183 Comments

• 1.Finfan:
  3 Apr 2012, 14:59 pm

  Pink dragons will never be up to it.

• 2.Slappes:
  3 Apr 2012, 15:14 pm

  The lions are building.

• 3.Slappes:
  3 Apr 2012, 15:18 pm

  The 2011 Currie cup Champs will come good and sweep all before them, as they did in the CC last year.

• 4.Yetirat:
  3 Apr 2012, 15:49 pm

  Ummm, Keo I have to say I’m less than convinced by your statement that you have no agenda with the Kings. Your argument wasn’t very compelling.

• 5.Doppies:
  3 Apr 2012, 15:51 pm

  Keo en Cheeky sitting in a tree….. K..I…S…S…I…N…G.

• 6.White Shark:
  3 Apr 2012, 15:52 pm

  Pink Bulls and Sharks are scoring tries and breaking the advantage line.

  The Stormers are trying hard but just not taking the right options to get those bonus points. The better teams in Australasia will push them hard away from home and the cracks will appear.

• 7.PissAnt:
  3 Apr 2012, 15:58 pm

  You reason for wanting the Lions out focuses on just the Lions.

  I am yet to see one compelling reason by you to include the Kings. You are using a rugby reason (wins vs. losses) to exclude the Lions – surely you can raise one rugby reason to include the Kings?

• 8.Oranjebliksemblou:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:04 pm

  Keo trying to put the hex on the Cheetahs with that lions comment.

• 9.Oranjebliksemblou:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:09 pm

  @PissAnt(PissAnt)-7:
  What Keo does not realise is that where the lions loose by close margines, the Kings are going to get hammered 50+ and be another embarrassment in our very long line embarrassments.

• 10.Rum And Maple:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:11 pm

  Keo, I see your Lions out and Kings in comment…

  And raise you this…

  http://btgirugby.com/2012/01/27/the-questionable-relationship-between-hsm-and-luke-watson/

• 11.Transformation:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:13 pm

  @Oranjebliksemblou(Oranjebliksemblou)-9:the lions should’ve been relegated in 2006 already, they’re playing super rugby illegally!

• 12.keo:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:17 pm

  The Kings have been confirmed to play in 2013 Super Rugby. So there is no lobbying from me for them to play. That decision has already been made. SARU now are trying to get the tournament expanded to six SA teams.

  If this fails, one of existing five has to go – and that in my opinion has to be the Lions, based on 15 wins in 73 matches in the competition – which is consistent with their 1 from 5 so far this season (with 4 of the 5 games being home games).

  I don’t believe the tournament can accommodate 6 SA teams and I don’t believe the Lions should be guaranteed a continued free ride on the basis of their historical past in the tournament

• 13.houston, we have a problem...:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:19 pm

  @Doppies(Doppies)-5:
  

  @White Shark(Predawn)-6:
  look, theres the bulls and the stormers and then there’s daylight………….and then theres the rest……you know who they are….

• 14.Rum And Maple:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:22 pm

  @keo(keo)-12: The SARU decision to hand the Kings a Super Rugby spot in 2013 is short sighted, idiotic and unrealistic…

  We all know this…

  We have all seen some dof decisions made by SARU over the last couple of years…

  Why do you support this dof decision and not previous ones made by SARU, like the appointment of P Divvy?

• 15.White Shark:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:24 pm

  Stormers will do their usual dry up and blow away overseas.

• 16.Transformation:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:26 pm

  @keo(keo)-12: “confirmed” you say?

  is that the equivalent of the legal SARU document that said:

  5. At the end of the 2007 Super 14 season, the South African franchise team, which is last on the Super 14 log, excluding the SE Cape, shall play in a promotion relegation match against the franchise team who did not play in the 2007 Super 14 competition.

  6. That the decision which was taken at the meeting on 15 April 2005 in respect of the South African franchise system, are hereby amended in order to reflect the above agreement.

  that Oregan Hoskins & Basil Haddad ignored and reinstated the Lions illegally?

  do the Kings have any binding contracts with SARU that spell out their participation or is this a verbal “confirmation”?

• 17.>^..^< katman:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:26 pm

  The Kins?

  Oh, the Kings.

  What makes them good enough?

  Oh yes of course, they MUST have it.

  Plus your man Luke must start earning for you, and he can’t do this from the Sport Pienaar Trofee.

  Nê?

• 18.Transformation:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:31 pm

  @keo(keo)-12: saru also said:

  3. The SE Cape franchise shall be entrenched in the Super 14 Competition for the 2007 & 2008 rugby season

  did that ever happen?

• 19.namLion:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:36 pm

  @Rum And Maple(Rum And Maple)-10: yes, R&M what you describe is well known within communication studies. The theory of gatekeeping; “Gatekeeping is the process through which information is filtered for dissemination, be it publication, broadcasting, the Internet, or some other type of communication”; Agenda-setting theory describes the “ability of the news media to influence the salience of topics on the public agenda” and Framing, a term used in media studies, sociology and psychology, refers to the social construction of a social phenomenon by mass media sources or specific political or social movements or organizations

• 20.Transformation:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:37 pm

  @Rum And Maple(Rum And Maple)-14: ja, allowing the lions to continue being rubbish in 2007 up until now was indeed “short sighted, idiotic”, the Lions and the GLRU have proven that beyong reasonable doubt.

• 21.namLion:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:37 pm

  compliments of wikipedia, and i do not enjoy that it is being employed against my beloved lions

• 22.Rum And Maple:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:39 pm

  @namLion(14261774)-19: @namLion(14261774)-21: Agree, our beloved Lions are also not helping our own cause here…

• 23.>^..^< katman:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:39 pm

  @Transformation(Transformation)-20: Win the fcken CC 2nd division, compete in the top flight and THEN we can talk about deserving it. It really is that simple, unless you’re banking on political handouts. Which you are, of course.

• 24.Rum And Maple:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:41 pm

  @Transformation(Transformation)-20: The question here is Keo’s agenda for fighting the King’s cause…

• 25.Transformation:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:41 pm

  @>^..^< katman(katman)-23: we’ve won it already

• 26.NoRugbyGuru_0_:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:41 pm

  Yes the lions must fark off and the kings deserve an opportunity.

  I’m sick of watching the lions lose and mismanagement of the union.

• 27.keo:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:43 pm

  @Rum And Maple(Rum And Maple)-24: the Kings are there … nothing to fight for

• 28.NoRugbyGuru_0_:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:44 pm

  Everyone points out the kings are in 2nd division etc etc who says the lions can win the 2nd division. I doubt it. Fark off lions

• 29.>^..^< katman:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:44 pm

  @NoRugbyGuru_0_(RugbyGuru_0_)-26: Define “deserve”. Is it a kind of “we didn’t struggle to be poor” deserve?

• 30.keo:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:44 pm

  I believe the EC needs a Sup Rug opportunity as a franchise and the Lions continued failure to deliver can no longer be excused or should not be tolerated. If that amounts to an agenda then that is it.

• 31.>^..^< katman:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:44 pm

  @NoRugbyGuru_0_(RugbyGuru_0_)-28: They won the CC, poepol.

• 32.NoRugbyGuru_0_:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:45 pm

  @ Keo, amen hairless man amen

• 33.>^..^< katman:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:45 pm

  @keo(keo)-30: I don’t think you’ve convinced anyone here, keo.

• 34.Transformation:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:46 pm

  @Rum And Maple(Rum And Maple)-24: no, say the question YOU, individually are posing.

  Keo punting or not punting for the Kings has no bearing on the merits or demerits of whether the lions or any team that finishes last should be relegated.

• 35.NoRugbyGuru_0_:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:46 pm

  @ kat, it means that they didn’t end bottom of the super rugga log for last decade

• 36.Rum And Maple:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:47 pm

  @keo(keo)-27: Where are they Keo???

