SA’s ailing asset
18 Sep 2012
RYAN VREDE writes the Currie Cup has completely lost its prestige and is now no more than a platform for some young players to stake a claim for a Super Rugby contract.
I’ve watched every round of the tournament and have been completely uninspired. Certainly there are a handful of promising young players emerging, but overall the standard is decidedly mediocre for what used to be South Africa’s showpiece tournament. This of course has been the case for some time, but the quality on offer in 2012 is the lowest it has been in years, even with the current six-team format.
South Africans often boast of their bountiful player resources. This country is undoubtedly blessed in that regard, by quantity doesn’t translate to quality if the Currie Cup is an indication.
The quality will rise in the closing rounds of the league phase when the Springboks return and reach its climax in the playoffs. This is what South Africans will have to become used to – two and a half months of mediocrity followed by an injection of quality for a couple of weeks.
An extended Super Rugby tournament has contributed in part to this. The wizards at the South African Rugby Union who negotiated the Super Rugby deal did so at the expense of the world’s oldest domestic competition. This made financial sense to them, of course, as there was more cash to be made from broadcasting revenue and commercial opportunities that arose from Super Rugby than there were for the Currie Cup. Australia, with no domestic competition to rival South Africa or New Zealand, shafted their partners in the negotiation and emerged as the big winner, with more Australia derbies and a guaranteed team in the play-offs despite having the weakest conference.
More teams will be accommodated in Super Rugby in 2015, which is likely to mean the tournament cutting deeper into August. Where will that leave the Currie Cup? Will we see a one-round, five match league phase followed by semi-finals and a final? It would certainly heighten the stakes and make for more entertaining viewing, albeit not because of the quality of the product. Some club-standard players will continue to give their mates reason to toast with their TV cameos, when those players should have been watching from their couches. But this is what the Currie Cup has become – the playground of the ordinary.
There is no immediate solution on the horizon. There is no way Sanzar will trim Super Rugby to pit only the very best teams against each other and in so doing reducing the time it takes to complete the tournament. In an ideal world I’d have a Super 10 that starts in early February and finishes 11 weeks later, with a one-round, six-team Currie Cup commencing thereafter. If, for example, Western Province host the Sharks in 2012, they will travel to Kings Park in 2013.
This would allow Springboks players to compete in the Currie Cup before the June Tests. The game’s most important assets – the players and supporters – win, with a higher quality product and roughly the same amount of game time.
This is a pipe dream. The tournament that was once the pride of a nation is being reduced to rubble, serving as no more than an opportunity for aspirant young bucks to impress their coaches. So sad.
Follow Ryan on Twitter
Follow SA Rugby magazine on Twitter
614 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 » Show All
19 Sep 2012, 10:32 am
@Transformation-315: Transie should I hate all black people just because a minority murder and rape? In a similar vein why punish all the springboks and springbok supporters who were against apartheid by denying them rugby? Our faulty politics were punished, let that be that. There is a very good reason why Madiba kept the springbok emblem and used Rugby to unite.
19 Sep 2012, 10:43 am
@Transformation-432: Treverton!!!? Fark. If you said Glenwood or Northwood I would take it as a severe insult… But Treverton you being a c.unt.
a KZN Waterford if ever there was one…
19 Sep 2012, 10:46 am
@Heavens Game-452: HG Northwood have more than one springbok to their credit and more than just a few international cricketers.
19 Sep 2012, 10:53 am
@Skeppie-453: A proper Johnny come lately school
19 Sep 2012, 10:56 am
@Skeppie-451: who is talking about “HATING” anyone?
you’re seriously misguided if you think BANNING the Springboks because the team was NOT picked on merit amounted to hating all white people! rif yourself of that notion. FIFA banned SA from international football and the majority of the football playing/loving population in this country applauded them even though the likes of jomo sono, kaizer motaung, kalamazoo mokone, “horse” mokoung, jimmy joubert couldn’t play in world cups and pit themselves against the likes of johan cruyff, berti vogts, pele who were their teammates in america at the time…
no normal sport in an abnormal society!
19 Sep 2012, 10:57 am
@Transformation-455: you equating rape and murder to institutionalised bigotry is fecking ridiculous!
19 Sep 2012, 10:59 am
@Skeppie-451: you equating rape and murder to institutionalised bigotry is fecking ridiculous!
19 Sep 2012, 11:12 am
@Skeppie-451: “Transie should I hate all black people just because a minority murder and rape?” – so it’s only black people that murder & rape in this country?
