You are about to be exposed to South African rugby’s Axis of Evil, its administration, where rules and agreements are made and signed off by SA Rugby and despite their creation, are flouted with impunity, as also the SA Rugby constitution which requires all unions to uphold agreements made at the President’s Council and by SA Rugby.
The simple question of whether this is right or wrong, underpins the organisation. Not a month goes by without SA Rugby violating their own constitution by not holding unions, administrators and players to President’s Council resolutions. The President’s Council, meeting on a monthly basis, presides over an administration that is so deeply flawed and riddled with hypocrisy, it beggars belief.
We are about to embark on a 2009 Super 14 rugby season, in the second last year of the current five-year agreement with Sanzar and its broadcast partners, Newscorp with New Zealand, Australia and South Africa.
This is the SA Rugby Super 14 franchise participation agreement that commenced on January 1 2006 and ends the May 31 2010. The renewal of this, in whatever new format is proposed, will have to be tabled in June 2009 and Sanzar — led by South Africa — are unable to decide on which set of ELV’s to use before kick-off on February 13 2009.
I need not remind you that SA Rugby, since 2006, has spent an obscene and reckless amount of R27,1-million in deliberately excluding the Eastern Cape from this competition and the cost will continue to soar. In addition, millions upon millions of rands have been given to the Cheetahs and the Lions each year in lifeboat grants, not loans, that exceeds anything offered to the three Eastern Cape unions in the past three years.
Had SA Rugby stuck to their unanimous binding President’s Council resolution, there would be no argument about a franchise, nor transformation, nor acrimony with the Ministry of Sport and the government, and they would have saved themselves tens of millions of rands.
Moreover, the three Eastern Cape rugby unions have been excluded from Super Rugby for over eight years, and you have to understand that the existence of a franchise is the “well” from which all other 11 unions derive their revenues, hence the pitiful state of the three Eastern Cape rugby unions.
Combine this with the raids of the other five so-called big unions finding the elite school players from the Eastern Cape and you begin to realise the appalling victimisation and pillaging of the province, which is condoned by SA Rugby and its administrators.
There is no coherent tournament fixture or structure that takes SA Rugby from the antiquated 1990’s to 2015 and beyond. All SA Rugby can look forward to are obstacles, hurdles, pitfalls and a legal siege on the domestic and international front.
Gate attendances of the Super 14 have plummeted to an all-time low and not a single one of the five South African franchises has an average gate attendance in excess of 48% for the Super 14 season since 2006. This 48% is achieved only by the Bulls while on the other end of the scale, the Cheetahs and Lions compete for an average gate attendance of 18%. The Absa Currie Cup attendances are also abysmally low, showing that spectator support for rugby is in the toilet.
In a snapshot of the existing status quo of Super 14 rugby in South Africa, it becomes patently obvious as to how and why the system is manipulated to the detriment of the entire rugby playing nation. It is so outdated, grotesquely unbalanced and riddled with bias, that no level or fair playing field has been created to include all South African rugby fans and players.
You would think that the credo of “may the best team win” would apply, but it doesn’t. SA Rugby has been so manipulated and tainted with the obsessive compulsion of the few, to protect the interests of these few, that it is now a volatile time bomb about to explode and destabilise the system.
The game of rugby is in peril. SuperSport, the anchor sponsor and broadcaster of rugby in South Africa, are likely to see their treasured broadcast rights upended and lost to the public broadcaster and a phalanx of other international broadcasters.
Allow me to walk you through the inner sanctum of South African rugby and reveal the vulnerability of the game — due to incestuousness — and reveal how short sighted SA Rugby has been.
The individuals mentioned below are not fictitious cartoon characters, yet not one of them is associated with the tabling of any new initiative in growing the game of rugby or generating new revenues, to make the sport relevant to audiences in South Africa and internationally. Each is solely intent on jealously guarding their five “patches” which has been at the expense of the game in South Africa.
The deliberate exclusion of over 40% of rugby players in South Africa in the Super Rugby competition, is nothing short of apartheid and the victimisation of this group.
To top it off they have vicariously plundered the SA Rugby treasury and violated the SA Rugby Constitution with impunity. Not a single individual has been at the forefront of change to make the game of rugby relative to the country’s population or the rugby spectators. Of course there has been the usual rhetoric trotted out, “we will do this and we will do that, next year” … always next year. Ticket prices for the Super 14 and Test matches, are at an all-time high and spectators are voting with their feet and staying away. Not a single, coherent, all-inclusive programme has been tabled by these unions so-called leaders, to advance the game nationally, in the Southern Hemisphere or internationally. So much so, that the NZRU and the ARU pour scorn on Hoskins and Marinos at the Sanzar meetings and these are supposed to be their tripartite partners.
Each of the (five) South African franchises is required and obligated to have a rugby academy, if they are to have a franchise. It is quite simply a condition in the Super 14 franchise participation agreement. Only the Stormers, Sharks and Bulls do. So why is it then that two of the five, the Lions and Cheetahs, have been permitted to be without a rugby academy for three years? This is where the development of each of the franchise unions rugby talent is to be fostered.
Please meet the South African rugby decision makers and decide for yourself whether South African rugby is capable of turning the corner, or in desperate need of rescue.
Oregan Hoskins, formerly of the Sharks, is president of SA Rugby, Mark Alexander, formerly of the Lions, is deputy president, Rautie Rautenbach, formerly of the Falcons, is vice-president. Johan Prinsloo, formerly of the Lions, is CEO and Andy Marinos, formerly team manager of the Springboks, is acting MD. Soon SA Rugby will be dissolved into a section 21 company. Marinos has yet to familiarise himself and read all the sponsorship and broadcast agreements of SA Rugby, which is why John O’Neill of the Australian Rugby Union is giving Hoskins and Marinos a right royal run around at Sanzar.
A basic cost to company of about R12 000 000 per annum is spent on retaining the ten individuals comprising the five CEO’s and five coaches. The five South African franchises, for their 11 unions, have directly cost their unions R36 000 000 over the last three years for their retention and engagement and a further collective R450 000 000 over the last three years (R150m per annum) for the cost of contracting about 250 players for their five franchises and still they continue to cost SA Rugby over R100 000 000 annum in lost revenues.
By all means, reward executives and administrators handsomely for solid performances, results and potent innovative revenue generation, but when they are a liability, with spectators staying away, you then have to draw a line. SA Rugby’s depleted treasury continues to financially “support” the big five unions to the detriment of the other nine unions.
How long can this last and when will it implode?
Chairperson of the Finance committee is Hein Mentz of the Pumas in Witbank and Chairperson of the Competitions Committee is James Stoffberg of the Leopards in Poitchefstroom. These so happen to be the junior partners of the Lions.
