Confusion at the Kavaliers
6 Nov 2009
Eugene Eloff is apparently on Boland’s short-list, but there is a lot of misunderstanding about the coaching positions at the union.
According to Die Burger, former Lions head coach Eloff is on the Wellington union’s short-list for the director/head coach post.
Boland CEO Piet Bergh confirmed that Eloff is on a short-list but said the union is still ‘undecided’ which position will be available.
Boland president Francois Davids, however, opposed Bergh’s statement.
‘I don’t know where these rumours are coming from. They are not true,’ he told keo.co.za.
It has also been reported that Eloff is in contention for the head coach post at British clubs Leinster and Harlequins. So it is not known whether Boland will be able to compete for his signature.
Meanwhile, current head coach Deon Davids’ court battle with Boland still continues.
Davids is allegedly suing Boland for R1 million after the sudden appointment of Chester Williams as Director of Coaching in the latter part of last season.
Davids was only informed of the appointment minutes before Williams’ first practice in charge.
Boland’s lawyer Chris Faure told this site that the union is trying to resolve the matter.
‘We are still busy trying to settle the case. Boland has given Deon certain proposals but he and his attorneys have failed to come back to us,’ said Faure. ‘We are just waiting to hear from them.’
It is uncertain what future roles Williams and Davids will have at the union as Bergh refused to comment.
‘I answered your first question, but I will not comment on any other matters at this point,’ said Bergh.
By Gareth Duncan
38 Comments
6 Nov 2009, 10:02 am
These Dragons looked confused on the field as well.
6 Nov 2009, 10:03 am
Not giving much of a *****
6 Nov 2009, 10:06 am
Check Chester run away from this now…
6 Nov 2009, 10:11 am
What a mess this is, pathetically run by management of the Union…
6 Nov 2009, 10:20 am
I dont think they expected to be relegated. What now happens to all those proposed signings?
6 Nov 2009, 10:27 am
made my first visit to Wellington a couple of weeks ago, and was struck by two things;
firstly this place is tiny! it’s a little farming dorp and it’s hard to believe that such a small centre is a viable home for a currie cup rugby side.
secondly, this tiny dorp is literally a stone’s throw from cape town. you’re looking at about 25 minutes from wellington to bellville where province train at the moment.
two of the biggest challenges facing our rugby right now are the number of games our players have to play each year and the number of top players we lose to European rugby. Now, it’s clear that the vast majority of our rugby revenue is generated by the boks, super 14 teams and the top tier of the currie cup. most of the smaller unions are taking more than they’re giving back – and i am talking purely financially here, as i appreciate that there are a lot of good, dedicated rugby people in these unions.
if the smaller unions were scrapped, and perhaps two new unions formed by merging these smaller unions, i think we could make huge strides towards rectifying the two problems i’ve mentioned. let’s imagine griquas absorbing the leopards and the griffons, and thereby becoming a 6th strong union drawing from all the platteland regions outside of bloem. let’s also imagine that the southern kings fulfill their potential and become a strong 7th union, drawing from and investing in, the immense talent of the eastern cape.
the net result is that we’ve removed the financial strain of paying several hundred professional rugby players who really should be playing club rugby and working at other jobs. we’ve also created two strong unions that should become profitable in their own rights. think about the fact that the kings would pull at least 3 times the support of each of the feeder unions, probably far more, as they would give the eastern cape a strong, exciting team and ignite fresh interest in the sport. they (and the super-griquas) would attract far greater sponsorship as they are now the teams of a much wider support base, are playing consistently in the top (and now only) tier of the currie cup, and sponsors are more interested in associating with a strong team than with the laughably ‘mighty’ elephants etcetera.
we would then have a shorter and infinitely more interesting currie cup. we’d be able to pay our top players more, because sa rugby is not propping up all the tiny, insolvent unions any more. on a national level we could invest in 7 strong coaching teams, academies, development programs and basically be giving far better development to a smaller pool of professional players.
