Kings deserve Super Rugby
7 Mar 2012
MARK KEOHANE, writing in Business Day Sport Monthly, says the Eastern Cape franchise doesn’t need to justify its place in next year’s competition.
It never ceases to amaze me how often the South African Rugby Union gets it wrong. What should have been a monumental announcement – that the Kings would play in Super Rugby from 2013 – turned into a debate of uncertainty as to whether or not South Africa would lose a franchise or convince New Zealand and Australia to accommodate a sixth South African team.
The wizards at Saru once again want it both ways.
The Kings deserve to be in Super Rugby, purely by virtue of promises made to the South African government when bidding to host the 2011 and 2015 Rugby World Cups. This time there was no escape, but instead of fronting the situation and making a decision on who falls out, the clever guys went cap in hand to Australia and New Zealand pleading for the expansion of the tournament.
The layman argument that the Kings don’t deserve to be in the competition is flawed on so many levels, as well as being an incredibly ignorant view.
The Kings are as deserving as any team and the rugby public forgets that the Lions and Cheetahs hardly won for 10 years and when the two sides combined as the Cats the results were as diabolical. The Kings can’t be a greater embarrassment than the 17 successive Lions defeats, as just one statistic.
The rugby argument aside, the decision to accommodate the region is an ethical one because a promise was made.
To recap for those suffering amnesia, Saru only stood a chance of hosting the 2011 World Cup if the government gave a financial guarantee and an endorsement. It was at a time when the sports ministry was fed up with the lack of transformation and continued neglect of rugby in the Eastern Cape.
Saru’s representatives promised a new beginning for the region and invested nearly R12-million in forming the Southern Spears, arranging friendly matches and promoting the region’s entry into Super Rugby in 2011. Then South Africa botched the bid, New Zealand struck a deal with Ireland and the rugby authorities backtracked on their enthusiasm for the region.
There was apparently too much division between Border, Eastern Province and South Western Districts. There was misadministration, claims of corruption and the convenient decision was that there was no way Saru could invest further in an Eastern Cape Super Rugby region. Saru then paid nearly R10-million to close down the region.
Very little happened between World Cup bids and when word was that South Africa was a guarantee to host 2015, again the emotional carrot of the Eastern Cape was dangled. Again it fell flat when South Africa cocked up in Dublin.
Only this time things were changing in the Eastern Cape. Cheeky Watson had been elected president and he declared that they would get their house in order and would be competitive in 2013.
He signed former Stormers and Ulster coach Alan Solomons and EP went from being the bunny boys to Currie Cup First Division champions in 2010 and runners-up in 2011. Support for the promotion-relegation match exceeded 40 000 and there were very good crowds for pre-season friendlies against the existing Super Rugby franchises.
The Kings, playing without a team sponsor, hammered the Bulls in a 2011 warm-up but the win was dismissed as the Bulls fielded an inexperienced side. Either way the Kings would be damned.
But in Watson and Solomons they have two rugby men who won’t give up and are prepared to put in the hours. The Kings became competitive with a limited squad because without Saru confirming their entry into the competition in 2013 it was impossible to attract top players.
The aim, with moderate talent, was to get the interest and the public responded. When EP hosted a Springbok Test against the All Blacks in 2011 the match was a sellout.
The region is ready to play and those who use the team’s performances in the First Division as a yardstick miss the point that the bulk of the 2013 squad will be imported from other regions and overseas. Transformation will be a big part of the Kings, but what will make them a success story is if they win and not how many black players start each match.
Solomons initiated a campaign of keeping the players home and bringing them home, given there were more than 40 players born and schooled in the Eastern Cape playing elsewhere.
The argument that the Kings had to earn the right through the Currie Cup has no merit. The need to have the Eastern Cape as a stronghold and growth point in South African rugby takes priority.
It was a similar situation to when the Natal Rugby Union couldn’t win a place in the six-team Currie Cup A division in the amateur era. A compromise between Natal and the national governing body was to expand the Currie Cup to eight teams and accommodate the Banana Boys, as they were then called.
Critics of the Kings’ entry have short memories. Natal built and bought a potent team and within a decade became the leading province in South Africa. With the right people, finance and commitment anything is possible.
Saru should have announced officially two years ago that the Kings would play in 2013, but they held back in the hope of an expanded competition. In the end Sanzar forced a decision out of them.
The Kings are there and that should not be a debate. A promise has finally been honoured and the embarrassment is in how long it took Saru’s administration to confirm it all … not in what the Kings will produce in the competition.
– This article appears in the March issue of Business Day Sport Monthly, which is on sale now at selected outlets. The April issue will be distributed FREE with Business Day newspaper on Friday, 23 March.
225 Comments
7 Mar 2012, 09:08 am
The Kings deserve Jack!! Prove something in the CC then they can!! Free ride Bulls hit!!
7 Mar 2012, 09:10 am
Keo Are you crazy! What political **** is this!
7 Mar 2012, 09:11 am
Keo serving his clients again.
So many fallacies in this article.
“Hammered a Bulls team in 2011.” Hehe.
I happened to be at that game. Boland would have “hammered” that “Bulls” team even further.
That wasn’t even a Currie Cup level team. It was Vodacom Cup level at best.
7 Mar 2012, 09:12 am
Natal still did it through the CC! Which the Kings can do too!!
7 Mar 2012, 09:14 am
“The Kings can’t be a greater embarrassment than the 17 successive Lions defeats, as just one statistic.”
Uhm i think they can….they cant even get into the Currie Cup. Even Boland are more deserving than the Kings. They whipped them in the 1st division final.
Keo What are you smoking pal…..must be some good ish!
7 Mar 2012, 09:15 am
Come on and have a free ride. These mutts can’t even make it into the Currie Cup. Lawd help us.
7 Mar 2012, 09:16 am
Looks like Keo’s hits are down.
This should remedy situation.
7 Mar 2012, 09:17 am
hehe sharkies did have to ‘negotiate’ their way into the cc a-division…tis so…
7 Mar 2012, 09:20 am
“Transformation will be a big part of the Kings” Transie i didnt know you play rugby professional boet! Are you a speedy winger? lol
7 Mar 2012, 09:21 am
haha keo what a headline !
7 Mar 2012, 09:22 am
@Dawn(Dawn)-7: Good observation Dawn.
7 Mar 2012, 09:25 am
@Sasuke(Sasuke)-9:
no, he’s their player 23.
a legend of the game.
7 Mar 2012, 09:25 am
Wow, and it’s not even April the 1st.
Am I wrong or are the majority of players in the Kings starting lineup white, even if you exclude Watson?
7 Mar 2012, 09:25 am
Threads have been averaging 100 posts.
Not good enough.
7 Mar 2012, 09:28 am
I sense a touch of desperation in this article.
Not a good look Keo.
Stop trying to crawl up your clients nought, if you just step back and view this thing objectively you’ll see that their inlusion at this stage would be a massive error.
7 Mar 2012, 09:30 am
“Deserve” is such a nebulous term. They certainly don’t merit super rugby.
7 Mar 2012, 09:31 am
So if the Kings make it into Super Rugby, will they buy better players similar to what the Rebels have done? The fact that their rugby is not up to standard has nothing to do with there status as deserving. Anyone can go out and buy 7 or 8 players that can make all the difference for the first couple of seasons. Also, a number of fringe players from other unions will move there as the will be guaranteed more game time. With this said, Saru need to ensure the appropriate structures are put in place to breed local players that will stick around. They have a chance of making a huge success out of this exercise and driving transformation to the point the government want.
7 Mar 2012, 09:31 am
Rubbish keo, they deserve diddelyfukkensquat.
No one “deserves” anything without proving their worth. You point at the Lions losing streak, but you forget to mention that the Bulls had a similar losing streak. You speak of the turn-out at the promotion-relegation match but you conveniently omit the result of that match. You speak of Natal’s rise to the CC first division and their subsequent successes, and in the next breath you claim that the Eastern Cape are somehow exempt from this route and should be shoehorned straight into the top.
Is it because they’re a political trump card and we’re all held to ransom?
Or is it because your big client and his Pappy need Super Rugby for you to get a return on investment?
Either way, you are talking straight from your arsehole.
7 Mar 2012, 09:34 am
@Dawn(Dawn)-7:
Pissant should revamp his awfully designed website (damn that rat logo is ugly) and write more articles on a regular basis. Keo is more of a spin-docter than a sports journo. He coughs up politically motivated bull more often than not.
7 Mar 2012, 09:36 am
Agjinnevok
This sort of thing makes me want to kots on a Kings jersey.
7 Mar 2012, 09:38 am
to be fair, the fact that Ellis has been so empty these past couple of weeks even though the Lions have a pretty decent side is a real concern.
PE would definately have a full house.
that is definately something to think about, come on the gautengers get out there and start supporting your side at ellis.
7 Mar 2012, 09:38 am
And the day was going so well .
7 Mar 2012, 09:38 am
Typical South African ‘sense of entitlement’
Eish….we demand….
7 Mar 2012, 09:40 am
Oh dear where to start…
For a moment I want to forget all about the actual argument to include the Kings and just concentrate on the reasoning behind all this as pointed out in the article.
It starts off with Mark saying they ‘deserve’ it because a ‘promise’ was made.
Holy **** Mark, you highlighted the merits of this promise yourself! The promise was not made with the game of rugby’s best interests at heart, but for self-serving agendas!
How can any rational man hold this promise up as a reason to now give them this franchise?
It was never a rugby decision or carrot – it was a political one.
You then go onto highlighting the failures of current Super Rugby franchises as a reason how the Kings would be no worse (than losing all games in a season). Well of course you cannot get worse than that, apart from losing them by bigger margins!
