Melbourne clinches S15 spot
11 Nov 2009
Melbourne has beaten the Southern Kings in the race for a Super Rugby franchise.
An Expert Determination Panel was asked by the Sanzar Executive Committee to decide on the location of the 15th Super Rugby team. The Experts were former World Cup-winning captain David Kirk and retired New Zealand High Court Judge, the Hon Barry Paterson QC.
In a statement, Sanzar said the key reasons for the Experts selecting Melbourne over the the Southern Kings from South Africa, were:
· The Experts commented that both applicants were able to point to excellent infrastructure support, and both provided sound business plans and financial forecasts, with the support of their National Unions, guaranteeing financial viability.
· The Southern Kings proposal was more advanced with regard to business and financial planning and organization structure and governance. The Southern Kings were also able to point to a strong rugby tradition, a large playing base and presented a stronger case than Melbourne as to their rugby readiness.
· These strengths of the Southern King’s Application did not, however, offset the benefits in geographical location and commercial value to Sanzar (both of which criteria the Experts were asked to place considerable weight on) that the Melbourne Application was able to deliver.
· The 15th Super Rugby team will play in the Australian Conference under the new Super Rugby competition format from 2011. This means they will play both home and away against the other four Australian Conference teams. As a result the Southern Kings would be required to make two crossings of the Indian Ocean in a season. The local derby aspect of matches in Australia, an important issue for generating attendances and broadcasting value, would also have been diluted and it would not have been possible to schedule at least two matches in each country each weekend. In addition having the team resident in South Africa introduces additional costs to SANZAR of around NZ$720,000 per annum.
· The Melbourne Application provided considerably greater commercial benefit to SANZAR than the Southern Kings Application. Evidence was provided that revenue from the sale of broadcasting rights to Australasian broadcasters would be reduced by US$15-20m over the course of a five year agreement should the 15th team be resident in South Africa, with little or no commensurate rise in the value of South African broadcasting revenue.
148 Comments
11 Nov 2009, 20:12 pm
Crock of **** dragons..
11 Nov 2009, 20:20 pm
#1 Winston: co-sign…
11 Nov 2009, 20:27 pm
Okay, so now we’ll see Saffas turning on Saffas again, one trying to kill-off the other. Whoever’s going to end last of the SA S14 teams will be forced out to make place for the Kings.
11 Nov 2009, 20:30 pm
Count your blessings — diluting the shallow talent pool in either country will surely turn all the other, fairly-potent, franchises into also-rans. Melbourne isn’t rugby union territory — in fact, it’s hardly even Rugby League territory. It’s all about Aussie Rules there.
11 Nov 2009, 20:34 pm
No kidding.
According to PdV I’m just a 15 year old girl who knows nothing about rugby and even I saw that one coming.
11 Nov 2009, 20:39 pm
As per usual our friends in New Zealand and Australia screw us over.. But people wonder why we always complain that there is a conspiracy against us.
11 Nov 2009, 20:39 pm
Why are the full stops at the beginning of each paragraph?
11 Nov 2009, 20:41 pm
Yawn. Was this ever going to end any differently? We lost the fight when we agreed to the conferences…..
I guess it’s the GOLDEN CATS all over again….
11 Nov 2009, 20:41 pm
Well, if you asked a neutral observer they would say it makes sense.
The trick will be how SARU manage the spears / kings / E Cape.
11 Nov 2009, 20:43 pm
Phu$K what a mission to get my password sorted out after a few months away (only 110.
Anyway, money rules again, stuff the development of rugby……and don’t even think that having a franchise in M/bourne will help the poos aussies. All that will happen is that all the fringe players from the other unions will move
11 Nov 2009, 20:58 pm
Fair enough, now it’s 5 each. The only problem is now the bloody aussies will try to snatch more and more saffas to fill up their teams. The last place saffa team must play the Kings in a play off in my opinion.
Hey Sarah
Did PdV actually say that to you? Or do you just not like him for another reason?
11 Nov 2009, 21:02 pm
#7 SpringbokSarah: Bless you child, those are bullet points.
11 Nov 2009, 21:04 pm
How independant is a “SANZAR independant pannel” when everyone on the pannel hails from NZ?
I agree, this was a forgone conclusion long ago.
I also agree that it is a blessing in disguise for SA, but only if they can find a way of dealing with the Kings in a sensible manner.
11 Nov 2009, 21:07 pm
As for the ruling, well, it’s about as surprising as the fact that the ANC won the last election.
Fifteen franchises divided by three nations equals five franchises each.
How many franchises do we have? Five.
How many franchises do the Kiwis have? Five.
I think you can see where I’m going here.
But if you don’t (perhaps you’re a bit slow, maybe even Daddy Watson slow):
Which conference is the 15th franchise competing in?
That’s right.
11 Nov 2009, 21:09 pm
Knew Melbourne would get it, no surprise there. 5 each now. Just don’t think they have enough players for another team. Good luck to them anyhow. Just don’t come and scout and take our players.
11 Nov 2009, 21:09 pm
Duh
11 Nov 2009, 21:15 pm
I only have one question: Now what?
11 Nov 2009, 21:15 pm
Kockett
vermulen
liebenberg
sykes
Joe P
11 Nov 2009, 21:20 pm
#6 Winston:
#13 fsjakes:
Where exactly do they breed guys like you, is it like a factory underground that spits em out like Uruk-hai ?
