Lions set for chop?
11 May 2012
Saru has confirmed its plan to relegate the last-placed South African franchise at the end of the season.
This proposed solution was made by Saru’s executive council at its special general meeting in January. The top four teams on the SA conference log would therefore join the Kings in 2013. As it stands, the Lions would drop out.
Saru said a promotion-relegation play-off would then take place after the 2013 and 2014 campaigns.
However, the franchises requested that a decision on the mechanism of qualification be postponed to allow them time to make alternative proposals. The officials at the general meeting accepted the request. Saru CEO Jurie Roux asked for it to be recorded that this delay was at the franchises’ request, therefore precluding the franchises from criticism of late decision-making.
A final decision will be made after meetings with the SA Super Rugby franchises on 17 May, the Saru executive committee on 24 May and the Saru general council on 13 July (21 rounds into the 2012 Super Rugby tournament).
‘Rugby has been consistently united in supporting the Kings’ place in Super Rugby in 2013,’ said Roux. ‘Our focus has been on finding a rugby answer to the questions that flow from that that’s fair, transparent in its mechanism and will strengthen South African rugby in the long run. Those discussions continue.
‘Until a final decision is reached, the franchises and the Saru presidency are agreed that it would be unhelpful to the competing teams to publicly debate the pros and cons of different scenarios. When a decision is announced we will be able to report back to rugby supporters in full.’
305 Comments
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 » Show All
11 May 2012, 11:08 am
@willievz(willievz)-99:
If the competition was reduced to only 4 or 3 teams per country, then some would inevitably fall out.
But if a traditional powerhouse has to make way for the Broad Bottomened Kings, for political reasons, then no, I am not happy with it. Even if it is the Stormers.
11 May 2012, 11:09 am
@Tacitus(Deucalion)-93: Fair point, however human nature is such (these days) that I’d be surprised if anyone ever postponed short term benefit for possible long term gain any more.
But I don;t agree that the unions have a guaranteed perpetual right to remain in the competition.
Look at some of the great clubs of English Football.
Some that won the league in the ’60s aren’t even in the top flight any more. And rightfully so, despite what nostalgic fans may say. Meritocracy rules.
11 May 2012, 11:09 am
I think many bloggers need to revisit the difference between unions and franchises.
They are not the same.
11 May 2012, 11:12 am
Was the E/Cape (of which the Kings will be made up) not part of the Coastal Sharks when super rugby started?
If memory serves they sold their rights to be part of super rugby to the Sharks?
Now the piggy’s are hungry and want to feed again?
11 May 2012, 11:13 am
Well don’t mind if I missinterpreted a sentence…
11 May 2012, 11:13 am
@PieterJordaan(PieterJordaan)-43:
no man, take the kings out of the equation and focus on how kak the lions are and have been for 16 years..?..
11 May 2012, 11:14 am
@willievz(willievz)-103:
That is a long running debate. I have shown evidence to demonstrate that the Best performing teams from South Africa are the ones that consisted virtually exclusively of players from the Big Union the franchise represents.
And in contrast to you, I argue that this is how it should be. The continuity built up from the Currie Cup season – especially after a number of consecutive seasons of performance – such as achieved by Meyer at the Bulls – is the only proven success recipe for Super Rugby success by a South African team.
So while you may think that there shoudl be a seperation between Union and Franchise, I have always argued the contrary. And am borne out by the reality of the situation, in the case of the Bulls, Sharks and Stormers.
Show me the non Bulls, Sharks or WP players in their match 22′s, please.
11 May 2012, 11:19 am
The vitriol here reminds me back in the early 2000′s when cricket moved from the provincial structure to franchises, all the usual kenners, who happened to white were saying the same thing about EP/Border cricket, we have seen it all before.
If that lot wasn’t forced into that arrangement back then, the likes of Ntini, Parnell, Tsotsobe, Rusty Theron, Colin Ingram, Ashwell Prince, Johan Botha would be playing for the Lions, Dolphins, WP or Titans.
To remind you, back in 2000′s EP/Border cricket was bankrupt and bleeding players to “bigger” unions, now the Warriors boast a minimum of 7 Proteas, no other union comes close to them, well, WP will now, that they have bought Boucher and Steyn.
Guess which franchise has represented SA in the World Franchise Tournament more than any other franchise?
11 May 2012, 11:26 am
@Tacitus(Deucalion)-107: But those top Currie Cup teams you are referring to are de facto beneficiaries of Super Rugby money. A question for you, would these CC unions be these gladiators without Rupert Murdoch’s money?