In no way do you logically weight up the relative strength of the region in rugby terms as a argument to those already in there but also ****. The premise that the Kings stand a good (or as this article seem to suggest better) chance of being an improvement on the Lions and Cheetahs given time (and money) is also a desperate attempt to make a point with no real reasoning.
Highlighting wins in warm-up games (which writers on this site continually remind us mean nothing) and selling out a Springbok vs. All Blacks test (which will sell out in any stadium in the world) is hardly good reasoning.
SWD is all but bankrupt, who the hell knows what is going on in Border? The Kings (the pillar of strength of this franchise) cannot progress to the Currie Cup proper.
You mention transformation (what this promise was based on and what you highlight as the primary reason they should be included) but in the same breath mention that the majority of this squad will be made up from players currently outside the region.
I have followed the Kings/Spears situation very closely since it all started, not once, and specifically in recent times, have I seen any program or project (even just as a draft) to highlight how a franchise in the region will benefit transformation. If there is such a roadmap, forgive my ignorance but I will also love to see it.
For the last 2 years I had to read from you and others on this site how we simply cannot allow mediocrity in our rugby anymore. How a non-rugby decision (and ironically according to most on here) a political decision 4 years ago all but destroyed the Springbok brand when PDV was appointed over Meyer – and that we should never make that mistake again.
Back to the Kings.
I have backed this region being brought into Super Rugby from 2005 – I still do. If that is at the expense of a current franchise then so be it – BUT IT NEEDS TO BE BASED ON RUGBY DECISIONS!
I have personally wasted kilometers of comment space on this and other blogs on this issue and the one point I always maintained is that the biggest mistake the Spears, and now Kings made/make – is to sell themselves as a brand and potentially successful franchise based primarily on political or transformation reasons!
Sell yourself on rugby reasons first, and the whole world will buy into your brand and idea.
The fact that most black players find themselves in this region is a bonus, a bonus which means that if you properly set up your organisation the transformation aspect of rugby here will take care of itself and in time can be the shining light SA Rugby and government so dearly want – none of these artificial, politically engineered bullshit which has held this country back and still does.
At least McKeever in the days of the Spears offered merit based suggestions and options to SA Rugby and other franchises to be included in Super Rugby like play-off matches.
Sorry Mark – as much as I agree the Kings need to be included in SupeRugby the reasoning you highlight here is exactly why they have failed since 2005. No-one ‘deserves’ anything based on political promises.
7 Mar 2012, 09:40 am
Transformation my ***. Solomons himself said they will be looking for players overseas. Idiots
7 Mar 2012, 09:41 am
@Brigadier Van Zyl(Brigadier Van Zyl)-21:
Yeah, seems winning the currie cup didnt help much. Its pathetic seeing such a empty stadium for a home game. Does a team with that amount of supporters deserve a super rugby team? I dont think so. Kick out the Lions and the cheetahs and forget about the kings. SA only needs 3 teams that will dominate!
7 Mar 2012, 09:41 am
I foresee a hamster wheel thread.
All those Kings posts from January will be re-hashed here once more.
7 Mar 2012, 09:43 am
@Brigadier Van Zyl(Brigadier Van Zyl)-21: Agreed i was expecting much more from the so-called Lions faithful or was that all of them?
7 Mar 2012, 09:44 am
but does super rugby deserve the kings…?
7 Mar 2012, 09:44 am
Not even Reyhan’s deliberate baiting yesterday could generate hits.
7 Mar 2012, 09:47 am
@PissAnt(PissAnt)-24: I can only pray that sense will prevail amongst the Australian and New Zealand contingents and stakeholders in Super rugby, and that ultimately the decision to lose one of the current teams in favour of the Kings is not made.
Mark – How do you reason that the argument for qualification through the Currie Cup does not hold ? Wasn’t this used before ? I think it was 1997. You should remember that. Your beloved WP didn’t play that year because they didn’t make the Currie Cup semi-finals.
Now that it involves a politically motivated decision, devoid of any merit whatsoever, now its not a valid argument ?
Tell me – how many braais have you had with Luke and Cheeky ?
7 Mar 2012, 09:47 am
The Kings deserve to play Super Rugby just as much as a begger deserves R5 from every passing motorist. The only reason they will play is because of politics – certain government officials pushing for them to play, not for any rugby or humanitarian reasons, but their own selfish interests. They Kings is a charity case, they have done absolute nothing to deserve to be playing Super Rugby. The Kings will probably replace either the Cheethas or Lions who have both been very competetive in the Currie Cup. The Kings cant even win the First Division. Sure, they will attract players from other regions, but this is still no guarantee they will be competetive. For me, they first need to prove they can get their own house in order before they deserve to anything.
7 Mar 2012, 09:48 am
@Jeez(Jeez)-26: I wonder whats the problem? Is it the environment around Ellis Park? I havent been there myself but I heard it leaves alot to be desired. I was at Newlands on Saturday and the atmosphere was great. Went early had a bite to eat with my lady friend at Spur, which was packed to capacity with people queing up. Maybe they just need to develop the area around Ellis Park.
7 Mar 2012, 09:52 am
@Sasuke(Sasuke)-33: Newlands is an affluent neighbourhood with leafy streets and trendy hangouts. Doornfontein is a shithole resembling downtown Lagos. No amount of upgrade is going to change this in the next 20 years.
7 Mar 2012, 09:52 am
@PissAnt(PissAnt)-24: Excellently put! (as usual).
I recon we should arrange a “post off” between Morne (Pissant) and Keo (Pissant)
I think you could take him.
Before lunch and with a hangover.
I’ll buy the beers
No Steinlagers. We don’t want to be giving the Kiwi and unfair advantage.
7 Mar 2012, 09:53 am
@Horing(Horing)-32: And if they do attract players from other regions and overseas how long will it take for those players to gel? They need to build a team for about three years and play competitively in the Currie Cup with that team of home grown talent with a few bought players.
7 Mar 2012, 09:55 am
@>^..^< katman(katman)-34: Really? Is it that bad.
7 Mar 2012, 09:55 am
@Sasuke(Sasuke)-33: Boet. You and me need to sit down and have a chat about a few things.
Firstly, stay away fro the Spur. You’ll eat there enough once you have kids. Go somewhere that isn’t child friendly and you can actually hear your partner speak. Unless that’s the whole point of it, of course. In which case you’ll again enjoy the Spur once you are married.
Get it? Got it? Good.
And remember. I’ll be watching you.
7 Mar 2012, 09:56 am
I have to agree with Mark. So the Kings will be there as a politically elected team, and not on merit. We are all awre of the circumstances in this country. My argument is… They ll be replacing one of the Lions or Cheetahs… These two sides have had how many seasons in Super rugby, what have they achieved… The odd victory here and there… No real players came thru to the Springbok ranks from these two teams during this time…It s not really like they gonna be title contenders anytime soon… and SA doesn t have the depth to field 6 teams of Super rugby quality… If it was one of the possible title contenders (Bulls, Stormers, Sharks), then it may have been something… But honestly, Lions and Cheetahs.. come on… give me a break..
7 Mar 2012, 09:58 am
Any Super Rugby franchise operates from the principal that the Union contracts the players who then also play for the Super Rugby franchises. They get paid for both.
Until this happens the Super franchise will be like a travelling circus. Players passing through.
That’s why the CC route is so vital.
You know sometimes Keo, I really wonder.
7 Mar 2012, 10:00 am
And a mercenary crew of white rejects, journeymen and overseas-based players will really take transformation in SA rugby to a whole new level.
What happened to the 200 000 strong black player base? Or was that just political spin?
If they’re to buy a team that is then supposed to inspire the region to greater heights, what makes the Eastern Cape more deserving than, say, Namibia?
And don’t mention “the promise”, because PissAnt has dealt with that rubbish notion pretty decisively.
7 Mar 2012, 10:01 am
Sanzar should tell the sa kings brigade to pisssoff with their politics. They should be told that SA politic’s meddling in sport may not spill over to the super rugby comp. As simple as that and that should be a good enough reason for sanzar to reject a sixth team to be added.
The Lions and Cheetahs (although i believe that they had their chance and deserve to be relegated) can argue that they dont deserve to be relegated, because they might, just like the bulls did, stand a chance to build a winning team in the future. The bulls showed that a bottom of the log team can rebuild and be successful. The Reds did it too for that matter.
That being said, what makes it ‘fair’ to let the lions or cheetahs drop out in favour of the kings?
7 Mar 2012, 10:02 am
@line break(line break)-39: Have you perhaps heard of players like Jaque Fourie, Ricky Januarie, Juan Smith, Heinrich Brussow?
7 Mar 2012, 10:03 am
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-38: LOL Thanks for the life lesson boet!
7 Mar 2012, 10:03 am
@>^..^< katman(katman)-41: “What happened to the 200 000 strong black player base? Or was that just political spin?”
That’s rhetorical, right?
7 Mar 2012, 10:04 am
@Sasuke(Sasuke)-33:
yeah i heard the surrounding area is a bit dodge, but with a full house stadium the atmosphere should take care of itself… inside the stadium at least….
7 Mar 2012, 10:05 am
@Sasuke(Sasuke)-37: Pretty much. To stick with your example, Spur would never in a thousand years open in Doornfontein. Mense wat die lewe smaak don’t hang out there longer than they absolutely have to.
7 Mar 2012, 10:07 am
Hehehe
Just read the title.
It’s gonna be an interesting day on Keo
7 Mar 2012, 10:07 am
@Sasuke(Sasuke)-44: Any time.
