Kings to play Super Rugby in 2013
27 Jan 2012
The Southern Kings will be included in Super Rugby in 2013, but how they will be accommodated has not been decided yet.
Saru CEO Jurie Roux confirmed the news at the Springbok coach announcement in Newlands on Friday afternoon, where Heyneke Meyer was unveiled as Peter de Villiers’ successor. While the main focus from the national media was on Meyer’s appointment, keo.co.za got clarification from Roux about the Kings’ Super Rugby future.
‘There were many topics discussed at our executive meeting. On the Southern Kings specifically, it has been decided that they will play in Super Rugby in 2013, and this was supported by all parties concerned,’ Roux told this website. ‘However, we haven’t decided on how we will accommodate them with the five other South African franchises. We will bring this up at our AGM [annual general meeting] in March, and have further discussions with our partners at Sanzar about how we will accommodate six teams. We will also allow the Southern Kings to give their suggestions for possible solutions.’
The fact that the Eastern Cape has been given definite Super Rugby participation is a great step forward for the national sport and for a province that’s rich in black talent and has been starved of top quality rugby. However, with Saru confirming this news without a decided solution is a major concern.
With this decision to come into effect next season, how does Saru plan to accommodate their six franchises should Sanzar decline the proposal of including all teams in an already extended and lengthy tournament format? Will the Cheetahs and Lions’(South Africa’s least successful franchises) Super Rugby participation be under threat? Will they be forced to return to the Cats amalgamation initiative or duel in promotion/relegation play-offs?
A complex decision like this should’ve been finalised before the Kings’ Super Rugby participation was confirmed. Saru will now be pressurised in finding a solution that will ensure the happiness of all parties. The chances of achieving that, however, is highly unlikely.
Meanwhile, EP president Cheeky Watson, who was one of the several union bosses present at the press conference, said he was delighted with the Kings’ Super Rugby inclusion.
‘That is the main prize and we are delighted,’ said Watson. ‘Whether Saru is late in deciding on how they will accommodate us is debatable. The most suitable solution would be to have all six franchises playing Super Rugby.
‘The Southern Kings can only grow from here now,’ he continued. ‘We have struggled to recruit top-class players in the past because you have to be playing Super Rugby to be in contention for Springbok selection. And that’s a requirement for the best players. But knowing that we will definitely play in next year’s tournament will help us build a strong and competitive squad.’
By Gareth Duncan
74 Comments
Pages: [1] 2 » Show All
27 Jan 2012, 14:18 pm
It would be nice if the Kings actually qualified for the Currie Cup Premier division first.
27 Jan 2012, 14:21 pm
Of course SANZAR will not allow SA to include 6 teams in Super Rugby. One of the 5 current teams will lose out so that the Kings can finish 15th.
27 Jan 2012, 14:21 pm
Not going to happen.
Think of it as an BBBEE appointment.
27 Jan 2012, 14:27 pm
Who would benefit from the Kings? Cheeky and his cronies? Maybe it will create a bit of employment and get the odd test match. How will a sub-standard Super Rugby franchise in the Eastern Cape promote transformation. The Lions won the Currie Cup and will still get hammered in Superugby, nowhere to hide.
27 Jan 2012, 14:30 pm
Vrede can talk kak all he wants … my money is on the Stormers being relegated just like they were back 1997. No Rassie, soon be without Nienaber only the kak and mediocre AC.
JC pick your launch spot on top of brokeback mountain and practice your wing flaps chom.
Yippie no no boring Stormers articles.
27 Jan 2012, 14:38 pm
@RL-5: The Lions finished 14th last season, pal.
27 Jan 2012, 14:39 pm
Absolute rubbish that is all i can say about this news.
27 Jan 2012, 14:40 pm
With the majority of games played within each regional conference, having one with one an extra team could be accommodated – just a question of working out a fair system for play-off spots.
It would also end the ludicrous position where teams have to have a bye in the opening rounds.
27 Jan 2012, 14:40 pm
How the Kings are to participate in Super Rugby should’ve been finalized already.
If SANZAR doesn’t allow a 6th SA team, either SARU will be forced to go back on their statement (again), or relegate one of the other South African Franchises which will cause all sorts of problems.
Whether we have a pool of players who are good enough for Super Rugby that can support 6 Super Franchises is another story.
27 Jan 2012, 14:41 pm
@ali-8: Ja, more rugby is what we need. There just isn’t enough. Last year I thought the Super Rugby ended far too quickly …
27 Jan 2012, 14:42 pm
@Kietzphat-9: “Whether we have a pool of players who are good enough for Super Rugby that can support 6 Super Franchises is another story.”