11 Nov 2009, 21:24 pm
from hereon the kinds just have to be included in the Currie Cup premier division. guarenteed.
still think that for super 14 freestate and kings should conglomerate, esp. since cheetahs struggle for depth. home base can be decided on which team ends furtherst on the cc log..
just a thought. either way something is gonna have to be done.
11 Nov 2009, 21:24 pm
#6 Winston:
Did you honestly expect the Kings to get it? The team is to play in the Australian conference, so it makes the most sense. Why should Aussie give up a team so SARU can satisfy the politicians?
The only way for the Kings to get in is to drop another SA team.
I can’t belive people actually feel screwed over by this, there was not going to be any other result.
11 Nov 2009, 21:28 pm
#6 Winston: How did you work that out you wanker? Paranoia in the extreme, watch out or the enemy will start taking away other average performing super teams
11 Nov 2009, 21:35 pm
With platoffs looming, we will definitly see the Lions being relegated. Bye bye Lions!!!
11 Nov 2009, 21:39 pm
Well the Melbourne franchise is anyway gonna become the 6th South African franchise… all the okes who don’t get recognised by Pdivvy will voetsek… Say it ain’t so…
11 Nov 2009, 21:45 pm
Geez Waster,ur really hard core hurling abuse on cyber space.. Amazing. It just never ceases to amaze me how South Africa always seem to get the short end of the stick with Sanzar but I suppose I am imagining it along with all the other people on this site that think that as well.
11 Nov 2009, 21:51 pm
we should of told these kissing cousins to get stuffed a long time ago….bloody Charles Dempsey screwed us with the football WC and we being taken it ever since….
Stuff these okes man…move to the N H …dont need these wan kers!
What an opportunity missed to broaden the game….ag io am so befok now!
Biko would be ashamed!
11 Nov 2009, 21:56 pm
Grant you’re not being logical. The concept of an SA team playing in a Autralian conference is just dof.
11 Nov 2009, 21:58 pm
I will give you this. Charles Dempsey did fk us over. But he took as much heat from his fellow country men as from us. But he was censured by the highest levels of goverment SMS his sport.
11 Nov 2009, 21:59 pm
#27 SodaJoe: Well Marinos and Hoskins are bloody fools then…we set up again by these sods…
Must be playoffs then….because as night follows day the Kings gonna get a spot.
Pasop lions…all over rover?
11 Nov 2009, 21:59 pm
Fkn iPhones.
11 Nov 2009, 22:00 pm
#28 SodaJoe: Dont trust them…never have…the Japies e mail the clincher for me….
And J Marshall…may he rot in hell….
11 Nov 2009, 22:01 pm
Grant may be slow on phone. We all well know that our admin are incompetent.
This may well see a promo rekegation concept. But remind where Stormers finished in S14 last year vs Lions?
11 Nov 2009, 22:02 pm
#26 grant10: Dare I ask how was the drumming?
I am on Facebook trying to lure a mate of mine to come to watch the Boks at Wembley on Tuesday, she is keen but has a full diary that needs tweaking!! I need to deliver a killer line that will make her come with me!!
Stumped at present……After the Leicester performance!! Lol
11 Nov 2009, 22:02 pm
#19 WakaNathan: WakaNathan, please explain what in my post caused such a reaction in you?
1. I don’t think NZ’s can be impartial when it comes to deciding between SA and Aus. Therefore my comment that it was a foregone conclusion. That most people expected it to go this way. Why be insulting towards me?
2. I do believe it is a blessing in disguise for SA rugby. It will dilute the Australien player pool even more – good for us. And I don’t think that the Kings are up to S14 level yet – theferoe good that they are not there yet.
3. SA rugby’s track record regarding the Kings isn’t good. Hopefully they will use the time they have to build the Kings franchise and a way to introduce them to S14 level that will suit the Cheetahs and Lions.
Now, why so insulting towards me? What on earth did I say that warranted your insult?
11 Nov 2009, 22:04 pm
#32 SodaJoe: Hi to our resident peacemaker and common sense guru!!
11 Nov 2009, 22:04 pm
Bobby Skinstad made his own bed. Don’t blame JM.
Narrowing your world view is still narrow minded. Nothing wrong with Aussies or Kiwis.
11 Nov 2009, 22:07 pm
Hello Duck. I am at Austin airport. Just another airport. But it’s hot here. Although Minne is stll nicer weather than yours!
11 Nov 2009, 22:07 pm
How did we get screwed? If anyone genuinely believed that we should get a franchise in the Australian conference, should come back to reality.
We must either combine the Bulls and LIons, or as Ali said, the Cheetahs and Kings.
11 Nov 2009, 22:09 pm
good imo why would we want another franchise when 3 out of our 5 arnt even producing goods in s14 year in and out …all square.stuff nz and auz anyway
11 Nov 2009, 22:09 pm
Jake your knowlege of the relationship between Kiwis & Aussies may be enhanced through watching Flight o the Conchords.
11 Nov 2009, 22:10 pm
Dave there are other options.
11 Nov 2009, 22:12 pm
I am going to go. This phone blogging is a pain in the arse.
See you through the window.
11 Nov 2009, 22:14 pm
bottom sa team relegated…Kings in…about time we started transforming properly ….take the game to the people…Stormers can be relegated for all i care…
11 Nov 2009, 22:15 pm
#25 Winston: Sorry didn’t mean to be quite as abrupt as that. But seriously what is 15 divided by three? And what would be the advantage to NZ to have another Australian team instead of a south african team? Think you are barking up the wrong tree
11 Nov 2009, 22:17 pm
#42 SodaJoe:
You’re supposed to hold it in your hand.