11 May 2012, 11:27 am
@XhosaKid(XhosaKid)-94: you’re wasting your breath (or in this case bandwidth), Tac is bonafide elitist.
fate dealt his a kak hand when he was born in south africa, he should’ve been born in switzerland or something
11 May 2012, 11:32 am
The reality is that the 5 SA franchises are built around the 5 strongest CC unions, and that is what has and will always make sense.
For the odd exception every now and then the 5 unions which dominate the CC and are in real contention to be champions for the last 20 years have been Lions, Bulls, WP, Cheetahs and Sharks.
These are the teams around which rightfully the franchises are build .. it makes business and just plain normal sense. To give yourself the best chance you have to use your strongest options.
If I had my way I would prefer the s12 to return anyway .. with the top 4 CC teams from the year before competing, strengthened by the other SA unions for super rugby.
11 May 2012, 11:32 am
@XhosaKid(XhosaKid)-109:
Well, you can create a strong franchise out of nothing, based in De Aar, if you pump R100 million into them and buy all the best players, so your argument is a bit absurd.
Of course any franchise needs money to be successful. But what we argue about is what makes a franchise deserving of getting this money?
I say it should be the top 5 unions in the country that go through to Super Rugby.
You say that it should be the top 4, plus the Easten Cape, for some symbolic reason that I don’t agree with.
But then, this is a neverending debate, isn’t it.
11 May 2012, 11:33 am
Breaks my heart.
11 May 2012, 11:37 am
All the half decent Lions players will either go overseas or to other unions Mitchell and Spencer will also leave. The Kings will probably snap up most of them. The Lions wont be able to sign any players without Super rugby status unless they have mega bucks(which they dont have). So come relegation time the Lions will probably lose to the Kings. And so the fall of a once reputable union begins.
11 May 2012, 11:44 am
@Tacitus(Deucalion)-112: It’s the biggest black rugby player base, remember. That’s why the deserve it and not, say, De Aar or Namibia or Limpopo. 200 000 registered and rearing to go, held back only by the fact that the racists don’t want cheeky to play with them. I’m sure this about to be unleashed hotbed of Xhosa rugby awesomeness will shut the likes of me and you up for good. Can’t wait.
11 May 2012, 11:47 am
@Paws(Paws)-111: Simply put, if one takes away Newscorp money from the Lions and its given to the Kings for 5 years in a row, what will be the effect?
11 May 2012, 11:52 am
@Tacitus(Deucalion)-112: What makes the current Top 5 unions the current Top 5, its surely not better administrators and if its not, its the gravy train money they get from Murdoch via Super Rugby, this is the money that filters through to the union and boom!!!, you have the Top 5 unions.
So, you have practically agreed with me without even knowing it. Get sharp Tac, get sharp, we know this game.
11 May 2012, 11:52 am
It is really immaterial what the Lions record is in super rugby this year, last year or even the last 10 or 15 years.
The facts of the matter are that SA has 5 spots at the super rugby table, which need to be filled by the 5 strongest SA teams.
Does anyone truly believes in their hearts and heads that the kings (made up of 3 teams that play in the B division of the CC) are (or will be) better and stronger than the current 5 franchises representing SA?
They are going to be doing the region, there players and fans an injustice by having the kings partake in super rugby. They are being set up to fail by greed.
This problem could have been sorted long ago.
How difficult would it have been to include the kings (as they would be as a super franchise with the 3 cc teams combined) into the A-division of the CC and prepare them for 2-3 years, access their progress, and then make a call on their readiness for super rugby.
But greed, corruption and plain stupidity unfortunately like too much in our current SA society spoils the day.
11 May 2012, 11:53 am
@Falken(Falken)-114: Spot on!!!
11 May 2012, 11:54 am
@>^..^< katman(katman)-115: Yes yes yes!!!! I’m already picturing a mighty 15-man army, every one of them making Pierre Spies look like a gangly teenager, all marching in perfect unison like the hammers in Pink Floyd’s The Wall, crushing all who dare to stand before them like bugs…..
11 May 2012, 11:56 am
@Paws(Paws)-118: In my heart, in my head, in truth, in mathematical reality, YES, I do believe that the Kings will be better than the Lions, especially taking into account brains and administrative abilities of both teams.
11 May 2012, 11:56 am
I also feel that Swaziland should be granted automatic entry into the next two World Cups (probably at Portugal or Namibia’s expense, but you can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs, can you) because if they were given the same sort of money as, say, England, they’d undoubtedly be fukkenawesome.
11 May 2012, 12:00 pm
Super 15 is stuffing up SA rugby.
Whether the Cheetahs, Lions, Bulls, Stormers or Sharks fell out of S15, the results for that union will be devastating. I know they are called franchises but in reality they are the unions and then maybe a couple of outsiders. Lets face the truth of the matter.
