Sanzar stands firm on Super Rugby format
14 Feb 2012
Sanzar CEO Greg Peters dealt South Africa’s hope of gaining an additional Super Rugby franchise a hammer blow by insisting the format will not change until 2015.
In January the South African Rugby Union (Saru) committed to the Kings’ Super Rugby inclusion in 2013 but conceded that they did not know how they would be accommodated. They then rejected a relegation match as an option of trimming a franchise and also said a merger between two franchises was not an option.
Weekend reports indicated that the South African franchises had resolved to boycott the tournament in 2013 if they were not awarded another franchise. Saru quickly moved to dismiss those reports as false but did issue an ultimatum to their Sanzar partners saying: ‘… the franchises have made it plain that the only option to them is the expansion of 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.’
A letter from the five franchises to Saru president Oregan Hoskins stated:
* 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.
However, Peters insisted that no such concession can be made in light of the current tournament model being sold to broadcast and commercial partners until 2015 and the conference system being unable to function with an uneven number of teams.
‘The reality is that expansion of Super Rugby is not possible at this stage,’ Peters told keo.co.za. ‘Before their inclusion, the Kings’ aspirations were discussed in detail. How they are accommodated is a domestic issue for South Africa. And while we are always open to dialogue on this issue, it is incumbent upon them to make the necessary adjustments to facilitate the Kings’ inclusion.’
Peters added that they had explored a wide range of format options prior to settling on the current model and that there simply was no viable alternative to it at present. He added that New Zealand and Australia, the latter recording a 41% increase in television viewership in 2011, were opposed to any change in the format.
‘The Reds won the competition last year and I know other Australian franchises feel confident they can replicate that success, so it is understandable that there would be resistance to this idea from them. New Zealand are pleased with the model. They are realistic about the number of franchises they can field before the quality of those franchises is compromised,’ he said.
‘Also, we’re in year two of Super Rugby. The tournament in this guise is still in its infancy. It is nonsensical on a number of levels to alter its form.’
A final decision on the matter is expected on 31 March once all discussions have concluded.
By Ryan Vrede
Read Mark Keohane’s view on this issue here
Follow Ryan on Twitter
Follow SA Rugby magazine on Twitter
370 Comments
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 » Show All
14 Feb 2012, 09:20 am
The King Dragon saga ….. hier kom n ding! Hou dop!
14 Feb 2012, 09:22 am
Well Peters is 100% correct.
It’s a domestic issue for SA Rugby, up to them to sort it out.
14 Feb 2012, 09:24 am
Great. I don’t want 6 teams in any case, as it will just dilute our strength.
Sorry Kings. See you in 2016…Maybe.
14 Feb 2012, 09:30 am
cheers kings, see ya wouldnt wanna be ya.
14 Feb 2012, 09:36 am
First lesson in economics…
some things aren’t “economically” viable….
but they are politically…..
geuss what will be the outcome…..
14 Feb 2012, 09:37 am
I still believe there is going to be a massive issue. I still cannont believe how SARU would come to a decision with out discussion it with SANZAR. Did they really believe that they will say what a great idea. I am sure we can fit another team in the tournament. While we at it why not promise Limpopo a rugby team also and include them in too.
14 Feb 2012, 09:39 am
@Staal-5:
Se maar? Wat dink jy gaan die uiteinde wees, Staal?
14 Feb 2012, 09:43 am
@patch-6:
I reckon the original press release was deliberately misleading. They said that all 14 unions had agreed to the Kings inclusion, butthey left out that all 14 had agreed PROVIDED that a 16th team was included.
14 Feb 2012, 09:49 am
i’m betting on the lions/cheetahs merging or one falling away.
to shaft the kings again will take some balls and will carry with it some pretty serious blowback down the line.
14 Feb 2012, 09:53 am
@Tacitus-8: of course tac, because if they had put that in there would have been wailing and gnashing of teeth.
the wailing and gnashing can begin now.
14 Feb 2012, 09:55 am
@au revoir mon tout noirs, au revoir…-9: i am betting the kings get screwed like a two dollar hooker.