Us older folks have a responsibility to you young ‘uns to impart the odd snippet of wisdom.
Trust me about the Spur.
7 Mar 2012, 10:08 am
@line break(line break)-39:
Read my comment number 42
7 Mar 2012, 10:10 am
Kings do not deserve promotion as Boland, Griquas and Pumas are better than them!
Not even talking of Cheetahs, Lions, Bulls, Sharks and Stormers.
Why should they get it, they also does not look like a “black” team , but like a bunch of well paid old has beens(or never beens!)
7 Mar 2012, 10:11 am
We don’t actually have the depth the field 5 teams IMO.
The format should be shrunk, not expanded.
Top 2 or 3 teams in a quick round robin after the domestic competitions have concluded.
Oh. Wait.
The Aussies don’t have a domestic competition. This is it.
Now I see.
7 Mar 2012, 10:11 am
@PissAnt(PissAnt)-24:
What he said Keo. What he said.
7 Mar 2012, 10:11 am
@line break(line break)-39:
I agree about one thing. The sad truth is that we dont have the debth in quality players to have 6 or 5 or 4 teams, but greed plays a big role in rugby these days. If it where true then at least 4 of our 5 teams would make the top half of the log on a regular basis…
7 Mar 2012, 10:14 am
There are only two legit ways for the Kings to get into Super Rugby:
1. Qualify for the 2013 CC premier division by winning the 2012 lower division. Then end amongst the top 5 teams in the 2013 season to become one of the 5 franchises for the 2014 Super15.
2. Play a home-and-away promotion/relegation match against the side that comes last in then 2012 Super15 SA Conference, thereby replacing them in the 2013 Super15 (if they win, of course).
7 Mar 2012, 10:16 am
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-52:
You have my backing on this point.
100%.
7 Mar 2012, 10:17 am
The Kings “deserve” Super rugby?
KAK!
7 Mar 2012, 10:18 am
@>^..^< katman(katman)-55: It’s a nofuckenbrainer, isn’t it?
7 Mar 2012, 10:18 am
We already have 2 useless teams. Why would we want another easy 5 points for the keevies and ozzies?
7 Mar 2012, 10:19 am
Rise the Mighty Elephants!!
Despatch!!
7 Mar 2012, 10:26 am
Where is Transie?
Keo industrial action?
Virtual toyi-toyi?
7 Mar 2012, 10:30 am
@the artist formerly known as gunther(gunther)-61: Isn’t he a steward in the big Xhosa II march today? Tony Erenreich put him in charge of dustbin flipping. It’s a big day for our Trannie.
7 Mar 2012, 10:32 am
@greatest13gerber(greatest13gerber)-60: the only sense you’ve ever typed on this site is when you typed your nic while registering…
7 Mar 2012, 10:32 am
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-20:
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-38:
look, i do have a soft spot for the spur every so often but you really have to pick your spot, time and day of the week wise.
7 Mar 2012, 10:32 am
Ok so as some may already know, Pissant (Morne) has a rugby site called Ruggaworld, where I get all my decent rugby info from, and he posted an article from (Tank Lanning) about audience viewership for the first 2 rounds of Supe Rugby.
Guess which 2 games had the highest viewership??
You guessed it.
Both Stormers games.
So not only do we have the highest average attendance at our stadium, but we have the most people watching our games.
So I don’t want to hear another word about Sharks this and Bulls that as far as “brand” and most supporters” go.
As usual, talking out of your arse.
The fact that the Sharks played in the second game is obviously not the drawcard as the next most popular game is also the Stormers.
For completeness sake, you can view the table here:
http://www.ruggaworld.com/2012/03/07/tv-ratings-drop-in-round-2-of-superugby/
7 Mar 2012, 10:36 am
@>^..^< katman(katman)-55: Agreed. Unfortunately this logical approach, supported by so many is worthless in this country.
South Africa nourishes the weak and punishes the strong through systems like BEE, Employment Equity, Transformation, Affirmative Action, Reverse Apartheid or Theft……whichever you prefer to call it. And ultimately, ALL skin tones will be negatively affected by this.
Thank the Lord that by the time this whole ‘jannie jammergat’ system fails, I will be several thousands of kilometers away. Thank Heavens for that !
7 Mar 2012, 10:38 am
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-65: ya but most of the bulls fans are watching at the shebeens in soweto and mamelodi, aren’t they? so that’s 1 tv to 200 people….
7 Mar 2012, 10:40 am
@JONCK. All those teams that you claim are better than the Kings, already have exposure to Super Rugby. Boland falls under Stormers, Griquas under Cheetahs and Pumas under Lions. And yes, they do benefit from being part of those franchise setups. The EC teams (EP, Border and SWD) are the only unions in SA Rugby NOT to benefit from Super Rugby at present.
SARU has made so many promises to them in the past, but never kept to it. No wonder rugby in that region suffered over the last few years, The fact that EP managed to “rise”, is really admirable.
and by the way, dont be so sure that Griquas and Pumas are better than EP. EP did beat them last year 26 – 16 and 23 – 8…
7 Mar 2012, 10:40 am
I deserve…..
Bullshit.
Life is harsh and then you die.
Keo’s client deserves to play super rugby.
7 Mar 2012, 10:42 am
@Dusky(Dusky)-66: jeezuz, do you have to use every ****** possible opportunity to tell us that you are emmigrating? fukoffandgetdonewithit…
7 Mar 2012, 10:43 am
@Jeez(Jeez)-42:
to compare the history of the bulls to the history of the lions(cats) is deliriously disingenius to say the least.
chalk and cheese my china…chalk and cheese…
7 Mar 2012, 10:43 am
@Dusky(Dusky)-66: You still in SA? Wassa matter? And where are you fleeing to?
7 Mar 2012, 10:44 am
@PissAnt(PissAnt)-24:
Very good post.
7 Mar 2012, 10:45 am
@Alfie7(Alfie7)-68: EP was part of the Sharks but decided to take the money and leave. Their own ******* doing.
7 Mar 2012, 10:47 am
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-52:
exactly my opinion…
cc teams competing for fewer super slots would mean sa is far more competitive… not only in super rugby but try nations and other internationals as well…
we’ve got to reward excellence and be accountable for our failures…
and would mean less wear and tear on all players… and longer careers… and more sustained success in the long term…
but i would like to see the kings getting stronger and really deserving their place…
saru have really fawked this up royally…!
7 Mar 2012, 10:48 am
This rather ridiculous article by KEO essentially highlights why a journo should remain only a journo (and not venture into… I don’t know… let’s say talent representation) if a journo wishes to maintain his integrity and pen credible content.
7 Mar 2012, 10:51 am
Kings already in super rugby, now just a question who to get rid off. My money on the lions…. worse record in super rugby, cant fill a stadium and bankrupt
7 Mar 2012, 10:51 am
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-65:
is this news…?
the pattern is repeated year after year…
7 Mar 2012, 10:56 am
As I predicted
Same old same old
7 Mar 2012, 10:57 am
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-65:
It all them closet boys from North of the Jukskei (and Slummies) that wont admit to, but cannot miss watching a Stormers game that boost the viewing audience
7 Mar 2012, 11:01 am
@ufo(ufo)-78: You and I have known this for some time. Now there are more statistics to prove it though.
Check out the article. The next 2 most popular games, were on at similar times to the most popular 2, so it’s not a “time-slot” issue,.
Also that fact that a Stormers vs a lowly team like the Canes is more popular than the Bulls-Sharks or the other local derbies says a lot.
7 Mar 2012, 11:09 am
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-81:
yeah i know bud…
very interesting reading
7 Mar 2012, 11:13 am
Boddie
I’m in the pharmacy do you want me to pick up some cream for your itchy v@gina?
7 Mar 2012, 11:23 am
@welcome to my life, hugh…(i_love_u_bakkiesbotha)-71:
Why?
7 Mar 2012, 11:24 am
@the artist formerly known as gunther(gunther)-83:
Pray tell,,,, what are you doing in the pharmacy??
Let me suggest…… nah, lets not go there….
7 Mar 2012, 11:34 am
@atlas… that’s only half the story. Sharks had all kinds of issues to play in EL and PE at the time.
Among their reasons was Teichman claiming that playing there was no “home gound” advantage for the team. (That doesnt surprise me at all, because Natal and EP were fierce rivals at the time)
Natal simply wanted to have all the games in Durban. Also, Natal went further and contracted many of the EP guys who made the Sharks setup. Ricardo Loubscher and Deon Kayser to name just two. EP guys who didn’t go to Natal, just simply didnt get any game time.
Besides all of this – The EC region is still without Super Rugby and SARU has been promising them that since mid 2000′s already. So all the Kings really want now and what they will be getting, is what was promised to them. This battle has been going on since before Cheeky already
7 Mar 2012, 11:46 am
@Alfie7(Alfie7)-86:
Thats whats making the whole thing such a bitter pill. WIth the Watsons, its not about giving the EC supporters a team in the super comp they can support, but its about making a political point. Rugby takes a back seat when the Watsons are involved. Problem is after the Spears’ bid failed, they had years to make it a better rugby orientated decision, but they decided to take the easy road and got politicians to put pressure on SARU. Thats not the way it should be.
7 Mar 2012, 12:03 pm
@Jeez, i hear you. But if SARU kept their promises to start with, it wouldnt be necessary for politics to be involved.
Rugby in the EC region suffered, not because of the Watsons, but because of SARU not keeping to their word. At least SARU is now trying to fix their mistake. I hate to see any other franchise suffer, but the time for the Kings is long overdue.
To have no Super Rugby in such a large geographical area with so many players (playing and originating from there) simply does not make sense.