  First Division of the CC…

  Let them get promoted first…

  Jumping 2 levels of rugby because the politicians want it…

  Makes absolutely no sense, does it???

• 37.NoRugbyGuru_0_:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:48 pm

  You won the watered down CC because you don’t have any boks. Whoaa that means farkall!

• 38.keo:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:48 pm

  @>^..^< katman(katman)-33: and why would I be trying to convince anyone. I answer a question and it is a defense? I don’t answer a question and it is a cop out? Come on why would I feel the need to defend anything. i am what I am … take it or leave it …

• 39.Transformation:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:48 pm

  @>^..^< katman(katman)-23: how did the lions remain in super rugby katman when they were LEGALLY supposed to be relegated, Broederbonde handouts?

• 40.mshiniwami:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:49 pm

  @>^..^< katman(katman)-23:

  Lions have managed to maintain status in Superrugby due to “political handouts/protection” for the last 7 years…..

  Did Force/Rebels do the same process for their inclusion? Dont think so.

  Lions been a mess for years…Nations economic capital,ownership of major stadium,SARU stipend,TV money from Superrugby participation & CC….Yet they have been dishing up nonsense all but 2 years under Laurie Mains…Unacceptable.

• 41.NoRugbyGuru_0_:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:50 pm

  Here we go katman, the lions can stay in the CC but they do not deserve super rugga status.

• 42.Rum And Maple:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:50 pm

  @Transformation(Transformation)-34: What was the score in the pre-season warm up game between the Lions and the Kings???

• 43.keo:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:51 pm

  so when Natal were given A section Currie Cup status in an expanded 8 team CCup after they could never win promotion to the A section what was said then … it would be chaos … they went out and bought the Free State team, turned themselves into the first professional union in an amateur era and dominated the provincial landscape for a decade and evolved into the Sharks.

  The Kwazulu Natal region never earned the right to play in the A section of the CCup but they have built a team over the last 20 years (once in there) that is among the most powerful provincial sides in the world on a regular basis.

• 44.keo:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:53 pm

  @Rum And Maple(Rum And Maple)-42: the Lions beat Border (playing as Southern Kings) 88-0 in George on the Wed and the EP Kings (playing as the Southern Kings) lost 30-odd 13 to the Sharks in PE on the Friday. Your point?

• 45.Rum And Maple:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:53 pm

  @Transformation(Transformation)-39: Your frustration in this regard should be directed towards SARU… they made that decision, however unfair it was…

  The new decision by SARU to add the Kings at the expense of one of the SA S15 sides is just as unfair…

  Replacing one evil with another will solve nothing…

• 46.Transformation:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:54 pm

  @Rum And Maple(Rum And Maple)-36: you know that the EP Kings and the Southern Kings franchise are tow different entities neh?

  the Cheetahs won the currie cup on their own, the Griquas did not, but Griquas players (sarel, viljoen, basson, raubenheimer, willie le roux) have been featuring in super rugby for the cheetahs all along!

  don’t get confused.

• 47.Rum And Maple:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:55 pm

  @keo(keo)-44: Oh, nothing then…

  They clearly deserve their spot…

• 48.NoRugbyGuru_0_:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:55 pm

  @ rum, conought (irish province) almost beat the boks pre 2007 WC but still we won the WC.

  Your point pointless

• 49.Transformation:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:56 pm

  @Rum And Maple(Rum And Maple)-42: hahahaha the lions were playing the SWD Eagles 2nd team but hey if it makes you happy

• 50.Rum And Maple:
  3 Apr 2012, 16:57 pm

  @Transformation(Transformation)-46: EP is the major union… hence the most players will come from EP…

  The rest will fill open spots… you know this, ne…

• 51.Transformation:
  3 Apr 2012, 17:00 pm

  @Rum And Maple(Rum And Maple)-45: you are happy being the recipient of corrupt practises but want to scream “MERIT” when your arse is on the line?

• 52.NoRugbyGuru_0_:
  3 Apr 2012, 17:00 pm

  Whether the kings deserve it or not is irrelevant. The fact is that the lions don’t deserve it.

• 53.Rum And Maple:
  3 Apr 2012, 17:00 pm

  @NoRugbyGuru_0_(RugbyGuru_0_)-48: Must I really spell this out…

  They will get murdered… for a long time…

• 54.NoRugbyGuru_0_:
  3 Apr 2012, 17:02 pm

  @ rum, must I spell it out?

  THE LIONS ARE BEING MURDERED.. FOR THE LAST DECADE ALREADY…

• 55.Rum And Maple:
  3 Apr 2012, 17:04 pm

  @Transformation(Transformation)-51: @NoRugbyGuru_0_(RugbyGuru_0_)-52: Your gripe is with SARU… not the Lions…

  I foresee this new Kings will play S15 in 2013 will end as an empty promise as well…

  And jumping on the Keo “money motivated” bandwagon does nothing for your credibility and the merit of your argument…

• 56.Rum And Maple:
  3 Apr 2012, 17:05 pm

  @NoRugbyGuru_0_(RugbyGuru_0_)-54: Funny guy…

• 57.Transformation:
  3 Apr 2012, 17:05 pm

  @Rum And Maple(Rum And Maple)-45: no, my frustration is that the lions were indignant in 2006, as shown:

  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.”

  in 2012 they still think they “deserve” to be playing super rugby!

• 58.Rum And Maple:
  3 Apr 2012, 17:10 pm

  @Transformation(Transformation)-57: I do not disagree about the mismanagement of the GLRU… all the problems over the last couple of years is public knowledge… I have always supported the Lions and know all about non deliverance from their part…

  The GLRU are however busy getting their house in order…

  The Kings should start doing the same and not wait for handouts… I tell you, this SARU promise will again come to naught… as in 2006…

• 59.Transformation:
  3 Apr 2012, 17:14 pm

  @Rum And Maple(Rum And Maple)-55: you’re quite right, and if SARU says the team finishing last should be relegated then so be it…but we all know it won’t happen.

  Lions fans should rest assured their team won’t be sacrificed as it was not in 2006, you guys are ENTRENCHED in super rugby despite your kak record.

  gym calls (no peter davies)

• 60.Rum And Maple:
  3 Apr 2012, 17:15 pm

  @NoRugbyGuru_0_(RugbyGuru_0_)-54: @Transformation(Transformation)-57: Would like to stay and discuss this matter further but I have to run… pick up the kiddy…

  Maybe later tonight…

  Toedels…

• 61.Break:
  3 Apr 2012, 17:27 pm

  I fail to understand the logic in this. Spears are not even playing premier devision CC, but get a free pass to super rugby. Give them, or whoever else wins the first devision CC, an opportunity to play a relegation match against the SA bottom super 15 team. If they win, I would be glad to let them play! If not, go work on it!

• 62.H:
  3 Apr 2012, 17:37 pm

  Well this thread has degenerated into a Lions vs. Kings mudslinging match.

  Getting back to this season I’d say the Stormers, Bulls and Chiefs are the best sides in the competition. The Sharks supporters keep telling the others “wait until you travel”, but the fact is the others already have the log points safely tucked away. The Sharks have in the past also thrown away handy log position once they get back to Kings Park so here’s hoping things are different this time.

  I’m not Shark-bashing, just saying sort out your own problems instead of directing your frustration at other teams who are actually performing.

• 63.seabiscuit:
  3 Apr 2012, 17:38 pm

  Fark the kings!!!!!!!!!!!!
  my word keo is annoying

• 64.H:
  3 Apr 2012, 17:39 pm

  @Break(Break)-61: Relegation matches are unfair. You’ve just peaked to win your own competition and must then immediately play another even more important match. We give too many second chances in SA. If you’re at the bottom then you must drop a league.

