Saru’s Super Rugby solution not set in stone
23 Aug 2012
GARETH DUNCAN says while most of South Africa bemoaned Saru’s decision-making in accommodating the Southern Kings next season, many missed the fine print.
On Thursday last week, Saru announced that the Lions would be relegated from the South African Super Rugby conference in order to make way for the Kings. This was the decision voted by majority of the 14 unions at the annual general meeting, after no other suitable solution could be drawn up after months and months of negotiations and emergency meetings.
Saru also announced its promotion-relegation initiative, which will allow the Lions to compete for a Super Rugby place in 2014 as they’ll face next year’s last placed South African franchise in a play-off.
Many pundits see this as a lose-lose situation. And they are right.
Let’s look at the Kings.
It’s ridiculous to expect them to escape the wooden spoon in their debut season (well, at least in the South African conference which was the strongest group in this year’s competition). Super Rugby trends have proven that the newbies don’t do well during their early years. The Melbourne Rebels and Western Force finished last in their debut campaigns and still feature in the bottom half of the table every season, despite the odd upset victory. The Lions and Cheetahs haven’t fared much better since splitting from the Cats initiative in 2006.
The Kings will also struggle to recruit the necessary player base to be competitive at Super Rugby level. High-profile names will be hesitant to sign a one-year contract as the Eastern Cape franchise can’t guarantee tournament participation in 2014.
Saru’s answer to the media’s question of the Kings not being given enough time to carry out the necessary plans to ensure they will be competitive in 2013 was that the confirmation on their exclusion was made ‘several months ago’.
If this is so, the national administrators handled the situation poorly.
There were several stories that speculated the Kings were going to be dropped at the last minute. This including the report from the Weekend Argus in July that Saru offered the Eastern Cape franchise R40 million to stall their Super Rugby ambitions until 2016. If this was false, why didn’t Saru come out publicly and denounce these rumours?
This did the Kings no favours.
Kings boss Cheeky Watson has complained that they’re not happy with being given only one season to prove themselves. But Saru CEO Jurie Roux has revealed a way for them to extend their stay.
While most of the media focused on lamenting Saru’s decision, Roux confirmed that if the Kings received the majority vote to have an extended stay in Super Rugby at the next annual general meeting, and if this was passed by Saru’s executive council, then it would be granted.
Roux did, however, add that this is unlikely.
When it comes to the Lions, they’re in a very tricky situation.
While they’re in the Super Rugby wilderness, they’re also in trouble financially as reported on keo.co.za on Wednesday.
Saru confirmed that they are in negotiations with powers up north to see if the Lions could compete in any European competitions in 2013, but this is unlikely to happen as the European season starts in a couple of weeks.
However, Roux revealed a way for the Lions to feature in Super Rugby next season. He said the South African franchises are ‘businesses’ and they are allowed to run their ‘businesses’ as they’re pleased. So if the Lions were to amalgamate with another South African franchise, this would be allowed.
The only issue is, who would want to merge with a franchise in financial turmoil? The Lions have shot themselves in the foot (maybe even the chest) in the way they’ve run their business.
Saru’s Super Rugby solution is not set in stone. The Lions and Kings are likely to appeal its current terms, but the national union is unlikely to budge. If possible, the franchises should look at the fine print to solve their woes, more so the Kings.
Follow Gareth on Twitter
Follow SA Rugby magazine on Twitter
623 Comments
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 … 13 » Show All
23 Aug 2012, 11:53 am
@David-145: professional era davey, professional era.
wp were relegated.
my word on this is final, you shouldnt bother trying to convince me further.
23 Aug 2012, 11:55 am
@i_love_u_bakkiesbotha-149: exactly, it was in a pro era too.
a bitter pill but one david must swallow finally after keeping it hidden in his cheek for all these years.
23 Aug 2012, 11:55 am
@i_love_u_bakkiesbotha-149:
You’re right. I was confusing the S10 and S12.