if sa rugby then continued the impressive investment in club and university rugby – the intervarsity cup and the national club champs have become an exciting and well supported initiative – you keep the door open for players who have not been signed by one of the 7 unions. top club rugby could be semi-professional, which essentially is already happening, with clubs like Hamiltons paying players a better wage than some of the smaller union players get.
so to summarise, i’d like to see 7 strong unions, each of which could win the currie cup in any given year. i’d like to see the savings from this set-up reinvested in 3 areas:
- keeping our top players by being better able to match
european offers
- better development programs
- continuing the recent improvement in club rugby
this would mean that two or, if we get the extra s15 spot, one of our teams is not in each years s15 competition. however, i would then suggest that our top 6 teams play in the s15, with a draft system in place whereby the players of the 7th placed currie cup team are available to the other unions, as is successfully practised in new zealand. there should also be some kind of financial payout for these players so that the financial playing field is kept reasonably level and the team not in the s15 does not lose ground permanently.
6 Nov 2009, 10:34 am
#6 toughnrumble: All sounds brilliant in theory but when you have fat arse rugby bosses of smaller unions who only do things that benifit themselves and do anything to hold on to what little power they have,changes like you propose are unlikely to take place soon.
6 Nov 2009, 10:35 am
now
1. who the f*ck is Gareth Duncan
and
2. does he also wear mascara?
..
have to give it to him though … boland rugby is just one hell of a mess at the moment!!
oh and by the way
keo (you little c*nt)
what did you make of the comment by pdv in sarugby mag when in reply to a question about the *** scandal he said that the worst part about the whole issue was that apart from being innocent, he had to watch his 80 year old mother cry?
will we see an apology from you (you little c*nt) after you published an article on here stating that you had information that the whole thing was true and also gave a s-called place where this act took place?
yes, i know this is your site and you can do as you wish, but for once in your life show some backbone and apologise!!!
oh, and i’ll understand if you cant post an apology immediatly (i know that you first have to crawl out of jw’s ***)
….
so take your time bru, i have patience, i can wait!!
6 Nov 2009, 10:36 am
#6 toughnrumble:
I would strongly oppose something like this.
Our problems in rugby and small unions is not lack of quality to become top unions, it is lack of proper administration in those unions.
We have about 10 times the number of players and resources of that of NZ, how come they can run a 14 union-based competition successfully?
How do those small unions, in little towns similar to Wellington survice and challenge the city boys?
Boland alone has over 200 clubs – you want them all to disappear?
Sort out rugby administration, the game will take care of itself, it always has.
6 Nov 2009, 10:37 am
#8 ashley:
s-called = so-called
6 Nov 2009, 10:38 am
#9 PissAnt:
morning PA
how are you?
6 Nov 2009, 10:42 am
#11 ashley:
Hey Ash,
Friday so no complaints here.
Will crack my first beer at 13:00
6 Nov 2009, 10:43 am
#11 ashley: i would say RELAX…but scared you will bite my head off!!!
Hi Boet…agree with your sentiments….KEO needs to apologise and applaud the maestros year he has had!
6 Nov 2009, 10:44 am
Hows your Friday?
6 Nov 2009, 10:44 am
#7 Number 8: you’re right. the problem is that sa rugby is run by the presidents’ council. a group of 13 (i think) union presidents, of whom 5 or 6 represent viable unions. so, the majority of power is held by the presidents of struggling unions that are a drain on our rugby resources. this is a crazy system of ‘one union, one vote’ which must be changed to represent south africans in general better. the president of boland represents a few thousand rugby fans, whereas the president of wp represents hundreds of thousands, so the current presidents’ council is actually undemocratic when you look at the national picture.
i agree that change is a distant hope, but if more people – especially those with a louder drum to beat than mine – started making this idiocy public and suggesting good solutions, maybe things could slowly move in a better direction.
6 Nov 2009, 10:45 am
#12 PissAnt:
bloody hell, noooooooooooooo
i’ll have to wait till 17h00 …. life’s not fair
6 Nov 2009, 10:47 am
#13 grant10:
but i am relaxed!!
you should know me by now nervous_grant10,
…
i’m EVERYONE’s friend!
