New SA Rugby boss Oregan Hoskins has indicated he will review the Super 14 relegation system – a move that could see the Southern Spears kept out of next year’s tournament.
Acknowledging the concerns about the relegation system that will see the weakest South African team make way for the Spears, he also agreed the Southern and Eastern Cape deserved a place in rugby’s southern hemisphere sun writes Derrick Spies for The Herald Online.
“Although we have not set a date yet, we are planning to hold the first SA Rugby meeting (under the new leadership) in the near future, and this (the relegation system) will be one of the main topics that will be discussed,� he said.
During a special presidential council meeting held in June last year, it was decided that the weakest South African team from the 2006 Super 14 series would be relegated to make way for the newly formed Southern and Eastern Cape franchise, the Southern Spears.
However, when push came to shove, the five main franchises – the Bulls, Cats, Sharks, Cheetahs and Stormers – refused to sign a participation agreement at the beginning of the series in February. If the agreement was signed, it would have brought the relegation rule into effect, paving the way forward for the Spears to participate in the Super 14 series for the next two years.
Hoskins said he was planning to address the issue to find the most amicable solution. “There are two issues that need to be addressed, the first being the issue of relegation, and the second being the fact that the Southern Spears have become a reality that needs to be addressed,� said Hoskins.
“It would be a very sad day if one of the existing franchises has to be relegated at the end of this series. The implications of relegation in terms of sponsorships and players are enormous and the franchise will more than likely die. On the other hand, we need to do everything in our power to try and restore Eastern Province Rugby to its former glory,� he said.
Hoskins said he was planning to accompany a high level delegation to the Eastern Cape within the next week to meet with all the relevant stakeholders from all three rugby unions, namely EP Rugby Union (EPRU), Border and South Western Districts (SWD).
Hoskins said he was aware of the problems the EPRU had faced in recent months, but said he did not want to prejudge them.
“I am having a meeting with the top SA Rugby management structures (today) in Cape Town, and will be asking them to table the reports into the affairs at EPRU so that I can get a better understanding of what is going on.�
www.theherald.co.za
March 7th, 2006 at 12:20 pm
Is it really going to be sad if the Stormpies or Kietie Kats got relegated? They are indeed trying hard to be the lucky team
March 7th, 2006 at 12:34 pm
“There are two issues that need to be addressed, the first being the issue of relegation, and the second being the fact that the Southern Spears have become a reality that needs to be addressed.â€?
The wisdom of Solomon will be needed reach a compromise on this one.
March 7th, 2006 at 12:40 pm
Exactly, JJ.
They’ll earn their money coming to an acceptable compromise on this mess.
March 7th, 2006 at 12:40 pm
May they seek that wisdom JJ. The cats and Stormers are trying so hard to be non-performers, I sea no problem in relegating one of them.
March 7th, 2006 at 12:44 pm
I see fireworks in the not to distant future. I reckon it’s fasten your seatbelt, as we’re in for a bumpy ride!
March 7th, 2006 at 12:50 pm
Tony must be really peeved with thi one.
March 7th, 2006 at 12:59 pm
I don’t see fireworks except at you know where.
This one will be decided by the old men with the black batman capes called “M’lord” in old buildings in Grahamstown and Cape Town
And based on documents that start with
“Be pleased to take notice that….”
JJ
The wisdom of Solomon will indeed be needed to geta compromise.
Dunno how SARU will reverse a board agreement it reached last year though.
BUT I want to agree with Jaap and say that based on the performance of the coaches at the Cats and Stormers, maybe Pieter De Villiers could get a chance to strut his stuff next year with a mix of exciting youngsters and some Boks
March 7th, 2006 at 1:04 pm
The relegation concept was always stupid. But the different unions all agreed to bind themselves to a stupid agreement and hence should stand or fall by that.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:06 pm
THere is something I don’t understand with this whole thing, so can somebody be kind enough to explain it to me?
The article says that “However, when push came to shove, the five main franchises – the Bulls, Cats, Sharks, Cheetahs and Stormers – refused to sign a participation agreement…”.
Further down it says “During a special presidential council meeting held in June last year, it was decided that the weakest South African team from the 2006 Super 14 series would be relegated to make way for the newly formed Southern and Eastern Cape franchise, the Southern Spears”
And Tony says the whole thing was agreed upon already. Surely, if nothing has been signed then it is not official.
What is the legal situation here?