11 Nov 2009, 22:49 pm
the team was due to play in the Australian conference and oh golly what a surprise it’s an Australian team.
11 Nov 2009, 22:49 pm
I’m tired of people pushing transformation down our throats! come on man. It’s a gradual and eventual process not a rapid one.
Come on man, look what it did to the Boks so called B team!
Nai man. Nxa!
11 Nov 2009, 22:50 pm
ditch the Lions i reckon, they’re a Bad Team anyway.
11 Nov 2009, 22:57 pm
It was expected, I just cannot understand why it was necessary to expand this format anyway. Ok, if bringing in team from Pacific or Argentina, or whatever, except NZ (5 is enough), Aus (4 is more than enough), SA (5 is enough, besides you can bet 2 SA teams will be in the bottom 3, so why bother).
11 Nov 2009, 22:57 pm
#47 WP_:
What “B” team? It was the regular Bok squad players that let us down. Anyway, I’m off to bed. ‘Night all.
11 Nov 2009, 23:06 pm
#11 WP_: That looks much better than automatic relegation. Like in CC relegation playoffs. Southern Kings must earn their right to be represented in home and away play-offs with the weakest SA team in S15.
11 Nov 2009, 23:13 pm
as if there was going to be any other outcome.
11 Nov 2009, 23:15 pm
can’t we have a return of The Cats? combine Cheetahs and Lions and wham! Southern Kings have a place.
11 Nov 2009, 23:23 pm
#51 Nils:
Hi Nils,
I do not agree – it is time for a change – the weakest team over say 2 seasons must just be replaced by the Spears.
The Spears team will not be in a position to attract top players before they have certainty that they will be in the super 15. Therefore their chances in a play off will be remote – they will have very few top players during such a match and will have not much chance of success.
11 Nov 2009, 23:30 pm
oh hell, why don’t we just play our own conference with six teams then. won’t affect the amount of Saffa teams to reach the next round.
11 Nov 2009, 23:30 pm
#19 WakaNathan:
Who pulled your chain? … you little obnoxious specimen.
You still hanging around??! Like a serious case of PILES – a complete pain in the arse & damn hard to get rid of.
You just can’t help yourself, can you? Have you got nothing better to do? Is this site really the highlight of your life?? Just standback & take a moment to think about how sad you are.
11 Nov 2009, 23:56 pm
Should have done both: Super 16.
Obviously.
12 Nov 2009, 00:54 am
#26 grant10:
take your medicine
12 Nov 2009, 00:55 am
Anyway – using the Currie Cup to identify S15 qualifiers is not a terrible outcome.
12 Nov 2009, 01:07 am
#31 grant10:
and this email is where ?
#34 fsjakes:
#56 jocuba:
cretins, listen up good.
enough with the ‘conspiracy’ this and the doubts of ‘independent’ that.
What does it take for you guys to realise not everything is a conspiracy or corrupted or a sham or motivated towards the undoing of your superior being ?
check out G10 with his theories based on ‘kissing cousins’. What ****, spouting complete nonsense. Why, if a respected senior Judicial figure and a leading businessman and sportsman – both who are Independent in the 3 man partnership – make a decision because 2 stubborn sides wont shift; then why is the only explanation that it must be corrupt, and the individuals are corrupt, and theyre National bodies corrupt with other vested interests.
And fsjakes turns around and says “why are you insulting me” ?!
Who is insulting who here ?
12 Nov 2009, 01:09 am
#56 jocuba:
oh, yippee – look !……1 sad blogger telling the other sad blogger “Just standback & take a moment to think about how sad you are.”.
u-huh
12 Nov 2009, 01:13 am
#61 WakaNathan: Check this out for a laugh, go to google and type in the box “why are south africans” and see what it prompts,
12 Nov 2009, 01:40 am
#62 Waster:
*ouch*
12 Nov 2009, 02:31 am
Jeez Okes, pull it together….NZ 5 teams SA 5 teams Aus 5 teams. That seems fair to me. With the new format, there always had to be equal numbers in each conference.
Guys go and talk to someone about that persecution complex. You will live a longer happier life.
I just get sick of the vitriolic diatribe that comes about (from some, not most) every time something goes against SA.
Childish!
Some one smells of Salt and Vinegar:))))
12 Nov 2009, 03:33 am
I’ll tell you what. There are a couple of Saffas here in Melbourne that are as happy as pigs in sh*t. Finally, some decent sport may come our way.
12 Nov 2009, 05:04 am
#62 Waster: Hey Einstein, why don’t you go to Google and type in the same for your country of origin and see the results?
Does that make you feel secure about yourself or do you want to pull your head out of the sand sometime?
12 Nov 2009, 05:50 am
Forget the conspiracy theories for a moment. Why is that SA with its massive player base has, relatively speaking, such pathetic teams? In a nutshell, I think its administration and training (or lack thereof). SA needs a draft system, a better distribution of resources (money & players), better support for youth programs and the development of more top level coaches. All of this ideally free of quotas.
My guess is that the Griqua’s team could go en masse to Melbourne and, with Melbourne’s choice of training staff, finish above one SA team in their first S14. In their 2nd season, Sarel P and Riaan V would turn out for the 1st string Wallies and possibly Naas O would be a backup fly half.
What do the muppets think?