14 Feb 2012, 09:58 am
@Tacitus-8: i fail to find the “misleading” or ambiguous bit.
SARU’s official statement
The Southern Kings’ place in the Vodacom Super Rugby competition in 2013 was reaffirmed at a Special Council Meeting of the South African Rugby Union (SARU) in Cape Town on Friday. Proposals on mechanisms to identity the four other South African entrants will be considered at a SARU Special General Meeting on March 30.
“The decision to include the Southern Kings in the 2013 Vodacom Super Rugby tournament was unanimously confirmed by the members,” said Jurie Roux, CEO of SARU on Friday.
“We will now look at the options to identify the other entrants to the competition, which will include further discussions with our SANZAR partners on the possibility of including a sixth South African team in the competition.
“The Unions will also be making their own recommendations and the outcome of those discussions and other proposals will be tabled for the Executive Council and ultimately a General Meeting to consider.”
so the unions have tabled their “recommendations”, now to hear the “other options” jurie was talking about.
14 Feb 2012, 10:00 am
@Transformation-12:
Well then I just fail to understand what went on at that meeting. I remain convinced that there is something big we don’t know about, else why would Harold Verster and Kevin de Klerk vote in favour of there being only 4 other SA entrants joining the Kings?
They knew their unions are the ones in the firing line. What’s cooking?
14 Feb 2012, 10:04 am
@Staal-5: Correct. In this Country political expedience has long since taken over from good sense.
14 Feb 2012, 10:04 am
@Transformation-12: i also find it hard to understand how kings fans can punt their inclusion and moan about exclusion previously whilst accepting that some other unions will be excluded if they are to enter?
or is it “our turn to eat”?
14 Feb 2012, 10:04 am
@rangerman-11:
yes, this is possible but the blowback will hurt either springbok rugby or the franchises/provinces further down the line, perhaps even both.
besides, if saru holds the rights to this comp and gets to decide who participates in the comp its not inconceivable they could force someone’s hands. they did it with the cats as well the structuring of franchises comprising different unions lumped together.
14 Feb 2012, 10:06 am
@Tacitus-13: i also have no idea.
my pervading gut-feel in this whole saga has been that the Kings won’t be playing Super Rugby next year or even in the near future.
14 Feb 2012, 10:07 am
@rangerman-11: I’ll take that bet.
The kings will be there I fear.
The real question is at who’s expense?
Just because it doesn’t make any sense doesn’t mean they won’t do it.
14 Feb 2012, 10:07 am
It just seems a bit strange all of this. But maybe its the calm before the storm. Maybe the unions just want to have some calm at the start of the competition and no other added pressure. once the tournament is up and running then they will bring out the knives for SARU
14 Feb 2012, 10:07 am
@Tacitus-7: Bulls & Lions.
Ek weet jy wil dit nie **** nie maar dis soos ek dit sien gebeur.
14 Feb 2012, 10:08 am
van wanneer af is h o o r ‘n vloekwoord?
14 Feb 2012, 10:09 am
maybe not close in the future but it is on the cards.
14 Feb 2012, 10:12 am
I am quite happy to see a promotion/relegation fight. At least if we do not win the Super 15, we’ll have some exciting games. I am tired of seeing **** coaches like Naka Drotske given an extended run. When the Stormers got relegated in the late 1990s they came back with a bigger brand and a better team. Maybe teams will not think about giving their loyal supporters value for their money instead of dishing halfassed attempts at entertainment.
14 Feb 2012, 10:13 am
@stormersboy-18: we shall see but its a catch 22 imo.
law suits from existing franchises, sponsors, players etc.
or blowback from politicians?
i say screw the politicians.
imo the kings will be admitted to cc premier div rugby and maybe bribed with a fat paycheque to “allow them to build the requisite depth for their imminent inclusion in superrugby in 2016″.
but lets see.
14 Feb 2012, 10:13 am
Just imagine a relegation scrap between The Kings and The Bulls…Man, now that will be entertaining…
14 Feb 2012, 10:13 am
@Staal-20:
Dit sal die Bulle oornag ruineer. Want dan kry ons net helfte van die Super Rugby geld wat ons voorheen gekry het, met die ander helfte wat Ellispark toe gaan.