• 65.Horings:
  3 Apr 2012, 17:46 pm

  Well, if they ever need to do it, now is the time while we are in this k a k competition.

  The Lions can come to an agreement with the other Super franchises to loan their players to the other teams while concentrating on the Currie Cup. This will strengthen 4 of our teams’ depth.

  Secondly, the Kings will give away 10 points to each of our teams, while it may happen that the strongest team from Australasia may miss the opportunity to play them. This will strengthen us even more.

  I will take Taute ahead of Kirchner. Maybe Jantjes for backup, or even better. Jantjes can go to the Cheetahs, because they need to sell Goosen to the Bulls.

• 66.PissAnt:
  3 Apr 2012, 17:48 pm

  Keo again I ask you for just a single rugby reason.

  Your reason for excluding the Lions can in many ways be justified – they are **** at Super Rugby level for starters, but I cannot find one good reason to include the Kings ahead of them.

  You state the Natal situation – that was the amateur era – a more compelling argument now would be; “Would the Kings be able to attract, and afford the quality of players (more than the Lions can at this point) to play at this level, or perform better than the incumbent Lions?”

  THAT question becomes one of management, and finances.

  Last I looked none of the EC unions are rolling in the money and there were some really piss-poor management decisions. EP has no sponsor unlike the Lions Altman Allers investment and the MTN sponsorship – and EVEN with that, they are unable to attract the game-breakers or quality players you so often refer to. How on god’s green earth will the Kings attract those type of players in the next 8 months, or even 18 months?

  You also reckon the Kings, or region, deserves or should have Super Rugby participation.

  I have argued this point since 2005 so it is not that I disagree with you in any way. But they must deserve this or get this based on Rugby Reasons – not political bullshit as is currently the case.

  Political meddling is the main factor in creating mediocrity.

  By all means boot the Lions if we have a better, sustainable RUGBY solution to replace it. The Kings in its current state and form does not present this.

• 67.Pee Wee:
  3 Apr 2012, 17:50 pm

  @White Shark(Predawn)-15: Yes, the Stormers have fallen away badly on their overseas leg the last couple of seasons hey. So badly that for the last three seasons they’ve won waaaaaaaaaaaay more away games than they’ve lost. If losing one or two out of five is a disaster in your books then you’re just displaying typical Tjarks sour puss syndrome. Suck it up!

• 68.stormersboy:
  3 Apr 2012, 17:50 pm

  if you look at all 3 franchises there are, at best, 3 teams in each that play consistently well.

  This should be a Super 9 with possibly additional national sides like Fiji, Samoa and Tonga thrown in.

  There’s your super 12.,

  Fiji
  Samoa
  Tonga
  Stormers
  Bulls
  Sharks
  Brumbies
  Reds
  ‘Tahs
  Saders
  Highlanders
  Chiefs

  Each year the top 3 finishers in the local comps play in the Super comp the next year.

  But of course we know why this won’t happen.

• 69.stormersboy:
  3 Apr 2012, 17:54 pm

  @stormersboy(stormersboy)-68: All 3 franchises = all 3 conferences.

• 70.stormersboy:
  3 Apr 2012, 17:56 pm

  @Pee Wee(Pee Wee)-67: Ja we didn’t beat all 5 NZ teams a couple of years ago.

• 71.Tuna:
  3 Apr 2012, 18:00 pm

  @PissAnt(PissAnt)-66: You will never get a reply.

  @NoRugbyGuru_0_(RugbyGuru_0_)-28: When are you rewriting your Grade 8 exam?

• 72.ufo:
  3 Apr 2012, 18:12 pm

  @stormersboy(stormersboy)-68:

  hundreds…

  have called for a three-team-per-country super comp since they first announced they were expanding to fifteen teams…

  less is more… fewer teams… fewer games… better teams… better quality rugby…

  top 3 CC teams go into super comp… and play each other team once… home one year… away the next and vice versa…

  get the best players in the best teams playing the best players in the best teams…

  quality of rugby would improve at provincial and national level for all 3 countries…

  but most posters on keo reckon it’s crazy…

  or maybe it’s me they think is crazy…

  they may like your idea… hehehe…

  

• 73.Yetirat:
  3 Apr 2012, 18:13 pm

  Keo, since when did you place such faith in a SARU promise? This is an organisation that you ridicule on a regular basis?

• 74.victoriabok:
  3 Apr 2012, 18:19 pm

  @PissAnt(PissAnt)-66:

  > Your reason for excluding the Lions can in many ways be justified – they are **** at Super Rugby level for starters, but I cannot find one good reason to include the Kings ahead of them.

  The reason is simple

  $$$$$$$

  Mark “Tony Yengeni” Keohane wants his snout in the money trough, what other reason does he have to get involved with comrade Cheeky “tenderpreneur” Watson?

  Bet if you look closely HSM already has a contract to do either or all the marketing, communications and public relations for the Kings

• 75.Yetirat:
  3 Apr 2012, 18:20 pm

  In fact I’d be interested to hear whether the Lions have any legal strength to rely on if s h i t starts to get serious with SARU in the coming months?

  @PissAnt(PissAnt)-66:
  Is there a chance that if it comes down to it SARU will dig into their R28m profit or whatever it was to bankroll the Kings into this comp to save face?

• 76.IAAS:
  3 Apr 2012, 18:28 pm

  Hey keo

  Which way will you go at Loftus on 2nd June?

  Just remember who won at Loftus last year.

  When Elstadt introduced himself to Bakkies and had the said Bakkies taking backward steps.

  Loftus isn’t the fortress people think it is.

  Just look what the lowly Blues did this year.

• 77.PissAnt:
  3 Apr 2012, 18:30 pm

  @Yetirat(Yetirat)-75:

  Someone has to bankroll the Kings and SA Rugby can use their money at their discretion.

  As for what the Lions can do – expect a truck-load of litigation. As far as I am aware there is no signed agreement that guarantees the Kings inclusion. Keo is grasping at straws – Lions will stay.

• 78.IAAS:
  3 Apr 2012, 18:42 pm

  @ufo(ufo)-72:

  This conference system doesn’t do it for me. Even the coaches agree that there are too many derby matches.
  I think only one person is happy because he got his way for the benefit of Australian rugby – John O’Neil.

  The sad thing is – the Super Rugby comp will be increased and not the other way. It’ll eventually lose its appeal if more uncompetitive teams are shoved in. As it is, the crowds are dwindling.

• 79.Hondo:
  3 Apr 2012, 18:52 pm

  @IAAS(I am a stormer)-76:
  The Bulls were only done by 3 points at the dying moments at Newlands, thanks to a Joubert’s gift, they were not whacked or anything
  But, they were whacked by the Blues and at Loftus by putting pressure on their back three and on the hooker

  @PissAnt(PissAnt)-77:
  I think you are right, few corporate lawyers that I know will represent the Lions for free

• 80.houston, we have a problem...:
  3 Apr 2012, 18:53 pm

  @NoRugbyGuru_0_(RugbyGuru_0_)-54:
  lmao
  

• 81.JL1:
  3 Apr 2012, 19:08 pm

  Interesting take Keo, if you follow your logic on not being good enough, then you should not play Super 15, OK so the Kings are not good enough for Currie Cup, then they should not be allowed to be there as well

  Rather ask the question, what has SARU done to help the bottom performing team to be better, at all levels in SA. By doing this they will lift the whole SA Rugby product and ensure that all unions are performance driven and rated.

  Now if the do not have a say or cannot place KPIs on a team then they will have major law suits if they reckon they will just get rid of the Lions from the the S15

  You tend to claim that you investigate all angles but I sense a different motive from you when you want to get rid of the Lions

• 82.JL1:
  3 Apr 2012, 19:10 pm

  In fact, if the bottom team will one day have make space for another, let it be on merit
  if I was Boland or the Pumas I would have a major issue with this

• 83.JL1:
  3 Apr 2012, 19:13 pm

  I mean why the Kings?