12 Nov 2009, 06:30 am
#67 husky:
Makes sense,
At any rate a large numer of SAs young players will be taken by the new Melbourne francise anyway
The selection of last Friday’s SA XV Team must be a vindication for many promising young players of things to come
12 Nov 2009, 06:36 am
“Looks at the scoreboard” (Boy Louw)
SA teams routinely occupy most of the pathetic cellar-dwelling last three teams in every year of Super Rugby.
Clearly they are simply not equipped to field an extra sixth team. They’d only add to those annual parade of yarpie losers making up that perennial sorry tail end.
Not so?
12 Nov 2009, 06:40 am
#68 Hondo:
Mapoe
Ludik
Alberts
Vermeulen
Kockett
Vermaak (don’t think he has been capped yet?)
Grant (can’t play for Aus, but still a potential marquee)
Have I missed anyone? We’re short on hookers if there’s any young promising ones you can suggest
12 Nov 2009, 06:59 am
So the Kings got the spear finally. I just hope that Cheeks has learnt his lesson and decides rather to emulate Griquas and qualify for the CC first.
12 Nov 2009, 07:01 am
Tendai “Beast” Mtawarira is out of the Springbok team because he is not a South African national – even though he has already played 15 Tests in the green and gold.
The SA Rugby Union (Saru) had recently asked sport minister Makhenkesi Stofile to help expedite the Zimbabwe-born prop’s South African citizenship, but in a statement on Wednesday night Stofile’s ministry accused the union of poor administration.
“This request to have the Minister use his position to have the process of securing permanent residence and subsequently, citizenship expedited ahead of the year end tour in Europe, has exposed our sport administrators’ clear disrespect or lack of understanding of our laws,” the ministry said.
“Talented as he is, Tendai, like all foreign nationals plying their trade in South Africa, is bound by the laws of this country. The migration laws of our country are clear on issues relating to permanent residence and citizenship. We expect our sport administrators to understand and respect legislation that regulate their business. None of the athletes, sport codes, or federations can be bigger than the country.”
Mtawarira, who is in France with the Bok team, was one of the stars of the side that beat the touring British Lions earlier this year.
“While Tendai is a live wire on the field of play, the question is whether it is, in the first place, justifiable to say he has scarce skills – the rationale that would have enabled him to obtain the current work permit. If we go the route our rugby administrators are requesting us to take, and facilitate the fast-tracking of Tendai’s citizenship, what would this say to all rugby players in our country? We cannot as a
government department responsible for sport and recreation in this country, afford to insult our players like this.
“The principle here is clear: Only citizens of our country can play for our National team, irrespective of the sport code. Therefore, no foreign national can play for any of our national teams, no matter how
outstanding they may be. If any player in any code is to become a South African citizen, this has to be done within the legal framework of our country.”
12 Nov 2009, 07:05 am
Why don’t SA just pull out of Super Rugby. We get shafted in any case everywhere. The Aus and NZ boys are in bed together. I’d rather watch a full strength CC over Super Rugby. I will bet Noakes will also get a semi, it will be less rugby for the players.
12 Nov 2009, 07:07 am
Wow this is a surprise – not.
12 Nov 2009, 07:08 am
#74 PissAnt: Beast out of Bok team as he not a citize…..David…more news boet…wassup here!
12 Nov 2009, 07:11 am
#73 Hop Hop Spinnekop: it is easier to tell the Kings that they are simply out of their depth and should rather uncorrupt themselves and earn a CC place.
12 Nov 2009, 07:22 am
Surely more of the blame has to lie with the silly demands the SARU have come up with recently, than some Oceanic Alliance conspiracy theory?
The SARU agree to a 3-zone, 5-team format, then get mad when a panel decides it isn’t feasible to have a 6th SA team in someone else’s zone?
This coming after they also initially agreed to a 6-team finals format for the previous S14 (a format I thought very feasible), but then demanded it be on the proviso that 2 SA teams were in that top 6 regardless of their actual placing in the competition.
Perhaps rather than just accuse everyone of being against SA, think maybe that if the SARU came up with a practical and beneficial idea for the ongoing success of the Super 14, it would be welcomed much more warmly than some of their other harebrained plans.
12 Nov 2009, 07:24 am
#75 grant10: I believe it was sorted out before the Springboks left for France. Or has it been rehashed?
12 Nov 2009, 07:26 am
#78 Sharksgirl: I also thought so…will be a body blow!
12 Nov 2009, 07:29 am
#79 grant10: I am going to check the KZN papers if Beast has been dropped it will be all over our papers. Give me 5 minutes.
12 Nov 2009, 07:31 am
#79 grant10: Agree that’s a big loss.
I also thought I read on here recently that it was resolved?
Perhaps WP Nel will be the next to be called up.
Unless the Melbourne Rebels get to him first
12 Nov 2009, 07:32 am
Checked both the Witness and the Mercury, nothing on it about Beast not playing, Will check Daily news this afternoon. But I am sure this matter was resolved before the Boks left for France.
12 Nov 2009, 07:41 am
#75 grant10:
Funny how they ‘pushed through’ our now fired soccer coach’s work permit…
12 Nov 2009, 07:43 am
The 15th franchise is a joke anyway. Neither Australia nor SA can support an additional team. SA can’t maintain the 5 that they have for gods sake, in playing terms at least.
We’ll see what happens with the Melbourne franchise, I’m pessimistic. Melbourne isn’t exactly a rugby hotbed and it struggles to sell out for test matches so the crowds will be sparse. Super Rugby is in danger of killing itself chasing the mighty dollar.