En Loftus kry net helfte van die wedstryde.
So ons gaan nie meer ons top spelers kan bekostig nie, en daar gaan ons drome van “die beste provinsiale span in die wereld” aan skerwe op.
Dit is onwerkbaar, en die Bulbestuur sal nooit daarvoor gaan nie. Alles wat in die laaste 10 jaar opgebou is sal vernietig wees.
14 Feb 2012, 10:14 am
Is this an episode of Game of Thrones?
14 Feb 2012, 10:14 am
@rangerman-24:
And who did the Cheetahs and Naka Drotske payoff to deserve a spot in the Super Rugby competition. They certainly aren’t their on merit.
14 Feb 2012, 10:15 am
@Staal-20: so an amalgamation of the bulls, lions, leopards, pumas and valke?
thats a lotta slices in just one pie.
@RugbyStudent-23: why is naka a sh i t coach?
imo the cheetahs punch above their weight when you consider what they have to work with?
14 Feb 2012, 10:17 am
@rangerman-15: no rangerman, don’t come with your lame diversionary tactics here.
in 2005 the Presidents Council resolved that it is imperative for SA rugby that the South Eastern Cape be included in Super Rugby and reap the SAME benefits that the rest of them were enjoying. what happened since 2005 and 2012 is well known, the fact still remains though that SIX years later 3 unions are STILL excluded from benefitting from Super rugby largesse.
if it is about “eating” as you suggest, then some unions must look like khulubuse zuma right now and they’re think they’re immovable from the trough.
14 Feb 2012, 10:17 am
@Tacitus-13:
some nasty BEE poitje.
14 Feb 2012, 10:19 am
@rangerman-24: I’d prefer that SARU tells the Kings to take a hike until 2015.
But as Keo himself said yesterday, the Kings’ inclusion next year is a “given”.
I’m not sure if that’s the same as “it’s a FACT that the Kings will play next year”.
14 Feb 2012, 10:21 am
@rangerman-29:
Well the Lions have no money and still won the Currie Cup? What has Naka done besides get a free ride?
14 Feb 2012, 10:22 am
@Tacitus-26: ek verstaan maar glo my dis waaraan gewerk word. Ek dink ook die dae dat die “oud CC unies” die wedstryde ” finansieel deel” gaan nie meer van toepassing wees nie…
Maar almal is baie “oopkop” insake die implikasies.
Miskien gebeur dit nooit.
14 Feb 2012, 10:24 am
@rangerman-15:
hawu.
you are very counter-revolutionary.
if you are not careful you will get a goodyear necklace for valentines day.
14 Feb 2012, 10:24 am
@Staal-34:
Ek verstaan nie mooi wat jy bedoel nie. Wat bedoel jy met oud CC unies wat wedstryde finansieel deel?
14 Feb 2012, 10:26 am
@Staal-34:
I don’t mind if we absorb the lions.
But we wear blue and all home games are at loftus.
And the lions must learn the words to at least 5 steve hofmeyr songs.
14 Feb 2012, 10:27 am
@the artist formerly known as gunther-37:
Those are my sentiments exactly. And we get to keep all the cash.
14 Feb 2012, 10:28 am
@the artist formerly known as gunther-37:
You are condemned to pink.
14 Feb 2012, 10:28 am
Saru must be the biggest bunch of idiots .
“Kings will play in S15 in 2013″
“We don’t know how to do it”
” You the 5 teams that stands to lose ou out, plase advise us how”
14 Feb 2012, 10:29 am
This story has been haggled now since Sunday
I never knew men were capable of re-hashing goeters for three days straight.
No wonder some women go bedonnerd!
14 Feb 2012, 10:31 am
SARU are so amateur.
Our NZ and Aus counterparts are just so much smarter than them.
SANZAR’s response is entirely predictable. OF COURSE they were never going to change the format mid contract.
Australia will NEVER agree to a change of the boring conference format anyway.
This was an extremely telling statement from Peters: “New Zealand are pleased with the model. They are realistic about the number of franchises they can field before the quality of those franchises is compromised,’ he said.