There are five franchise CEO’s, representing 11 out of the 14 South African rugby unions:
1. Bulls – Barend van Graan, also of Sail, which has investments and shareholding in the Cheetahs and the Stormers and exclusively manage Vodacom’s rugby account.
2. Lions – Manie Reynecke
3. Cheetahs – Harold Verster
4. Sharks – Brian van Zyl
5. Stormers – Rob Wagner
Then there are five franchise coaches, of the:
1. Bulls — Frans Ludeke,
2. Lions — Eugene Eloff,
3. Cheetahs — Naka Drotske,
4. Sharks — John Plumtree
5. Stormers — Rassie Erasmus
This point is not about racism or transformation, but inclusivity. Peter de Villiers, formerly of the Spears, was the only coach of colour as part of this management committee in 2006 and now that he is the national coach there has been no other replacement or substitute in three years. Does this indicate any advancement by SA Rugby, or is this a sign of some sinister institutionalised thinking?
The Super 14 is essentially run by a management committee and selection committee.
Conspicuous by its absence, is the inclusion of and representation from the three Southern and Eastern Cape unions, Border, Eastern Province and SWD and their allocated franchise.
Below are excerpts of the SA Rugby Super 14 franchise participation agreement with all six franchises that commenced 1st January 2006 and ends 31st May 2010, that is particularly revealing, in that one struggles to find any adherence by SA Rugby and these “five franchise unions”, to their own agreement or constitution.
SCHEDULE XI: Management Committee (14 people)
1. COMPOSITION
The management shall consist of:
1.1 The chairman of the Rugby Committee — Keith Parkinson (Sharks)
1.2 The managing director of SA Rugby, who will act as chairperson. (Acting Managing Director: Andy Marinos)
1.3 The national coach (Peter de Villiers)
1.4 The coaches of the franchises (Frans Ludeke, Eugene Eloff, Naka Drotske, John Plumtree and Rassie Erasmus)
1.5 The chief executive officers of each franchise.(Barend van Graan, Manie Reynecke, Harold Verster, Brian van Zyl and Rob Wagner)
1.6 The regional tournament director who will also act as secretary of the management committee. (Johan Botes)
10. Team selection and management
10.1 Selection of Squads
10.1.1 The management committee shall annually identify a list between a minimum of 210 and a maximum of 245 players for consideration for inclusion in the squad. The Franchise will submit a list of players identified for this purpose to the management committee by 31 October of the preceding year.
10.1.2 The management committee shall select the squads.
10.1.3 The management committee shall implement a draft system to ensure that the top 150 (one hundred and fifty) players in South Africa participate in the competition in each season in accordance with Sanzar’s obligations within the respective broadcast agreements.
10.1.4 The management committee, subject to clause 10.1.5, has the right to draft a maximum of eight players into a squad in any one year.10.1.5 A minimum of eight players of colour must form part of the final squad.
10.1.6 Remuneration, reasonable travel and accommodation costs of players drafted by the management committee into any Squad shall be for SA Rugby’s account.
10.1.7 In any one year of the competition, SA Rugby will pay the franchise R 23 500 per month per drafted player for remuneration for the period January to May, or a pro rata thereof if the player is not in the squad for the full, and reimburse the franchise for any reasonable travel and accommodation cost incurred by the franchise in connection with a drafted Player for the abovementioned period.
10.1.8 Should any two or more franchises agree to the drafting of a player then the CEO’s of these franchises shall agree as to the applicable costs to be paid between the franchises, provided that the combined monthly remuneration as per 10.1.7 shall not be less than R 23 500 per month per player.
10.1.9 The franchise shall be responsible for all costs for those players used before and during the season in preparation whether or not those players are selected for the final squad, subject to 10.1.7 and 10.1.8 above.
10.1.10 The franchise team not participating in the competition in any one-year agrees to a maximum of eight of its Springbok contracted players being drafted to another franchise participating in the competition for that season, where such drafting shall be subject to the player’s consent.
10.1.11 The franchise obtaining the services of such a drafted Springbok contracted player as per clause 10.1.10 will reimburse the non-participating franchise for the player’s full remuneration, and bear all other costs associated with that player’s services for the period January to May of that particular year, or a pro rata share thereof if the player’s services are acquired for a lesser period.
10.1.12 After Sanzar has officially been notified of the names of the members of the squads, any player nominated as a member of a squad for the competition in any particular year may not play in the competition for any other participating team during that year.
10.1.13 The franchise may contract and / or select a maximum of two foreign players in their squad in any one year, subject to the prior written approval of SA Rugby.
10.1.14 The franchise must supply to SA Rugby pen portraits and photographs of the squad, coach and support team in a format determined by SA Rugby on or before a date to be determined by SA Rugby.
10.1.15 The management committee shall submit the final squad of 30 players to Sanzar on a date as determined by Sanzar.
10.2 Announcement of team 10.2.1 SA Rugby shall announce the squad not later than three weeks prior to the start of the competition.
10.3 Match scheduling 10.3.1 The franchise shall have the team play on the afternoon or evening of any day in accordance with the official match schedule, which will be issued by not later than 30 December of the preceding year by Sanzar to the franchise.
10.3.2 Sanzar has provisionally created a five-year competition draw, which will be subject to changes at Sanzar’s discretion by not later than 31 December of the preceding year.
10.3.3 The franchise team that is promoted for any one year to replace the relegated franchise team will adopt the official match schedule, which would have been applicable to the relegated franchise. For the avoidance of doubt Sanzar is not obliged to consider prior match schedules involving the promoted franchise team in order to determine the official match schedule.
Where this all starts to unravel is that no one watches out for the Southern & Eastern Cape regions and that there is hardly an effort to stick to the eight players of colour from each of the five squads of 30. That would make it 40 players of colour from the 150 Super 14 teams.
It is an inescapable fact that over 60% of rugby players in this country are players of colour.
Why then only have 26% representation in the Super 14? Not even that is reflected in the super 14 squad make up for 2009.
or
It will be most interesting to see the outcomes of the selection of the Super 14 squads from SA Rugby in the next 30 days, especially with the input of South African Rugby’s national coach, Peter de Villiers.
In my view, Peter de Villiers has every right to insist that all the franchises play eight players of colour. If the franchises do not meet this requirement they must be sanctioned financially.
What irks me greatly is the gross injustice and victimisation to over 200 000 rugby players in the Eastern Cape who have been excluded from Super Rugby competition for over three years.
It is a status quo so vile and repugnantly unfair, that SA Rugby should not receive one iota of support for the 2015 and 2019 Rugby World Cup bids until this is remedied with a Super Rugby franchise, in 2009, not when this Super 14 tournament is over in 2010.
The International Rugby Board (IRB) does not stand a hope of persuading the 117 International Olympic Committee (IOC) members, in October 2009, that rugby should be included as an Olympic sport in 2016, when this kind of apartheid and deliberate exclusionary tactics is perpetuated by the country second on their log.