12 Nov 2009, 07:46 am
On the Kings issue.
So in short, they (Kings) were the better rugby choice/decision, but Melbourne was the better money spinner?
It is ironic as I said elsewhere…
A couple of years back the Spears would have been given an undeserved place ahead of another SA union/franchise if most reports were to be believed…
Now within the SANZAR ranks, exactly the same has happened…
12 Nov 2009, 07:47 am
#72 David: Well strange as it may seem the govt is probably in the right here – what I’d like to know is how come Beast has been allowed to play 15 tests without citizenship and have the rules changed recently to make it a requirement?
You’d have a very very hard time arguing that SA is short of quality props wouldn’t you?
12 Nov 2009, 07:49 am
#86 jonnymain:
I can only imagine his work permit expired?
12 Nov 2009, 07:49 am
#86 jonnymain:
I am actually more interested in what the IRB will make of this…
12 Nov 2009, 07:53 am
hmmmm… Congratulations to Melbourne… Let’s hope Australia make a fist of it and are able to field a competitive team… without diluting the current ‘strength’of their existing teams.
Let’s also hope SARU doesn’t drop the Southern Kings/Spears ball again and they put the required effort and finance into establishing the Eastern Cape as a real force in SA rugby once and for all…!
12 Nov 2009, 07:54 am
#86 jonnymain: After the Tri-nations and now the Leicester test, perhaps not as hard as it was 2-3 years ago.
12 Nov 2009, 07:56 am
#83 PissAnt: yes…..
12 Nov 2009, 07:59 am
#89 ufo: There are several top level players currently on a 1-year contract, who I suspect have left themselves open to join the new franchise.
Rocky Elsom, Berrick Barnes, and I believe also Drew Mitchell, Josh Valentine, Brett Sheehan and Matt Dunning.
On top of this there will be a few more coming off multi-year contracts at the end of 2010, it will be interesting who else goes.
12 Nov 2009, 08:01 am
and who didn’t see this one coming?
12 Nov 2009, 08:02 am
#87 PissAnt:
I doubt whether it’s just a work permit. Either he qualifies as a resident and citizen, or he doesn’t.
12 Nov 2009, 08:05 am
#88 PissAnt: It sounds to me like a monumental **** up on the part of SARU – why are we not surprised!?
I’m not sure if the IRB will, or can do anything. It’s a matter for the SA government and governing body (SARU) is it not?
12 Nov 2009, 08:07 am
#94 David: I agree with you, The Sharks are professional and they would have ensured that his Work permit was timeously renewed. Afterall its not like he is the 1st international playing for the Sharks
12 Nov 2009, 08:07 am
#92 DonutDunning: But isn’t the talent in Oz spread too thin? Where does this leave the likes of the Reds and Force? You will have to import from abroad I presume in order to be competitive, and this probably means SA because there isn’t enough cash in Super Rugby to attract the top paid players in Europe.
12 Nov 2009, 08:09 am
On another subject, I read the Twitter posts of 2 England cricketers this morning – seems they were caught up in the aftermath of the Rolex gang bust in Sandton. Welcome to SA boys LOL!
12 Nov 2009, 08:10 am
#92 DonutDunning:
Let’s hope…
I just remember some rumblings from Aus when the Force was established that “Aus rugby had been diluted” by the extra team… Hope it doesn’t happen this time…
12 Nov 2009, 08:12 am
Maybe this will further awaken SARU’s administration from their immature loyalty to SANZAR.
SARU really believed SANZAR would decide to award the franchise to the Spears. It completely overlooked financial and geographic considerations.
SARU cannot expect SANZAR to look after its interests. It has to do this itself with a more mature view of the relationship.
SARU is the junior partner to the ANZAC brotherhood. It must act accordingly, not by blind loyalty to the uneven partnership, but by looking after its own interests in the context of this partnership.
There should be boundaries beyond which the ANZAC brotherhood cannot cross, or the partnership ends. Even travel should be one such boundary. Truly impartial and efficient judiciary commissions should be another. And so on.
12 Nov 2009, 08:15 am
Didn’t the Boks vs Tigers game show us against whom we should be playing franchise rugby? To late now, unfortunately.
12 Nov 2009, 08:16 am
Springbok Team (Test caps in brackets): Team review:
15. Zane Kirchner – Needs to pull up his socks, not playing as he use to in Griekwas jersey, lacks confidence not his best season – I believe the best is still to come from him
14. JP Pietersen – Below par as well, can do allot better, needs to go and find work, go and watch a few games Paulse played & get standard back – Haven’t seen his best yet, still waiting on that 1 test
13. Jaque Fourie – best in the world – French will have no answer
12. Adi Jacobs – Tackle boetie tackle like you use to – still under par, but solid in mid field 11. Bryan Habana – Can do better
10. Morné Steyn – best in the world – can run more as confidence grow
9. Fourie du Preez – best in the world – just keep on doing what you’re doing
8. Ryan Kankowski – can dominate from behind the scrum – send Fourie away in there 22
7. Schalk Burger – Coming back to 2006- 07 form – need a solid performance from him
6. Heinrich Brüssow – Keep grinding you’re becoming the best in the world
5. Victor Matfield – Keep it tight you’re not an inside centre
4. Bakkies Botha – Keep the discipline
3. John Smit – captain – Best in the world
2. Bismarck du Plessis – Keep discipline need to play the ball not the man – still waiting on better performance from him
1.CJ can der Linde – not sure if he was selected to play, if so please get the front row sorted
12 Nov 2009, 08:17 am
#100 sglazer: No matter how much you may wish otherwise, Oz and NZ will always stick together when the going gets tough. SA is simply the cash cow that they have to put up with in order to fill their ever-growing coffers. What does SA get in return for this? Think how much more money could be made by throwing SARU in with the major NH unions! Having said that it may destroy the Sprinboks as it is destroying England. Too much money means too many imported superstars to the detriment of developing local talent.