Also, to expect the Kings to play their way into Super Rugby is not fair. Like i mentioned before, the Kings teams (EP, Brdr and SWD) are the only teams which gain nothing from Super Rugby. can you really expect them to now “prove” themselves against sides who have had Super Rugby for so many years? Once the playing field is level, ie Kings have had Super Rugby for a couple of seasons, THEN comparisons can be made.
7 Mar 2012, 12:14 pm
@Jeez(Jeez)-87: this is such a boring topic now and quite frankly i’m sick of it…just destroy the Kings franchise too and let the Lions or whoever comes last keep the spot.
you talk about “rugby reasons”, read the following and tell me that the Spears franchise was destroyed for “rugby reasons” when Oregan Hoskins was using every NEFARIOUS trick in the book to keep the team that had finished last in 2006 from not getting relegated, in the process breaking a contract SARU had signed with the Spears in 2005?
Saru broke company law
19 Sep 2006
SA Rugby has acted “illegally and immorally” by writing up minutes of meetings with the Spears unions before the meetings had actually taken place.
This is according to corporate governance experts contacted by the EP Herald newspaper.
SA Rugby’s managing director Basil Haddad confirmed that he had written up the minutes before the meetings in order to buy a 25.1% shareholding in the three unions, which would have given Saru a 50% shareholding in the Spears, and allowed them to withdraw the franchise from the Super 14.
Professor Kathy Munro, a corporate governance expert at Wits University, told the EP Herald that drawing up minutes before a meeting had taken place was illegal.
“It’s simply bad practice, it’s immoral, not to mention that it’s in contravention of company law, she said. “Then why have an executive committee in the first place? The person who wrote those minutes is placing the company at risk both legally and financially.”
tip of the iceberg
7 Mar 2012, 12:21 pm
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-65:
Hold your horses before popping that champaigne cork, lad.
Firstly, you can ignore all Friday night games, as they can’t compete with the Saturday night timeslot.
Secondly, I watched the Stormers vs Canes, and I’m no Stormer supporter. It was their opening game, on a Saturday night, everyone wanted to see what they look like this year. (And we got our answer).
As for the Sharks vs Stormers on a 7pm Saturday timeslot – put the Bulls up against the Sharks in that timeslot and then we can talk again.
The Cheetahs vs Lions almost outscored the Bulls Cheetahs game. Because we thought it would be competitive, which everyone knew the Bulls game would not be.
That’s probably another reason the Stormers Canes game scored highly – we knew it could go either way…
Let’s compare apples with apples, shall we.
7 Mar 2012, 13:04 pm
I think that its flawed argument by Kohane to imply that the Kings are owed a franchise. Yes, it appears that Cheeky Watson and Solomon’s has done some fantastic work, but don’t forget that it was a transformed administration board that ran the union into the ground with bad administration and corruption. It is only of their own making that EP is in such a mess. Why not give Griquas a franchise then. They have even less money, but they seem to have a competitive team almost every year in the currie cup. Look at some of the fantastic players they have produced over the years and most of colour. Bjorn Basson, Zane Kirchner, Mokohena, Rebenheimer to name a few.
What EP needs to do is invest in a 5 to 10 year plan and invest in their youth system and get them to a level where they are winning the under 21 league at a regular stage. The same applies to the Varsity cup. It is no coincidence that the Stormers have improved in the last couple of years. They had a fantastic under 21 team and varsity cup teams to draw players from.
The theory of importing players to make up the numbers doesn’t always work. My final point is that they need to get their business in order. It is a professional game now. I for one would love to see them succeed, but you can’t just blame SARU.
7 Mar 2012, 13:18 pm
@Bod(bod)-85:
I was getting some cream for your puss filled kisser.
I wasn’t sure if the Itinerant Fruit Pickers Union’s medical aid covered that.
I’ve left it for you at the Edgemead Nightshelter together with a happy box of Suiwersap Red.
7 Mar 2012, 13:25 pm
@Tacitus(Deucalion)-90: I see.
Apples with apples you say.
Ok, so by that am I to infer that not only are some Blue Bulls supporters obviously closet Stormers supporters too, but that they, apart from being fair weather supporters, are mostly Saturdays only as well??
Lets look at the top 4 games, all played on a Saturday, The bulls-Cheetahs game for example. Or the Lions Cheetahs game.
Hoe’d you like them apples?
Fact is, the Stormers get the most viewers. Their stands are consistently the fullest.
I, by the way, watch the other games too, so that is obviously factored into this, but you can’t get away from the facts, no matter how you choose to interpret them.
7 Mar 2012, 13:30 pm
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-93:
I’m glad you bring up the Bulls-Cheetahs game.
The Bulls-Cheetahs game drew almost 700k viewers, compared to the Stormers-Sharks 776k. That’s just a 10% difference.
So going by your logic, the combined viewer support for the Stormers and Sharks is only 10% greater than for the Bulls and Cheetahs combined?
Come now. You’re smarter than that.
7 Mar 2012, 13:35 pm
@Tacitus(Deucalion)-94: Well actually, the common denominator in games 3 & 4 is not in fact the Bulls, but rather the Cheetahs.
So I can believe it.
Not sure where it leaves the Bulls though.
7 Mar 2012, 13:37 pm
Here’s a nice article for you:
Bulls dominate Currie Cup viewership – 11 August 2011
After only four rounds of the 2011 Absa Currie Cup, the Vodacom Blue Bulls are leading the race in SuperSport’s audience ratings, having surpassed the half a million mark (566,832) in their opening encounter against the Sharks in mid-July.
The Bulls also took second, third and fourth position on the viewership log with the next highest figure recorded being the 484,506 audience who viewed the game against DHL Western Province at DHL Newlands Stadium on 30th July.
In third place was the 475,864 viewers who tuned in to watch the Bulls in action against the Golden Lions at Loftus Versfeld on 6th August.
The Vodacom Blue Bulls lowest audience ratings after four weeks was 404,010 (Vodacom Blue Bulls vs Toyota Free State Cheetahs on 23rd July 2011), which was still higher than the best figures for DHL Western Province, GWK Griquas, MTN Golden Lions, Platinum Leopards and Pumas.
According to Repucom, the average audience during live coverage of Vodacom Blue Bulls games is 23.7% higher when compared to the average audience across all Absa Currie Cup games, a stat which Blue Bulls company CEO Barend van Graan is delighted with…
End of article
Give the Bulls a Saturday night game against the Sharks and then we see how the 776k figure stacks up, shall we.
7 Mar 2012, 13:39 pm
@Jeez(Jeez)-84:
are you asking me to do a comparison of the bulls history versus the lions in super rugby..?.. because i can…
7 Mar 2012, 13:42 pm
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-95:
What a silly statement. Which you’ll privately acknowledge, once you’ve given it a moment’s thought.
Try to be honest in your debating style, rather than just saying things to make a quick comeback. It will improve your credibility.
7 Mar 2012, 13:47 pm
@Tacitus(Deucalion)-96: Great article, and it proves my point.
Last year you guys struggled in Super Rugby so your supporters turned to the Currie Cup, which (at the time obviously) you were hoping you’d do well in.
Tell you what: If you can find me official stat that show that the Bulls games averaged higher TV viewers last year than the Stormers I’ll eat my words.
7 Mar 2012, 13:48 pm
@Tacitus(Deucalion)-98: 100
7 Mar 2012, 13:50 pm
@Tacitus(Deucalion)-98: It’s only silly because it contradicts your own defence.
How about this for honesty then:
The two games that the Cheetahs played this year averaged higher viewers than the 2 games that the Bulls played this year.
Fact or fiction?
7 Mar 2012, 13:51 pm
How much are you paid to write such trash Keo? You use your position to influence things, that much has been exposed even by your own big mouth. What of the best thing for South African rugby? Do you not realise that the Cheetahs are a very important part of South African rugby? If they disappear then this will affect our rugby significantly! The Kings will NEVER be successful at Super level. You say they deserve to be in the Super XV, yet they have lost EVERY game they’ve played! But hey, onwards we go with another media spin by Keo, and backing his chum Cheeky Kakson. You disgust me Keo. It’s filth like you that make South Africa what it is today. Always ready to brown-nose to suit yourself. You have no credibility, descency or character.
7 Mar 2012, 13:53 pm
What is going on with the site’s slowness? Is someone sitting on Vrede’s windpipe again?
7 Mar 2012, 13:54 pm
I’ll be reasonable though.
I will concede that the viewer stats support the notion that Saturday afternoon games are more popular than the Friday evening games.
So let’s see at the end of the season then who has the highest average over the season?
Deal?
7 Mar 2012, 13:54 pm
So, to summarize, maak die cheetahs almal kings and give cheeky the money.
7 Mar 2012, 13:55 pm
@Alucard(Alucard)-102:
“The Kings will NEVER be successful at Super level”
Funny, one could say the same about the Bulls a decade ago.
7 Mar 2012, 14:00 pm
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-104:
Hehe. “Reasonable?”
You mean, save yourself the embarressment of having that obvious fact pointed out to you, and thus destroying your ridiculous “Cheetahs have great support” argument.
And the Currie Cup article “proves your point”?
Julius Malema couldn’t make a better argument.
Best extract yourself from this one before you make a bigger fool of yourself.
7 Mar 2012, 14:04 pm
@Michael(mikeybrass)-106: The difference is that Bulls were not a political experiment. They were completely reconstructed by DEVELOPING structures. The Kings have NO emphasis on development. It’s just a typical handout. Remember seveal years ago the nonsense with funding from SARU disappearing? Keep dreaming buddy.