Almost half the voting members of the 117 IOC members are from Africa and South Africa has excluded the Organisation of African Rugby in competitions, let alone three of their own unions. It will be a hard task persuading these IOC members to look favourably on accepting rugby in the Olympics, unless there are drastic reforms.
I have eight letters from African rugby nations imploring SA Rugby to be a part of Super Rugby competitions via a composite African Leopards side. Do you think that any of these letters have been answered? Lapasset, chairperson of the IRB, has been copied on this correspondence, so it will be a real eye opener for him when he visits South Africa early in 2009 to see that SA could quite easily be the cause of the IOC refusing rugby admission to the Olympic games for the fourth time. This presentation has to be done in June 2009 to the IOC executive, before a final vote in Copenhagen in October.
Odd then how SA Rugby becomes the Axis of Evil in June 2009 with the IRB, IOC, NOC, OAR, Sanzar, NZRU and ARU. This did not suddenly happen. This has been a process of toxic fermentation.
Allow the Eastern Cape to have their own franchise and afford them the opportunity to compete against the established five South African Super 14 franchises in a relegation and promotion series and may the best team win.
Related Posts
None
This entry was posted
on Friday, December 26th, 2008 at 12:34 pm and is filed under Rugby.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
31 Responses to “Everything you wanted to know about SA Rugby’s Axis of Influence Peddlars”
Yeah, you and Cheeky will make a hell of team.Don’t forget to make Puke captain of you side.
The players is there, the talent is there, the supporters is there, but the money is not there - the Eastern Cape is the poorest province (per capita GDP)in the country.
I think it is mostly a group of greedy rugby administrators that feels their interests will not be served by the inclusion of the Spears in the Super 12. The Spears does not look very financialy attractive to them.
But please Tony, stop playing the race card - the whole of the white race is not against the Spears.
GS van Zyl - There is no race card. This is all about being fair and equal. This can never happen if you exclude a community.
Surely you can see that and then judge on performance only. But you are right about the greedy administrators! They exist within the Big Five, not wanting the Spears in to Super Rugby, which is the point of my article.
How you can imagine the Eastern Cape administrators to be greedy with no money and I mean no money, is beyond me. That is a myth. Rather turn your attention to the SA Rugby’s books and financial statements.
GS you have to agree with me that a way has to be found, even if it is a tournament under the S14, that the Spears have to be included.
Chat to any number of people in the Eastern Cape and this is not a black white thing, this is about being fair and equal.
Level the playing field and let results speak for themselves, but do not handicap a region for the benefit of a few.
I agree with feeder tournament to the Super 14. Spears, one team from AUS and NZ each and teams from the Pacific Islands and Argentina - That would be really great. (It would actually be very exciting)
Tony… I never said the Eastern Cape Rugby Administrators are greedy, in fact I thought it was implied that I talked about the “Big Five”.
But I would rather you not even mention race… except if you can prove that the fat cats on top are not only greedy but racist as well.
This should excite you. Now who mentioned th R-word? Performance performance performance, which is why there should be a relegation and promotion series made up of a Tri-Game series (Home, Away & Neutral Territory) so the best team wins!
This is disappointing Tony. From what I’ve read on here, you’re better than this.
Come on, naming a group of people and putting up photos of said people, under the banner ‘axis of evil’. Is at best tabloid-esque and at worst defamation.
This sort of rhetoric, makes it very hard for me (and perhaps others) ‘on the fence’ to support the Spears as much as I would perhaps like to.
I can see no logical reason for especially the Lions and Cheetahs participating, when the Spears do not.
This sort of vilification, ‘with us or against us’ attitude, ‘gun to the head’ ultimatums that increasingly feature in your articles - win you no friends. It preaches to the choir, hardens the attitudes of those against you and cements your ‘outsider’ status.
I just read diatribes such as this and turn off. I could have been persuaded and remain open to the idea at least, that the Spears should participate in place of the Lions and Cheetahs franchises. But am unsure about some of the personalities behind it, a name and shame of ‘these are the evil ones’ is hardly challenging this perception. Going out on a limb, I’m sure there must be others that feel the same way.
This is then surely the antithesis of what you are trying to achieve with this blog? Which appears to be winning more support for the Spears/EP, which mainstream media ignores. Unless I’ve got it all wrong and your goal is just to court controversy and push agendas, but having read some of your more considered thoughts, I don’t believe that to be true.
“This point is not about racism or transformation, but inclusivity.”
“Does this indicate any advancement by SA Rugby, or is this a sign of some sinister institutionalised thinking?”
Come on, you come out with those quotes as a footer to your pseudo rouges gallery of white faces, under the header Evil Axis. Then take issue with contributer ‘van Zyl’ raising a query on this?
Anyway, I digress and will address some of the points raised (something I will always do, rather than just chucking ill mannered and perhaps misplaced abuse around, like contributer ‘Jerry’):
1.
You mention Barend van Graan and SAIL. I also note you’ve mentioned SAIL before and I quote:
“You know the SARACEN connection of course to SAIL, Morne du Plessis, Francois Pienaar and others?
SAIL also has a majority shareholding in the Stormers, Cheetahs and the Bulls and are the “agency” for VODACOM, who happens to be the title sponsor for each.
Can you connect the dots now?
We are venturing into the underworld of who controls what in SA Rugby now.”
Firstly I’ve seen these veiled and not so veiled attacks on SAIl before (hence quote of your from previous article). Second you single out Morne du Plessis and Francois Pienaar especially, why? Francois Pienaar was attacked fairly recently by someone else in a speech, I recall.
SAIL of course is fully compliant with BBBEE good practice as stated by the department of trade and industry. With a BEE partner having a direct 36% shareholding in the company. Previously disadvantaged individuals account for 68% of all employees, 61% of the junior management, 35% of the middle management, 30% of the senior management, 55% of the board and 20% of top management.
They have had contracts with Telkom (and by extension Vodacom) and Gauteng Provincial Government. As well as likely winning the management contract for the Green Point stadium in a joint bid with Stade de France Group. So government and their parastatals clearly have no issue at all with them - in fact the exact opposite.
There is nothing shadowy or ‘underworld’ about SAIL. This is all public knowledge. Yet you and others, appear to be against them. Why? All they do is organise hospitality side of things and develop brands.
SAIL, does not have majority shareholdings, they have 49.9% and 24.9% stakes in the commercial arms of franchises/unions. They’ve had a 24.9% stake WP (pty) ltd and a 49.9% stake Blue Bulls Company, since the late 90s I think.
Unsure about the Cheetahs, there is obviously some involvement though the Vodacom sponsorship. SAIL seems to have bought SuperSport’s stake in Griquas or at least part of it. Think they’ve bought half of SuperSport’s 49.9% stake in the Cheetahs (pty) ltd also. SuperSport still having a 40% stake they have in the Sharks (pty) ltd (having increased on the 24.9% stake they had in the early 2000s).