12 Nov 2009, 08:18 am
The Super series is DEAD. There’s nothing super about it anymore. It’s boring. SA should have climbed out to get involved in a new series with NH teams.
12 Nov 2009, 08:18 am
The French is over confident the Boks is not number 1 on the world for nothing – the French will loose with more than 20 points
12 Nov 2009, 08:27 am
one thing I’d like to know is… where did SANZAR get their information before restructuring the S15 into three conferences saying that fans prefer to see local derbies? I for one far prefer to watch the NZ and Aus teams at Newlands than the local teams. We watch the local teams during the CC and (used to) in the S14…
HAs anyone worked out now how many foreign teams fans are likely to see at their (the fans) home ground? If your team makes it thru to the second round you will see four foreign teams playing. If your team doesn’t you’re not going to see any international players at all…?
How can this be a good thing for rugby fans? And how can this increase TV viewership as Andy Marinos said?
Unless I’m just being really stupid… (go for it!)
Can any of the really clever guys here explain this to me…
Would appreciate it…
12 Nov 2009, 08:27 am
#105 Kwagga: And you say the French are over confident! There isn’t 20 points in this game, there isn’t even 10 points in it! Too many factors at play to be confident, tired players, not the best prep for wet NH conditions, partizan Toulouse crowd, tight stadium, no Spies or Juan, no JdV or Frans Steyn. This isn’t the same Bok team that waltzed the 3N or beat the Lions.
12 Nov 2009, 08:33 am
#106 ufo:
I reckon you’re a 100% correct. Having 2 rounds of a glorified CC isn’t what the Super Series should be about. Basically, we’ve handed the Aussies a local competition and helped to foot the bill for it.
The Air NZ cup has also been faltering, so a regional competition would help them as well.
12 Nov 2009, 08:37 am
#95 jonnymain:
I dont know so much…
Surely the IRB will have protocols in place that only allows for qualified people to represent international teams?
If SA played an illegal player there might be an issue – remember the whole thing with Chavanga?
12 Nov 2009, 08:42 am
#108 David:
eish David… doesn’t look good…
David, I agree with you… it’s boosted the NZ and especially Aus domestic rugby but is going to hurt ours… So much for protecting the Currie Cup…
If anyone knows Marinos, please ask him where SANZAR got their intell..? How many bloggers here or any other site in SA, Aus, or NZ where asked their opinions…? I think we cover a fair cross-section of rugby supporters… but I bet you you won’t find a single supporter who was canvassed for his or her opinion…!!
This is just some marketing spin that SANZAR has come up with and us gullable fans just accept it…
12 Nov 2009, 08:46 am
#109 PissAnt: Hmm. Not sure about that one. Hell the consequences could be severe if that is the case!
Is this not a result of a recent change in SA policy though? That being the case Beast was eligible under the old laws but not the new? Dunno, if they don’t sort this out it could be big trouble!
12 Nov 2009, 08:47 am
#108 David:
David, did anyone ask your opinion or those of your members…?
12 Nov 2009, 08:48 am
#108 David:
That said our Currie Cup is strong, and a strong Aus and NZ can surely just aid our rugby too since we play them most of any other team?
What worries me from the above is that the decision was not made in the interest of rugby.
Aus’ rugby has been spiralling downwards at a rate of knots, and I am sure I am not the only one who is sceptical about what the Melbourne franchise will do for them?
From where I sit, this was a last ditch, desperate effort to save union in Aus.
And make no mistake, I think union post RWC 2011 will be in serious trouble in NZ too.
12 Nov 2009, 08:49 am
#111 jonnymain:
I don’t think the new ammendments affect the basic requirements for national representation. It is directed more at club or provincial sides and was introduced because of the influx of foreign soccer players into our clubs sides.
12 Nov 2009, 08:49 am
#111 jonnymain:
Well either way, it is government interference within the sport and I am very interested to see if the IRB is going to respond either positvely or negatively to this…
Knowing them, they have as much balls as SARU.
12 Nov 2009, 08:50 am
#108 David: Spoke to a Kiwi friend of mine (a Cantabrian) about the Air NZ Cup and the shocking attendances. He said that Kiwis value the Ranfurly Shield more than the Air NZ Cup itself, and that Super Rugby is the main focus now for the fans. Seems to be a case of too much rugby for the Kiwis, the expanded S15 will only exacerbate the problem for the provincial competition.
12 Nov 2009, 08:51 am
#112 ufo:
If you’re referring to SARSU, it sadly doesn’t exist any longer.
12 Nov 2009, 08:53 am
#117 David:
I was… oh hell David… sorry to hear that…
12 Nov 2009, 08:56 am
#116 jonnymain:
I wonder whether NZ provincial rugby will go the same was as it has here in the case of the Sharks and Bulls, where the provincial union and regional franchise are effectively the same team?
12 Nov 2009, 08:58 am
#99 ufo: All the Force did was show up how bad the Reds management is, as they performed better in their 2nd year with a bunch of Reds 2nd stringers.
I think there is enough players for a 5th team if managed properly.