19 Sep 2012, 11:25 am
@Transformation-458: Ah Transie let’s not twist words here. My point was simply why use sport to punish a bad political system? You view is that all bok games during apartheid should be expunged from history, how is that fair? There were many, many white springboks who were against apartheid, who voted against the nats, who were good people. Why should their contributions to the game we love be destroyed? And no Transie it’s not just black people who commit crime, it’s BAD people, not people defined by a skin colour.
19 Sep 2012, 11:26 am
@Transformation-457: Why is it ridiculous?
19 Sep 2012, 11:27 am
“I, personally, would love to see a backline of … the development of [Francois] Hougaard’s pass, [Johan] Goosen, [Pat] Lambie, [Juan] De Jongh, JP Pietersen back, [Bryan] Habana and I think Jaco Taute and Francois Steyn could really have a crack for the fullback position,” said Mitchell.
Not much different from a back line I posted before the English series. Mine was:
Hougaard, Lambie, de Jongh, Ebersohn, Habana, JPP, Aplon.
Of course I was ridiculed about the “size” of the back line players.
Interesting to see that Mitchell does not see Fransie as 1st choice inside centre and also not as an automatic choice at full back.
Mmmmmm….interesting that…..very interesting.
19 Sep 2012, 11:41 am
@Skeppie-459: so why ask me if you should hate black people then?
@Skeppie-460: which country do you know about that was sanctioned by the UN, made a pariah by the rest of the world for having high murder and rape stats?
your assertion is absurd and the fact that you don’t see it is….ag never mind.
why do you think England cancelled their cricket tour when the SA government tried to bulldoze them not to pick Basil d’ Oliviera? they could’ve dropped him and said as you suggest “we won’t deny our selves the pleasure of playing test cricket in SA because of a moralist stance, basil tough one lad we’re leaving you to appease the racists”
19 Sep 2012, 11:44 am
@Skeppie-459: “let’s not twist words here. My point was simply why use sport to punish a bad political system?”
because the “sport” was NOT divorced from the system! in the same way that people couldn’t live in the same neighbourhoods, ride the same trains etc people of colour weren’t allowed to were that green jersey, it was reserved exclusively for whites…is that not immoral in your mind?
19 Sep 2012, 11:55 am
@Transformation-462: Apologies, I take back the word hate, bad choice of words.
You are being too literal here Trans, I was using an analogy. All my point is (veering away from your word gfencing) is that personally I don’t think sportsmen should be sidelined to punish bad politics. Apartheid was an abomination and the world rightly so punished the architects of that political system. don’t think sport needed to come into it. I also don’t think comments like yours about erasing bok history because of the political system is fair.
19 Sep 2012, 11:58 am
@Transformation-463: @Transformation-463: They are different. In a government everyone votes, even if you voted against the government of the day you at least had the opportunity to vote. Did SARU conduct a voting system for alll boks to decide whether they wanted to allow people not of the same skin colour to play for the boks? And even if they did (which they clearly did not) would it be fair to erase the records of the bok players who wanted rugby to be open to everyone?
19 Sep 2012, 12:01 pm
@Skeppie-459:
The fact of the matter is Skeppie, that those Bok teams did not represent the WHOLE of SA. They only represented a portion of the country. Therefor their records should indicate that or be destroyed.
The fact that Tommy Bedford or Morne du Plesis were against Apartheid did not mean that they represented ALL the people of SA when they ran onto the field. They represented only the white minority back then.
That is what transformation intended, isn’t it? A whole new beginning leaving the past behind. You can’t build your new house on the ruins of your old home that burnt down. You’ll always experience problems somewhere along the line and that is exactly what we see in our rugby.
19 Sep 2012, 12:06 pm
@nama1-466: So nama is it fair then to erase all of bok history pre 1992/3/4 and presume they were all racists? Surely not. I agree that it should be understood that there may have been a lot of players of colour who could have been boks during that period and we should never lose sight of that but trying to erase history is equally not fair. “Sorry Morne, because of a system you were against we are going to erase your proud acheivements from history”
19 Sep 2012, 12:07 pm
@nama1-466: Equally nama should we indicate on all black players post 1994′s records that they were potentially quota players and could have been selected because of the colour of their skin? Or should we just erase 1994-2012?
19 Sep 2012, 12:14 pm
@Skeppie-465: you are being very naive if you think the tentacles of the apartheid government didn’t reach SARFU or Danie Craven or whoever was in charge! The Springbok team that played then did not represent the whole country which is why in places like New Zealand it was viewed as an abomination that SARFU would YIELD to the government’s decree that NO MAORIS can tour SA and play their colour exclusive Springboks!
19 Sep 2012, 12:21 pm
@Skeppie-465:
How long did it take SARR to go up against the regime? They reneged on their promise to the ALL Blacks that anybody in their team would be welcome for the 1970 tour, including Maoris, after John Vorster’s famous Loskom Dam speech.
