Let’s save SA Rugby!
Posted by Kandas - 10/04/06 at 10:04 pm under General Discussions, Other Unions / Teams, Rugby Administration, SA Unions / TeamsWhat is the real state of South African Rugby? And what is the solution? I’ll give you mine.
I am a firm believer in the practice of sitting back at times, reflecting on the factual issues at hand in any given situation, and then making informed decisions. Right or wrong – at least it’s based on facts. That’s why I also believe in scenario planning. Planning for possible eventualities. Off course, this implies planning for the long term. Not fighting fires year in and year out. Getting structures – the correct ones – in place.
I’m also, especially in the last couple of months, totally converted to the culture and power of blogging. Like with this site. The opportunity to present, within the constraints of the value system of this specific blogging community, one’s own ideas and thoughts. Independently. Without having to spin a certain story to satisfy hidden agendas (which are usually financially driven – forcing the question of who are the real gravy train passengers in the whole SA Rugby Industry/Mafia?).
When I combine the two, I realise that we are actually in a very powerful situation here. We could really influence people in high places. However, due to the true nature of blogging, our comments are mostly impromptu. Our comments are also based on the drivel that we are being fed. Which brings me to the question whether we really think about the real situation within SA Rugby? Sure, we do think about it. But do we analise it to the extent where we disregard the nonsense we are presented with? And do we have any solutions?
It is for this reason that I’m asking you to sit back for a while and really think about the State of the Nation’s beloved Rugby Union. (And sorry about this long article but I thought a lot and I will never try and compete with PissAnt).
It is also important to note that I could not, for obvious reasons and the fact that I didn’t want to write a book on all these issues, present you with ALL the facts and fallacies. But I would like to change our perspective a bit and, in disregarding the drivel, I would like us to forget a bit about previous agreements, honoured or not, and sentiments. Yes, I am also referring to the Spears situation here. But I am not going to refer to agreements that the Big 5 do not want to honour. Hence the different perspective.
The Status Quo.
The following facts form the basis of my argument and proposed solution:
Our total Rugby Administration setup, in an extremely increasing demanding corporate environment, is unprofessional. Fullstop. One gets the idea of secret meetings, backstabbing, incapability, clandestine inner dealings, conservatism………. Whatever, you name it! And they are totally unapproachable. And arrogant. I can not imagine any Management Team of any Corporate Company that will totally ignore their stakeholders, in this case the fans, in the way that it is done within our rugby structures. Although the Administration, obviously, forms an integral part of the eventual solution, I am not going to go into more detail here. That I will leave to you to discuss.
Our club Rugby is in utter shambles. The decline started in 1995 after Francois Pienaar walked into Louis Luyt’s office. Gone were the days where a Naas Botha, after being injured, first had to play for Tukkies before selected for Noord-Transvaal again. Gone were the days where families gathered on a Friday evening at the local Town’s field watching club rugby. Gone were our real feeder sources. How can we blame kids when they stop playing rugby after school because they feel they just have no chance making it into the big leagues? We all know that it is not always the best players representing their provinces at Craven Week. If that was the case, the majority of our past Springboks would never have been Springboks. It was a Danie Craven who took Goggie van Heerden out of the “Koshuisliga� at Stellenbosch one Friday afternoon to play for Maties the next Saturday and Province the Saturday after that! I can give you tons of other examples like that. No, we got to a situation where a player is identified at schools’ level, lured to a top school with R3 000-00 per month pocket money and at the age of 19 he is playing provincial rugby and earning R30 000-00 per month. Set for life. Other unions are bidding for his services without looking at their own resources.
Which brought about another extremely ironic situation. Some Unions now had the so-called best players. Why would they then need the best coaches? The real coaches!? But, like I said, I do not want to, for the purpose of this article, venture into the field of Administration and Management Teams. Ironic also because the emphasis shifted somewhat to certain players – like it should be – but for all the wrong reasons!