March 7th, 2006 at 1:14 pm
Ollie, if nothing’s been signed, then the Spears doesn’t have a legal footing. Unless records shows that it was agreed on verball and that all of them will sign the contract.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:18 pm
Aldo, so it appears that there is nothing in B&W with a few little squiggles at the bottom then.
Geez, is Tony gonna be peeved.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:19 pm
Rasputin
The article by the Herald failed to quote the interview I gave them last night and to their credit they are running a follow up tomorrow in response to this inflammatory article.
Similar interviews have been heald with the Argus and Die Burger
March 7th, 2006 at 1:19 pm
Ollie
There was a memorandum of understanding the parties drafted in June last year.
The memorandum recorded the agreement between the franchises and SARU.
The last part of the memorandum says something on the lines of
“SARU shall draft a formal agreement between the parties to reflect these changes and it shall be signed within 30 days from today”
Of course it’s history that instead of 11 July 2005, the agreement was presented to the Big 5 in January this year….
Legally, an agreement comes into being when there is consensus between the parties on the matter agreed on.
The memorandum can easily be interpreted to be that consensus. There is no need for anything to be signed or sealed or whatever, as long as there is consensus or as they say in English law “a meeting of minds”.
This is also why when lawyers talk about drafting a contract you will hear them say the “agreement is reduced to writing”
All the writing part does is record the agreement that has already been recahed, thus it is not the be all and end all, it is a recordal of an existing agreement.
The famous case on this is Du Toit v Atkinsons Motors
March 7th, 2006 at 1:20 pm
Tony would you care to give us your response to this?
March 7th, 2006 at 1:24 pm
Tony: I was at school in the eastern cape and honestly believe that the raw talent it well worth keeping in the region.I would also love to see you guys succeed in every manner but I dont know if the best way to do it is to go into Super rugby and get hammered, could that not do the cause more harm?
March 7th, 2006 at 1:25 pm
Aw man, this has got the signs of a long legal battle written all over it.
I hope that OH has plench wisdom on this one.
C’mon Spears
March 7th, 2006 at 1:27 pm
Billy,
Can a brand new, fledling team being hammered in the Super 14 be any more humiliating than what is happening to some of the experienced teams (sporting plenty Bok players) now?
March 7th, 2006 at 1:29 pm
If Regan Hoskens disagrees with the Relegation Promotion idea this can ONLY be changed POST 2008 for the following reasons:
1. The 8th June 2005 Presidents Council resolution defused a highly volatile situation pre 8 June when it was proposed that the likes of Eastern Province be partnered wih the Blue Bull and various othre outrageous marriages.
2. The 8 June resolution was borne out of this chaos to bring an order and parity to rugby in South Africa and not to fix rugby in 2-3 months but over 2-3 years – hence the 2007 and 2008 clauses which give the Spears time in the Super 14 series.
3. The same forum that elected Hoskens (27-17) and the Deputy President and Vice President, just 11 days ago, is the same forum that unanimously agreed to the 8 June 2005 resolution and staved off an intervention from government to bring order to rugby – Hoskens was part of this decision.
4. Any decision to change the R&P system can only be done after 2008.
5. It was also decided that the Spears would bide their time and allow the promotion of the Cheetahs to go ahead into the 2006 Super 14 series on the proviso that the Spears would be in for 2007 and 2008 – This was all unanimously agreed
The Spears have embarked on sponsorship a
March 7th, 2006 at 1:33 pm
Ollie,
I see your point but i dont think its fair on the players, surely there must be a better way?
March 7th, 2006 at 1:34 pm
Ollie + DavidS
The fact that 5 errant CEO’s – soon there will only be one left standing on his own at the bottom of the table – as he will be deserted by his colleagues – started their protest or tabled their concerns 7 days prior to kick off of the Super 14 series speaks volumes of their preparation and planning.
The mere fact that they participated in this years 2006 Super 14 series is a tacit agreement of the 8 June resolution.
The Franchise Participation agreement is a definitive legal agreement drawn up to protect SANZAR, SA Rugby, the broadcast sponsor and competition sponsors.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:35 pm
BACKGROUND
On the 8th June 2005 the Presidents Council took a decision and issued a resolution, borne out of necessity, to strategically reposition South African rugby for the future and fast track rugby development and transformation, in the smaller and bigger unions respectively.
The smaller unions require financial resources to fast track development, as they already have moved beyond transformation, whereas the bigger more financially powerful unions need to fast track transformation, instead of “borrowing� players from the smaller unions.
What better system to put in place, than the President’s Council ruling and resolution made on the 8th June 2005?