7 Mar 2012, 14:07 pm
@Tacitus(Deucalion)-107: You see, you are assuming that because I represent the facts, that this somehow makes me a fool in the debate.
Fact: The Stormers hold the top 2 slots for most viewers (so far)
There isn’t really an argument here.
You are coming up with all sorts of fanciful explanations for why this doesn’t mean that the Stormers are the most watched team thus far in the competition.
It’s like saying that Microsoft actually buys all of Apple’s products because they are afraid that the Microsoft customers may buy them.
Apple still sells the products.
And you are right, neither you nor Julius could make a better argument.
But my offer still stands.
I’ll even throw in a Steve Hoffmeyer CD on the bet.
Against a 20 song credit on itunes for me.
Think about it.
7 Mar 2012, 14:09 pm
@Michael(mikeybrass)-106:
Shouldn’t you be off deciphering some hyrohlyphs or something?
Rugby is so post-fall-of-the-Roman-Empire, you know.
Maybe in 1000 years or so you could write a dissertation on the fall, rise and fall again of the Mighty Elephants/Southern Spears/EP Kings.
Until then, Emperor Cheeky’s Machiavellian rule is way too raw for you to trouble yourself over it. And the dynasty is only in it’s first generation. King Luke hasn’t even succeeded the throne yet.
7 Mar 2012, 14:14 pm
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-109:
Ok. Not wasting my time on trying to provide the context of the stats to you.
The Stormers have the highest viewership so far. Well done.
And the Lions-Cheetahs game got 100 000 more viewers than the Bulls-Sharks game.
No need to provide context. All perfectly self explanatory…
For those in Slaapstad, it seems.
7 Mar 2012, 14:20 pm
@Michael(mikeybrass)-106: The difference is that the Bulls were an historically strong franchise at a low ebb. The Kings, or their predecessors, never have been. A better comparison would be with the sharks who took a century to win the Currie Cup. Now in the professional age it is all about the quality of the organisation. I hate to agree with Alucard, because his position is usually the opposite of mine in every regard, but I think he is right on this one.
By the way listen to Tac. Anyone whose nic is 2000 years old knows all about dusty old fossils.
7 Mar 2012, 14:24 pm
@Tacitus(Deucalion)-110:
shouldnt it be prince luke then..?..
7 Mar 2012, 14:30 pm
@line break(line break)-39: “No real players came thru to the Springbok ranks….”
You dont follow a lot of rugby, do you? Here is a list of a few recent Springbok players from Bloem
Hendro Scholtz, Freidrich Lombard, CJ van der Linde, Juan Smith, Gerrie Britz, Hanyani Shimange, Michael Claassens, Gurthro Steenkamp, Meyer Bosman, Bevin Fortuin, Kabamba Floors, Jannie du Plessis, Biscmark du Plessis, Barend Pieterse, Adriaan Strauss, Jongi Nokwe, Heinrich Brussow, Wian du Preez, Coenie Oosthuizen, Ashley Johnson.
7 Mar 2012, 14:33 pm
Thank you. But I feel as if I owe you an apolgy. You see, you obviously thought that my posting of facts was subject to you agreeing with them.
I’m sorry if I gave you that idea.
My bad.
7 Mar 2012, 14:38 pm
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-115:
hehehe
very funny
7 Mar 2012, 14:40 pm
@Michael(mikeybrass)-106: Even when the Bulls were at their lowest they produced a few Springboks and were competetive in the Currie Cup. How do you want to compare that to a team that cant win the First Division?
7 Mar 2012, 14:52 pm
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-115:
That the best you can do?
There are of course many quotes relating to the use of statistics out of context. One that applies in this case particularly is:
“An unsophisticated forecaster uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – for support rather than for illumination.”
Stormersboy FACT:
The Cheetahs vs Lions draw 100 000 more TV viewers than the Sharks vs Bulls.
7 Mar 2012, 14:56 pm
Bit of a d ick-swinging contest going on about who has the most viewers? You can tell it’s a Wednesday
7 Mar 2012, 14:57 pm
@Alucard(Alucard)-102: Disagree – they have been highly successful at cricket and so can they be in rugby. Rugby supporters in the Eastern Cape deserve some top rugby. Your prejudice seems to lie with Watson. So what if the OFS or any other province lose their S15 status based on performance. A promise has been made and if anything it is not Keo’s ethics that needs to be questioned but rather SARU. If you are really concerned about developing the game in this country then I suggest you get behind the Kings. I’m proud to say I grew up in the Eastern Cape & I know what their sport means to them. Since living in CT for many years I am a fanatical Stormers supporter but if we went out at the end of the season then so be it.
7 Mar 2012, 14:59 pm
@Atreides(Atreides)-119:
I’m out of time, so can’t swing along any further, for the time being.
Just helping some of the less fortunate to broaden their understanding. But those who don’t want to understand, well,
“Jy kan n perd water toe lei, maar jy kan hom nie maak drink nie.”
7 Mar 2012, 15:00 pm
@Atreides(Atreides)-119: Apparently it si not just about numbers. They want the waistlines of their supporters to be taken into consideration as well.
7 Mar 2012, 15:04 pm
@Alucard(Alucard)-108: Right, I guess the structures being set up by Cheeky and Solomon independently are figments of their imagination.
7 Mar 2012, 15:04 pm
Bulls viewership numbers are only so high because the Pater Familias forces the whole family, including infants and in-laws, to watch from start to finish, including build-up and interview.
7 Mar 2012, 15:06 pm
@Tacitus(Deucalion)-118: No actually it’s not the best I can do.
You see, when I feel that someone isn’t convinced my may arguments, there is a point where i can just say “Tacitus won’t see it my way, in spite of my best efforts”.
I can live with that.
What I haven’t done is resort to cheap ad hominum attacks like you have:
“Slaapstad”
“a bigger fool out of (my)self”
“Julius Malema”
“What a silly statement….”
“Try to be honest in your debating style…”
If anything about this debate has been disappointing, it just that you “went” there.
The facts are not in dispute. Get over it. I put forward facts, you counter with conjecture.
Found those 2011 Super Rugby viewer stats yet?
Still waiting to eat my words.
7 Mar 2012, 15:06 pm
@Tacitus(Deucalion)-110: That’s hyroglyphics to you buddy
Funny, guess you don’t like being reminded of the days your lot were the whipping boys of the Super.
7 Mar 2012, 15:06 pm
*sigh*
if only the lions could do half as much with their prides…
7 Mar 2012, 15:06 pm
@>^..^< katman(katman)-124:
Indeed.
Quite right.
In the immortal words of king luke.
I PAY I ORDER.
7 Mar 2012, 15:08 pm
@the artist formerly known as gunther(gunther)-128:
7 Mar 2012, 15:08 pm
@Horing(Horing)-117: don’t be disingenous, if the Bulls were excluded from Super rugby for 6 years how do you think they’d be able to even attract the talent they do now?
7 Mar 2012, 15:08 pm
@stormer in a teacup(stormer in a teacup)-112: The bottom line is the Bulls were getting their arses whipped consistently. One cannot use the argument of no results as a consequence when it happens to suit their supporters.
7 Mar 2012, 15:10 pm
@Transformation(Transformation)-130:
I thought you were taking light industrial action?
7 Mar 2012, 15:10 pm
@Transformation(Transformation)-130: Exactly.
Anyways, it wasn’t exactly hard to be a Bok in Viljoen’s days.
How soon people forget that the Eastern Cape made the Super competition one year.
Context is king.
Kings for Super
7 Mar 2012, 15:10 pm
@the artist formerly known as gunther(gunther)-132: The Bulls know all about light in their away jersey *giggles*
7 Mar 2012, 15:13 pm
@Michael(mikeybrass)-131: True, the Bulls did set new records for Super Kakness, but they pulled themselves around. Nobody else did it for them. If the Kings can even surpass Griquas there may be something to work with. Until then….
7 Mar 2012, 15:14 pm
@Transformation(Transformation)-130: Done marching? Did you impress Tony E with your bin tipping skills? I’m ambivalent on the labour brokering business, but I’ve got your back on the e-tolling. Amandla.
7 Mar 2012, 15:15 pm
@Michael(mikeybrass)-133: Wow, I have forgotten. What year was that?
7 Mar 2012, 15:16 pm
@Michael(mikeybrass)-123: don’t waste your breath mikey, nothing you say will change the minds of some of the okes here. if it involves cheeky watson the reactionaries dig their heels in.
7 Mar 2012, 15:19 pm
@Michael(mikeybrass)-134:
if you are going to giggle.
then make sure you have something to giggle about.
*mikey*
7 Mar 2012, 15:20 pm
@the artist formerly known as gunther(gunther)-132: me?
i allowed my sub-ordinates to go, that’s my contribution to the struggle of the working class.
7 Mar 2012, 15:20 pm
@the artist formerly known as gunther(gunther)-139: Unless you’ve just hit the bong. Then the odd unprovoked giggle is 100% acceptable.
7 Mar 2012, 15:23 pm
When Nelie Smith coached EP a few seasons ago, EP regularly beat teams like the cheetahs, Bulls, Province and the Sharks …. then A Coetzee took over and EP fell to 14th in the Currie Cup …. so actually A Coetzee f*cked up EP Rugby and therefor the Stormers should drop out of Super Rugby! farking quota coaches!
7 Mar 2012, 15:24 pm
@Michael(mikeybrass)-131:
sometimes you talk kak micheal and sometimes you don’t. i would like to determine whether tihis is one or the other of such times. so then, please qualify your statement when you say the bulls were ‘getting their arses whipped cconsistently’.
please give a more specific definition to the term ‘getting one’s arse whipped consistently’..?
is it by number of losses?
or number of log placings over time?
does it derive its value by a relative comparison to other teams and their historical experience of whipping or non-whipping?
because i think this might be one time where you are talking more kaka than less….