It’s obvious to everyone that 6 teams will not be good for SA rugby. We already have 2 bottom feeding teams, why would we want another?
SARU are thick as planks. Now what are they going to do.
The only solution is to apologise to the Kings for getting their hopes up, and tell them to fark off again.
14 Feb 2012, 10:31 am
@Tacitus-36: in short.. Sarfu will decide who the conferances/franchises will be…..
Those conferances/franchises will then get the income…
remember that this hasn’t got a lot to do with rugby…. actually nothing at all.
I might not be economically viable but politically it is… (as they tell me)….
14 Feb 2012, 10:31 am
ASA face liquidation hurdle
2012-02-14 09:01Email | Print
Related Links
SA athletes build on form Caster to run less in SA Powell headlines NY meet Johannesburg – Athletics SA (ASA) could face liquidation if it failed to repay a R7 million debt to a sports promotion company, Beeld newspaper reported on Tuesday.
Chairman of the promotion company, Accelerate Sport, is Gideon Sam, who was previously chairman of the SA Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee (SASCOC).
Rian Oberholzer, previous executive head of the SA Rugby Union, is also a director of the company, Beeld reported.
According to Oberholzer, there was a strong possibility ASA would be liquidated if the debt was not repaid.
Oberholzer said all avenues were being considered to recover the money,
“We came to an agreement on several occasions, but ASA never keeps its word. Our legal representatives are in discussions with the ASA’s legal team.”
According to Oberholzer, ASA owed Accelerate Sport a commission for the Yellow Pages and Nedbank sponsorships, and for television broadcasting rights.
ASA chairperson James Evans denied the organisation owed Accelerate Sport any money. According to him, contractual obligations were suspended in 2008.
These moges are as bad as the highlife lions.
******* broederbond.
14 Feb 2012, 10:32 am
@RugbyStudent-33:
in case you have not noticed, this is not about the cc comp and is instead about the sr comp. a comp in which the lions have come last 10 out of 16 times on the sa log. not to mention the overall log.
14 Feb 2012, 10:33 am
@Dawn-41: No multi tasking
14 Feb 2012, 10:33 am
@Staal-43:
But the 14 unions control SARU, and the Big 5 stand united. And their little partners in their regions – the Leopards, Pumas, Falcons, Griquas, Griffons will vote with them.
So there’s your majority deicision right there. The allocations remain as they are. Cheers Kings.
14 Feb 2012, 10:34 am
@Dawn-39:
indeed.
I am secure enough in my masculinity to deal with it.
Happy Valentines day my lovely.
14 Feb 2012, 10:36 am
The Kings haven’t been able to qualify for the top level of our own Currie Cup yet, and Saru is not giving them free passage into that competition, so why should SANZAR change the format of Super Rugby for their inclusion? It seems clear to me that the Kings idea needs some fundamental changes. First of all, there is no point in adding the financial burden of an extra union, administrative team, management, coaching staff and player contracts to an area that already had 3 unions struggling to survive financially. The Kings should have been birthed through Border, EP and SWD all voluntarily merging into one streamlined union, at least at professional senior level. If all of the resources spread across the current 3 squads were instead focused on one Kings squad, plus u21s and u19s, they would be able to invest far more deeply into the top tier of rugby in the Eastern Cape, and attract/retain better players.
If the Eastern Cape wants collective Super Rugby, then the 3 old provinces should throw their lot in properly with the Kings, instead of trying to have the best of both worlds. It also seems logical to me that the Kings calls for inclusion in Super Rugby should never be at the expense of a union currently more successful that they are. Either they need to build strength and be ready in 2015 to give a good account of themselves in an expanded format, or they need to deliver on the field, get promoted to the top level of the Currie Cup and finish a season ahead of one of the 5 incumbents. At the very least we’re looking at 2 years before the Kings have a valid claim for inclusion ahead of an existing team. In the meantime, they should be doing away with the minor failed unions, and putting everything they have into making the Kings one of the top 5 sides in SA.
14 Feb 2012, 10:36 am
@Tacitus-47: Cheers Kings… hoop jy’s reg!
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 » Show All
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.