I actually think the NZRU system of centrally contracted players would be much more effective to ensure all teams are competitive from the start.
Being a privately owned team, it may face the same issues that the Force did initially and SA Rugby do at the moment, that is the hording of players by bigger unions.
12 Nov 2009, 08:58 am
#118 ufo:
Yeah, a Keo/RT situation.
12 Nov 2009, 09:01 am
#120 DonutDunning:
That’s a major problem here and one of the reasons, I suspect why PdeV brought certain players on tour to get a look at them.
From what I’ve seen, though, the ARU excercises more control in the form of salary caps, than SARU do. Here, it’s just a free for all and buggar the national consequences.
12 Nov 2009, 09:04 am
#106 ufo: I’ve had the same question running through my head.
While undoubtedly the biggest Brumbies game of the year is vs the Waratahs, the next biggest is actually the Crusaders and in the last couple of years, the Bulls have become 3rd.
I don’t want to lose these international rivalries just to watch the Brumbies beat the Reds over and over again.
12 Nov 2009, 09:04 am
#119 David: Hard to say. I think the NZ provinces have a wider spread of talent than in SA and they also have this draft system which they utilise to share players who aren’t getting enough gametime at their franchise. If you look at the Bulls as an example, they have a surfeit of talent in most positions and players who could be doing a job for other SA franchises but will spend the majority of the S14 on the bench.
12 Nov 2009, 09:07 am
#121 David:
You know David… it is a pity it didn’t work out… but… at least you got off your butt and tried something…
most of us here… me included… just sit on our butts and moan and… occassinally… don’t…
kudos to you… sincerely…
12 Nov 2009, 09:11 am
#122 David: That is true. The unions can only offer a certain base amount to players ($AU150,000 i think maximum), everything else comes from ARU contracts, and more recently these stupid 3rd party deals.
Melbourne isn’t a known rugby city, but has quite a few strong rugby private schools and an amateur rugby base, as well as big corporate deals to get these players to the city.
They are in a much better position than Perth, and should have been given the franchise 5 years ago over them.
The CEO before Jon O’Neill didn’t have the balls to take on the AFL in its heartland, but failed to realise that Perth is just as AFL dominant as Melbourne.
12 Nov 2009, 09:16 am
#126 DonutDunning:
I thought the Perth decision was more about giving the game a wider geographic spread. With the number of ex Saffas there, it shouldn’t take too long before they can start recruiting locally.
12 Nov 2009, 09:18 am
#127 David: I’m not sure of the demographics, but I would bet that Melbourne has a fairly large number of Kiwis in exile, as does Sydney. I for one hope it works out for them but I have my doubts.
12 Nov 2009, 09:26 am
#127 David: That was all spin.
Perth was the ‘safe’ option.
The growth potential in Melbourne was much bigger, both player and money-wise, but they saw it as too much of a risk and instead went with Perth, where they thought they were at least guaranteed the fan base of the Saffa Expats.
The Victorian Rugby Union (VRU) in Melbourne may still only run amateur rugby, but has been around for 100 years.
Have a look at the Force’s homeground and you will see how big rugby is in Perth among the locals, they don’t even have a rectangular ground.
12 Nov 2009, 09:30 am
#128 jonnymain: That is the fear, that the ship has already sailed.
) and when Aus Rugby’s growth was at its highest.
Melbourne should have been announced the team in 2004, right after Australia hosted an extremely successful World Cup (result aside
Now after five lean years for the Wallabies, interest in rugby outside the loyal supporters has waned.
I’m still hopeful though.
12 Nov 2009, 09:30 am
Just to clarify things:
1. SANZAR’s only loyalty is to the Super Competition. The recent outcome is an example of that. No surprises there.
2. SARU must aggressively look after our interests. Not rely on others to do it for us.
3. The conference system is most beneficial for the Aus teams as they don’t have a regional competition of note.
4. The conference system is worse for us because the more Super Rugby, the more it erodes the CC. Playing Super rugby into October will definately have that effect.
5. The politicians care more about representation and ego than results. If you remember this one thing, all those ridiculous statement coming out of their mouths will be less surprising. (that’s why they re-hired the Bafana coach. He’s Brazillian and a WC winner and they want to associate with that (EGO). They don’t care that a local coach who knows the systems and players is likely to achieve more).
6. We live in a country where mediocrity at the highest level of officialdom is tolerated and ignored. To address these things would be admitting (from a politician’s viewpoint) that they too, are not up to standard.
7. The goal of a ruling party is not really to govern and serve, but rather to ensure that they are re-elected. All statements, policies, posturing etc, must be seen in this light. Hence the Julius factor.
8. Sport in this country is political. Which means that we as the fans (and by virtue of our support, the investors and “fund” – ers) have to make things happen. Don’t allow them to get away with mediocrity. Chellenge at every turn. That’s what patriotism is all about.
12 Nov 2009, 09:32 am
#127 David: Maybe they just dont want a political based team in there. Do they really want to dance to the SA Governments pipes?
The Spears or the Kings dont even win the B division CC ion SA.
12 Nov 2009, 09:43 am
#132 111BIG5:
I’m sorry, but I thought we were discussing the benefits of Melbourne over Perth and the effect on Aussie rugby.
12 Nov 2009, 10:02 am
#133 David: O OK my wrong then.
But why do you always blame the others on the SARSU failure, i do not know the whole story but you sound so holy on this issue. Did you ever take some blame on that, are you the innocent one?