7 Mar 2012, 15:27 pm
@stormer in a teacup(stormer in a teacup)-135: Griquas who make up half of the Cheetahs Super Rugby squad? do you think the likes of Riaan Viljoen, Sarel Pretorius, Raubenheimer, Barry Geel, Naas Olivier etc if there was no promise of Super rugby game time or salaries?
7 Mar 2012, 15:27 pm
@stormer in a teacup(stormer in a teacup)-137:
super 10 in 1994
7 Mar 2012, 15:28 pm
Besides hot air and preconceived prejudice, none of you sods have said anything worthwhile to counter Keo’s argument.
7 Mar 2012, 15:29 pm
@stormer in a teacup(stormer in a teacup)-137:
played 4, lost 4, zero bonus points, zero log points….
7 Mar 2012, 15:31 pm
@welcome to my life, hugh…(i_love_u_bakkiesbotha)-147: Cheers.
7 Mar 2012, 15:39 pm
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-125:
See, your holier-than-thou attitude would come across a bit more believably if you hadn’t started it all off with this little gem:
Start Quote:
“Guess which 2 games had the highest viewership??
You guessed it. Both Stormers games.
So I don’t want to hear another word about Sharks this and Bulls that as far as “brand” and most supporters” go. As usual, talking out of your arse.”
End Quote
So far from just presenting the facts, and letting people draw their own conclusions from it, as you are trying to portray your efforts now, you in truth went and interpreted the “facts” in your own special way, using them:
” as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – for support rather than for illumination”
To draw conclusions from stats, context and interpretation is required. Sadly, you chose to look at the figures in isolation, because it supported your the argument you wanted to make. And as soon as you did that so eloquently in your original post, you went beyond just posting the facts, thus opening yourself up to correction.
So can the feigned outrage and take it like a man.
7 Mar 2012, 15:39 pm
@welcome to my life, hugh…(i_love_u_bakkiesbotha)-143:
Pos Name Pld W D L F A +/- BP Pts
12 Bulls 11 0 0 11 232 500 -268 1 1
The Bulls were considered one of the worst teams in the Super 14 competition, finishing last or second to last for five consecutive seasons from 1998-2003. In 2002, they became the first team ever to go through an entire Super Rugby season without winning a single game.
7 Mar 2012, 15:40 pm
Once Cheeky Pty Ltd gets their slice of the pie, I hope there is still change left to spend on real development and transformation. But I guess that wount be priority in the short term. First need to adequately address that bottom line of Cheeky Pty Ltd.
7 Mar 2012, 15:40 pm
No Keo, they don’t deserve to play super rugby, nobody deserves the right to play super rugby, you have to EARN it!!!! Geddit? If …. IF (that’s a BIG if) they can prove themselves as Currie Cup title contenders, i.e. semi-finalists them maybe, just maybe they should be considered to play in the super 15. That’s life I’m afraid, nothing is free … At times you can write brilliant articles, this one however, comes straight from you a$$
7 Mar 2012, 15:41 pm
How about a structure like this….
Cheetahs union…. feeder union to the 3 bigger unions(they send all their better players to Bulls, Stormers and Sharks….it s happening now anyway… Most Grey kids dont end up playing there
Kings… rugby institution for the previously disadvantaged .. they get to play every year..
Lions and Cheetahs can rotate every second year, cos they both **** anyway..
We end up having 3 very strong teams almost always challenging for the title…SA conference becomes less arduous for our players… Transformation box is ticked, and we may even end up fast tracking some players of colour to the Bok team…
SA is ultimately the winner… Oh, and cheetahs fans, the Lions may be bankcrupt soon, then u guys can have that No. 4 spot all to yourselves…
7 Mar 2012, 15:41 pm
@welcome to my life, hugh…(i_love_u_bakkiesbotha)-143:
Pos Name Pld W D L F A +/- BP Pts
12 Bulls 11 0 0 11 232 500 -268 1 1
The Bulls were considered one of the worst teams in the Super 14 competition, finishing last or second to last for five consecutive seasons from 1998-2003. In 2002, they became the first team ever to go through an entire Super Rugby season without winning a single game.
7 Mar 2012, 15:41 pm
Who-ever gets relegated if anyone:…Should SUE the living **** out of SARU….wakey wakey SARU…you have litigation coming to you like a bad shitstorm!!!! The next thing we’ll hear is that SARU is insolvent….
7 Mar 2012, 15:43 pm
@Transformation(Transformation)-154: True, no bollies there….Keo is ravelling in the oppertunity for the Lings to play as his pockets will be properly lighned with blood money…
7 Mar 2012, 15:44 pm
@BWA(Dusktill)-142: I think you were trying to demonstrate to the world that imbeciles can type in english… well done. I watched a few programmes about how you can get apes to use a keyboard to communicate. In both these cases we can quite clearly see that it is possible
7 Mar 2012, 15:45 pm
@Horing(Horing)-151: The South Eastern Cape franchise is not Cheeky’s brainchild, he was nowhere near EP Rugby management when the three unions bid for a franchise in 2005.
if you’re playing to the gallery of the verkrampte then gaan aan
7 Mar 2012, 15:47 pm
@Horing(Horing)-114: from bloem or born in bloem?
7 Mar 2012, 15:48 pm
@Transformation(Transformation)-150:
now do the same for the lions/cat/cheetahs, transie.
and when done please tell me if the bulls were still a ‘consistent’ team in getting their ‘arses whipped’.
its easy to make numbers look good, hey…
7 Mar 2012, 15:48 pm
@XhosaKid(XhosaKid)-146: Rubbish. He has been shown up good and proper in at least 30 posts here. But I guess you’re also of the “deserve” school of thought.
7 Mar 2012, 15:48 pm
shaun if you have any complaints email me at : 2955850@uwc.ac.za or pinkkisses069@gmail.com
7 Mar 2012, 15:48 pm
@Stormtrooper(Stormtrooper)-120:
an excellent point you make…
ep cricket had not won a single trophy in over a hundred years…
then kepler came back from aus and joined the province…
and within 3 years they were the one-day and four-day champions in the country…
amazing what can be done with the right personnel in place with the right motivation and drive…
food for thought…
7 Mar 2012, 15:49 pm
@Transformation(Transformation)-140:
I’m sure the shelf packers enjoyed their day out.
boerie roll, t-shirt cool drink.
@>^..^< katman(katman)-141:
our mikey wouldn’t know a bong from a cockpump.
7 Mar 2012, 15:49 pm
@Transformation(Transformation)-150: Don’t remind Tac of the dark dark days….
7 Mar 2012, 15:49 pm
South Africa having a sixth team is total BS. What is this sixth team suppose to do? Compete with the Lions & Cheetahs for the wooden spoon and strain the Sharks/Stormers/Bulls with more games/injuries within the conference?
If SA has quality surplus players (which they don’t really have), establish a fourth conference in the US and reinforce the American teams with surplus SA/NZ as well as maybe some Argie & islands players. Super rugby sits perfectly on the American sporting calendar to make inroads in this part of the world. The NFL Superbowl happens early February which concludes American football and Americans are stuck with indoor Ice Hockey & Basketball till April when baseball starts (and baseball with its 165 games per season usually starts slow – interest picks up when the season moves deeper) Some big US mild winter cities (like Los Angeles, San Antonio, Memphis, Las Vegas, Portland, etc) do not have NFL teams which may give them more reason to embrace an outdoor contact sport team. And the surplus of huge NFL and college football stadiums should be very happy to stage additional events that generate income.
Super Rugby anyway seems to be driven by television. More games in another timezone will almost give you 24 hours of game after game over weekends. Looking at how poorly some S15 matches are attended within SA, NZ & OZ, you may just see larger attendances in the US!
7 Mar 2012, 15:49 pm
@PieterJordaan(PieterJordaan)-156: i’m not concerned about Keo’s motives.
7 Mar 2012, 15:50 pm
@Tacitus(Deucalion)-149: And you took that to mean specifically that I was talking to you???
Again, not sure how I created that impression.
But the facts support my argument pretty well. You’ve given me nothing supported by any empirical evidence other than your opinion that for some or other reason the Bulls guys were also watching the Stormers to support whatever point it was you were trying to make. I’m not sure what it was quite frankly, it seems to me that you just can’t bear the thought that more people support the Stormers than the Bulls.
Please supply me with facts to the contrary. I’ve given you two pieces of evidence: Stadium attendance and viewer stats.
I don’t see how those facts support the opposite opinion.
I know I’m not going to convince you. You don’t think logically when it comes to the Bulls. This was a comment for all the bloggers out there who love to throw out unsupported statements. If you feel that you are one of them, well I can’t stop you.
Ironically if the post was directed at you then I wouldn’t have put that statement in it. I try and shape my message according to the recipient, and in your case I usually try and keep it respectable. Hence my (not feigned) indignation.
Take it or leave it.
7 Mar 2012, 15:50 pm
@Transformation(Transformation)-154:
ok, you force the point, thank you for the info, transie.
are the bulls still considered sonsistent when measured against the lions/cats?
or will they then be considered a somewhat less consistent team at getting their arses whipped?
7 Mar 2012, 15:51 pm
@Transformation(Transformation)-167: How ever pure they are…?
7 Mar 2012, 15:51 pm
@the artist formerly known as gunther(gunther)-164: I believe some models are interchangeable.
