may be interesting, particularly with time.
13 Feb 2012, 08:10 am
SARU should’ve consulted the unions before they made this decision for them. Tank you ANC, your involvement in this matter is very obvious.
13 Feb 2012, 09:48 am
For the first time in years I think Keo has written an article worth reading. The unions weild way too much power in SA rugby. Why do the lions deserve a Super rugby spot? They have for the last 5 years finished last or second last. Frankly they dont desrve to play Super rugby. So they won the curry cup, honestly so what?
Unions should stay in the curry cup the the super rugb franchises should be professionally managed, based in the big cities and not be held captive by unions. The players should be centrally contracted and the bok coach should have input, only inlput into where and how the players should play. it should be national interest first not petty union issues first.
The cheethas and the lion may as well not bein super rugby for all the impact they have.
13 Feb 2012, 10:40 am
@BreakdownBoy-301: which decision was made for the unions? in 2005, the unions agreed to get the South Eastern Cape involved in Super Rugby through the Spears, when the time came for the Spears to join, the same unions through SARU spent over R10 million rand getting rid of the Spears through nefarious means, and just so you know Cheeky Watson had nothing to do with EP Rugby at the time.
the British & Irish Lions were here in 2009 and the Southern Kings “franchise” was resurrected, now it is 2012 and the same unions supposedly have not understood what the inclusion of the South Eastern Cape means in terms of the existing licences SARU holds, that is nonsense!
nothing has been sprung on these unions, they have been part and parcel of every step of this process but clearly there are deep-seated entitlement issues here. it is everyone’s wont to say the Kings must FIRST prove they’re ready and jump through all sort of hoops before they are allowed to participate in Super Rugby but the current licence holders can get up to all sort of s(hit in the meantime and there is NO accountability on their parts – lions can lose all 13 of their games if they want and they can be a financial nightmare and it’s all good.
the likes of De Klerk are panicking and speaking in tongues to save the gatte!
De Klerk emphasised the need for Saru to make a decision that would be in the interests of South African rugby in general.
“It (the inclusion of the Kings) has to be a rugby decision, not a political decision,” De Klerk said.
“Perhaps a Super 16 series could be the solution, and we will continue hoping that another franchise could be accommodated.
“The restructuring of the existing franchises to include the southern and eastern Cape unions is another possible solution.
13 Feb 2012, 11:03 am
Time to get rid of the whinging Yappies. It’s like playing with a migraine.
13 Feb 2012, 11:12 am
Transformation and Pissant. Great posts and the truth. The one thing Mark highlights with this article and is sooo true, is the Hoskins and Saru cannot make decisions. If John O’Neil was in charge here the unions would not be so lippy, they would understand that Saru is the mother body, and their participation in the Super comeptition is Saru’s final decision. Some unions have been on a gravy train of Super rugby security for way too long, and didn’t even care to perform in the competition, and ran up debts waiting to be bailed out, and still feel entitled. They need a wake up klap.
17 Feb 2012, 17:07 pm
Hi from Sydney, i am sorry to hear about this mess you guys have yourself in. However one thing is sure the strength and depth of rugby talent in your country will shine through regaurdless.
5 Mar 2012, 14:34 pm
“R5 million to former coach **** Muir,” – JEEEEEZ! 5 Million?!
What an awesome industry to work in – lose every single game and get paid 5 million!
I seriously hope D ick feels ashamed of his contribution to the Boks and the Lions
as a coach
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.