  Why not the Bulls 2nds or Stormers 2nds?

• 84.Slappes:
  3 Apr 2012, 19:17 pm

  Bye Bye Lions.

• 85.Slappes:
  3 Apr 2012, 19:19 pm

  Bye Bye Lions.;(

• 86.the artist formerly known as gunther:
  3 Apr 2012, 19:40 pm

  Any truth in the rumour that the Lions have put Jertemy Gauntlett on a retainer?
  

• 87.victoriabok:
  3 Apr 2012, 19:41 pm

  @NoRugbyGuru_0_(RugbyGuru_0_)-54:

  The SA Super Rugby stats so far

  S10 had two pools A and B, winners of each pool played each other in the final

  Transvaal won it once, and played in one (lost) semi, Natal too

  S12, S14 and S15

  Bulls 3x wins, played in 3x losing semis

  Sharks played 3x finals, 3x losing semis

  Stormers played 1x finals, 3x losing semis

  Cats 3x losing semis

• 88.ufo:
  3 Apr 2012, 19:42 pm

  @IAAS(I am a stormer)-78:

  absolutely bud…

  everything you say is correct…

• 89.stormersboy:
  3 Apr 2012, 19:43 pm

  @the artist formerly known as gunther(gunther)-86: Well then SARU are on a hiding to nothing then.

  Royally.

• 90.stormersboy:
  3 Apr 2012, 19:44 pm

  @ufo(ufo)-72: Ja boet, but it’s not like this site is the poster boy for sanity.

• 91.ufo:
  3 Apr 2012, 19:52 pm

  @stormersboy(stormersboy)-90:

  it’s not…??

  

• 92.the artist formerly known as gunther:
  3 Apr 2012, 20:02 pm

  Maevis says that Josh Strauss is her favourite player.

  She also says that Lukas is carrying a lot of tension in his soldiers (I think she means shoulders although I might be wrong).

• 93.Dawn:
  3 Apr 2012, 20:04 pm

  Where is Thelo’s story!

• 94.the artist formerly known as gunther:
  3 Apr 2012, 20:14 pm

  Thelo’s story is in the fridge.

  He says it’s his turn to eat?

  I hope you are having a Grouse and burning your candle Dawn.

  Enjoy what’s left of your day.

• 95.JL1:
  3 Apr 2012, 20:17 pm

  @the artist formerly known as gunther(gunther)-94: keen to come and share a TV, hehehe

• 96.the artist formerly known as gunther:
  3 Apr 2012, 20:20 pm

  Indeed JL…

  My TV is bigger than yours.
  

• 97.Transformation:
  3 Apr 2012, 20:30 pm

  @Rum And Maple(Rum And Maple)-58: “The Kings should start doing the
  same and not wait for handouts…”

  a supporter of the franchise that kept on playing super rugby has the audacity to tell others not to expect handouts, are you bloody kidding me?

  you okes have been living on the super rugby hog for the past 6yrs on what can only be described as broederbond HANDOUT! on the day heyneke meyer was appointed the Leopards rugby union was on it’s way to suing the GLRU for SR outstanding since 2007 & SARU had to come in & intervene on your behalf again!

  surviving on mercies yet are arrogant enough to point fingers hehehe

• 98.Transformation:
  3 Apr 2012, 20:36 pm

  @Transformation(Transformation)-97: ^ “illegally” & ^ “money”

• 99.victoriabok:
  3 Apr 2012, 20:59 pm

  @Transformation(Transformation)-97:

  > a supporter of the franchise that kept on playing super rugby has the audacity to tell others not to expect handouts, are you bloody kidding me?

  As a King supporter could you please tell me what would happen if they’re still bottom dwellers after a reasonable time, say five years?

  Do you propose they could be relegated or should they stay there because they “deserve” it?

• 100.JL1:
  3 Apr 2012, 21:22 pm

  @the artist formerly known as gunther(gunther)-96: nice to see you have not lost your sense of humour

• 101.Dawn:
  3 Apr 2012, 21:22 pm

  Indeed had an excellent day

• 102.>^..^< katman:
  3 Apr 2012, 21:33 pm

  It’s so simple.

  All the Kings advocates – keo, transie, mshini, etc – say that the Lions aren’t good enough and that’s why they should be replaced by the Kings.

  But are the Kings good enough?

  Only one way to find out. Have them play home and away relegation matches against the Lions.

  And spare me the bullshit about how they’ll be able to build a team with money that has to come from somewhere. That’s hocus pocus once upon a time stuff. That’s not the Kings.

  Home and away promotion/relegation. If it really is about not being good enough, this should sort out the sediment from the shiraz.

  But Cheeky and his useless bunch don’t have the stomach for that. They’d rather play the WE MUST HAVE IT card. Works everywhere else in life.

• 103.Transformation:
  3 Apr 2012, 22:16 pm

  @>^..^< katman(katman)-102: in your DREAMS! it doesn’t work like that in professional leagues, you’re last, you are OUT.

  after 6 years of bullshit & incompetence they still think they’re entitled to relegation/playoff games, without gumede money that the glru swindled off him there would be no currie cup trophy, no john mitchell, no wayne taylor, no butch, no mapoe, no cilliers & the homegrown players would’ve done a runner like alberts, deysel, ludik, fourie, mujati etc.

  no second bite at the cherry, you’re last you’re out!

• 104.the artist formerly known as gunther:
  3 Apr 2012, 22:17 pm

  Indeed.

  Cheeky and Co perspiring to pervert the course of Justice,

  Very dehydrating.

• 105.Transformation:
  3 Apr 2012, 22:22 pm

  @>^..^< katman(katman)-102: you want to use a squad that you put together whole earning money in a competition you were participating in illegally to gauge whether a team with not even half your resources is good enough bwahahaha

  some warped form of “MERIT” this is.

• 106.the artist formerly known as gunther:
  3 Apr 2012, 22:23 pm

  Gumede money?

  Taxpayers money surely?

• 107.>^..^< katman:
  3 Apr 2012, 22:27 pm

  @Transformation(Transformation)-105: Can the Kings beat them? Yes or no? It really is THAT simple in the real world.

  But in the slanted world of WE MUST HAVE IT, things tend to slide all over the place.

  The better team must play. Who do you suppose is the better team?

• 108.>^..^< katman:
  3 Apr 2012, 22:28 pm

  @the artist formerly known as gunther(gunther)-106: Same thing, innit?

• 109.rangerman:
  3 Apr 2012, 22:34 pm

  The Questionable Relationship Between HSM and Luke Watson
  Posted on January 27, 2012 by Yoni Bass | 3 Comments

  Friday saw the announcement of Heyneke Meyer as Springbok coach and confirmation that the Kings will feature in some capacity in 2013 Super Rugby tournament. However, it was the development of another story, which has been simmering beneath the surface for several months now, that caught the attention of many South African rugby followers. That story being the complex and potentially problematic relationship between Luke Watson and Highbury Safika Media (HSM).

  Background

  On the 17th of May 2011, HSM announced, via its online mouthpiece keo.co.za, that it had taken the decision to enter into the sport management business with Luke Watson confirmed as their first client. HSM previous business prior to the signing of Watson as client, was publishing, with pre-eminent titles such as SA Cricket and SA Rugby in its stable. Additionally, through keo.co.za and other social media platforms, HSM supplies daily rugby news to South African rugby fans.

  Whilst the months proceeding Watson’s signing to HSM, saw a rise in his profile in reported items across HSM platforms it was not until the lead up to the annoucement of the Springbok coach that the conflict of interests between HSM’s sport management arm and its news media work began to clearly emerge.