7 Mar 2012, 15:55 pm
@welcome to my life, hugh…(i_love_u_bakkiesbotha)-160: when some says “don’t forget, even the bulls were beaten consistently for a number of years” it is not to make a comparison to let’s say the lions or cheetahs. the point is, continued participation in super rugby – exposure, sponsors (basically money) – and good structure can in some instances reap success.
don’t be defensive. quoting other people’s kak records won’y minimise your own
7 Mar 2012, 15:56 pm
@Transformation(Transformation)-154:
in the history of the competition the lions/cats have come last of second to last a total of 9 out of a possible 16 times….does this make the bulls inconsistent relative to the lions/cats..?… or just poorly consistent (i.e. inconsistent)..?.
7 Mar 2012, 15:57 pm
@>^..^< katman(katman)-171:
7 Mar 2012, 16:00 pm
Anyway, out for the arvie
Cheers all.
7 Mar 2012, 16:00 pm
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-168: are you disputing that the Bulls are the Man Yoo of rugby?
7 Mar 2012, 16:01 pm
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-175:
enjoy the tease without the slease.
7 Mar 2012, 16:04 pm
@stormersboy(stormersboy)-168:
Hehe.
Who it was directed at has not the slightest thing to do with whether the conclusions had merit or not.
If your statements are questionable – and amount to “fighting talk” in the way they were articulated – then who cares who you directed it at? Anyone is free to respond.
You’re waffling now, and you know it.
7 Mar 2012, 16:07 pm
@Transformation(Transformation)-172:
the stormers have played 180 games winning 89, losing 86 and drawing 5.
the bull have played 195 winning 92, losing 96 and drawing 7
can we say these teams are consistently average over time..?…
even though one has three super titles and the other has none..?..
7 Mar 2012, 16:10 pm
@XhosaKid(XhosaKid)-146:
Let me direct you to post 24.
It is most worthwhile.
7 Mar 2012, 16:12 pm
@>^..^< katman(katman)-161: Nope, they don’t deserve it, they must get it.
7 Mar 2012, 16:20 pm
@Transformation(Transformation)-172:
in 1996 the stormers played 11, won 3, drew 1 and lost 7
in 1997 the were farking relegated…finito…nada…zip….
in 1998 the stormers played 11, won 3 drew 0 and lost 8
is it appropriate to say they were consistently getting their arses kicked..?..
7 Mar 2012, 16:20 pm
@XhosaKid(XhosaKid)-181: What does that even mean?
7 Mar 2012, 16:20 pm
@John Galt(John Galt)-180: Been down that road before, 2001 both EP and Border cricket were broke and bankrupt as church mouses, the University of Port Elizabeth cricket was none existent. Then the Warriors franchise was formed with professional administrators, today the Warriors are probably the best provincial franchise in the world.
During the dark days of the late 90′s and early 00′s, Border and EP were leaking all the talent out to the likes of Lions, WP, Dolphins, now every youngster’s that plays and dreams of playing for the Proteas, knows which is the franchise to join, even the likes of Kallis went to join the Warriors in the Eastern Cape for a season or two, which would never have happened.
7 Mar 2012, 16:21 pm
@>^..^< katman(katman)-183: They must get it.
7 Mar 2012, 16:23 pm
Great article Keo, I agree with you 100%
7 Mar 2012, 16:29 pm
@BWA(Dusktill)-162: Yes the deal young man.. we have an idea of where you live and in that respect it is a matter of finding the local twat.. I understand that this could be difficult because there are so many where you live. Now there has to be moments where forget where you are and start bragging about your exploits on Keo and then someone will arrive here on Keo and I identify you.. and then you will have to watch your back for the rest of your life… Now that may happen any day so start panicking.. I would not trust your closest friends if I were you
I remember: I am connected… One phone call
7 Mar 2012, 16:29 pm
@welcome to my life, hugh…(i_love_u_bakkiesbotha)-182: hahahaha clearly this vexes you
7 Mar 2012, 16:31 pm
Julle lol weer met Tacitus
7 Mar 2012, 16:35 pm
@XhosaKid(XhosaKid)-185: From the man who was just lamenting the lack of substance in the other side of the argument.
7 Mar 2012, 16:36 pm
@PatrickC(PatrickC)-186: Patrick Craven, is that you?
7 Mar 2012, 16:37 pm
@Dawn(Dawn)-189: Tacitus LOL nie, punt.
7 Mar 2012, 16:37 pm
@XhosaKid(XhosaKid)-185: don’t bother, you will never get anything honest from most lions supporters because they know in 2006 they dodged a bullet as they were slated for relegation up until they called up their favour from Regan Hoskins! now 6 years later, the same lions are STILL being talked about in relegation circles and they are hellbent on fudging the whole discussion and make it about politics/races/quotas/200 000 black players etc.
what they won’t talk about his how in the past 6 years they have gone NOWHERE instead just being a financial blackhole!
talking about ENTITLEMENT!!!!
Loffie: Spears fiasco never rattled us
17 Nov 2006
Lions coach Eugene Elloff says the Spears saga had no bearing on their preparation for the Vodacom Super 14.
The Southern Cape franchise were involved in a protracted battle with Saru and SA Rugby (Saru’s commercial arm) over their participation in the regional tournament, until they abandoned their legal action yesterday.
The Lions were the franchise standing to lose out had the Spears been successful and, as the lowest placed South African team, would have been relegated from tournament.
While Elloff conceded that relegation had been a reality that he had to deal with daily, he said it never affected his team’s preparation.
“We were never burdened by the whole Spears saga,” Eloff told keo.co.za. “While everything was going on around us we went ahead with our preparation as usual and this debacle didn’t affect my team in the slightest.
“I am a rugby coach not a politician and my players focus on their games and not the political sideshows,” he added.
Asked what the consequences of a Spears victory would have meant for the Johannesburg-based franchise, Eloff was adamant that they would have taken it on the chin.
“At the moment this team is so motivated as a result of the way they finished off the Currie Cup that it wouldn’t have rocked the boat at all.
“We would have re-focussed our attention on preparing for next year’s Currie Cup and while it would be stupid to think that they [the players] would not have been disappointed, everyone here knows we are working towards a goal of being the best South African team.”
Eloff was reluctant to comment on what he thought of how the Spears had conducted themselves throughout the saga and added that he doubted his players would’ve been open to any player-sharing proposal from the Spears.
The Lions have routinely delivered poor performances in Super Rugby, but Eloff insisted that the Spears decision would not place them under any further pressure to prove that they could compete with the best teams in the southern hemisphere.
“We don’t have to justify anything to anyone,” he snapped. “We will go out and play our game and try to wave the flag for South Africa.”
7 Mar 2012, 16:40 pm
@Dawn(Dawn)-189: wat is to “lol’?
7 Mar 2012, 16:43 pm
@Transformation(Transformation)-188:
hehe
you’re right.
ok i accept, there was a time when the bulls were ‘arse whipping boys’… its true…
thankfully is was just for 5 out of 16 ocassions.
and need i remind you they are currently first on the log.
7 Mar 2012, 16:43 pm
@youknowwho(youknowwho)-187:
pipe down little buddha.
your low rent cape spanish wannabe gangster threats don’t impress anybody.
unless you intend to sit on them.
If you don’t behave I’m going to put you in a cell with JonnyMongril.
by the time he’s finished with you your @ss is going to resemble a windsock.
you will be smuggling in cellphones for the whole block.
7 Mar 2012, 16:56 pm
@youknowwho(youknowwho)-187: Lol I doubt many people take a rugby blog quite as seriously as you.
Besides, it could take you 3 or 4 days to get a standby seat on Air Nigeria Livestock Class from Slough or Sludge or whatever toilet council estate you live in to CT.
And then, your mismatched looted Nike’s and half-full papsak under one tubby arm would put you such at a speed disadvantage, you’d never catch him anyway.
As for making a call, you’d have to get a whole new pre-paid card for that, (so there’d be no cash left for KFC this week) and try get your stolen 3310 unblocked for inernational roaming.
7 Mar 2012, 16:57 pm
@welcome to my life, hugh…(i_love_u_bakkiesbotha)-195: see, how difficult was that? if jake doesn’t pull the brumbies out the poo then even their supporters wont be able to deny that they’re in a bad space currently.
7 Mar 2012, 16:58 pm
@Transformation(Transformation)-198: How are they looking? I’ve missed their games so far….
7 Mar 2012, 17:03 pm
@Atreides(Atreides)-197:
Hooliha!
7 Mar 2012, 17:03 pm
@the artist formerly known as gunther(gunther)-196:
They don’t call them “chargers” for nothing.
7 Mar 2012, 17:10 pm
@Dawn(Dawn)-200: Howzit Dawn!
7 Mar 2012, 17:16 pm
@Atreides(Atreides)-199: too early to tell but they have keen youngsters
7 Mar 2012, 18:41 pm
Keo offers nothing as constructive reasoning in this debate other than a political promise – the rest is a whole shitload of waffle.
The biggest disservice you can do to a region (mostly made up of the PDI) is to ‘give’ them something for no other reason than the colour of their skin. It is insulting. I would dare anyone to go to a club where you will find a large majority of coloured or black rugby players and ask them what they want, or how they want to get it.
They are rugby players, not ******* politicians – and thank god they are getting tired of being used as political pawns.
If you want to serve this region and its rugby community, give them the tools to build something to be proud of. Invest in them. Don’t play political games with them.
If this means that all current Super Franchises commits to giving the Kings franchise X% of their SupeRugby Murdoch pie in addition to Currie Cup proper entrenchment to get sponsors on-board, then so be it. Because money is obviously the big issue here.
But for fucksake for once do something right.