#14 PissAnt:
cool bru
no complaints!!
6 Nov 2009, 10:49 am
#9 PissAnt: i’m not sure i’d call the new zealand system a roaring success mate. they’re losing their best players at a frightening rate. maybe i didn’t make my thoughts about club rugby clear enough, because the last thing you want is to lose our clubs. i’d recommend deliberate investment and support of club rugby as part of the plan. i don’t think that the professional unions in these smaller provinces (i’m not trying to pick on boland here) necessarily help their club game. in fact, in places like boland, club rugby would now become the sole focus of the region.
6 Nov 2009, 10:49 am
#15 toughnrumble:
That system, the president’s council, is being addressed and changed currently isn’t it?
6 Nov 2009, 10:52 am
#9 PissAnt: one more comment – i heard chris jack saying that the major difference between the air new zealand cup and the cc was the fact that all their unions were much more similar in strength. their s14 teams are more- truly regional sides, so in their domestic competition has less unviable unions than ours, where the whole 2-tiered system is basically an opening act for the semi-finals.
6 Nov 2009, 10:52 am
#19 PissAnt: could be – you may be ahead of me on that one.
6 Nov 2009, 10:59 am
#18 toughnrumble:
There needs to be a progression from club rugby to professional rugby. Making club rugby pro or even semi-pro would be an impossible task.
The way forward I believe is for SARU to implement a micro management model.
For this I believe much of the responsibility of regional rugby (union and club rugby) needs to be given and tasked to a regional franchise.
So establish the 6th franchise, we will have 6 major areas or franchises in SA representing the whole country.
These franchises then have to re-invest into their representative unions, both financially and through resources.
SARU’s only aim should be to manage our top 180 professional players (30-man squads for each franchise) and through that of course manage all levels of Springbok rugby and national tournaments and teams including age-group level teams.
Franchises are run independently and even privately or semi-private with their own board of directors, made up of representatives of the unions and different levels of those unions, i.e. club, school and union rugby as well as commercial identities (investors and stakeholders).
CEO’s or chairmen of each franchise represents part of the SARU administration in turn to allow for continuity and transparency and most importantly, accountability for the game of rugby in SA as a whole and in each region or franchise.
Franchises procure and invest in their respective unions to allow for sustainability and of course on-field success, i.e. contracting of players and coaches etc.
SA Rugby implements a draft system for the top 180 professional players in SA, and directly contracts the elite (Springbok) players, controlling their conditioning and participation at various levels and competitions.
In short, implement a micro management model.
6 Nov 2009, 11:07 am
#22 PissAnt: i completely agree with the concept of investing more in our top 180 players, and i suppose the equivalent number of junior players, and i think we’re looking for the same outcome. how would your system affect the currie cup? would you still have all the small unions, with each now falling under one of the 6 regions in terms of management etc? or would you do away with them?
i differ slightly with you on the impossibility of stepping up from club rugby to professional rugby. have a look at the hamiltons squad this year, and you’ll see how many guys there have been around the provincial system. i’m thinking that even with 6 or 7 strong teams, you’d still have the vodacom cup running concurrently with the s14. i think that the step up from the varsity cup or the national club champs to the vodacom cup is not too great a leap at all, and a lot of the current varsity guys have either received pro contracts, or have been playing vodacom cup rugby all along.
6 Nov 2009, 11:20 am
#23 toughnrumble:
No I would not want to do away with unions, and with proper re-investment and management (from the Franchise) I believe smaller unions can become quite strong.
The Currie Cup will stay, no question.
The format will be a different issue however.
I would like to see a 14-union competition (I know impossible) split in the two regions or leagues with the top 2 of every group advancing to the semi’s and ultimate final.