Which brings me to the players. Our players (or, rather, these players), for various reasons including the abovementioned, are a bunch of arrogant, unprofessional, unapproachable, uncreative, over-coached zombies. Little Gods. And are they really our best players? There are people saying that we do not have 300 first class players – players that can play in international competitions. This is utter nonsense and I will prove it to you. Do yourselves a favour and have a real good look at all the contracted players at the Big 5. We are sitting with situations where these Franchises/Unions have 12 first class Wings, 10 first class Props, 8 first class Locks, etc. contracted. To do what with? Play some of them in the Vodacom Cup? Use them as backup? With no playing time? Don’t you think that players like Jaco Gouws, Dean Hall, Cedric Mkhize, Dusty Noble, Nico Breedt, Allistair Hargreaves, Skipper Badenhorst, Brent Moyle, Sandile Nxumalo, Lafras Uys, MJ Mentz, Tertius Carse, Wayne van Heerden, Nicky van der Walt, Casper Steyn, Grant Bartle, Ashieq Wise, Ian Fihlani, Josh Fowles, Valentine van Wyk, Ambrose Barendse, Rynard van As, Tewis de Bruin; Bertus Mulder, Bennie van Vuuren, Ig van der Merwe, André Wessels Jonathan Muller, Gavin Williamson, Hennie Daniller, Luvuyo Mhlobiso, Riaan van der Bergh, Jacques-Louis Potgieter, Trompie Nontshinga, Neil Powell, Johan Wasserman, Adriaan Fondse, Derick Kuün, Marius Delport, Justin Peach, Conrad Burke, Gio Aplon; Egon Seconds, Corné Uys, Zhahier Ryland; Ricardo Croy, Paul Delport; Robbie Diack, Hendrik Gerber, Leon Karemaker, Mpho Mbiyozo, David Hendricks, Duimpie Theron, Andre Hough, Bertus Swanepoel, Jonathan Mukuena and many, many more deserve to play in a competition of a higher standard to prepare them for possible Super 14 – and International participation? Add to these players all our u/19 and u/21 players! Instead they are playing in a watered down Vodacom Cup not helping their cause at all. A competition where, this year alone, EP beat WP and SWD last Friday lost 21 – 18 in the 42nd minute of the second half to the Blue Bulls! With “ordinaryâ€? club players! Neither does it help the 14 CC Unions because they don’t make money from these games and their players don’t get the exposure they deserve.
Biggest problem however is the fact that these players are not fairly distributed throughout the Country. Zanzar require the best players to play in the Super 14. Not the best teams! This is an important factor to keep in mind as I would also immediately ask myself why SA Rugby would not have the same requirement for the Super 14, CC and other SA competitions. No, SA Rugby would rather exclude a complete (massive) geographical part of the Country in the SEC! Entrenching the Big 5!
And this brings me to the crux of my argument. Like I said, forget about previous agreements and sentiments. You can not exclude a quarter of the country and entrench the Big 5. One of the main points in contention for the Big 5 was the fact that the Spears would be entrenched in the Super 14 for two years. Tony McKeever, CEO of the Spears, this last weekend said publicly that they do not want to be entrenched! If the Spears finish last out of the SA Teams next year, they will play a 3-match promotion/relegation series to determine who should play in the Super 14 in 2008.
Now why would you then want to entrench the Cats, or the Stormers or any of the other Teams, for that matter, in the Super 14. The Spears “must prove that they will be ready� whilst in 3 Spears warm-up games, the crowd attendance has been a total of 53,500 and the mighty Cats home attendances have been barely 10,000 per game and they have lost 38 times in the last 42 outings!!! When must they start proving themselves? And where do they get these huge amounts of money from that they will lose if they do not play in the Super 14?
At the same time Unions like Boland, Falcons, Leopards, Griquas, Griffons, etc. are surely not benefiting from the status quo. Neither are their players.
No, we urgently need to start looking at our situation with the long-term in mind. Like I said, not fighting fires with fires.