We all know that we don’t.
27 Jan 2012, 14:42 pm
“The fact that the Eastern Cape has been given definite Super Rugby participation is a great step forward for the national sport and for a province that’s rich in black talent and has been starved of top quality rugby. ”
You are joking, right?
27 Jan 2012, 14:44 pm
@ali-8: Yeah right!! I am sure OZ and NZ can’t wait to welcome another saffa team to the competition.
Super 18 here we come!!!
27 Jan 2012, 14:46 pm
SARU’s biggest headache is that their agreement with SANZAR is that the best players of every country will play super rugby. Now how do they eliminate the cheetahs or lions as long as they can pay their players?
If the lions do go bankrupt then they have an easy way out of it…
The Valke can claim to play ahead of the Kings as they will beat them anyday…
27 Jan 2012, 14:52 pm
Look, they’re probably counting on the Guma group to clear the way for them.
Take the Lions down, and voila, a spot miraculously opens up for Cheeky’s Kings.
27 Jan 2012, 14:52 pm
@Cheetahboytjie-14: In Cheeky Watson’s view the solution is that the players from the relegated Super franchise come and play for his franchise.
‘The Southern Kings can only grow from here now,’ he continued. ‘We have struggled to recruit top-class players in the past because you have to be playing Super Rugby to be in contention for Springbok selection. And that’s a requirement for the best players. But now that we will definitely play in next year’s tournament will help us build a strong and competitive squad.’
Of course this means that only he benefits, but isn’t that the whole point?
27 Jan 2012, 14:57 pm
@kaksioek-16: Of course the selfish Cheeky only cares about him and puke. I think most of the lions or cheetahs players would rather go to Europe or sit on the bench for the bulls or sharks than play under puke.
27 Jan 2012, 15:00 pm
Bye Bye Lions/Cheetahs
27 Jan 2012, 15:04 pm
If the EP Kings (95% of the Southern Kings) can’t even beat Boland (5% of the Stormers), where in the name of Watson is the sense in this decision?
27 Jan 2012, 15:06 pm
@>^..^< katman-19: You forget: the Watsons are honorary blecks.
27 Jan 2012, 15:13 pm
@>^..^< katman-19: Exactly. It makes no rugby sense…..hell it makes no sense at all. They cant even win the 1st Division Currie Cup.
27 Jan 2012, 15:14 pm
I wonder who is the 6 guys voting that the kings should have been entered automatically? Are the Watson family among us….
27 Jan 2012, 15:15 pm
In management speak there is something called a bad news sandwich. Good news, followed by k..k news followed by good. So, Meyer good news, Kings k..k, what to follow as good again.
27 Jan 2012, 15:17 pm
This issue can be resolved by rethinking the entire domestic season.
All 14 teams play in the Vodacom Cup. The best 6 play Currie Cup Premier devision, the rest 1st division.
The top 5 Currie Cup teams play next year’s Super tournament. While those teams play Super rugby, the others fight it out for the next Currie Cup season and so forth.
27 Jan 2012, 15:18 pm
@BiltongBoer-24: But how does that benefit Cheeky financially?
27 Jan 2012, 15:21 pm
@kaksioek-25: It doesn’t. And it won’t benefit any other team with k@k management and the inability to manage their players. That is how it works in Europe – well sort off.
27 Jan 2012, 15:21 pm
@BiltongBoer-24: you can’t let the vodacom cup be the decider for who will play in the Currie Cup. It is the Super rugby team’s 2nd or 3rd string side.
27 Jan 2012, 15:23 pm
The moment teams EARN their right to progress to the “next stage” will be the moment there truly is a level playing field. If the Leopards are good enough to win Super rugby matches (for example, don’t bite my head off here), let them play!!
27 Jan 2012, 15:25 pm
@Cheetahboytjie-27: True, but who was the 6 best teams in last year’s Vodacom Cup?? Seriously, I can’t remember…
27 Jan 2012, 15:27 pm
@BiltongBoer-28: I think everyone except Cheeky will agree with you there. but let the top 5 Currie cup teams play super rugby. It used to work like that in the Super 10 days
27 Jan 2012, 15:29 pm
@Cheetahboytjie-30: Yes, the top 5 Currie Cup teams then play Super rugby. Can anyone remember who the top 6 teams was in last year’s VC?? Supersport has got the new logs, and I can’t find the old one’s anywhere.