  Lead up to the announcement

  In the days before the announcement, HSM publishing director Mark Keohane released an article titled “Pick the player; then the captain” via keo.co.za which purported to examine the potential options for the position of Springbok captain. The basic premise of the article was that the player selected should first be considered the best player in his position in the country. Several players were named, with Schalk Burger, Bismarck Du Plessis and Juan Smith being at the forefront of that list. However inserted at the end of the naming of candidates was a throw away line on Watson. Keohane stated ” Luke Watson, once the Kings play in the 2013 Super Rugby competition, is also a contender”.

  It must be noted that 28 year old Watson has not been considered for Springbok selection since mid-2008. Moreover, he is currently playing for the EP Kings in the Currie Cup 1st Division and whilst he has performed well, he has certainly not set the rugby world alight. Most rugby pundits and experts, whilst acknowledging Watson’s talent, would admit that at the very minimum Schalk Burger, Juan Smith, Heinrich Brussow and Willem Alberts stand clearly ahead of him in both the skill and ability ranks in the positions of flank and Eighth-man. This doesn’t even account for people like Francois Louw and Pierre Spies.

  To suggest in early 2012, that a 1st division rugby player who has not played for the Springboks in almost 4 years should be considered as one of the best players in his postion and thus a worthy candidate for Springbok captain, is at best ill-informed and contradictory of the basic premise of the article and at worst highly disingenuous and opined with ulterior motives.

  Springbok coach announcement

  Matters came to ahead at the Springbok coach announcement in Cape Town with questions to the newly appointed Springbok coach Heyneke Meyer from Ryan Vrede, a HSM employed journalist, on whether he would consider appointing Luke Watson as Springbok Captain. Despite the bizarre nature of the question, given that Watson is currently languishing in the 1st Division of the Currie Cup, it may have simply have been ignored were it not for the follow up article on the topic written by Jon Cardinelli. The keo.co.za article again devoted several paragraphs to the topic of Watson’s potential candidacy. This after Meyer’s response to the initial question about Watson’s candidacy being non-committal, generic and standard to any player who he would have been questioned on regarding his suitability as a potential Springbok captain.

  The only reason that Watson can be written about as a potential Springbok captain is because HSM have inserted his name into the public discourse on the issue and not because his name would naturally be there. One can only wonder if HSM is attempting to make the news, as opposed to just reporting on it.

  Clarity

  It must be noted that many journalists have personal biases and favourite players which they bring up often in their news reports. HSM though is contracted directly to promote Watson and may benefit financially from Watson having a greater public profile. In fact, depending on how their agreement with him works they could stand to make more money from Watson improving his annual income through increased publicity or Watson being appointed to a higher paid position. Furthermore, as his agents it would not be unreasonable to assume HSM have agreed to promote Watson in their publications.

  Whilst, no one would suggest that HSM should not act directly in the best interests of its business, it is problematic that it is unknown what those interests are. The rugby media consumer has a right to know whether the news HSM provides is in the first instance promotion or whether it is motivated by what is current and newsworthy in the rugby world. In short is business public relations and spin or publishing news. Currently, the answer is unclear with HSM dodging the question throughout the day on social media sites.

  HSM should bring an end to this discussion by either publishing the terms of its agreement with Luke Watson or by explaining honestly and clearly what the priorities of its business are. The rugby watching public deserve to be able to understand the news it is given in the context it was written and not be unwillingly subjected to public relations hidden in legitimate news stories.

  Yoni Bass

• 110.the artist formerly known as gunther:
  3 Apr 2012, 22:36 pm

  Einapoes.

  He must have it.
  

• 111.rangerman:
  3 Apr 2012, 22:40 pm

  haha, taxpayers money is right

• 112.Transformation:
  3 Apr 2012, 22:41 pm

  @victoriabok(victoriabok)-99: they should be kicked out VB, in the most professional leagues in the world even teams that are a 100 years old get kicked out of top flight if they’re bottom of the log…

• 113.victoriabok:
  3 Apr 2012, 22:42 pm

  @Transformation(Transformation)-103:

  > no second bite at the cherry, you’re last you’re out!

  Would the same rule stand for the Kings as well?

• 114.rangerman:
  3 Apr 2012, 22:45 pm

  @Transformation(Transformation)-112: cmon man, you cant compare the two.

  in those leagues the replaement is certain to have been picked ON MERIT.

  straw man.

• 115.>^..^< katman:
  3 Apr 2012, 22:50 pm

  Transie, I think it’s time you reminded this lot of the Dynamic. Because they clearly don’t get it, with their Logic and their Reason and all that nonsense. There is a Dynamic at play here that trumps everything. They MUST get it, right?

• 116.Transformation:
  3 Apr 2012, 22:50 pm

  @>^..^< katman(katman)-107: bullshit! go look at the aviva premiership, you’re last you’re out!

  the amateurish ring fencing of the currie cup will never fly elsewhere in the world.

  even in the barclays premiership it doesn’t matter if is a club steeped in history like newcastle united they get the boot & the likes if swansea, norwich, burnley, hull get a crack at the big time!

  “promotion/relegation” hahaha talk about archaic protectionist bullshit

• 117.stormersboy:
  3 Apr 2012, 22:54 pm

  @rangerman(rangerman)-109: Hahahahahahaha

  ha

  ha

  ….

  mmmmmm…..

• 118.>^..^< katman:
  3 Apr 2012, 22:54 pm

  @Transformation(Transformation)-116: Except in this case it’s not Swansea or Burnley or Norwich. It’s Royston Vasey, who snuck in there from the fifth division because Prince Charles promised his Mommy they would play.

• 119.victoriabok:
  3 Apr 2012, 22:54 pm

  @Transformation(Transformation)-112:

  Hello Transie, sorry I’ve posted while you were replying

  I know here in NA the sports teams must not only perform on the ice, court or field but there should be enough local support and money as well otherwise the NHL or NFL moves the team

  Do you really think there’s enough local money to sustain a Super Team there?

• 120.>^..^< katman:
  3 Apr 2012, 22:57 pm

  I saw a Kings game on TV on the weekend that seemed to have NOT A SINGLE soul in the stadium. The 40 000 empty red seats made for quite a striking visual.

• 121.Transformation:
  3 Apr 2012, 23:03 pm

  @>^..^< katman(katman)-115: how did the Lions remain in super rugby in 2007 if by not being HANDED the spot to play undeservedly and ILLEGALLY?

  nothing like a hypocrite to jump for obfuscation when all else fails.

  the GLRU are like SAA, a bloody financial vaccum/blackhole but the reckon they’re the on merit.

• 122.>^..^< katman:
  3 Apr 2012, 23:04 pm

  @Transformation(Transformation)-121: Who is the better team – the Kings or the Lions? You have avoided this question 4 time now.

• 123.Transformation:
  3 Apr 2012, 23:06 pm

  @>^..^< katman(katman)-115: first tell me what was the “dynamic” when the bottom dwelling lions were allowed to continue playing in super rugby, the original broederbond fatboys club?

• 124.>^..^< katman:
  3 Apr 2012, 23:11 pm

  @Transformation(Transformation)-123: Don’t be deliberately light with the truth. Everyone knows that SARU stepped in and handed the spot back to the Lions because by mid October the Spears were nowhere near Super Rugby in terms of putting a team together. They had more than enough time, but couldn’t organise a piss-up in a brewery, let alone a half decent rugby squad. SARU did the right thing, and I suspect they will do so again.

• 125.Transformation:
  3 Apr 2012, 23:12 pm

  @victoriabok(victoriabok)-119:yes! do you think the NA leagues would’ve stuck around ellis park the way it was deserted? at one point tgey had no more than a couple of thousand peopke showing up at the stadium.

  do you think the lins with their financial chicanery would’ve survived a guy like david stern?

• 126.>^..^< katman:
  3 Apr 2012, 23:13 pm

  @Transformation(Transformation)-125: See my post no.120. Why weren’t you there? I know you weren’t because NO ONE was.