The first multi racial team was only selected in 1976 and even then a guy like Jan Ellis, who was given the captaincy of the team, refused to play in a multi racial team because it was “against the laws” of the country.
It cost him his place in the Bok team to face the AB that year but he would rather give up the chance to play against the All Blacks than play in a team where POC were also represented. So you are saying that the records of a guy like Jan Ellis should stay there forever, as if he represented South Africa?
19 Sep 2012, 12:28 pm
@Transformation-469: Ok so wipe all the records clean and presume they were all racists…that’s your solution?
19 Sep 2012, 12:32 pm
@nama1-470: Yes nama I am, it should be known what the situation was and each individual like him would have to live with himself but he is being judged on his sporting ability not his political preferences. So do we now say that any rugby player worldwide who we think is a racist will have his record erased? Do we also include players with criminal records…..or those who were just tossers? Come on, everybody knows how bad it was that SARU did not follow the correct moral path but erasing records and labelling everyone from the era a racist is palpably unfair and I think you and Transie know it as well.
19 Sep 2012, 12:35 pm
@Transformation-455: Allow me to rephrase that; my slogan for the last 14-odd years has been: No “abnormal” sport in a “normal” society.
19 Sep 2012, 12:42 pm
@Skeppie-471: you’re hung up on the fact that some players may have not been racist when the jersey they were wearing and the WAY the team was selected was in fact racist!
i don’t know what you want me to say because you are now denying that the Springbok teams then were selected based on colour and thus racist!
19 Sep 2012, 12:44 pm
@nama1-470: Ellis played for the Boks against the All Blacks in 1976.
19 Sep 2012, 12:47 pm
@Skeppie-472:
It’s about the system that denied other people a chance to represent their country, Skeppie. Nobody is ” labelling everyone from the era a racist” and you know it.
There records, if they are kept forever, will give the impression that they represented ALL of the people of SA and they never did as you very well know.
Jewish sport people have their Macabi games where they represent the SA Jewish community, not SA.
Likewise, the Bok teams of pre 1992, represented the SA white community (Afrikaans and English), not SA.
19 Sep 2012, 12:47 pm
@Transformation-474: No Transie I am not, I agree that the selection policies were inherently racist, full stop. I am only saying that you cannot erase all records because of it as that would mean erasing the records of some boks who were against the racist selection policies and that is not fair. I also disagree that sport should be overruled by politics. Just because I don’t agree with Iran’s political landscape doesn’t mean I cannot appreciate Iran’s soccer team…they are seperate issues for me.
19 Sep 2012, 12:49 pm
@nama1-476: Ok how about this for a compromise….we keep the records and have a starred footnote that states players of colour were not allowed to be selected? Fair? I understand where you are coming from Nama, I really do but I think you are bringing politics to close to the sport we love.
19 Sep 2012, 12:51 pm
If anything, the statistics suggest that if we did pick POC during Apartheid, we would have been pretty much unbeatable.
19 Sep 2012, 12:53 pm
@Skeppie-477: the records of an “inherently racist” team mean what? they didn’t represent all people of this country!
19 Sep 2012, 12:59 pm
Funny how the players that didn’t represent the whole of SA had a positive win record against the AB’s and the players who represent the whole of SA has a negative record against the AB’s.
19 Sep 2012, 13:01 pm
@stormer in a teacup-475:
Sorry, I should’ve phrased it clearer. Let me do it this way.
1st test: Jan Ellis and Boland Coetzee
South Africa won 16-7. Then Jan gets dropped for the next three test matches because of his refusal to play in a multi race team. A young Theuns Stofberg made his debut, still only 21 years old.
2nd test: Theuns Stofberg and Boland Coetzee
3rd test:Theuns Stofberg and Boland Coetzee
4th test: Klippies Kritzinger and Boland Coetzee
19 Sep 2012, 13:05 pm
@nama1-482:
That was the flankers in that series. Morne Dup at 8.
19 Sep 2012, 13:06 pm
@Skeppie-472: Skeppie, you are being ridiculous. Let say SA made a rule back then that only men can swim, or be sellected for swimming colours etc. Only men. You happen to know a woman that can swim circles around you, but due to her being a woman will never be allowed to swim or even be sellected for the country. Should we praise you, and hold your records in esteem when in the record books it showed you were the best swimmer in SA in 1968, when we all know that there was someone at the time who was better than you, who was not allowed to swim. That makes your record **** in my book as it was never honestly obtained. You were hypothetically sellected due to your ***, not ability. Same as those old Boks. They were sellected on skin colour first, never mind ability.