The 8th June 2005 International Media Release, from SA Rugby, following the President’s Council meeting, was circulated to the desks of all President’s and CEO’s of all 14 Rugby Unions in South Africa, including the 6 Super 14 Franchise CEO’s, stated:
“The parties present at the SA Rugby President’s Council meeting held on 8 June 2005 at the Intercontinental Sandton Sun agreed the following in respect of the franchise system in South Africa for the Super 14 Competition.
1. That a formal legal agreement shall be drafted immediately confirming what was agreed regarding the Super 14 franchise system in South Africa.
2. The South Eastern (SE) Cape Franchise shall be financially supported by SA RUGBY / SARU in respect of their development during 2006. In light thereof SA RUGBY / SARU must procure sponsorships for the SE Cape Franchise for the 2006 season.
3. The SE Cape franchise shall be entrenched in the Super 14 Competition for the 2007 & 2008 rugby seasons.
4. The South African team finishing at the bottom of the log in 2006, will automatically be replaced by the SE Cape for the 2007 season.
5. At the end of the 2007 Super 14 season, the South African franchise team, which is last on the Super 14 log, excluding the SE Cape, shall play in a promotion relegation match against the franchise team who did not play in the 2007 Super 14 competition.
6. That the decision which was taken at the meeting on 15 April 2005 in respect of the South African franchise system, are hereby amended in order to reflect the above agreement.
7. That the Falcons Rugby Union will form part of the Blue Bulls franchise.
8. SA RUGBY shall within 21 days as from 8 June 2005, compile a “White Paper” in respect of the total SA RUGBY’S competition structureâ€?.
Following this unequivocal media release and message, from SA Rugby’s President’s Council decision and resolution taken as per the above, as well as the endorsement from the Minister of Sport Makhenkhesi Stofile, it is inappropriate for a handful of renegade CEO’s to usurp and overturn this President’s Council decision and bring the game of rugby into disrepute, by deliberately and wilfully placing SA Rugby in breach of its Broadcasting and Competition Sponsor agreements for the 2006 Super 14 series.
These SA Rugby agreements require that SA Rugby has its franchise participation agreements signed on or before the 10th February 2006, the start of the 2006 Super 14 Series.
In the interim, the Southern Spears have signalled their fullest co-operation to SA Rugby, in a letter on Friday the 3rd February, stating their position and acceptance of the President’s Council resolution, contained in the franchise Participation Agreement, plus indicating their availability and willingness to sign the Franchise Participation Agreement, which was duly done on Tuesday the 7th February at SA Rugby at 09H00.
SA Rugby is mandated by both the IRB and SANZAR to run and oversee the domestic South African rugby competitions and Super 14 franchises, on account of the fact that SA Rugby has the final authority over ALL South African rugby competitions, fixtures and rules and can determine who will, or won’t play, in these domestic competitions.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:36 pm
Tony:
It sounds like a case of it works for now and we can sort it out properly later, that and BVR’s complete lack of leadership. Are you confident you can build a team good enough to not harm your brand and that of your sponsors?
March 7th, 2006 at 1:37 pm
Southern Spears Commentary on the 8th June Presidents Council resolution and subsequent developments and initiatives:
1) Legal Agreement: The formal legal agreement identified in Point One of the Presidents Council resolution above, although not immediately drafted, has been substituted with an appropriate definitive legal Franchise Participation Agreement, issued by SA Rugby and distributed to all 6 Franchises on the 2 December 2005.
2) SA Rugby issued the following e-mail notices with the franchise participation agreement to all 6 Franchises as per the below dates:
i. Sent: Mon 2005/12/12 11:05 AM
Gentlemen
As we are unable to schedule a meeting for this year, please confirm your availability for a meeting on Tuesday, 17th January 2006.
In the interest of reaching a resolution on the agreement please provide the major areas of concern so that we can prepare and address these issues as a priority. Please provide the information as soon as possible either by email (kyle@sarugby.co.za) or by telefax on 021 686 3907.
ii. Sent: Wed 2005/12/14 11:02 AM
Good day Gentlemen & Ladies
Herewith please find an official notice for a S14 CEO’s meeting to be held on 17 January 2006 at the SA Rugby office. The meeting starts at 11am until 15:30. (See attached letter circulated ex Kyle Nel)
3) SA Rugby convenes meeting: SA Rugby unequivocally invited comment or concerns to be tabled in writing, prior to the meeting, which meeting was eventually held on the 2nd February 2005 at SA Rugby.