This country can field 6 unions if we limit top-flight rugby to 6 unions only. Unfortunately we have the Currie Cup which is a mess and is really a waste of time now. SANZAR have destroyed SA domestic rugby competitions and SARU have let it happen.
If there is an agreement that SARU have to abide by then they should pull out the financial card, since we subsidise Aus and NZ and get the agreement changed to suit us.
I’ve said it earlier. WE cannot have S15 and Currie Cup anymore, we can only have one. There simply are not enough weekends in the year to accommodate both. SARU need to cut one competition adrift. I would rather see S15 go so we can set up 6 highly competitive unions and then come back in when we are allowed 6 teams. Or we change the S15 to a Heineken Cup format of small pools.
Certainly if I were ABSA I’d want my money back from the Currie Cup. There is so little value left in it.
The current set-up is an unholy mess and has to be fixed. SARU need to grow some nuts. We need someone is not out to make friends to run the show for a few years – perhaps we need some ugly Louis Luyt type tough love?
11 May 2012, 12:01 pm
@>^..^< katman(katman)-122: You would be smart ,funny and true if Swaziland had a history of bleeding players to England and the likes, but that doesn’t exist now, does it?
11 May 2012, 12:05 pm
@Paws(Paws)-104: My point exactly, as I mentioned on this site a few days ago. Don’t recall exact details but do recall an amount of R400 000 changing hands for giving the hosting rights to the Sharks…but with regards to the TV rights side of things though I cannot remember but seem to think it was a “permanent deal”.
Perhaps somebody out there can recall further.
11 May 2012, 12:09 pm
@XhosaKid(XhosaKid)-124: EITA daar! ugqibele nini emakhaya?
11 May 2012, 12:12 pm
@XhosaKid(XhosaKid)-121:
Don’t take the pain and disappointment to personal when they lose game after game, week-end after week-end, year after year … after all as a Lions fan I am use to this frustration.
You think it was just plain fluke and money that made the Lions a strong union the last 100 years?
You need Chelsea or Man City type of money to buy almost instant or short time success, and super rugby ain’t gone give the kings that king of money and buying power.
11 May 2012, 12:30 pm
@Paws(Paws)-118:
5 franchise slots don’t need to be filled by the 5 strongest unions.
It needs to be filled by the best 110 players though.
The New Zealand model is a superb example of what can be achieved if provincialism plays second fiddle to the greater national cause.
11 May 2012, 12:34 pm
# 113 Rooooooooaaaaaar….meeeooouuuuuu1!
11 May 2012, 12:44 pm
@willievz(willievz)-128:
If I’m not mistaken they still have stong unions as there core around which the team is built?
Auckland Blues
Cantebury Crusaders
Otago Highlanders
? Hurricanes
? Chiefs
It is easier to slot players into a team than building up teams from scratch .. and anyway, most of the top 110 players are at the stronger unions anyway.
With the current comp, one can also not blame anyone to not share player resorces, you need dept in this new version because there is just to much rugby.
11 May 2012, 13:10 pm
@Tacitus(Deucalion)-107: Agreed, but why even bother with calling WP the Stormers etc.
11 May 2012, 13:17 pm
@zoo cleaner(zoo cleaner)-123: The only way to save the Currie Cup is for it to double as the play-off stages for a shortened Super Rugby competition where only the best teams participate. This would mean that the Currie Cup will have to be played before Super Rugby. Unfortunately, I think the changes of selling such an idea too the money-grabbing fcuknuts of SANZAR is a long shot.
11 May 2012, 13:47 pm
Indeed, a sad day in Hell.
I do hope the Lions can contest this decision through the Courts.
The incompetence of the SARU is truely unbelievable.
I have nothing against the Kings………………………………………….But why could these events not have put on hold until 2015, when the NewsCorp “Deal” was renegotiated.
11 May 2012, 13:47 pm
@Transformation(Transformation)-126: Bendidlule eGcuwa on my way to kuGatyana last year ngoDecember
11 May 2012, 13:53 pm
@Paws(Paws)-127: What you lot don’t get is that EP rugby didn’t deteriorate to what it became because of lack of player talent. EP became runnish because of the type of poor management as epitomized by the current Lions set up, So, ceterus paribus, in 2022, the Lions will be exactly where EP found themselves for the last decade.
11 May 2012, 14:09 pm
@XhosaKid(XhosaKid)-135:
Just to correct you, not the current set up, the few too many before …
I can honestly say that in my 40 years or so of existence that the EC was never really a strong rugby region .. they had an occasion or two to shine in the sun, some good teams in the 80’s, but since then they have sucked.