• 127.Markel77:
  3 Apr 2012, 23:14 pm

  Buaaa chaval, these years i have known many Quota players (too many in fact), this going to be my first Cuota team!!!!!!!!!!

• 128.wooden spoon:
  3 Apr 2012, 23:15 pm

  Lol Transie, you cannot defend the indefensible.

• 129.wooden spoon:
  3 Apr 2012, 23:15 pm

  @Markel77(Markel77)-127: howzit Markel.

• 130.wooden spoon:
  3 Apr 2012, 23:16 pm

  @rangerman(rangerman)-109: eina!

  Food for thought.

  News writers or news makers?…

• 131.Transformation:
  3 Apr 2012, 23:17 pm

  @>^..^< katman(katman)-122: if you’d bothered to answer the question in post #39 then maybe i’d reciprocate.

• 132.Markel77:
  3 Apr 2012, 23:20 pm

  Congratulations Wooden!! good victory in Canberra, Playoffs hopes still alive

• 133.Transformation:
  3 Apr 2012, 23:21 pm

  @>^..^< katman(katman)-124: you are talking kak and you know it hahaha

  tony mckeever would put you to shame with your lies!

  even pissant too.

• 134.>^..^< katman:
  3 Apr 2012, 23:24 pm

  @Transformation(Transformation)-131: This was published on 23 October 2006. That’s a couple of months before they were supposed to have started their S14 season. And this is the EP CEO stating that they cannot participate. But he’s still insisting that they do. Go figure.

  Phillip Joseph, Eastern Province Rugby Union CEO spoke on the weekend about the ongoing debacle between SARugby and the Spears which is partially owned by Eastern Province Rugby Union and he admitted to Liam Del Carme of Beeld that the Spears cannot appear in the 2007 Super 14.

  “We know the Spears do not have the infrastructure to participate in the competition next year but we also realize rugby in the region will deteriorate if we do not play Super 14 rugby,” he said.

• 135.Transformation:
  3 Apr 2012, 23:50 pm

  @>^..^< katman(katman)-134: hehehe stop now, i warn you

  phillip joseph is your credible witness/source tl tl tl

  you are scraping the barrel.

  i will point you to the three court cases the Spears won before the 2007 Super 14 season, EVERYTHING there is FACTUAL not soundbytes from corrupt rugby officials who are under investigation by the Hawks & asset forfeiture unit exactly for taking sweeteners to sellout tony mckeever!

  you have no leg to stand on! haha

• 136.Steel Shark:
  3 Apr 2012, 23:57 pm

  Tough one.

  Lions on the one hand have resumed service as usual: complete mess on and off the field, constantly teetering on the edge of financial ruin not being helped by bone headed decisions like the one to stay at Ellis Park. Sure they have some great young players like Jantjies, Taute and Strauss but it’s hard to see them keeping these guys long term if one of the big boys come knocking.

  Kings on the other, we want them to be good enough before they get a chance but they maintain they need a chance before they can be good. Their current team is KAK and the only way they will attract some decent talent is by guaranteeing Super rugby participation, then and only then could they seriously attempt to attract that wealth of quality currently ex-pats plying their trade in Europe.

  I agree the EC needs more rugby but not sure the Kings are ready for it….

• 137.Transformation:
  4 Apr 2012, 00:07 am

  i never thought i’d see the day where katman has to quote Extraball’s SACOS gatgabbas to make his supposed point hehe

  i guess gerald majola would also vouch that the lions’ finances are in order & j arthur brown seconds him…

• 138.Transformation:
  4 Apr 2012, 00:17 am

  @Steel Shark(Steel Shark)-136: this is the conundrum the world over. in the aviva premiership there’such disparity in the wsy the rfu distributes the money to the clubs to a point where it is sometimes seen as pointless for championship teams to be promoted. the teams that were part of the original premiership apparently get more money just because they have more “shares” in the league. in the event that one if the originals gets relegated they get a golden parachute of £1,75 million, which basically means they outmuscle everyone in the championship because of their financial advantage and bounce back up to premieship immediately.

  there’s nothing meritorious about that system either.

• 139.Robzim:
  4 Apr 2012, 00:18 am

  @Steel Shark(Steel Shark)-136:

  Yip, agree with most of what you have said.

  Bottom line is we do not know whether the Kings are ready or will be able to field a strong enough team but we do know for a fact the Lions are kak and have been kak for a long time and will probably be kak next year again.

  I believe they should just give the Kings a chance now and get it over with. Let the Lions go to court or do whatever they want to do but Saru must pull their fingers out of their arses and fulfil their promises to the Kings.

• 140.Transformation:
  4 Apr 2012, 00:19 am

  @wooden spoon(wooden spoon)-128: say your piece & not just waffle hackneyed one liners.

• 141.Transformation:
  4 Apr 2012, 00:25 am

  @Robzim(Robzim)-139: hi robbie. it won’t happen, like i asked keo earlier on this thread whether he knows if the kings have any valid legally binding papers declaring that saru is including them. keo didn’t answer and i bet you there’s no such piece of paper because regan hoskins will NEVER bite the hands that have fed him since 2006 when they backed him against van rooyen.

• 142.Steel Shark:
  4 Apr 2012, 01:53 am

  @Robzim(Robzim)-139:
  See ideally you would like to see the Kings attract quality players who will benefit the franchise long term the likes of Schalke Britz, Brian Mujati, Ruan Pienaar, FLouw, Jacques Cronje etc. But realistically? They will be lucky to get a few journeyman looking to get one last decent pay cheque before they call time. These guys are on very healthy euro salaries playing for established top clubs over there, coming back and playing for the “ugly red-headed step child” of SA rugby is going to be a hard sell for Cheeky and co.

• 143.bryce_in_oz:
  4 Apr 2012, 02:42 am

  I agree… the Lions should be relegated and the next best in the Currie Cup promoted… that most certainly is NOT the Kings… those useless politically motivated chumps cannot even win the next division down!

• 144.Kiefpant:
  4 Apr 2012, 03:57 am

  Whats going to be really funny is when Lions first choice players start to return from injury while Boks become unavailable or injured later in the season. Its been a horrible start to the season, but even with second stringers they only narrowly lost to the Hurricanes and on another day would have beaten the Stormers. 17 points were gifted to the Sharks too. Its a long season, and while its likely the Lions will finish last on the log, dont count your chickens just yet. As for this Transformation guy carrying on about the rights of the Kings to be included, talk about a racist agenda on his part. If the Kings were even able to compete in the Currie Cup, he may have some reason to complain. Given that they are destined for 80 point plus thumpings, Ill rather ask him “Have you no shame?”.

• 145.bryce_in_oz:
  4 Apr 2012, 04:48 am

  @Kiefpant(Kiefpant)-144:

  Injuries are part and parcel of Super Rugby… ask the Stormers last year… the Lions have been gobshite for the better part of a decade now… time for someone else to share a piece of the pie… but it most certainly isn’t the Kings…

• 146.the artist formerly known as gunther:
  4 Apr 2012, 05:23 am

  They MUST get it.

  Remember there is a stadium to pay for.

  Its standing empty right now.

  I wouldn’t worry though.

  If we can make the charges against Comrade Mduli disappear we can do anything right?

• 147.bryce_in_oz:
  4 Apr 2012, 05:40 am

  @the artist formerly known as gunther(gunther)-146:

  Who is going to pay Luke’s wages, Keo’s commissions and just what coffers are there for Cheeky to swindle if they don’t?

• 148.the artist formerly known as gunther:
  4 Apr 2012, 05:54 am

  What commission has Keo earned?

  It’s not like he was needed to negotiate with Daddy over boy wonder’s allowance?

  I suspect keo is earning his crust on the propoganda front.