12 Nov 2009, 10:06 am
#134 111BIG5:
I’ve never discussed the issue, here or anywhere else. So what the hell are you talking about?
12 Nov 2009, 10:08 am
All in all a good decision however sad it is for the Kings.
Was never going to work having a South African side based in Australia for the conference matches.
Get the Kings into the S15 along with Cheetahs, Bulls, Sharks, Stormers. Lions players should play for the Bulls and Bulls should play at Loftus and Ellis. Keep the franchises for the Currie Cup but let the Lions back in so there are only 6 sides.
It’s a win win. The Kings have to start playing in the S15, its inevitable and will develop rugger in the E Cape no end.
12 Nov 2009, 10:11 am
#108 David: That is spot on.
12 Nov 2009, 11:11 am
#26 grant10: Biko? Is he a yarpie cyclist?
12 Nov 2009, 11:13 am
#138 TheTackler: hey!!!
You a mad oke…but enjoy your stuff…very funny….but dont mess with Biko….MY HERO…
12 Nov 2009, 11:34 am
Sanity at last.
Lets reverse the situatation.
Would SA admit an Australian Franchise into their Conference, at the expense of one of their own Teams?
To all the hand-wringers, whiners, Conspiracy Theorists, Xenophobes and Parnoids.
GET REAL.
12 Nov 2009, 12:05 pm
#106 ufo:
It all started when RSA wanted 2 teams in the finals every year and sanzar said that must be done through qualifying. RSA was not satisfied so Oneill proposed top six qualify for the fianls. RSA wernt satisfied.
It seems like regardless RSA wanted 2 qualifiers irrespective of placement.
Then other formats were put to the table and the 3 conference format seemed to suit RSA although it may have interfered with the CC.
It was aus and NX trying to accomodate RSA but RSA played their cards too early. They got what they wanted with the qualifying now when it came down to a fifth franchise Aus came in and said…”you have got what you wanted this is what we want”..”you cant have everything!”
RSA shooting before the bullet has been loaded!
12 Nov 2009, 12:14 pm
#133 David:
The effect of having the cheetahs in s14…cellar dwellers.
The Force – have been competitive and knocking on the door of the finals.
RSA currently has 3 poor teams in S14 and Aus has one. I am talking about consistently.
12 Nov 2009, 12:31 pm
#106 ufo:
I think the conference system is a very poor decision. A top six qualifier in the old format would have been much better.
Or one year split half way and 8 teams play each other and the other 7 have their own group and top two team from each qualify for semis.
At least not many games and fully charged affairs due to players being somewhat fresh.
12 Nov 2009, 12:33 pm
SA can support 4 franchises, Australia 3 at most. Expansion has diluted the player pool to the detriment of the competition. I could be wrong but this latest franchise will only serve to make this problem worse.
12 Nov 2009, 13:54 pm
#113 PissAnt:
Yes. The hosting of a RWC in your country usually does immediately lead to the sports loss in popularity….
What you hope and what you get and 2 different things, Pissant.
#143 wallabie.:
The Conference system came about simply due to the SARU holding their SANZAR partners over a barrell by insisting that they should be guaranteed playoff spots and, therefore, network coverage. They wanted to host the big games, not hope for 1 to be involved and then usually play away from home.
So Aus & NZ keeled over and granted them their guarantee. And thats how we got in this mess.
13 Nov 2009, 03:52 am
SANZAR is a kiwi aussie joke. South Africa should never be here. We provide the cash but get left behind. The winners are aussie rugby, which is dying, saffas and islanders that want to leave.
We only start winning the S14 when a Saffa sponsor came on board. We had a leading kiwi ref with an e-mail telling the other SANZAR refs how to screw South Africa. We have a leading Aussie ref, Dicko, who every time any saffas are involved rorts us. This an embarassment for South Africa.
We want consistant refeering. Look at all the spear tackles that were missed in front of the refs but every time we commit an offence out comes the card!
S14 is one sided with teams like the Cheetahs with a neutral ref will kill most aussie sides.
We should be in Europe where the money is, and leave SANZAR behind.
13 Nov 2009, 06:02 am
#146 KevinRack:”We should be in Europe where the money is, and leave SANZAR behind.”
So what do you want? No Trinations,
No Super 14 or 15,
A place in the 6 nations (now to be 7 nations)…
No year end tours because it would be pointless.
To stand aside and watch Australian rugby struggle because they compete against other codes.
Have you thought your proposal through carefully?????
Making a 5th team an Australian team is the best thing for SA rugby. Look at the bun fight above amongst the Saffas about player theft within your own conference!! Now you suggest a 6th team will improve things!! And if you don’t get it you will take your bat and ball and go north. Tell me, just who is the child here?
The decision is made. Australia has more players than given credit for, the domestic and club comps are still very good, it just they have never been able to get a provincial team going. Now it will happen and SH rugby will be all the better for it. If they poach some SA talent, and they turn out to be a find, that’s great they are still available for Bok selection.
Please enough of the persecution complex.
May I suggest a more pragmatic approach
13 Nov 2009, 13:21 pm
#146 KevinRack:
Off you go then you whining whinging malcontented insufferably persecuted little victim. Nothing is yours as of Right, you have to go out there and earn it first.
#147 muffy:
Leave him be. He wants to play Italian club sides every weak, he wants his International opponents to be sides he can guarantee increased Win-stats so that his puffed-up little ego can run laps around the in-goal area and claim vicarious heroism on the back of others achievements.
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.