27 Jan 2012, 15:30 pm
North section
Team P W D L Pts
MTN Golden Lions 8 6 1 1 31
GWK Griquas 8 5 0 3 26
Ford Pumas 8 4 0 4 19
Vodacom Blue Bulls 8 3 0 5 17
Tasol Solar Griffons 8 1 0 7 12
Valke 8 2 1 5 12
Leopards 8 2 0 6 11
Welwitschias 8 0 1 7 5
South Section:
Team P W L D Pts
Pampas XV 8 8 0 0 37
Western Province 8 7 1 0 33
Sharks XV 8 6 0 2 31
Toyota Free State 8 4 0 4 22
Eastern Province Kings 8 6 0 2 21
Boland Cavaliers 8 3 1 4 19
SWD Eagles 8 3 0 5 17
Border 8 1 1 6 7
27 Jan 2012, 15:31 pm
@gecko-23: Justin Bieber dies!
27 Jan 2012, 15:31 pm
@Cheetahboytjie-30: Also, if ALL teams know that they have the possibility of playing Super rugby the next year, you’ll see a significant change in mindsets, player acquisition and sponsors will also become more interested.
27 Jan 2012, 15:34 pm
@Cheetahboytjie-32: Thanks!! So, based on last year’s performances in the VC alone, the Lions, Griquas, Pumas, WP, Sharks and Free State will then produce the 5 Super rugby teams. The only big team is my Bulls, but, if they didn’t perform at VC level, they’re out and have to accept that.
27 Jan 2012, 15:40 pm
I think they should keep the current way of determining who plays currie cup. But then let the top 5 go play super rugby the next year.
If a team is good enough then they will play themselves into the premier division of the currie cup and have a change of playing super rugby if they can do well the following year. That way the team needs to show some consistency as well.
27 Jan 2012, 15:55 pm
Cheecky has bigger plans…… EP Queens , that will give Puke more TV time. That will mean more pressure on SARU to include Puke, as has been said they are honoray blecks. Cheecky wont rest until Puke is bok captain.
I shudder to think of Cheecki in any form of power at SARU. In fact it would be great to watch it all implode.
27 Jan 2012, 15:57 pm
hehehe you have to love some of the comments above
sourpusse almal
27 Jan 2012, 17:05 pm
I’m a Kings fan, so I accept that no one on here would appreciate my comments. But try and look at things from our point of view. We’ve never had a Super Rugby team, so most of us would choose a team from another region to support. Not really by choice, but by necessity, due to our love of the game.
Some people pointed out that teams qualified on merit in 1997. Sure, but since then the landscape of Super Rugby has changed dramatically. The transformation from amateur rugby to professional rugby was in its infancy back then, it’s a sport which is administered completely differently now.
Did the Eastern Cape deserve to have representation in Super Rugby back then? Or even when the Super 12 was expanded to Super 14? No. Most of the administration was a mess, it was still run like a very amateur organisation.
Do the Eastern Cape now deserve to have representation in Super Rugby back then? Still no, they don’t “deserve” anything.
But in the last few years, the administration of rugby has changed dramatically and things have improved dramatically since then. For one thing, they recently hosted a successful Sevens tournament, where their bid was considered to be vastly superior than that of WP/Stormers. The Nelson Mandela Bay Stadium is probably the only success story of all the stadia newly built for the World Cup. Apparently, there is an equity partner lined up to come in, that was just waiting for the announcement to come through that they would get Super Rugby in 2013. Hopefully, that will be announced shortly.
Basically, based on all those things, I believe the Eastern Cape now deserve the right to ask to be considered for a Super Rugby franchise.
A number of posters have mentioned that the EP Kings didn’t win the First Division. That is pretty lazy comment. They lost in a one-off game. On another day, they could’ve won that game. They did beat the Boland Cavaliers in the Currie Cup game in Port Elizabeth (although they lost twice in Wellington). In 2010, they did win the First Division. They also drew against the Pumas in Witbank in the play-off game before losing in Port Elizabeth. The margin between success and failure is indeed a very narrow one at times. Anyway, I would rate them roughly on par with the Boland Cavaliers, the Leopards and the Pumas. All of the other teams can (in theory at least) offer players a path through to Super Rugby.