23 Aug 2012, 11:56 am
What will happen to the Lions players during the S15 next year? Must be a worry for them. Could they not be ‘on a loan basis’ to other franchises during the S15? Doubt Lions will want to release them from their contracts or they may have too, them being in financial difficulties.
23 Aug 2012, 11:56 am
@rangerman-151:
So you agree then, that since Natal played in 1993 and 1994 Super 10, but not in 1995, that they were relegated in 1995 as well?
23 Aug 2012, 11:56 am
Clem Sunter Chairman of Anglo ?
News to me.
23 Aug 2012, 11:57 am
@rangerman-151:
How could they be relegated if they didn’t qualify, in the first place?
23 Aug 2012, 11:58 am
Simple analysis:
Lions just go quietly into the night – who are Gauteng players and supporters going to flock to? Free gain for no expense by the Bulls.
If the Bulls merge with the Lions on the other hand, they still get this same gain of players and supporters (maybe adding 10% more than they currently have), but have to share like half their revenues with the Lions.
It would be stupid to even consider it.
Nope. Just let the Lions fade away, and move in on their territory independent of any alliance with them. No free handouts, sorry.
23 Aug 2012, 11:58 am
@Puma-150: but you okes didn’t think he was worth it and played john at tighthead!
23 Aug 2012, 11:58 am
@David-157:
23 Aug 2012, 11:59 am
@rangerman-152:
@David-153:
yip
them’s the breaks
23 Aug 2012, 11:59 am
@Transformation-143:
i will read up on clem sunter.
its all sensible stuff really.
23 Aug 2012, 11:59 am
damning evidence….next time we want to moan about the conference system and how aussie teams are
getting an unfair advantage we must remember that we came up with the idea
South African incompetence wins the day
THE MAUL: By JIM KAYES – Thursday, 30 October 2008
The South Africans wanted a finals system that saw the top finishing side from New Zealand, Australia
and South Africa host a playoff. Sanity has prevailed.
The decision to scrap plans for an extended Super 14 finals series next year is hardly surprising. After
all, South Africa were involved.
The South African Rugby Union is so incompetent it is still staggering that Jake White was able to keep
things together long enough for the Springboks to win last year’s World Cup.
But their demands over next year’s finals were ridiculous and sanity has prevailed with the expanded
series delayed till 2010 when a bigger competition will probably be played in conferences.
So what was the fuss? Well, fed up with their poor track record in the Super 14, the South Africans
had wanted a top-six finals system that saw the top finishing side from New Zealand, Australia and
South Africa host a playoff.
Their opponents would be the next best qualifying teams.
The blatant unfairness of such a system, which could have seen a team finish outside the top six but still
host a playoff, seemed lost on South Africa.
Perhaps given their history of discrimination such a stupid system is simply second nature.
23 Aug 2012, 12:00 pm
Most are missing the typical SARU ‘inference’… a year is a long time and they will probably scrap the entire relegation/promotion ‘promise’…
Laughable the innuendo, board-room deals, broken promises in RSA rugby!
23 Aug 2012, 12:01 pm
@Transformation-163: what the hell happened to the text!
23 Aug 2012, 12:02 pm
@Transformation-159: I know but think Cilliers is a ‘Shark at heart’ would like to see him back at the tank.
What will happen to all Lions players now? Feel for all of them really. Hope other franchises can use them on loan until their mess is sorted out in a years time.
23 Aug 2012, 12:03 pm
@Transformation-165:
dramatic pause.?..
23 Aug 2012, 12:03 pm
@Transformation-163:
I reject that article – which is from 2008 by the way. The Super 15 only kicked in in 2011. And closer to the implementation date, it was the AUSSIES who were moaning for compulsory inclusion in the play-offs, precisely because SA had had two teams in the final in 2009 and 2007, and had finalists in pretty much every other year for the last few years.
It was the Aussies who were losing out on money, and pushing for this stupid system. I will not accept any claims to the contrary.
(Smiley face.)
23 Aug 2012, 12:06 pm
@Tacitus-147:
If there is no formal super rugby partnership agreement, Lions can refuse their contracted players to play for the franchise.