19 Sep 2012, 13:16 pm
@rossoneri-484: While I get your point, and it’s essentially a good one, that’s not a very good example to illustrate it. Because the reality is that the best men will ALWAYS outswim the best females. That’s not sexist or narrow-minded – that’s just nature. So even if you selected from everyone, the swimming team would still be all male. Which is why we have men’s and women’s events. And, following your metaphor, this could possibly mean white and black rugby teams. And I’m sure this is no what you intended.
19 Sep 2012, 13:17 pm
@Skeppie-478:
There’ll have to be a compromise somehow.
Just on another note. Have you seen that when you go on SARU’s website, there is no records of the pre-1992 SARU that played under SACOS? Why not?
Were their records destroyed?
We’ll always have this kind of discourse imho for the simple reason that we started wrong in 1992? when the agreement re amalgamation between the different rugby unions were forged in Kimberley. I remember clearly Louis Luyt boasting in a TV interview that it took rugby just “this weekend” to reach an agreement while sports like cricket, athletics and others were negotiating months on end to reach an agreement. Now how can you overcome 100 years of playing separate in 48 hours?
As I said, if you build your new house on the ruins of the old, burnt down one, you’ll always have to plaster over the cracks, put on a new layer of paint to hide the deficiencies.
Exactly what our rugby administrators now have to do constantly.
19 Sep 2012, 13:17 pm
@Transformation-480: Transformation, I think what Skeppie is grappling with is that to him, these guys were lauded as HERO’S on the rugby field. Legends of the game from conversations between fathers and sons through at least a couple of generations.
To someone like me, they were the equivalent of evil. People that must have known, as people that play sport, that the system was unfair, and dead wrong, but despite this, will keep their mouth shut and continue with the abnormality. After all, if the Bok sellection pool is smaller, your chances are better right?
Today we look at people like Morne du Plessis, and Naas Botha, and I would like to say: “You are not an evil racist man, by all accounts, why were you willingly part of something so evil and wrong.” Did it boil down to just not having courage. If so, then that is what should be reflected in those record books pre 1994. Players who just did not have courage.
19 Sep 2012, 13:18 pm
@Mr Black-481:
Seems you missed the part when the Boks had a positive win ratio against the AB team that could not pick its #1 players.
Hmm probably what you guys are going though now…..maybe.
19 Sep 2012, 13:20 pm
@katman-485: Focus on the analogy. That was the point. Don’t get bogged down in the science.
19 Sep 2012, 13:20 pm
@rossoneri-487: hehe You have no clue. Shame
19 Sep 2012, 13:23 pm
@katman-485: I didn’t even finish reading your post, and you know my blog personality well enough that I would never support any form of apartheid. Ever.
19 Sep 2012, 13:27 pm
@Zandberg Jansen-490: Truth is. I don’t hate those old “Springboks” anymore. To me they form two groups. One group that actually believed in apartheid policies and the politics of the day, and one group that are simply a bunch of gutless cowards.
19 Sep 2012, 13:30 pm
@Zandberg Jansen-490: Which group do you fall into I wonder. Racist or gutless coward. I’ll be complimentary and say the Gutless coward group.
19 Sep 2012, 13:36 pm
@rossoneri-484: @katman-485:
Equestrian events are the only code were men and women can compete against each other individually.
19 Sep 2012, 13:38 pm
@rossoneri-484: Ok so essentially you beleive all springboks pre 94 should have their records erased, all of them? So essentially even the boks who opposed apartheid and were pro skin colour not being a factor…even they should have their records erased? In order to be fair then should we not erase all records up untill today? As some selection between 94 and 2012 have also been based on skin colour.
19 Sep 2012, 13:39 pm
@Jeraldjay-494: Surely events such as shooting should be equal too?
19 Sep 2012, 13:41 pm
@Jeraldjay-494:
where
19 Sep 2012, 13:44 pm
@rossoneri-492: And this is where I call you up on a major bullshit post. If you were offered Springbok colours in anything, regardless of your political leanings, regardless of the era, you would have taken it. Claiming lofty principles after the fact is about as believable as Malema’s tender credentials.
Standing up for your beliefs is one thing. But claiming your saintliness (and reducing everyone else to either racists or cowards) is something else altogether. And no one here buys it.
19 Sep 2012, 13:46 pm
@rossoneri-492: Point taken. Gutless coward, I take it as a compliment. What makes you an expert on SA History and Politics?
19 Sep 2012, 13:54 pm
@katman-496:
After extensive research….. the only events at the London Games where men and women can compete against each other as individuals is Equestrian events and Sailing (London was the first Olympics where the rule was imposed).
Pages: « 1 … 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 » Show All
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.