4) Franchise Participation Agreement Obligations: The Southern Spears, as one of the 6 franchises registered some of its concerns and duly signed the amended franchise participation agreement on the 7th February, 3 days before the start of the Super 14 series, as SA Rugby has signed SANZAR, broadcast and sponsor agreements, which requires that SA Rugby has signed participation agreements, otherwise it places SA Rugby in breach of contract with these three entities and leaves SA Rugby open for a damages claim.
5) Sponsors: The Southern Spears has proceeded with the acquisition and securing of significant commercial sponsors and entered into 3 year contractual obligations, resulting from the 8th June 2005 Presidents Council resolution.
6) Development & Transformation: The Southern Spears, grouped the Presidents, CEO’s and Coaches of Border, Eastern Province and South Western Districts together in a meeting, on Friday the 3rd February, to agree on a regional development and growth strategy for the future, with the creation of five Elite Spears Youth Squads of 30 players in 5 Age Groups, in each Province, ranging from U-13, U-16, U-18, U-19 and U-21.
7) Funding: In Point 2 of the Presidents Council resolution it stated, “The South Eastern (SE) Cape Franchise shall be financially supported by SA RUGBY / SARU in respect of their development during 2006. In light thereof SA RUGBY / SARU must procure sponsorships for the SE Cape Franchise for the 2006 season�.
9) Government: The Southern Spears has embarked on participation and alliance agreements with the Department of Sports, Arts & Culture, and the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality in the Eastern Cape, as well as the Eastern Cape Academy of Sports and maintains regular contact with the South African Ministry of Sport and Western Australia Ministry of Sports, Arts & Culture.
10) Advisory Board: The Southern Spears is proceeding with the creation of a Southern Spears Advisory Board comprising of suitably qualified leaders in rugby, business and government, drawn from each of the three Unions of Border, Eastern Province and South Western Districts.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:40 pm
The Southern Spears has been forged out of the toughest times within South African rugby and will together with SA Rugby, following the President’s Council resolution taken on the 8th June 2005, whose mandate it was to instil in South Africa, a system that will accelerate development and transformation in rugby in and throughout South Africa, collaborate and work with SA Rugby to attain these objectives.
If SA Rugby deems it appropriate to change the relegation & promotion system – then by all means change it and that can only happen POST 2008.
Hope this answers some of your questions Gentlemen!
March 7th, 2006 at 1:43 pm
Tony, it looks like you have all your ducks in a row. I wish you the best in the coming weeks/months in this matter.
You have my support.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:43 pm
Thanks Tony, that was very interesting. Best of luck.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:45 pm
Ollie, Billy & Co.
Plan on coming to Port Elizabeth on the 19th May to see the Western Force play the Spears
March 7th, 2006 at 1:46 pm
Hier kom K5K – maar nie dat ons dit nie voorsien het nie.
Look at this scenario.
“boys even though you have all voted for me, I am not able to give you the tests that you feel you should have recieved – but don’t worry – i’ll take away this relegation axe”
Far fetched – I do not think so!
March 7th, 2006 at 1:46 pm
Tony,
Really wish I could, but I will only be in SA at the end of the year again.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:47 pm
I may just do that. I cant get enough sea air in winter or for that matter screaming insults at Aussies.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:56 pm
Like I said, fireworks and plenty of them. This is gonna be a long court case, and I hope it will not put us into a situation where we’re even worse off then with BvR. I feared that it will happen, as it was a vote to replace BvR at all costs, rather than a vote for someone that will be there for the good of SA Rugby.
Pietploos
Didn,t you also say that the smaller unions will lose out in the Hoskins era?
March 7th, 2006 at 2:03 pm
Tony
I really emphatise with you.
Just one question: What is in the best interest of SA Rugby?
That is the only sensible question to ask. I do not even propose to have an answer, let alone a firm opinion on any to be proposed answer.
If the politics, egocentrism and pressure groups can be disregarded, and the question be answered on an objective basis, we should be able to progress from this point onwards.
If we (administrators, players, fans and sponsors) are unable to overcome this, SA Rugby is going to slide in a pit with very steep sides.
March 7th, 2006 at 2:04 pm
Bring on the Spears!!! They cannot be worse than the Force, especially now that they will gain the boks of the relegated franchise. Not that getting the Cats players is a “gain”. Jorrie will also be grouped in their, as he is a previous bok. LOL
March 7th, 2006 at 2:16 pm
“It would be a very sad day if one of the existing franchises has to be relegated at the end of this series.”
Indeed it would be a sad day if “one” got relegated. Judged on the performances I can think of at least “two” if not “three” that needs to be relegated!
