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, 17:07 pm
@Tacitus-250:
Don’t confuse my ’cause’ being that of backing the Kings along the lines of what is generally said in the media.
My cause has always been for a professional approach ahead of an amateur one and ensuring that all unions and regions benefit rather than just the privileged few (read big 5).
14 Feb 2012, 17:07 pm
@PissAnt-251:
Bravo.
14 Feb 2012, 17:11 pm
@PissAnt-251:
That said, the Keo crew’s motives are embarrassingly clear.
14 Feb 2012, 17:13 pm
@the artist formerly known as Cun.t(her)-:
That ALL you can muster, boytjie, that faulty too vivid imagination and all that so stale, musty ‘claptrap’?
Jou etniese uitspraak is maar lam.
Gee ons die waarheide en waardevolle feite vanjou saak, daardie sogenaamde manheid van jou.
Hoeveel ‘tjinders’ het jy hierdie planeet gegee?
Wie noem jou ‘pappie’? Waar bestaan en woon hulle? Het hulle twee voetetjies en handtjies en tien vingers en so voort?
Was hulle ook in ‘n mandtjie beskerm en Australia toe gestuur?
Verstaan jy nou mooi seuntjie?
Dus jou gaat daai en jou gat.
Loop versigtig nou vandag. Die S E X Y Boys het ‘n oog op jou daar by Mavericks.
Tot ons weer mekaar sie!! Daai ‘shebeen’ uitnodiging bestaan nog(SA Kultuur is belangrik) maar nou moet jy wag tot ek weer beskikbaar is.
14 Feb 2012, 17:15 pm
@PissAnt-247: hahahaha As long as he doesn’t send me a private email and say “check yourself” or something like that.
@Transformation-244: I agree with that.
It’s in the how really that the issue becomes contentious.
Because if you kick the Gauteng Lions out (and their feeder unions with them) then that doesn’t solve the problem
Not sure what the solution is.
I would welcome an additional franchise, in the proper way and without prejudicing an existing one. SARU has known about this for many years and has had ample opportunity to negotiate the expansion in the appropriate way.
I’d be inclined to actually shrink the setup and consolidate into 3 or at most 4 Unions at most the old Super 12.
14 Feb 2012, 17:15 pm
@PissAnt-251: come on dude, be original!
244.Transformation:
14 Feb 2012, 16:46 pm @stormersboy-231: all i want is for all the unions affiliated to SARU to be included in Super Rugby so that all the benefits that accrue from that competition are shared EQUITABLY.
14 Feb 2012, 17:20 pm
@stormersboy-255: everyone talks about things being “contentious” but it is a little different when all the contention is happening with you outside in the rain while the other unions are cosy inside debating how to let you in hey
anyway gym calls (no peter davies or brown floaters)
14 Feb 2012, 17:31 pm
@Transformation-256:
Huh?
14 Feb 2012, 17:32 pm
@Transformation-257:
Just don’t scream ‘yebo’
14 Feb 2012, 17:33 pm
@Broeder Totdie dood
Ou wit “gam” is hier.
Die skurk met die siek en onmenslike woorde.
“gam = low class coloureds
Despite his even more depraved ” my understanding” attempt to sound worse than smartarsed, the irony of his original “gam” comments is typical of the so many Afrikaner posers here.
Those words “gam = low class coloureds’” can only come from a racist of ‘verkrampte proportions.
They flowed from a empty discussion and an even emptier question from his ‘black buddy’ where no anger was being displayed.
Those words are clearly inflammatory, insensitive, derogatory and meant to be ‘down-putting ‘ and destructive to a large sector of genuine S.Africans and especially in Cape area.
It clarifies his chosen racist position and emphasises that you just cannot legislate what is in people’s hearts and minds, but nowhere else in their worthless life. No Afrikaner has ever or will ever be for ‘apartheid’. It is all ghosts-like now. But it existed and is still alive and very well.
Ou wit ‘gam’ dis jou gaat en jou gat daai! Maar ek hey altyd geweet.
Wie was jou ouers se BAAS nou weer?
Die Broederbond of die NP? Een ding is dit nie?
14 Feb 2012, 17:36 pm
Speaking of low class cullarts how are you et buddy?
14 Feb 2012, 17:41 pm
@stormersboy-255:
Nobody, except the ones backing relegation, are suggesting kicking union out, just rearranging the current groupings that constitute a Franchise.
Relegation would be the worst option as it would gut the Franchise/Unions of their core players who the SANZAR agreement specify must play in the S15. In fact it would put those unions in exactly the same disadvantaged position as the Kings unions are currently in.
Geographically, the Kings make sense, as does awarding a franchise to region make sense from a rugby marketing perspective.
14 Feb 2012, 17:42 pm
@the artist formerly known as gunther-261:
I beg your pardon. Rude.
14 Feb 2012, 17:47 pm
I’m just quoting khakiballs dawnie.
Don’t hate the player.
14 Feb 2012, 17:49 pm
In your eye you sod.
14 Feb 2012, 17:50 pm
@Transformation-257:
But you cannot, or not be able to, swim according to the understanding of your buddies here.
So you have to be chocolate “brown floaters” then right there in your not-so-comfort zone.
Tot ons weer mekaar ‘sien’.
14 Feb 2012, 17:55 pm
I am the sophisticated S.African that cannot be handled.