This is a politically driven, and the greed of the gravy train is right there along with it.
There are very few, if any rugby reasons.
One of the reasons given is the development of ‘black’ rugby player .. Let’s see if that happens, I doubt it.
This strangely reminds me allot about the current e-toll saga
11 May 2012, 14:23 pm
@Paws(Paws)-136: A question, what is the case for the Lions, we have heard all the reasons pro/anti Kings, how about the Lions, what’s their case?
11 May 2012, 14:24 pm
@Tacitus(Deucalion)-112: Hayibo….what is this word you use ‘deserving’ ? Is there a Pedi word for that ?
In South Africa….’we demand’….eeeee…not ‘we deserve’…….get out you bloody agent….
11 May 2012, 14:26 pm
@XhosaKid(XhosaKid)-137: I’ll give you one.
The Lions – as pathetic as they are – won the Currie Cup. How did EP do in the Currie Cup ?
I will give you another one. The Lions would thrash ten different shades of **** into the Kings if they played a relegation match right now.
And I will give you one last one. The Lions actually qualify or ‘deserve’ to play Currie Cup. This is how it works in most world structures, except African ones. You work your way up through the system and get to the top because you deserve it. You wanna know why the Kings dont play Currie Cup ? Because they cant even make the final of the Vodacom Cup…..hawa…eish…got it now ?
11 May 2012, 14:29 pm
If I were the Lions – I wouldn’t just lie down and take this. There must be some kind of legal recourse for them. Surely contracts have been signed etc. ? Come Lions….fight this….
11 May 2012, 14:29 pm
@XhosaKid(XhosaKid)-137: Simple: there are 5 SA teams in the competition, and they are among the top 5 (regardless of how poorly they’re doing in the Super15).
Can the Kings say that? Because that’s all it should be about.
11 May 2012, 14:32 pm
@>^..^< katman(katman)-141: Exactly – but the reason your argument is not connecting with u’Transformation and u’Xhosa kid is because that is not how it works in their minds.
The idea of progression via merit does not twig for them.
The rest of us all get it. Don’t worry.
11 May 2012, 14:35 pm
@Paws(Paws)-136: Every cloud has a silver lining though. You know, all of us have a primal drive to watch a gladiator fight between a villain and a much stronger opponent.
It will be fun – great fun actually to watch the Kings get mauled next season. And I want to see at least 10 ethnic players from the Eastern Cape region in the team.
11 May 2012, 14:37 pm
@Dusky(Dusky)-139: Simply, The Lions won the Currie Cup because they received Murdoch’s money along with WP/Bulls and Sharks and the later group had its ” Murdoch money” (read here players) busy with the Springboks RWC campaign. As I did say last year to ridicule, CC shouldn’t be played in RWC year, as its a distortion of reality and history.
Would the Lions thrash ten different shades of ****** into the Kings once you give the Kings Murdoch’s money for 10 years and give the Lions nothing for the same period?, better yet, lets try it out and see what will happen, lets start in 2013 and have this relegation/promotion game in 2024.
“Qualify”, “Deserve”, ” How it works in most structures, except African ones”, wow!! rational genious, where do you come from, Did Natal/Sharks “qualify”, “deserve” or better yet, who did Natal beat to “qualify” to play the Currie Cup?
11 May 2012, 14:39 pm
@>^..^< katman(katman)-141: Can the Lions say the same without the gravy train Newscorp money?
11 May 2012, 14:40 pm
So glad to see the hopeless Lions getting booted………………. The biggest embarrassment to super rugby i have ever encountered!!!!!!!!!!!!!
11 May 2012, 14:40 pm
@XhosaKid(XhosaKid)-145: Nice try. They’ve been among the top 5 long before News Corp was even a twinkle in the Murdoch eye. Once again, can the Kings say that?
11 May 2012, 14:41 pm
@XhosaKid(XhosaKid)-144: But – whichever method was used – that is the status quo now isn’t it ? As Tactitus has tried to explain to you several times, that argument holds absolutely no water – except in your own head. I am not going to bother trying to explain to you why.
Actually, Natal beat Northern Free State in 1989 to qualify to play Currie Cup in 1990 – which they won. I get that you don’t get this. As I said, the idea of merit progression is lost on you. South Africa will pay for that eventually unfortunately.
11 May 2012, 14:41 pm
@Dusky(Dusky)-139: Well said, Sir…(or madam!)
11 May 2012, 14:41 pm
@Dusky(Dusky)-142: What is merit in this instance, the fact that I’m empowering you with substantive knowledge so that you can argue your point intelligently is merit, ironic, the only person involved here is the one who chose not to use emotion but facts and reason.
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 » Show All
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.