  That and the new action figures due to be released as soon as the super rugby spot is secured.

• 149.bryce_in_oz:
  4 Apr 2012, 06:50 am

  @the artist formerly known as gunther(gunther)-148:

  Luke was Voldermort and co’s first ‘big’ sport’s management signing.

• 150.Kiefpant:
  4 Apr 2012, 06:54 am

  @bryce_in_oz(bryce_in_oz)-145:

  The difference is that much like the Cheetahs, the Lions have been getting raped of their talent for the last 10 years too. If you cant hold onto your team with the annual player raids there is not much a side can do to build is there? Amazing what improvement we have seen with just two years of continuity and a capable coach.

  Their record is poor, but they are a major team from the financial heart of the country and have a long history. It does South African rugby no good to see them this poorly managed, but its even worse throwing them away altogether given that too. No side in this competition would be competitive with 13 first choice players injured either, dont give me this “its part of Super Rugby” nonsense. The Reds are not down half as many and we are seeing the Super Rugby champs getting ***** slapped at the moment. And when a second string Lions side, which is basically Vodacom Cup level, can compete to the point they have, then its hardly doom and gloom as far as I am concerned

  For all the jokes made about the Lions, between us and the Cheetahs, we do a good job of keeping your stables well stocked.

  The Kings are a joke. Nothing more than political nonsense, and the fact that an “impartial” journalist like Keo is no longer critical of it just goes to show that perhaps the claim of an agenda on his part may not be that far from the truth. No one should be supportive of this farce.

  The season has a way to go and its reaching the point where we have nothing to lose. The naysayers though? May very well end up eating their hats by the time the final log is posted.

• 151.bryce_in_oz:
  4 Apr 2012, 08:28 am

  @Kiefpant(Kiefpant)-150:

  With all due respect… as one of the once richer and biggest unions in RSA, not being able to ‘hold on to your talent’ is none other than their own fault… I can count on one hand the ‘talent’ that’s been ‘raided’ from the Lions…

  The Lions are a product of their own gross maladministration much like the EC over the years…

  Improvement over the last two years?

  You are kidding me aren’t you… they were only not wooden-spooner’s last year because the Rebels were introduced and they are currently tied at the bottom again!

  This has not been the case of Cheetahs despite being a much smaller union and suffering greater pillaging each year.

  You won’t get any argument from me on the Kings… the chumps cannot even win some second division ****** competition.

• 152.PissAnt:
  4 Apr 2012, 08:44 am

  @Transformation(Transformation)-103:

  I don’t think anyone will argue even an automatic relegation – but to where? And where do you promote from?

  Surely you get demoted to the ‘lower’ league which in this case is the Currie Cup. And the other team then get’s promoted from that league too.

  Even the Heineken Cup has a qualification from the French Top 14 and Aviva comps for HC promotion.

  It still does not solve the problem discussed here – which is why I say develop a bloody roadmap for the Kings starting by entrenching them in a competition we do not have to beg SANZAR for – the Currie Cup. The invest financially in them to make sure they can sustain themselves for the next 2 years whereby after 3 years they can compete on equal footing against any other Currie Cup playing team for Super Rugby qualification.

  That is a rugby solution.

• 153.Transformation:
  4 Apr 2012, 09:14 am

  @PissAnt(PissAnt)-152: All these noble solutions were at the table YEARS ago but Oregan Hoskins & Basil Haddad chose to bulldoze forth (you know all of this) now 6 years later you want to draw up another “road map” like this is the middle east conflict

  the problem is NONE of the existing franchises have EVER had to prove themselves anywhere and in the case of the Cheetahs were BANKROLLED by SARU to get their feet off the ground (remember the R2 million the Cheetahs didn’t want to pay back because they assumed it was a stipend from SARU? what was that about entitlement?), not outside of Super Rugby!

  you really think the corrupt scum like regan have any inherent altruistic intentions? the “good of sa rugby” phrase only applies if the “big five” entrench the grip on rugby nothing else.

  the Lions need a “rugby solution” allow them to sort their s(hit out .

• 154.Transformation:
  4 Apr 2012, 09:16 am

  @bryce_in_oz(bryce_in_oz)-151: we’ve won that competition bryce_in_arse…go google it chump!

• 155.Mr Black:
  4 Apr 2012, 09:23 am

  @Transformation(Transformation)-153:

  Give it to the Kings, let them play. Give them 2 years to build without relegation hanging over them.

  Then see if they can stay up there in the big leaugues. I guess they will fail, and between them and the Lions will play super rugby every second year.

  Do it!

• 156.bryce_in_oz:
  4 Apr 2012, 09:25 am

  @Transformation(Transformation)-154:

  You Gen-Y Xhosa’s really are obsessed with a bit of bum-fun eh?

  You can huff and puff all you like little man… the Kings have NEVER qualified for the lowly Currie Cup and until they do they’re a joke and deserve sweet fanny Adams in any ‘relegation/promotion’ format you continually espouse!

  Even Tony MCeever has come to his senses!

• 157.Transformation:
  4 Apr 2012, 09:32 am

  @bryce_in_oz(bryce_in_oz)-156: blah blah blah wanna-be aussie

• 158.PissAnt:
  4 Apr 2012, 10:11 am

  @Transformation(Transformation)-153:

  I think you need to get just a couple of facts straight.

  At the first mention of the Spears ALL franchises were asked to tender an application for a franchise. The Cheetahs actually scored the highest out of all franchises ending first in the bid process and the Spears last.

  Following this, and since then, they tried to manufacture an entry for the Spears into Super Rugby.

  Even the agreement which SA Rugby was taken to court for was an artificially manufactured concept.

  Granted, McKeever had some great ideas and yes, SA Rugby never wanted to support him for whatever reason so there is reason to feel aggrieved about that perhaps.

  But the cards came tumbling down the moment the Spears/Kings wanted to bulldoze their way into Super Rugby using politics, and the ‘Ace’ in the pack of the hub of ‘black rugby in South Africa’. That became their only drawcard and focus on rugby was completely lost.

  My stance on this is very simple; employ a rugby solution that is sustainable and the whole country will support this.

• 159.Transformation:
  4 Apr 2012, 10:21 am

  @PissAnt(PissAnt)-158:
  elaborate on “artificially manufactured concept.”. is your concept a “genuinely manufactured concept”?

  why were the Spear not allowed to play Currie Cup in ’06?

  Mckeever even suggested the bullshit “promotion/relegation” still SARU declined where the “politics” as you say then?

  how much of the agreed budget that SARU was to assist the Spears with actually materialised? but they had the money to buy out the feeder unions and pay lawyers.

• 160.Transformation:
  4 Apr 2012, 10:28 am

  @PissAnt(PissAnt)-152: different stance 6 year later

  5.PissAnt said:
  18 Nov 2006, 10:06 am
  Hmmm,

  That is a load of kak.

  To compare them to the Cheetahs is rich.

  The Cheetahs has been an established team for decades, and the fact that they did not have S14 status means nothing.
  They had players, they had a coach, they had a world class stadium, history, money, etc.

  The Spears started from nothing – zilch – nada.

  Their (Cheetahs) main sponsor Vodacom is pumping R50-mil into the franchise over 5 years alone.

  As for the Spears, it was in Saru’s mandate to help secure sponsors for them – they did not.

  The Spears operating budget for 2006 was R12-mil – a budget Haddad specifically was aware of – they are still well short of that.

  The Spears, on their own, secured an apparel sponsor and a media sponsor.

  As for a title sponsor – how can you expect any business to be interested in them when Saru does not even recognise them or give them any games (CC) and shaft them left right and center.

  Your views are provincialistic and for your sake I hope the Cats/Lions improves their performance in 2007 because another 2006 will see more than people just laughing at them.