Gee ons die ware feite, klein seuntjie-in-’n-mandtjie en probeer tog die feite beantwoord.
Verstaan jy mooi nou of het jy iemand om dit vir jou te verduidelik?
Kultuur, ‘n ware Suid Afrikaanse een is belangrik.
14 Feb 2012, 17:56 pm
A while ago, EP rugby Union was a viable operation
In 1996, caders of the ancyl took over and in no time ran it to the ground. Then they took a rest
The Super Rugby is a good source of revenue, the looters smelled it and want their share, which they will get!
ANZAR stance is against it due to sure losses to incure for the already stretched financial Super Rugby structure but if the farce will take place they may try to look for a Argies replacing the SAs teams, it’s a possibility
14 Feb 2012, 17:58 pm
In truth I am quite insane. This does not make me stupid. It only means I have the ability to argue incoherently about issues that go completely off topic. You are all so gullible.
14 Feb 2012, 17:58 pm
@ET.-260:
Looks like Leeds are being thrown to the Wolves.
14 Feb 2012, 18:06 pm
Are Glasgow Rangers the Lions of the North.
14 Feb 2012, 18:09 pm
In summary, the Super 16 it will be. But only in 2016.
The Kings will have to wait a wee while yet.
14 Feb 2012, 18:10 pm
ET
No joking you’re quite insane.
In fact you’re barking mad.
14 Feb 2012, 18:29 pm
@ET-269:
The utterly unique E. and the T. says
Clearly this is only the most recent name-stealer humbly addressing you for he has tremendous pity for the beatings you have taken over such a long period now.
I do commend his being quite even-handed for both sides of the aisle.
Needless to say I know who he is and has had a number of AKAs, already
I could suggest that he joins me in handling the louts but then we will kill this site in a matter of days.
Also I do not have the time
@I Am A Stormer-Moffie-273:
Sorry for your stunning disappointment but as always you never are quite awake from you slumbering life of nothing but making money.
14 Feb 2012, 18:34 pm
@ET.-274: the work of gunther the pink mavericks bunny?
14 Feb 2012, 18:37 pm
@Hondo-268: hoe oud is jy seuntjie?
14 Feb 2012, 18:40 pm
how can the keo boys run a website where you can use your fellow bloggers nicks?
14 Feb 2012, 18:41 pm
@clm-275:
No he is totally incapable.
Someone truly much smarter than the Cun.t(her) will ever be.
14 Feb 2012, 18:50 pm
hey ET, am about to take a dip right now, 15 quick laps and i’m off to some revelry
14 Feb 2012, 18:53 pm
As I see, Cheeky Kings are 0-40 at HT.
14 Feb 2012, 18:57 pm
Likely Crusaders will play junior reserves versus them.
14 Feb 2012, 18:57 pm
Nils: behind the Sharks, the Lions are favourites to win the Saffa conference!
Currie Cup pedigree!
14 Feb 2012, 19:04 pm
@Transformation-282: oh, so Pink Bulls are in danger now?
14 Feb 2012, 19:05 pm
0-47. Yesterday watched NZ v Japan of WC1995, it was 77-0 at HT and a ton before an hour. Not that far away today.
14 Feb 2012, 19:08 pm
0-52. Cheeky Rubble Kings
14 Feb 2012, 19:11 pm
0-54. Lions roar.
Later gents.
14 Feb 2012, 19:15 pm
@Transformation-282: your Kings are being moered …….. right now by the Currie cup champions.
14 Feb 2012, 19:23 pm
Sheesh who is stealing my name!
14 Feb 2012, 19:54 pm
@ET.-274:
But you’re still barking mad.
That hasn’t changed.
14 Feb 2012, 20:00 pm
One thing I know is that the imposter can’t be a boertjie…. they are not that clever between the ears.
14 Feb 2012, 20:07 pm
@ET.-274:
That’s the ET we know.
The other ET’s command of English and sentence construction is a lot better than yours.
14 Feb 2012, 20:14 pm
This is irritating
14 Feb 2012, 20:21 pm
Absolutely.I wonder now whether this is the real IAAS.I wonder about myself now.
14 Feb 2012, 20:25 pm
@allblacksaregods-293: so do we
14 Feb 2012, 20:27 pm
i’m glad some sanity has prevailed and kings told in no uncertain terms that they’ll not be included next season.
but what makes everyone think that they’ll be included in 2016? unless the kings become better than they currently are theres no justification for letting them entry.
come negotiating time for the 2016 i still dont think Kings should get in. why should SA get a 6th team? how will this make super rugby better? it wont even make SA rugby better.
all this sabre rattling is immature
14 Feb 2012, 20:31 pm
Lions 88-0 Kings
)
Stormers 38 – 13 Kings
Bulls 16 – 12 Kings
Cheetahs 33 – 20 Kings
Sharks ( I going out on limb here, and predicting they are going to win by a large margin
Kings dont belong in Super Rugby yet!!! Enough Said!!
14 Feb 2012, 20:33 pm
If I know who this nic stealer is I will tear him limb from limb and feed him through my wood chipper
14 Feb 2012, 20:35 pm
@allblacksaregods-293:
Well I won’t die wondering.
About you behaving like a ********, that is.
14 Feb 2012, 20:38 pm
sorry about the shorthand.
******** actually spelt d.i.c.k.h.e.a.d
14 Feb 2012, 20:38 pm
Must be fancy a chipper you got
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 » Show All
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.