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
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 » Show All
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
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 » Show All
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.