23 Aug 2012, 12:07 pm
@WP-Forever-155: yes i do.
but that was amateur rugby bud.
since things went pro, its wps cross to bear
@David-157: what are you on about now david?
1997 wp played
1998 not invited
simples
23 Aug 2012, 12:07 pm
@PissAnt-169:
There ain’t gonna be any decent contracted players. And there ain’t gonna be any Lions union, in fact.
Just the Bulls in Pretoria, and an open free recruitment range in the greater Gauteng area.
23 Aug 2012, 12:08 pm
@Tacitus-168: I didnt know the Chiefs is a S.A team.
23 Aug 2012, 12:09 pm
@Transformation-163: duplicitous aussie.
before this ridiculous conference system they couldnt buy a semi final.
it was beyoooodiful watching genia whine when the reds got a hiding from the sharks.
23 Aug 2012, 12:11 pm
@PissAnt-169: they have to pay their players first PA.
why do you think the leopards and teh rest of the teeny tinies dont have squads littered with boks or potential boks?
no moola.
the lions are now joining the teenie tinies.
they shouldnt feel to bad, they are in good company with global brands like nokia.
23 Aug 2012, 12:12 pm
@Puma-166: to you and sharks_lover every player that has ever been in your set up is a “shark at heart”, do you also want jacque potgieter?
he is a sharks academy product too
23 Aug 2012, 12:12 pm
@rangerman-151: Funny old world this
WP were kak and they were relegated (Super rugby). Sharks were kak and they got promoted (Currie Cup) 
True story this.
23 Aug 2012, 12:14 pm
@Tacitus-168: you saw this bit mos? “But their demands over next year’s finals were ridiculous and sanity has prevailed with the expanded series delayed till 2010 when a bigger competition will probably be played in conferences.”
23 Aug 2012, 12:15 pm
@Transformation-175: no we dont lol.
but cilliers is a natal boy and loves the sharks.
he will probably be back sharpish.
@The Sharks rugby pedigree is packaged as dog food-176: haha, cc and superrugby.
one happened in an amateur era, the other in a pro era.
p.s. the sharks played in the CC final in 1989 (i think it was 1989?) so they cant have been that bad now can they?
23 Aug 2012, 12:15 pm
@Transformation-175: Is Bobby Skinstad a Shark at heart? Joel Strontsky?
23 Aug 2012, 12:17 pm
@Tacitus-171:
You forget Tac. ALL 14 unions make up SA rugby, and the president’s council…
The smaller unions (9 excluding the Lions
) carry majority votes.
SA Rugby will not let the Lions go quietly into the night, for the same reason we still have Border, Valke, SWD, etc…
ALL 14 unions gets a share of Super Rugby money (slice of the broadcast cake).
Stormers, Bulls, Sharks etc make additional money through participation which gives exposure to sponsors, fills stadiums, sells gear etc.
If the Bulls/Lions enter into a participation agreement THAT money you are concerned about (because of participation) will not be affected…
23 Aug 2012, 12:17 pm
@The Sharks rugby pedigree is packaged as dog food-179: nah, they are yours.
like peter grant and joe p.
all from natal.
23 Aug 2012, 12:19 pm
@rangerman-178: That’s the cross you have to schlep old friend. Them was gifted a leg up into the ‘big time’. Which is why when you watch the 120 years of Currie Cup heroes advert on Supersport, you Sharks fellows close your left eyes, so that the ’1′ is not seen, but the 20 is
20 Years of Currie Cup heroes…..
23 Aug 2012, 12:19 pm
@rangerman-174:
If the relegation system is upheld, Lions will be back in 2014…
23 Aug 2012, 12:20 pm
@PissAnt-183: if they can hold on to their players that long PA.
a big if considering sponsors will jump ship after this.
its not like the lions have had one bad year after a string of glorious years now is it?
23 Aug 2012, 12:21 pm
@sharks_lover-53: Well that is good rumours then. Good players all of them.
Really do hope we get Cilliers back. Taute would be a bonus to have. Though Ludik has played brilliant for Sharks in the last part of the tourney.