Next, look at SARU. Surely one of the key objectives of any sporting governing body is to develop sport in all the regions that they govern? And surely, the other regions have had exposure to Super Rugby for more than a decade, while the Eastern Cape have not. Should it not be expected from SARU that they should do their best to help an area that is lagging behind the rest to catch up? At the moment, if a decent young player is produced in the Eastern Cape region, he gets signed up by one of the other unions. That player does not have the opportunity to follow the same career path at the Kings; therefore the Kings – due to no fault of their own – can’t avail of the services of a player that was produced by their region. Couple with the fact that they can only attract players with no demand to play Super Rugby and it’s clear they can only attract older players (not in Super Rugby consideration anymore), up-and-coming young players (who have not established themselves at Super Rugby level yet), players from the Eastern Cape region (and therefore with an affinity to remain in the region) or players looking for a bigger contract that they might get elsewhere. Since they can’t attract top players – or retain the most promising youngsters – it’s obvious they will always remain mediocre, unless something drastic is done.
A governing body that prevents a team from growing the way it should isn’t doing its job properly, especially if that team have been getting things right behind the scenes to improve things.
Even as a Kings fan, I don’t think that another franchise should be sacrificed to allow them in. But if there truly is no way Super Rugby can be expanded to cater for the Kings, some sacrifice should be made. There is no right answer as to how to do this. If one of the traditional 5 franchises drop out, they would correctly feel very hard done by. But surely, further failure to give the Kings franchise the opportunity to develop will be equally as bad for rugby?
27 Jan 2012, 17:17 pm
@FlapjackJoe-39:
You make the same mistake that Biltongboer makes. EP provincial side is not the EC Kings. The Kings are a combo of EP, Border and SWD, in the same way that the Stormers are WP/Boland and Cheetahs FS/Griquas.
27 Jan 2012, 17:32 pm
Good points Flappy (post no.39).
The SARU do have an obligation to develop in all areas
27 Jan 2012, 17:58 pm
@David-40: The EP provincial side plays as “Eastern Province Kings” in the Currie Cup.
The Super Rugby franchise is called the “Southern Kings” – the “Southern Kings” are the collective name for the EP Kings, Border Bulldogs and SWD Eagles.
Eastern Province officially changed their name to the Eastern Province Kings about 18 months ago to bring it in line with the Super Rugby franchise.
27 Jan 2012, 18:03 pm
@FlapjackJoe-42:
My mistake.
The point I was making is that most bloggers claim that EP must compete in the CC first, yet the Kings franchise is not just EP.
27 Jan 2012, 18:25 pm
This is good news… not for the toothless leeuwyfies though. Remember boykies, Super rugby attracts big names and SARU voted overwhelmingly in favour of this ie wp, bb, lions, cheetahs, natal. No politics involved as the whole farken rugbybroederbond voted for their inclusion!
27 Jan 2012, 20:02 pm
Two easy solutions.
1) We revert back to a 16 team league where each team faces up against each other. And the final is played on the weekend just before Christmas.
OR
2) The lowest ranking SAFFA team gets booted into touch to be replaced by the Southern Kings for 2 years. Relegate a SAFFA team after a 2 year stint in S15.
Easy as.
28 Jan 2012, 00:01 am
@IAAS-45: why 2 years?
28 Jan 2012, 00:07 am
Look, in the current cr*p Super 15 format each team plays a total of 16 regular games. If you finish 3rd to 6th and have to play in the cr*ppy play-offs, you could play 19 games to win the trophy (play-off, semi and final on top).
Why not simply make it a Super 16, do away with the cr*ppy conferences and make everyone play each other once. That’s 15 regular games each, 1 less than the current cr*ppy format.
Do away with the cr*ppy play off games, revert back to top 4 semis only and the top 2 teams will only have to play 17 games to win it. Far more manageable and a teeny bit shorter than the current boring (did I say cr*ppy?) format.
The whole thing about not playing one random team from the 2 other conferences is just a load of cr*p anyway, and a little unfair.
28 Jan 2012, 03:22 am
Strange, okes have been unhappy for years that there are 2 traditional bonus points donors for foreign invaders, and now there is a support for an inclusion of a team which is weaker than any of those two? Ok then, it’s always nice to have 5 points guaranteed.
28 Jan 2012, 06:47 am
@Forseti-46:
2 years allows a team to settle into the comp. You can’t expext a new team to make massive headway in its first year.
And it’ll allow the team that was relegated time to get their ducks in a row and come back stronger.
But that’s with the current S15 system in place which I detest.
In 2013, I’d rather have a S16 and revert back to the old format where every team plays each other and top 4 qualify.
28 Jan 2012, 10:28 am
Man U can get relegated
Real Madrid and Barca can get relegated
Liverpool can get relegated
But not the 5 th finishing SA TEam in super 15?
Pages: [1] 2 » Show All
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.