Best as I can tell, SAIL is invested though minority stakes with Blue Bulls Company, WP (pty) ltd, Cheetahs (pty) ltd and Griquas (pty) ltd only. With SuperSport owning stakes in Sharks (pty) ltd, maybe Cheetahs (pty) ltd and Griquas (pty) ltd also. Is this grounds for mass hysteria about Axis of Evil and Third Forces?
Essentially 49.9% of the commercial arm and stadium deals are all the private ownership, that has ever been allowed by SARU. ARU announced some time ago they would allow similar private stakes in their franchises, it was heralded as a major O’Niell breakthrough. They were only 10 years or so behind SARU.
Would you be against SAIL (who are fully BBBEE complaint, with government contracts also) taking a stake in the commercial arm of the Spears? They after all are already involved with some of the most recognised and valuable rugby brands in the Southern Hemisphere (perhaps world). In the case of the Blue Bulls especially, having played a central role in building the brand as it is today. Would seem the perfect partner?
2.
The eight players in the 30 man squad, was a requirement that was dropped after 2006. Do I have to remind of what Solly/Bobo/Sephaka/Breyton, to name a few have said about non-merit based quotas? Most franchises are now operating at about 5 merit based selections in the squad, still too low, but more than previously. Would you rather pseudo facade transformation based on quotas, or real merit based transformation (that yes, will take longer to bear fruit)? Franchises now have more players in the XV on merit than ever before, none are forced to select those players as they were previously. Jake White and now Peter de Villiers, have capped more black/coloured players than any of their predecessors and been successful while they did that.
Peter is on record as allowing provincial coaches to use players as they see fit, he reiterated as much only just back in September during the Currie Cup. I think it would be better if he formerly told them who to rest, like Jake White. But it’s his choice and he chooses the softer approach.
He can formerly ’select’ squad players as you say, but imo forgoes that in preference (and the chance to demand players a re rested) for a chance to have a more constructive working relationship with coaches. ie ask them to ACTUALLY select players in match day teams and in certain positions, not just crudely ’selecting in the 30′.
You saw that with Ruan Pienaar at the end of this years Super 14 (Frans Steyn had been the next inline flyhalf after Fred) and I predict you’ll see it with Adi starting for the Sharks next season (not an impact sub). Plumtree has already stated Ruan will get significant game time in the 10 jersey with a view to the national setup.
There is more than one way to achieve a goal.
3.
This comment on the gate, using percentages of the stadium filled over a three year period. Concluding “spectator support for rugby is in the toilet”. Is well, quite out there. Using ‘percentage of the stadium filled’, is odd on a few levels.
These are multi use stadiums for a start (with exception of Newlands bar a few events), their setup and capacity isn’t just geared towards rugby.
Ellis Park/Loftus/Free State are 2010 world cup venues and had gates in 2007 affected by upgrades (now ever minor, this happened, something you neglect to mention).
A stadium’s size will be dictated by maintenance costs and what they can regularly expect to achieve for the top attraction. In SA on a rectangular pitch that’s Boks/Bafana/Big rugby or soccer derby games. This number happens to be 50K-60K, the same size most of our stadiums are and most of the new 2010 stadiums will be in legacy mode post 2010.
Facts:
- The Stormers have the highest average gate, of any Super rugby in the history of the competition (35K over history of Super rugby). The Stormers averaged 44K this season (in a roughly 49K stadium). The only season they achieved a better average gate was 1999 (46K).
- The Sharks all time Super rugby average gate is around 26K. Over the past few seasons they’ve been averaging in the 32K ballpark. Gates for each individual Sharks match are published on their website.
- The Bulls have the record for the highest season average gate in super rugby 47K in 2006, which I think was achieved again in 2007. Fairly sure the 53K for the 2007 semi, is the biggest for a single Super rugby match also.
- The Cheetahs have remained constantly around the 15K mark.
- Lions are the only side that have had a steadily declining gate.
Yet you extrapolate from these percentages, that rugby is on the decline, without any reference to historic figures. Even using your own distorted method?
I just don’t agree, support and success (both in results and squad transformation terms) of Super rugby in South Africa, has never been stronger than in the past few seasons. The Aussies and Kiwis are struggling, some of their franchises would enjoy even the average Cheetahs gate. Don’t confuse this with general collapse.
4.
You attack all the unions/franchises ‘in block’ as some sort of as yet collective ‘plot’. Yet also criticise them for being self interested individually, can you see a conflict here?
You would do well to look at them individually and see where they’ve succeeded/failed. The Bulls and Sharks can teach other franchises many lessons about merchandising/marketing and structures that produce on field success.
The Bulls especially are a model your Spears should seek to emulate. They were cellar dwellers in super rugby, a side with great history they had become divorced from and no future. They lost every match in the 2002 Super 12, winning just 4 Super 12 matches between 1999 and 2002 and had an average attendance in the 5K range. A super rugby joke team, with just the one Springbok gracing the side in the form of Joost.
They rebuilt, become essentially a completely new entity wearing the clothes of a past giant. They became the dominant force in Southern Hemisphere rugby winning the Super 14, producing the bulk of a Springbok team that went on to win a world cup. In the process becoming the biggest rugby brand in South Africa along with the Springboks, Sharks and Stormers. They are a franchise that actually runs at a small profit.
It’s similar to what the Sharks went through in the early 90s.
Yet you disappointingly crudely derided these very same people that made this possible and undermine the achievement through smear tactics. Rather than using it as a case against detractors who say ‘the Spears will lose every match’, ‘they will have no support’, ‘no money’ blah blah. You should be using the Sharks and Bulls as your inspiration and your ‘evidence’.
5.
The last point on some sort of Olympic rugby boycott by African nations, because of the Spears, is stretching. Rugby has already been included in the All African Games for Zambia by ANOC delegates.
It may come as a surprise, but rugby is not as political everywhere as it is in South Africa and many outsiders looking in (including other Africans). Just see Peter and his often 5 merit black/coloured Boks in the XV (Tendai/JP/Habana/Conrad/Adi), various sevens teams they actually play against … wonder what all the fuss is about and wish they had the same talent. Kenya just want a shot at a medal of any kind, they could well get, I expect. Certainly they have more chance in rugby, than many current Olympic sports.
Olympic and sport tendering processes aren’t the most transparent (Germany 2006, Salt Lake City 2002) … so I fully expect roller blade hockey to make it, or something equally ridiculous, past the truly world sport of rugby.
Overall a disappointing largely embittered post.