• 161.PissAnt:
  4 Apr 2012, 10:29 am

  @Transformation(Transformation)-159:

  Artificial in the sense it was politically motivated. SA Rugby spent R10-mil on the Spears if memory serves. And a lot more killing them.

  I was not part of the negotiations so I cannot tell you a) why or if the Spears asked for CC participation in 2006 and b) why it was not granted or never considered.

  So those are your questions answered.

  I would again highlight the very important fact to you that when all franchises were asked to tender, the Spears came last effectively ending a ‘fair’ inclusion into Super Rugby.

  Since then, it has been moving from one mess to another trying to create a politically motivated reason for inclusion.

  Why do the Kings not insist on a tender for franchises again (especially since licenses to franchises expire the end of this year)? They won the tender for the Sevens tournament – if they are really ready and that much better than the Lions or ‘deserve’ it more than they do, let them go up against them and everyone else through a franchise tender process…

• 162.PissAnt:
  4 Apr 2012, 10:36 am

  @Transformation(Transformation)-160:

  Different stance?

  Sorry transie that will not fly. You can post every single comment of mine from 2005 onwards on this issue and my stance remains exactly the same.

  I have always supported a franchise in this region, stated in this thread too mind you, but not once did I, or will I support politically motivated entrenchment into any competition. The fact that the Spears/Kings is the hub of black rugby is a bonus, not leverage.

  The comment above referred to SA Rugby failing to support the team or franchise financially, and I will make exactly the same point if it happens in future again (as they will again need help).

  My stance on this has never changed.

• 163.Transformation:
  4 Apr 2012, 10:43 am

  @PissAnt(PissAnt)-162: where has it been made “leverage”?

• 164.Transformation:
  4 Apr 2012, 10:54 am

  @PissAnt(PissAnt)-161: let them open up the tenders then and we have a transparent process adjudicated by independent auditors.

  the way some unions are in debt i bet you the Kings can take them!

• 165.Mr Black:
  4 Apr 2012, 11:02 am

  @Transformation(Transformation)-163:

  Are you stupid or something?

• 166.Transformation:
  4 Apr 2012, 11:26 am

  @Mr Black(Mr Black)-165: no, are you?

• 167.the artist formerly known as gunther:
  4 Apr 2012, 11:38 am

  They must have it.
  

• 168.Mr Black:
  4 Apr 2012, 11:42 am

  @Transformation(Transformation)-166:

  Prove it by talking out of your mouth and not you’re arhse.

• 169.Transformation:
  4 Apr 2012, 11:57 am

  @Mr Black(Mr Black)-168: do you have anything of value to say on the issue or like spooner just hackling me?

  say it to my face next time you see me?

• 170.the artist formerly known as gunther:
  4 Apr 2012, 12:05 pm

  Fark.

  That’s rich indeed Floyd.
  

• 171.rangerman:
  4 Apr 2012, 12:16 pm

  @Transformation(Transformation)-169: seriuously transie, mr black has a point, leverage it has been and leverage it will be.

  even though the team is white white white.

• 172.Transformation:
  4 Apr 2012, 12:16 pm

  @the artist formerly known as gunther(gunther)-170: you can chirp, because we’re not talking rugby, only administration of rugby

• 173.the artist formerly known as gunther:
  4 Apr 2012, 12:21 pm

  I’ll chirp you whenver I want boy.
  

  Rugby or admistration of rugby you still talk out yer bumhole.

  Nobody falls for your guff my little body language expert.

  However much you gaan on about skillsets yadayadam
  

• 174.Transformation:
  4 Apr 2012, 12:26 pm

  @rangerman(rangerman)-171: nowhere has it been used as leverage…it is only a bonus…go take a look at the Kings & Border rugby academies, there’s no BIAS to include only “hordes” of black players!

  players like matthew taylor-smith, shane gates, who are EP schools products know they are starters or will get an equal chance to play any day!

  this “political leverage” nonsense is a red herring used by those opposed to the SEC getting a franchise to pillory the region. they know it gets the backs of the white population up and lo & behold the inane “chirps” about entitlement etc

  FFS go look at the school rugby in the province you will find that the teams are on MERIT 60 to 70% black already so inevitably SOME black talent will flourish, it is not the sole purpose!

• 175.the artist formerly known as gunther:
  4 Apr 2012, 12:27 pm

  Sorry.

  Meant to say my boy.

  That came across as overly harsh.

  Apologies Floyd.

• 176.Mr Black:
  4 Apr 2012, 12:31 pm

  @the artist formerly known as gunther(gunther)-175:

  

• 177.Transformation:
  4 Apr 2012, 12:31 pm

  @the artist formerly known as gunther(gunther)-173: what do you “gaan aan” about, maevis, your education, your cars, where you live, disparaging other bloggers and TJOEPS about rugby, fokkol

  keep chirping Tweety

• 178.the artist formerly known as gunther:
  4 Apr 2012, 12:36 pm

  OoOhhhhh Transie.

  Seems like somebody is upset.

  Let’s talk about something you want to talk about.

  Peadophilia?

  If you aren’t interested in what I have to say just ignore me.

  You will be happier.

• 179.Transformation:
  4 Apr 2012, 12:39 pm

  @the artist formerly known as gunther(gunther)-178: upset?

  hehehe not a chance. you give yourself too much credit Tweety.

• 180.rangerman:
  4 Apr 2012, 12:40 pm

  @Transformation(Transformation)-174: kuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuk man lmao!

  solly has alluded to the black thing countless times as has that sheeky fellow.

  i dont have time for kukpraat ok? facts is facts sorry buddy.

• 181.the artist formerly known as gunther:
  4 Apr 2012, 12:40 pm

  As for disparaging other bloggers that’s farking rich coming from you.

  You are not to be taken seriously.
  

• 182.>^..^< katman:
  4 Apr 2012, 12:45 pm

  During the pitch & woo phase all we heard about was the 200 000 rugby impis waiting to be liberated from the shackles of their dusty hillside pitches. Now it’s a “bonus” if any of them see game time? Smoke and fcken mirrors abound in the friendly city.

• 183.Transformation:
  4 Apr 2012, 14:26 pm

  @rangerman(rangerman)-180: look i don’t have to convince you of anything

  you are making the claims, it is up to you to prove them! the EC is the “home of black rugby” that is not a mission statement of the Kings, it is a REALITY, a reality that is blatanly evident when you consider that 95% of the Sharks’ players of colour ALL hail from the EC – ndungane, mvovo, sithole, mthembu, vulindlu, loubscher, kayser, tyibilika, bobo.

  Solly has ALWAYS said we want “our boys home” ie dewalt, keegan, kanko, kockott, rory duncan, siya kolisi, tim whitehead, akhona ndungane, andile jho etc.

  so gaan aan with the kak praat

  it makes for fun reading.

Latest Rugby News by Category

• Super Rugby

  544

  Bulls boss classy Cheetahs

  The Bulls are South Africa’s best team and they proved it in Bloemfontein. Read More

• Springboks

  184

  Jean bracketed for Samoa

  Jean de Villiers will be given the rest of the week to recover in time to face Samoa in Pretoria. Read More

• World Cup

  13

  RFU rejects cheeky Welsh request

  The Rugby Football Union has turned down a proposal from their Welsh counterparts to stage the 2015 World Cup pool match between England and Wales in Cardiff. Read More

• Sevens

  14

  England bury Boks

  Marcus Watson scored in extra time to beat the Blitzbokke in the London World Series Sevens Cup quarter-finals. Read More

• Six Nations

  88

  Kilted Kiwi takes charge of Scots

  Kiwi Vern Cotter is Scotland’s new head coach. Read More

• The Rugby Championship

  312

  Ranger rocks France

  Rene Ranger was among the few highlights in New Zealand’s 23-13 win against France in Auckland. Read More

Find us on Facebook

Follow Keo on Twitter

twitter.com/keocoza