The other option is to create a Currie Cup league competition for all 14 unions, to start in May and run through to August or September, and then have a Currie Cup Trophy competition (similar to what we have now) where the 6 franchises (top 180 pro players in SA) competes in a 5 match league competition (play each other once and alternate home ground every 2nd year) with the top two teams competing in the final. A max 6-game competition per franchise over 2 months from August to October, or September/October.
You will then have a CC league champ (all 14 unions) and a CC Cup champ (6 franchises).
6 Nov 2009, 11:24 am
Our top 180 players will be limited to their Super rugby committments, (15 games isn’t it?), 25 to 40 of those 180 players (Boks) will then be involved in a further 5 games (3N) and 3 June tests equaling 23 games in total.
5 CC Cup games and then EOYT.
Obviously, it would be rate for a player to play all Super rugby games, all tests and all CC Cup games. But then again, SA Rugby manages the Bok players as they are directly contracted to them.
6 Nov 2009, 12:02 pm
PDV = joost …. die fame gaan na hulle “kop” en hulle wil net spyker … joost het ook gese hy is innocent …
6 Nov 2009, 13:02 pm
#3 PissAnt:
Stop being a racist!!!
6 Nov 2009, 13:08 pm
So this is where you peeps are hanging..
6 Nov 2009, 13:12 pm
#28 ICE:
This site is for men only! Please leave!!!
6 Nov 2009, 13:14 pm
#29 wpw:
Why? Coz none of you can talk sense??
6 Nov 2009, 13:18 pm
#9 PissAnt:
with PA on this…
6 Nov 2009, 13:19 pm
#30 ICE:
No, cos women are supposed to be in the kitchen preparing supper for when we get home…
6 Nov 2009, 13:21 pm
#32 wpw:
LOL Pffffft!!! Lekker tough here by your buds, ne??
6 Nov 2009, 13:22 pm
Hey Ashley…
You really should learn how to express yourself and speak about your frustrations…
Keeping it all bottled up inside is just not healthy!!
6 Nov 2009, 13:47 pm
Die lug is Blou!
6 Nov 2009, 13:50 pm
How is this for a structure?
1. Schools to remain amateur, but with Franchises being able to do talent identification of the very top of the crop of players they might want to fast track.
2. Clubs draw players from schools. Clubs are financed by Franchises via unions and contract players semi-professionally and pay matchfees only at a set scale accross the board.
3. Provinces draw players from clubs and play an extended Vodacom cup during the S14 timeslot, which serves as a ranking determinator for the CC first and second division. Provinces pay provincial players salaries from funds ex Franchises.
4. Franchises play S14 and Premier division CC.
This implies that Franchises accept financial responsibility for everybody down to club level in all their affiliated provinces, ensuring continuity of development. SA Rugby reward the Franchises for every Bok they produce for SA, with a bonus for every player of color and a further bonus for ethnic black players. All selections are done on merit- no quotas, by the coach and two assistants. This will take the focus away from transformation at test level and re-focus it at club level, because the more quality players of colour are brought through the system, the greater the income to the clubs, provinces and franchises ex the SA Rugby bonus incentives.
SA Rugby must also allocate a payment to each of the 6 franchises for distribution downwards based on performance to the provinces and clubs. It will ensure a more even yet performance-based distribution of funds throughout the system.
6 Nov 2009, 20:38 pm
The SWD union is in just as much turmoil.The president,Stag Cronjé is being sued by CEO Willie Small,for defamation.Mr.Small wants a million big ones.SWD stands to lose a R6.5 million per year sponsorship deal with Bunker Capital,as Bunker Capital have already indicated that they will withdraw their sponsorship if the union cant get their house in order.
6 Nov 2009, 21:02 pm
Same old story, copyrights belong to the defunct SA Tennis in 1992
see SWD, Border, Boland
First comes the Take Over from the old regime
Then the looting
then the begging for relief funds
then embezzeling of the relief funds
then the bankrupcy
Them they usually blame the w/man
(the GLRU ran through the same process under Van Rooyen in 2002-2005, how did they managed to surface back is beyond me)
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.