You seem to favour a negative politicised slant on events surrounding SA rugby. Little to no comment about the sevens team, or age grade sides, or the national coaches, or the background of the SARU president and what little positive comment there is, framed within a backdrop of ‘failure’ or ‘not enough success’. As in the move to section 21 status contained in this article. No mention of Hoskins announcing SARU would take over running of schools rugby, after 14 years of government inactivity. No mention of where we are now in terms of on field transformation, compared with 5 to years ago?
Sharks/Bulls/Stormers all having 4 black/coloured players in the 1st XV on merit, no mention?
Would you seriously have us believe things are exactly the same as they were in the mid 90s?
confused - What a great post and response to this. Just the kind of debate that is required. So thank you for your considered opinion and detailed comment and engagement on these topics and issues.
Still, I think you are a trifle over sensitive. You might well know these folk but the rugby enthusiast also has a desire to know “who” these folk are. This helps them. Besides why hide these administrators under a rock?
You have access to certain data, as do I so it is useful to share or ventilate this information to other readers so that they can make their own assumptions and opinions.
My view is that rugby is too secretive in this country. In the same way that all 14 unions are required to submit full disclosure of their financials to SA Rugby (and don’t), so too should SA Rugby disclose the unions and the various tournaments data on stadium capacity, gate attendances for Vodacom Cup, ABSA CC, S14, Tests and associated National teams performances on their website in the interests of transparency and full disclosure.
You were very quick to gloss over existing agreements and SA Rugby constitution violations which are condoned at the expense of the game. Do not do that, as it is not a true reflection on the ills of the game that are perpetuated by the administrators.
The pen pics of the cast of characters that are involved in rugby takes them from faceless individuals, to real life and pegs them in the union that they represent. No defamation here which is a bit of a stretch of imagination.
You forget that I have seen first hand and experienced the collaboration and collusion that goes on, not in the boardroom, but in the corridors, lifts, gents toilets, hotel rooms, restaurants, offices and always behind closed doors. I have left out the flurry of cell phone calls and SMS’s that do the rounds that is in itself spectacular as evidenced by SA Rugby’s cell phone bill.
Of the many rugby characters I know, Frankie Peanut AKA Francois Pienaar and Morne du Plessis are not singled out as demons or vilified by me at all. I really enjoy these guys and they are the genuine article, but do not do rugby full time. I wish they did, as I am sure you do.
The full time administrators are unable to agree on one thing and then act on its implementation and I will not labour you with the obvious again. You are aware of this as I am.
So your critique of my post above is highly selective to say the least.
I welcome your open mindedness about the Spears, but do not replace any one of the SA S14 sides with the Spears without there being a 3 game series for promotion and relegation and without there being a tournament for the surplus team to participate in.
The purpose of this SportsLeader column is not about the Spears but more about rugby in South Africa.
It so happens that the Spears saga ventilates and continues to reveal the frailties and shortcomings of SA Rugby and there is a litany of them and they need to be fixed for the game in South Africa to be stronger.
The column highlights the most incredulous blunders and short sightedness that prevails and to use the analogy of the game as you do, it would be like drafting the top ten jockeys of the Vodacom July in the National Squad.
You do an admirable job in endeavouring to laud the statistics of the game and how strong it is, when in fact it isn’t. It is at its weakest ever and even your Willie Basson has lamented this time and again in his reports to SA Rugby.
Now I am digressing, so let me comment on your points above:
1. There is no veiled attack on SAIL. They are business folk and in it for the bottom line. No philanthropy there, hence their heading for the exit when they saw the opportunity to offload their shareholding (and considerable liability and financial exposure)in Border, EP & SWD in exchange for some long term CIRCA hospitality agreements. Barend is one of the most skilled and knowledgeable rugby administrators in South Africa and he is effective, except that he avoids the Eastern Cape and does not seek out a solution for the whole game.
Note: The Greenpoint contract is a tough nut and as long as the sponsors and suite holders of the Stormers/Western Province/Newlands refuse to relocate from Newlands to Greenpoint this is going to be fatal to the success of the GPS.
2. The 8 people of colour is a crude reference in the SA Rugby Super 14 Franchise Participation agreement, but expect it to surface and be and explosive issue.
3. The stadiums and gate attendances.
3.1 Bulls
Total Attendance -
Average Attendance -
Stadium Capacity-62 500
Top 3 Matches-
Average Ticket Price - R00.00?
Number of matches televised -
3.2 Bulldogs
Total Attendance -
Average Attendance -
Stadium Capacity - 15 000
Top 3 Matches-
Average Ticket Price - R00.00?
Number of matches televised -
3.3 Cheetahs
Total Attendance -
Average Attendance -
Stadium Capacity - 38 000
Top 3 Matches-
Average Ticket Price - R00.00?
Number of matches televised -
3.4 Eastern Province
Total Attendance -
Average Attendance -
Stadium Capacity - 35 000
Top 3 Matches-
Average Ticket Price - R00.00?
Number of matches televised -
3.5 Falcons
Total Attendance -
Average Attendance -
Stadium Capacity - 20 000
Top 3 Matches-
Average Ticket Price - R00.00?
Number of matches televised -
3.6 Griffons
Total Attendance -
Average Attendance -
Stadium Capacity - 12 000
Top 3 Matches-
Average Ticket Price - R00.00?
Number of matches televised -
3.7 Griquas
Total Attendance -
Average Attendance -
Stadium Capacity - 14 000
Top 3 Matches-
Average Ticket Price - R00.00?
Number of matches televised -
3.8 Leopards
Total Attendance -
Average Attendance -
Stadium Capacity - 15 000
Top 3 Matches-
Average Ticket Price - R00.00?
Number of matches televised -
3.9 Lions
Total Attendance -
Average Attendance -
Stadium Capacity - 62 500
Top 3 Matches-
Average Ticket Price - R00.00?
Number of matches televised -
3.10 Pumas
Total Attendance -
Average Attendance -
Stadium Capacity - 20 000
Top 3 Matches-
Average Ticket Price - R00.00?
Number of matches televised -
3.11 Eagles
Total Attendance -
Average Attendance -
Stadium Capacity - 10 000
Top 3 Matches-
Average Ticket Price - R00.00?
Number of matches televised -
3.12 Sharks
Total Attendance -
Average Attendance -
Stadium Capacity - 53 000
Top 3 Matches-
Average Ticket Price - R00.00?
Number of matches televised -
3.13 Stormers Western Province
Total Attendance -
Average Attendance -
Stadium Capacity - 49 500
Top 3 Matches-
Average Ticket Price - R00.00?
Number of matches televised -
3.14 Boland
Total Attendance -
Average Attendance -
Stadium Capacity - 10 000
Top 3 Matches-
Average Ticket Price - R00.00?
Number of matches televised -
So let’s inspect the statistics that you have and those that I have and please quote the source. I also have the stats for the ABSA CC and the S14 and they are nowhere near your figures.