I am not that up-to-date with the issue, but wasn’t it to be expected that Hoskins would revisit the relegation issue? Him being from the Sharks who were the most vocal of the franchises against relegation. Wasn’t it also partly why the bigger unions “maybe” supported his election?
Just asking…
March 7th, 2006 at 2:18 pm
Judged by the previous weekend’s results it would seem that Hoskins has already lifted the relegation scare.
In the first two weeks it would have seemed that some were at least still trying to win, but last week those same teams just gave up!!!
Am I dreaming??
March 7th, 2006 at 2:25 pm
What will the relegated team do for a year witout top compitition? Who will sponsor them or include them in another compition? Should they play vodacom cup?
March 7th, 2006 at 2:38 pm
Small unions are in Trouble – mark my words!
March 7th, 2006 at 2:52 pm
Bluegreengold
The best interests for SA Rugby are to have a more equitable financial distribution and player distribution
Popeye
The relegated team is ONLY out for 4 months – the Super 14 series is BUT 4 months!
March 7th, 2006 at 3:13 pm
Wouldn’t we find a solution in introducing a similar competition structure (to the S14) for selected smaller unions as well as the relegated union – a step-up from the Vodacom Cup with enough sponsors. Could be against the Pacific Island teams, South America teams or smaller European etc. That would be good for SA development as well as International development. The relegated team would also not suffer such losses. Top teams and bottom teams could then move between S14 and the other comp.
They can also then enforce stricter quotas on the other comp. for development – heck, we could even involve some African teams.
Players would then also be more ready for a tough competition like the S14. Vodacom Cup can then remain for the development of more junior players, not yet ready for international rugby…
March 7th, 2006 at 3:15 pm
Solomon’s wisdom?
Rather Houdini’s escape trick is what is going to be needed for SARU to get out of this one
Thanks, Tony – you participation makes the RugRats the best informed of all fans re this issue.
March 7th, 2006 at 3:15 pm
Tony. Yes I realise that, but surely it is their biggest revenue stream in the year? It is like telling an icecream vendor he is being replaced, during the summer months, but don’t worry you have time from April till September to make up for it.
I want the Spears playing. I think that it is crucial that the powers stop fighting about relegation and start putting a Plan B in place for the relegated team. Maybe get them included in Europe or start another comp with Argentina, Romania, Islands etc.
March 7th, 2006 at 3:17 pm
Sorry WGC bit late with my post.
March 7th, 2006 at 3:19 pm
Now Bobby can start that London-based SA team. Give them a new name, which stays for all relegated teams. Something like: “RE-ALEGATORS”.
March 7th, 2006 at 3:21 pm
If Hoskins and his boys manage to boot out the relegation system, he will prove what I was asying that he was the frontman for a group ofr iondividuals who were using rugby to suit their beat interests. The relegations system is needed now more than other time to rid the Super 14 of teams who are only interested in the money and not in their performance.
March 7th, 2006 at 3:25 pm
Yep, Popeye. The only way that you are going to close the massive gap between the larger and smaller unions is by doing something similar to what we are discussing. We also need to take development to a higher level.
March 7th, 2006 at 3:35 pm
Tony
Sorry just got back and had a lot of reading to do.
Is the 8/6/2005 written in stone or can it merely be reversed by a new resolution.
Best of luck.
March 7th, 2006 at 5:27 pm
It will not be reversed.
It will however have to run its course through till May 2008. That is not a long time.
If there is an attempt to reverse it, it will invite the participation and legislation of government in rugby in SA.
Not something SA Rugby or the IRB wants.
March 7th, 2006 at 7:17 pm
Tony I like the fact that you have a constant clear message that you communicate consistantly. This is needed. I am a big Stormer supporter but if they are not good enough they must be relegated. SA Rugby would be better off with in the long term with a Spears team that wins and are representative and have the exposure on S14 level.
I just hope PdV ignores all of this and just focus solely on his teams performance against the Western Force. Good results would go a long way in changing peoples perception.
JJ ask a very valid question and if I understand your reply they can just change the resolution but would not because of political pressure – but what about the possibility of legal pressure from the Spears. Would that be an option?
March 8th, 2006 at 2:25 am
Amandla & viva the Spears! I am (and always will be) a staunch Province & Stormers fan but can tell you I can’t wait for some radical changes in the existing setup. The Cheetahs have been a revelation. For too long we have put up with mediocrity from the big 4 & the ‘wise’ words of people who don’t give a fig for the game. Well folks we are finally getting there – decent transformation & cheers to the underperformer. Bring on the Spears merchandise!