7 Mar 2012, 19:01 pm
Right.
I’m back.
7 Mar 2012, 19:28 pm
The Kings won’t be ‘transformed’ at all. The Bulls will field more Black players than them.
7 Mar 2012, 19:50 pm
Keo is talking through his stofpoepertjie *** as usual, and making it up as he goes along or distorting the facts as it suits him
Firstly Natal played in the 1985 Currie Cup final agains a very strong WP side, they got there by beating Free State in a one off game between the no 2 Currie Cup A vs no 1 in the B division,
I think Craig Jamieson was their captain at that time
They proved that they belonged in the Currie Cup A division
Northern Transvaal had a hard time adapting to professional rugby, they had no money as they’ve funded their new Northern(?) stand by selling suites (losies) and season tickets ahead for a couple of years so they didn’t have the cash flow to pay salaries to players when the game turned pro
They and the Blue Bulls were bottom dwellers for a few years although they did win the 1998 CC, I think they even had to play relegation matches against the top Currie Cup second division teams
When Heyneke became the coach in 2000 he, Schwartz and the MD at the time (I can’t remember his name) started contracting U20 players as it was all they could afford
Yet, they won the 2001 Vodacom Cup and the 2002 Currie Cup and a lot more after that
If the Kings were so deserving they would have won something by now
If they have some many players at there disposal (200 000 is the number always bandied about on Keo) why did Daddy contract Luke at 3 million a year?
Surely he could buit a good team with all that depth?
The rugby public would be a lot more sympathetic to their Super Rugby inclusion as well if they’re giving the opportunity to players who wouldn’t get it otherwise, istead of stuffing Luke’s pockets
If the Bulls could win the Currie Cup in 2001 with unknown youngsters surely the deserving Kings should be able to win the Currie Cup B division at least?
7 Mar 2012, 20:46 pm
@victoriabok(victoriabok)-207: you count vodacom cups & alles & then u say if the kings were worth anything they would’ve won something by now…the EP Kings won the First Div currie cup in 2010, they were runners up last year.
7 Mar 2012, 20:50 pm
@victoriabok(victoriabok)-207: tacitus says luke’s salary is R3 million and everyone follows him like sheep. when i asked him to prove of reveal his source he weasel-ed out.
so where did you VB get that luke is paid such an amount?
7 Mar 2012, 21:12 pm
Luke walks on water.. he’s next to God down in tinsel town bay.. go ahead ask Marky parky he’ll confirm it as gospel truth…
7 Mar 2012, 21:22 pm
@the artist formerly known as gunther(gunther)-196: I see you looking for some excitement in your life.. Has the poodle pimping lost its spark
@Atreides(Atreides)-197: I don’t mind the banter.. but the fk is stalking my daughter and that makes it dangerous… I hire people to sort out that kind of problem.. we are close to finding him
7 Mar 2012, 21:22 pm
Well Puke’s dad & friends got him to play for the Boks once, now they need to get the King Puke’s in the S16….so who will support these guys, I really feel sorry for them but guess they was promised big things to come.
7 Mar 2012, 21:34 pm
@Transformation(Transformation)-208:
Exactly, they should have played their way into the Currie Cup, they couldn’t even win their relegation matches
Natal did even better, they proved it by beating the no 2 in the Currie Cup, not losing against the last team in the CC
Although they were a weak side at the time, the Blue Bulls still won their relegation matches to stay in the CC
7 Mar 2012, 21:39 pm
@Transformation(Transformation)-209:
I’ve read it on Keo, I think PA mentioned it
If you claim it’s wrong please do tell what he really earns?
7 Mar 2012, 22:07 pm
@ashampoopaloo(joel1yahoo)-210:
Nope it’s not about Luke
@PissAnt(PissAnt)-204:
> If this means that all current Super Franchises commits to giving the Kings franchise X% of their SupeRugby Murdoch pie in addition to Currie Cup proper entrenchment to get sponsors on-board, then so be it.
> Because money is obviously the big issue here.
It’s more about the Loot than the Luke
Like all his struggle buddies Cheeky wants to cash in big time
Wonder how big Keo’s cut’s going to be?
Maybe he can buy himself another pink tie and hang himself for all his disservice to SA rugby?
7 Mar 2012, 22:24 pm
@victoriabok(victoriabok)-213: mate, the currie cup is no yardstick of how a franchise will do in super rugby in the same way the ITM Cup is not used to determine who is part of what franchise and who is not!
this whole they must prove themselves nonsense is convivient obfuscation. in 2005 when the 5th franchise was made available the lions & cheetahs split and they were HANDED franchises and it was agreed that whoever finishes last in 2006 will be relegated like the Stormers were previously all those years back, in 2006 the lions finished last now tell me WHY they were not relegated?
just tell me why?
7 Mar 2012, 22:38 pm
@victoriabok(victoriabok)-215: man grow up. the idea of a franchise in this region is not cheekys idea how long must i say this?
the CEO of the Kings is Stefan Pretorius not Cheeky Watson.
are the likes of kevin de klerk, tobie titus or graham mackenzie also “cashing in”?
7 Mar 2012, 22:50 pm
@Transformation(Transformation)-216:
> the currie cup is no yardstick of how a franchise will do in super rugby
I know, look how the Bulls won the Currie Cup from 2002-2004 and shared it 2006 yet could only win it in 2007, although they did play two away Super semi finals as well
However, if your team is good enough to perform at Currie Cup level you will have some players good enough to make the step up to Super Rugby, you’ll probably have some Boks in your squad as well
You’ll have the player depth in most positions too
> in the same way the ITM Cup is not used to determine who is part of what franchise and who is not!
If you’re honest most of the SA franchises use 99% of the parent union’s own contracted players and only the Cheetahs use a lot of Griqua’s players.
And if they do “borrow” a good player, he’ll be one of their contracted players come the next season
You must also tell us what do you think the Kings are planning to achieve in the Super tournament?
Are they there just to be there, or do they really think they will manage to get to a semi in the next ten years?
7 Mar 2012, 23:14 pm
@Transformation(Transformation)-216:
> this whole they must prove themselves nonsense is convivient obfuscation.
No it’s not, when it was the Super 10 the teams that finished 1-2-3 in the Currie Cup the previous year played the Super 10 the next.
When it became the Super 12 they added a fourth and when the SA teams formed conferences it stayed that way
> in 2005 when the 5th franchise was made available the lions & cheetahs split and they were HANDED franchises and it was agreed that whoever finishes last in 2006 will be relegated like the Stormers were previously all those years back, in 2006 the lions finished last now tell me WHY they were not relegated?
> just tell me why?
I can’t tell you why but I have a good idea, who else would have had the money and players to compete?
EP?
The crooks running it at that time was too busy carrying off all its money and assets
7 Mar 2012, 23:47 pm
@Transformation(Transformation)-217:
> man grow up.
Rather rich from someone thinking a team should be entitled to play in a premier competition just because they claim there’s lots of players around or because the ruling party wants it
> the idea of a franchise in this region is not cheekys idea how long must i say this?
Fact is how many Currie Cups or any other trophies has EP ever won?
Compare that against Transvaal/Lions and Free State/Cheetahs?
> the CEO of the Kings is Stefan Pretorius not Cheeky Watson.
Like Putin he’s the power (and the face) behind the throne, although not “officialy” in charge
> are the likes of kevin de klerk, tobie titus or graham mackenzie also “cashing in”?
Maybe, maybe not but in the end it depends how succesful your team is on the pitch, the Stormers have been in a semi and a final the last two years and the Lions albeit bankrupt, have won the CC due to Kevin getting the right coach etc
What real PROGRESS have the Kings made on the pitch?
They couldn’t even win the CC B division, do you really think they’ll have the players to beat the Super 15 teams or to even just to last the whole tournament?
You should see how sports work in NA, if your city doesn’t have the facilities or the money and will to improve it you lose your team.
No Cheeky, comrade or any amount of race card playing would help if it’s not economically feasible
Seattle lost their hockey team and the SuperSonics and they’re trying hard to get two teams back by building a $500 mil stadium
Winnipeg lost their NHL team because their ring was to small. They built a new one and got a team back on the premise that they have to play in front of a packed house. They sold all their season tickets in 17 minutes. Google the “Winnipeg Jets”
7 Mar 2012, 23:48 pm
the title has been jumbled
‘Does SuperRugby deserve the Kings ?’
and we ALL know the answer to that.
8 Mar 2012, 00:11 am
@Love the taste of Bok Prick in my mouth-221:
> ‘Does SuperRugby deserve the Kings ?’and we ALL know the answer to that.
Even a broken watch is right twice a day
For once I agree with you, if you take the reserves of the bottom dwellers of each of the conferences last year and cobble together a team, they would most likely beat the Kings
8 Mar 2012, 06:02 am
@I want to Prick-Boks in their South! (I want to Prick-Boks in their South!)-221:
hehehe…
well we ALL know the nature of your obsession with south african rugby players, pigeons holes and little yapping dogs…
you have all the intelligence and originality of a noddy-dog on the back windowsill of 1960s volvo car…
made this comment at #29 already…
no wonder you spend all day yap-yapping… like a bored dog at the garden gate watching the world go by, you yap to fill the vacuous silence in your head… you don’t even know why… much like the noddy-dog has no control of its movements… that’s what its role is and it just does it…
no thought required…
11 Mar 2012, 04:22 am
The so-called “Kings” are as comprehensively awful as their serial loser so-called “coach” Alan Solomons and… well, what can we say about Cheeky’s boy that hasn’t already been said?
11 Mar 2012, 04:48 am
Promotion / Relegation.
Argument over. No more Kings.
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.