KeoTV: Bonus-point Bulls will be back

KeoTV: Bonus-point Bulls will be back

3 Apr 2012

MARK KEOHANE says the Bulls weren’t good enough at Newlands but the Lions will never be good enough.


183 Comments

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 » Show All

  • 1.Finfan: Reply to this comment
    3 Apr 2012, 14:59 pm

    Pink dragons will never be up to it.

  • 2.Slappes: Reply to this comment
    3 Apr 2012, 15:14 pm

    The lions are building.

  • 3.Slappes: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    3 Apr 2012, 15:51 pm

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

  • 6.White Shark: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    3 Apr 2012, 16:04 pm

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

  • 9.Oranjebliksemblou: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    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...: Reply to this comment
    3 Apr 2012, 16:19 pm

    @Doppies(Doppies)-5:
    :lol:

    @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: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    3 Apr 2012, 16:24 pm

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

  • 16.Transformation: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    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. :D

  • 21.namLion: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    3 Apr 2012, 16:41 pm

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

  • 25.Transformation: Reply to this comment
    3 Apr 2012, 16:41 pm

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

  • 26.NoRugbyGuru_0_: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    3 Apr 2012, 16:43 pm

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

  • 28.NoRugbyGuru_0_: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    3 Apr 2012, 16:44 pm

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

  • 32.NoRugbyGuru_0_: Reply to this comment
    3 Apr 2012, 16:45 pm

    @ Keo, amen hairless man amen

  • 33.>^..^< katman: Reply to this comment
    3 Apr 2012, 16:45 pm

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

  • 34.Transformation: Reply to this comment
    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_: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    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_: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    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_: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    3 Apr 2012, 16:55 pm

    @keo(keo)-44: Oh, nothing then…

    They clearly deserve their spot…

  • 48.NoRugbyGuru_0_: Reply to this comment
    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: Reply to this comment
    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 :D

  • 50.Rum And Maple: Reply to this comment
    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…

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 » Show All

Keo.co.za has always promoted uncensored views, but has never tolerated racist or crass outbursts. Come on guys and girls. If you can't moderate yourselves or each other then I am going to be forced to regulate the posts and enforce a registration process for comments. The choice is yours.

Have your say

You must be logged in to post a comment.