4. Your whole argument here is based on the success of your “model citizens” the Bulls and Sharks. Both have franchises and entrenchment in Super Rugby for 12 years and three unions in the Southern and Eastern Cape don’t. Fix this and then let’s compare. This is the fundamental problem. How you fail to see this is the problem I refer to. Rugby must be equal and based on merit in South Africa.
This is the bedrock foundation on which to build a great rugby playing nation especially by the custodians of the game, the parent body. FAIR & EQUAL. Without these two tenets in the mix we will continue to have this imbalance and turmoil and I know you know this.
5. On the Olympic approval or disapproval of rugby for 2016, I did not mention boycott, so that is a leap. My reference is that the IRB and particularly South Africa are leaving it really late to lobby Africa for their support, when they have had adequate and ample time and opportunity to do so. For example, you mentioned Kenya. I organised a 3 game series between the Spears and Kenya in March 2006 with the express intention of assisting Kenya, which we did, by giving their 30 man squad strength and conditioning tests in Port Elizabeth in preparation for their Sevens and World Cup campaign. We even left a scrummaging coach in Nairobi for ten days to assist them further. Now if SA Rugby had done, or intends doing this type of bilateral sports exchange between South Africa and Namibia, Zimbabwe, Kenya, Uganda, Tunisia, Morocco, Ghana and others, like with the continuance of the African Leopards in a Super Rugby tournament under the Super 14, there would be enormous good will and support for South Africa. But as you know myopia is a problem.
So my comment to you would be there should be a coherent long term plan of inclusion to elite rugby. SA Rugby together with the IRB can do this, but do they?
You might score my post with an “F” with your comment of, “Overall a disappointing largely embittered post”, and I would agree that it might disappoint because we have no consensus on the fact that there are serious problems within South African rugby and although I am certainly not embittered, I am dismayed that with so much, potential, that which is wrong, could be fixed very quickly and is not. That is incredibly frustrating and I am not alone in this.
This then leads us on to Peter de Villiers, Paul Treu, Eric Sauls, Deon Davids, Stanley Raubenheimer, Allister Coetzee, Dumisani Mhani, David Dobela, Dali Ndebele, Chester Williams and others. These people are in large part the catalysts of transformation on field and it always seems that SA Rugby is dragged kicking and screaming, not so much to transform itself, but to make itself relevant to South Africa and especially its rugby playing members.
There is an enormous sentiment of denial that exists and massive misconceptions along racial lines and all this is vaporised if SA Rugby promotes and applies equality and selection based on merit and performance.
What Peter and Paul have accomplished is incredible with the National Teams, but I know they are frustrated because they could do so much better if the system was based on equality and a meritocracy.
Things are marginally improved from the 90’s and I am not saying this, but the coaches above and I listen to them and their comments. A Transformation Charter, posted out to all 14 Rugby Unions, authored by Prof Willie Basson will not alter this.
Addressing the weaknesses of SA Rugby with a rapid plan of implementation by a select competent task team, mandated by the Presidents Council will accomplish this.
This means implementation this month and the next, the market now moves too quickly for the old, “let’s have a meeting”, SA Rugby needs to be proactive, not with one initiative, but 3, for every level of competition and age group.
Then we can become giants of the game and lead world rugby with our pro-active, can do attitude.
I find Tony’s commentary on the goings on at SA Rugby incredibly illuminating and interesting.
His column is not about the Spears as he says, but about the modus operandi over at SA Rugby and around the country. I am aghast at the skullduggery and so should all the rugby sponsors and supporters be.
How it is tolerated is just terrible. Compare this to Cricket South Africa and rugby comes across as a bunch of boardroom thugs.
I hope 2009 will see rugby in South Africa improve.
Tony
I cannot claim as much insight or knowledge as you but just to say that what you say makes a lot of sense to me. I have oftened wondered about SA’s also rans in the Super 14. The Lions and Cheetahs seem to spend most of their time filling up the bottom of the log. WHilst the Bulls and Sharks seem to have successful business models and relatively successful teams. I never understood why the Eastern Cape was excluded. Surely if you want to grow the game you want as much African interest and support as possible in the game. The Eastern Cape is the traditional powerbase of African rugby and as such should be nurtured.
It seems that most rugby fans in Gauteng support the Bulls and not the Lions so why keep on with a half baked lot like the Lions. Rather to be fair have a relegation promotion battle. It works for the Premier League in the UK it should work for SA rugby.
Tony, once again an illuminating insight into SA rugby. I get your main point that the administration of SA rugby is done by a handful of people that are more interested in protecting the status quo than visionaries interested in developing the game. As such, in your opinion, the game will implode due to mismanagement and poor administration, populist actions not linked to long term goals, etc. And your previous posts that the current structure of professional (super & currie cup rugby) and semi-professional (vodacom cup) rugby in SA is outdated, not financially sustainable, not linked to broader social goals and in need of serious reform if the game is to remain financially sustainable, not to speak of economic / social sustainability.
But IMHO your argument lacks structure/ continuity and is unnecessary long. Why not have a series of posts dealing systematically with the problems of SA rugby as you see it and what are potential solutions?
Questions: Does SA Rugby have a 10-15 year plan for developing rugby in SA? Does this include an assessment of the status quo, the desired objectives? What are the objectives? Are there realistic 3, 6, 9, 12 and 15 year targets? Some that I can think off from the top of my head:
*Financail sustainability (i.e. how big can professional rugby be in SA based on costs, income, sponsorships, etc)
*Transformation i.e. becoming more inclusive (short term, medium term and long term goals)
*Administrative restructuring (e.g. realignment of administrative boundaries to correspond to the new SA)
What other goals/objectives should there be? Should they be seperate objectives or short, medium or long term objectives of these overarching goals?
Oupoot - Let me answer your questions. The volume of information and labarynth of complex agreements sometimes require a more lengthy answer - much as I would like to be short and sweet. So here goes:
1. Does SA Rugby have a 10-15 year plan for developing rugby in SA? No - Unless you consider the Rugby World Cup Bids for 2015 and 2019 which have yet to be approved on the 21st Jan.