23 Aug 2012, 12:22 pm
@The Sharks rugby pedigree is packaged as dog food-179: look, these okes pick and choose who is a shark at heart, cilliers left the sharks for the same reason hougaard left wp but if you were to claim that tattoo frankie is a disa at heart these guppys would break out in hyena-like laughter…
double standards
23 Aug 2012, 12:22 pm
@The Sharks rugby pedigree is packaged as dog food-182: haha, who cares, not me.
i simply enjoy the fact that in those 23 years, we have had the wood on wp.
as i alluded to earlier, do you honestly thinbk apple gives a toss that nokia were in the cellphone market longer?
23 Aug 2012, 12:22 pm
@rangerman-181: So Peter Grant and Joe P are not Sharks at heart either?
You know what, many of these okes only come down here to study initially, then end up staying. If KZN could pull finger with their tertiary institutions, and somehow get a team into the Varsity Cup MAIN competition (don’t be expecting hand outs again though), things might be different.
23 Aug 2012, 12:23 pm
@PissAnt-183: What will happen to their players during next years S15? Those players not gonna be happy just sitting about. What about them being allowed on a loan system to the other 4 franchises next year?
23 Aug 2012, 12:23 pm
@PissAnt-180: PA, are you managing the RuggaWorld twitter account? or one of the other blokes?
23 Aug 2012, 12:23 pm
@rangerman-184:
Most players contracted until end 2013. Two have escape clauses for Super Rugby participation.
It has been confirmed they will still get Super Rugby broadcasting money, and they have a meeting today with SARU to secure more support funding.
Paying their players is not so much the problem – having them play somewhere next year during Super Rugby is.
23 Aug 2012, 12:23 pm
@Transformation-186: hougie played senior representative rugby for wp?
really?
pat left because he wasnt getting gametime. like frans steyn, there isnt another union he would PREFER to play for than the sharks.
and so it may come to pass….
23 Aug 2012, 12:24 pm
@MacToogie-190:
No that would be me bud
23 Aug 2012, 12:25 pm
@Transformation-175: Well if he stayed with us he would not be playing ‘crash ball’ rugby hey! hehe.
23 Aug 2012, 12:26 pm
@PissAnt-193: good good, just wanted to check
23 Aug 2012, 12:27 pm
@rangerman-187: Close the left eye
And on a very serious note: What is the story with Varsity rugga in KZN? Is it as I have mentioned above, youngsters preferring to come and study down south for whatever reason? Or is it the standard of Tertiary education etc?
No joking, a serious question.
23 Aug 2012, 12:27 pm
An interesting stat on the SA rugby magazine facebook page
The Bok team in 1992 averaged 1.87 m and 97.4 kg per player.
The SA Schools team in 2012 averages 1.87 m and 97.6 kg per player.
23 Aug 2012, 12:29 pm
@The Sharks rugby pedigree is packaged as dog food-188: the focus at natal has been on the academy and i believe that the varsity cup caught them napping.
the nru are putting more emphasis on the VC now and i think we will see natal varsities playing in the main comp within 5 years.
our club comp is very strong as you know (rovers having edged maties two years back) so rugby is doing fine in natal.
our schools rugby is also looking pretty healthy.
all in all, we are in a good space.
and we have beaten wp three games and counting. plus our u21′s whacked yours recently.
so good, mmmmm good.
@PissAnt-191: PA, seriously bud, a contract is a two way agreement. the lions are by all accounts in deep financial trouble so paying the players may not be as simple as you think.
i am not rejoicing over the demise of the lions but i do expect a complete cleanout of their boardroom.
23 Aug 2012, 12:29 pm
@Puma-185: Taute is a Shark at heart. Must be. He did holiday in KZN once.
23 Aug 2012, 12:30 pm
@PissAnt-180:
There is a clear financial benefit to being a sole Super Franchise union. Hence the Sharks being willing to pay out Border and EP a few years ago to get lone access to the pie.
The same applies to the Bulls. The answer is to have FEWER mouths sharing in the pie, not more.
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 … 13 » Show All
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.