2. Does this include an assessment of the status quo, the desired objectives? No
3. What are the objectives? The best they have offered come from a 2003/2005 Vision Are there realistic 3, 6, 9, 12 and 15 year targets? No Some that I can think off from the top of my head:
*Financail sustainability (i.e. how big can professional rugby be in SA based on costs, income, sponsorships, etc) - There is only an Accenture Assessment that was done in 2003
*Transformation i.e. becoming more inclusive (short term, medium term and long term goals) This is dealt with their Transformation Charter - toothless document
*Administrative restructuring (e.g. realignment of administrative boundaries to correspond to the new SA) - Busy with the conversion of SA Rugby Pty Ltd to a Section 21 company and how to deal with R80m in tax liabilities
4. What other goals/objectives should there be?
4.1 Financial Sustainability: New sponsorship funding from a new revitalised Competition and Tournament format to create 7 Professional engines of growth: SA Rugby & 6 Franchises
4.2 Coherent Tournament Formats for Sponsors at all levels from SA Rugby down to all 14 Unions
4.3 On Field performance goals: 14 Unions - 6 Franchises - National Team/s
4.4 Equality Charter - May the Best Team and Best Man Win
4.5 Strict oversight and stringent penalties for racism and violence
5. Should they be seperate objectives or short, medium or long term objectives of these overarching goals? The Master Plan is Short Medium and Long Term and updated/revised annually
“In a meeting attended by Saru president Oregan Hoskins, his deputy Mark Alexander, vice-president Rautie Rautenbach and Eastern Province Rugby Union president Cheeky Watson, it was decided that the new franchise would be launched on June 16 or 17 in Port Elizabeth. This coincides with the British and Irish Lions fixture against the Coastal XV.
Saru confirmed that the Southern Spears name would be scrapped and a new name would be released in due course.”
Tony, thanks for the response. Im not thoroughly familiar with SA rugby (and by that I include all the provinces as well), so excuse my ignorance. In my line of work I have come across lots of strategies, charters, policies, etc. that are developed in lots of different fields. Only a handful of these have implementation plans with effective monitoring and evaluation tools and systems, not to mention that only a handful of these are actually implemented. Most of these were developed because that was what was required, i.e. an end in itself & not a means to an end.
Maybe I’m wrong, but it appears SA rugby has no concrete plans about how the heck they are going to achieve all their various goals/objectives.
E.g. so they have a transformation charter - so what? Are there an actual plan to achieve the goals of this charter? E.g. we dont want quotas - we want teams at all levels to be selected on merit, but are the current plans enough to ensure that within 1 generation (15-20 years) we have teams at all levels representative of the population (or at least the rugby playing population) that is selected on merit with short (3-5 yrs), medium (5-10 yrs) and long (12-20 yrs) targets? There should be targets for at all levels of the game, not just Springbok level. Yes, Jake White and Peter deVilliers are visionary Springbok coaches, but they can only focus on the setup at the highest level, not at what the system is able to supply them with. AFAIK, most Craven Week teams are quite representative and hopefully most of these selections are not quota but merit based. If so, why is so much of that talent not going into club, semi-professional and professional rugby? Is the academy system developing enough potential African rugby talent? Yes, SA rugby and the provinces have development programmes, but are these successful at all? Why are there no prev disadvantaged school playing in the top schools challenge??
Is there a person that is responsible for implementing the charter, not just the SA rugby MD/president who is ultimately responsible but who is too busy with all his/her other responsibilities? Does SA rugby have a big enough budget to achieve the targets, or should the targets be more realistice to accomodate the available budget?
OK, i dont expect you to answer these questions - just me raving a bit at the incoherent approach adopted by SA rugby. I dont blame the govt for wanting to interfere in the game, though I must say I doubt if they will be any better.
Off-topic: How is this suggestion for the super rugby structure because there is not enough money available to continously expand the game to meet all the desired objectives?
*Reduce the Super 14 to a Super 8/10/12, but the teams qualifying for the tournament is based on their positions in their respective domestic tournaments (NPZ, Currie Cup) - similar to UEFA championship league e.g. top 3 from NZ, top 3 from SA, top 2 from Aus to make a Super 8
*Have various lower international leauges where the next best teams in the domestic leagues play (e.g. the UEFA cup) e.g.:
a) African/Atlantic Cup (e.g. No 4 & 5 in SA, top 2 from Argentina, 2 from other Southern African countries (Namibia, Zim, Kenya, Angola, Tanzania, etc) and 2 from West/North Africa &
b) Pacific Cup comprising of the no’s 4 & 5 ranked team from NZ, No 3&4 from Aus, top 2 from Japan, 1 from Tonga/Samoa/Fidji and 1 from elsewhere in Asia: HongKong, Singapore, etc)
Because their participation depends on where they finish in their domestic leagues, their is a promotion-relegation inherent in the structure for SA, NZ and Aus teams.
Yes, it is a 2-tier system but it allows the weaker teams in SA & NZ to play competitively against other teams from Africa and Asia to develop the games there hopefully at a lower cost to each team.
Oupoot - Great considered comments from you. This Transformtion Charter has been around for 3 years.
The bitter irony and deep dark tragedy is this: On the day SA Rugby tabled their Transformation Charter in March 2006, was the day SA Rugby announced their withdrawal of support of the Southern Spears. Since then, blah blah blah blah.
There is no Transformation Czar and SA Rugby relies on the intellect of Prof Willie Basson as a consultant to “tune” the charter year in and year out. If the unions do not meet targets or criteria, like the establishment of Rugby Academies, they should get less money from the parent body. There is no enforcer and there is too much lip service of we will do this and we will do that.
I think you can expect the Super Rugby tournaments to look like:
1. A Super 7 feeder tournament for the surplus franchises to play their way into the Super 14
2. A Super 14 with promotion and relegation tri-gam matches in each of Australia, New Zealand and SA
3. A Super Rugby series, after the S14 is played, to keep the franchises alive for another 6 months. (You cannot have a professional set up for just 4 months of the year - only the Western Force are rugby’s 12 month a year franchise)
Good info… and it’s great to live in a world where this debate can be out here for ALL… isn’t technology and the internet great ?
I have a big CAVEAT and worry about QUICK FIXES for rugby in my beloved Eastern Cape… there will be NONE… stop looking for them… the road to Eastern Cape rugby redemption is going to be long, hard, costly and painful… but it’s probably the most worthy cause in SA Rugby.
Concerns of Quick Fixes:
1. Imports
I see so many locals overlooked by blow-ins. eg The coach at the NMMU is a Grey Bloem lad (a Cheetah)
2. Schools tournaments, clinics, coaches, kit, fields, bus transport and such and such…
The engine of EC rugby needs to be bolstered and broadened with local role models and the game popularized AGAIN at schools … I imagine Cricket SA’s model of bakers mini cricket with coaching clinics etc would do well enough but is gonna cost a LOT of money !
3. Non-elitist Eastern Cape
Return rugby to the People… if Grey PE, St Andrews and the old school elitest dominate EC rugby then forget it… in 1888 the EPRU grew out of a bunch of normal ‘raggamuffins’… for as long as I can remember EP rugby was a home for an eclectic mix of normal people: diesel mechanics, farmers, factory workers, teachers, prison wardens, the unemployed, car salemen and surfers - the rich dude/snob like Joel Stransky or John Allen wouldn’t fit into a traditional EP squad… they always went to the elite unions… lets keep our character… we’re proudly NOT the spawn of gold rushers (or social climbers) !
4. Ween Eastern Capers OFF the dependency they’ve developed for OUTSIDE unions - how do you develop EASTERN CAPE rugby when 90% of our supporters have systematically been CONVERTED to being fans of other unions ? I’m sick of finding Bulls, Stormers, Cheetah or Sharks fans in the Eastern Cape… rubbish I tell you - although I understand what devilish mindgames have caused this !
5. Boycott the Zimboks - As a proud Eastern Caper - a frontiersman from a province with a revolutionary legacy… I say, BOYCOTT SOUTH AFRICAN RUGBY ! Till we get the show on the road, and the focus and investment we deserve. 9 Million Eastern Capers like me MUST boycott the Springboks or any other local provincial union… I preach this daily… I convert many… so I can tell you rugby in South Africa is going DOWNHILL … one boycottee at a time… we now watch BAY UNION play soccer, a bitter pill for a rugby fan, but it must be done !
… a new franchise ? While holding thumbs optimistically I’m skeptical of the impact… if its just another half-baked GAUTENG bundle thrust down on us… without substance… it’ll fail… I assure you… the meat and guts of it has to be local…
and what about Boland??? another bone of contention, another “swart skaap” of SARFU, another province with so much potential and YES, another province that needs help: another province that has seen so many top end players start their careers in rugby there - after their Fidentia sponsor issue, these chaps were left out to dry: but, despite their severe shortage of anything financial, they continue to plague some of the more fancied teams during the CC - and to think that their wealthy neighbours WP / STORMERS are only a few km away with pockets full of money…how sad !!
rocco - Boland have rights and need not be relegated as the Junior partner of the Stormers. It depends whether they take a R780,000 payment to be a Junior partner or become more active on the Stormers Board. They are after all a stakeholder.
They are either a Man or a Mouse and must decide to either Speak up or Squeak up!
May I add a new stream of thought? A friend’s son has twice tried out for the U20 & U21 teams in our province, has made it through to final selection and has been told on both occasions that he’s sure to be selected. (Bear in mind, he does happen to be a top club rugby player.) But he hasn’t; supposedly less-talented players who happen to belong to a large rugby academy in the province, have been selected instead. Another young player had the same experience; he’s deemed not good enough for U21…yet he’s just been snapped up in a +Rmillion deal to play overseas. The word is, that because they are not part of this ‘powerful’ academy, they aren’t getting a fair chance - that young men whose families cannot afford the +R100,000/annum fees are being ignored in favour of those who can. It is also whispered that the academy is headed by people who are also selectors. Also, the word ‘kickback’ has been linked with the name of a well known rugby administrator by several people…the more the academy’s students get selected for provincial sides, the more money the academy makes. That’s no problem in a fair world - but this doesn’t seem right. Does this sound familiar?
All comments must be approved by our editors, click here to read the editorial guidelines for comments. Please allow some time for our editors to approve your comment after posting.
profile
Tony led the change in corporate identity of South African Airways from the airline of the old South Africa to the flag carrier of the new South Africa.
Before that he was a competitive provincial sportsmen in swimming, diving, waterpolo, lifesaving and white water rafting.
Rugby was played at Bishops, NW Cape, Maties, van der Stel, UCT, Hamiltons and False Bay.
Tony singularly authored the blueprint for the establishment of Soccer City Stadium for the PSL which in 2010 hosted the opening and closing ceremonies of the FIFA World Cup and the Finals of the soccer showpiece.
He was past CEO of the Southern & Eastern Cape Super 14 Rugby franchise, the Southern Spears and now CEO of the Super 20 Rugby World Series.
Tony's links
Rugby Union Links Rugby-Union.info links to live rugby union websites from all over the world. You can browse free sites by country or search for club teams, country sides, player profiles and international match statistics, news, results, manufacturers, and retailers. Rugby web sites listed are monitored and updated daily.
RugbyWeek A terrific one stop rugby anthology site updated "on the whistle" which means that when the whistle blows you have the results from around the world in one site. It is one of the newer websites and focuses on all facets of rugby. Every major tournament and every major team has their own dedicated section filled with all of the latest news on that topic.
Users can visit the site once a week and be kept fully up to date with the latest news on the tournament of their choice and at the same time scan the latest news in other tournaments that they do not follow as closely.
SuperSport The best and most successful provider of premium pay-television sports coverage across the continent of Africa.
SuperSport contributes its success to the seven departments which make up the company as well as the nine members of the management board who co-ordinate the functions of the company and the individual departments.
The Southern Spears This is the Southern Spears website with a catalogue of news, releases and thumbnail sketches of the Southern Spears team and activities set up a month after their formation.
This site carries more of a behind the scenes view.
VIP Limo Services VIP Limo Services of Cape Town & Johannesburg has it's own fleet of luxury sedans.
All vehicles have climate control systems with satellite navigation so drivers can get clients to their destination efficiently even in ever-changing Cape Town & Johannesburg traffic. VIP Limo Services drivers are professionally trained and licensed. All have a good knowledge of Cape Town & Johannesburg and a pleasant personality.
By the time you read this, the Springboks would probably have landed in Johannesburg and would be holding a press conference at the OR Tambo Intercont...
As you read this, Bakkies Botha is probably back in Pretoria leaving behind him New Zealand and the next three games of the Rugby World Cup, which end...
Dan Carter was to have captained the All Blacks for the first time on Sunday. An honour bestowed on him as a Kiwi legend akin to that of teammate Rich...
So now that we know Richie McCaw plays the bagpipes, and has Scottish heritage, the Rugby World Cup organisers are being put under pressure from all q...
The Rugby World Cup commences tomorrow September 9 with the All Blacks vs Tonga match. The flood gates will open for all the 20 team games with 600 pl...
Loading ...
Oregan Hoskins, formerly of the Sharks, is president of SA Rugby, Mark Alexander, formerly of the Lions, is deputy president, Rautie Rautenbach, formerly of the Falcons, is vice-president. 
Johan Prinsloo, formerly of the Lions, is CEO and 
Andy Marinos, formerly team manager of the Springboks, is acting MD. Soon SA Rugby will be dissolved into a section 21 company. Marinos has yet to familiarise himself and read all the sponsorship and broadcast agreements of SA Rugby, which is why John O’Neill of the Australian Rugby Union is giving Hoskins and Marinos a right royal run around at Sanzar.
Barend van Graan, also of Sail, which has investments and shareholding in the Cheetahs and the Stormers and exclusively manage Vodacom’s rugby account.
Manie Reynecke
Harold Verster
Brian van Zyl
Rob Wagner
Frans Ludeke,
Eugene Eloff,
Naka Drotske,
John Plumtree
Rassie Erasmus
or 
Yeah, you and Cheeky will make a hell of team.Don’t forget to make Puke captain of you side.
(Report abuse)