The Kandas Proposal 
We need to, creatively, look at our competition structures. Louis de Villiers, in last Sunday’s Rapport, asked the question whether we can still afford to play in the Super 14. To a great extend I agree with a lot that he has said. Unfortunately we are in the situation where deals have been signed and we are committed to the Super 14 for the next couple of years. But nothing is stopping us from giving our elite pool of players broader exposure! But, whilst we are looking at my suggestion for development and competitions, we also need to look at our structures.
It is important to note that my whole proposal is based on identifying new talent, development and getting rid of non-performers. (For how long do you, as a player, want to be entrenched in the system if you are not performing?). Also important to me is the fact that, six months ago, none of us knew about a Naas Olivier, Is-Maheel Dollie, Ashley Johnson, Andre Hough, etc. These type of players need to get the right exposure for a Jake White to realise that we do have the players – and they need to get quality competition and be part of overall development.
We have a duty and responsibility to develop, not only on a regional/national basis, but also globally. Do yourselves a favour and have a look at the IRB website (www.irb.com) and what is going on in the qualifying rounds for next year’s World Cup. Who would have thought that Spain is currently on the verge of qualifying. Isn’t it also our responsibility to assist these Countries, with the assistance of the IRB, to be fairly competitive come WC 2007 or 2011, etc? Isn’t it also our duty to assist our African neighbours to be competitive?
I believe, firstly, that we need to have six (6) Franchises. Not excluding anyone within the Country. These Franchises should be the following:
- Bulls – Blue Bulls and Falcons
- Cats – Lions, Leopards and Pumas
- Cheetahs – Free State, Griquas and Griffons
- Sharks – Natal
- Stormers – Western Province and Boland, and
- Southern Spears – SWD, Border and EP
These Franchises should contract, on a yearly basis, 50 elite players each. That will give us 300 elite players from which the Springbok Squad is selected – also on a yearly basis. These players must be contracted at the end of the year in order to give the Coaching Staff and Management enough time, including the December holidays, to start preparing for the different competitions. I am also doing away with the Vodacom Cup and, in the place of that, I am adding another International Competition. For the purpose of this proposal, I am calling this Competition the Inter-Continental Invitation Cup (ICI Cup). Invitation because I believe that it is the way to go in order to be creative, innovative and all-inclusive. And the IRB should be involved in promotion, logistics and raising sponsorships.
We, furthermore, need to look at our Clubs and smaller Unions. You can not do away with them and, if administered correctly, we can have a Currie Cup Competition, where all 14 Unions are involved, like no other in the world. A real kick-ass Competition!
I would propose the following structure for each of the six Franchises. Not much difference to the present situation but the real differences being in the Competitions we are playing, the way players are contracted (and, please, I am not going into detail regarding the remuneration packages – for that you can read PissAnt’s suggestions in his blueprint of last Sunday – although I believe that my proposal allows for interactivity on Club, CC, Franchise and National levels, saving everybody money to spend on real development. But also putting more money in some players pockets – providing they perform) and the exposure to our lower levels for development and identification purposes. As a suggestion I would say a player like Andre Hough could be contracted by the Griffons (his CC Union) for R10 000 per month (which would include the clause that, should he be injured or losing his place, he should play for his club in making a comeback), and should he get a Franchise contract for next year, the Franchise will pay him an additional R10 000 per month and in the event of Jake White wanting him to be part of the Springbok setup for 2007, SA Rugby will pay him an additional R10 000 per month. If Jake just calls him up for two Tests, he is only paid for those two Tests. But, like I said, just a suggestion. I’ll leave the nitty gritty stuff to you guys to argue.
A Franchise setup/structure will then look something like this (and I’m using the Cheetahs as an example).
The 50 contracted players will then compete in two Teams on Level B – the International Level. The Cheetahs in the Super 14 and the Cheetahs “Aâ€? in the ICI Cup. In, what I call, the International Season from February to May. All the Cheetahs home games will be at Bloemfontein and the Cheetahs “Aâ€? home games at Welkom and Kimberley. Mainly because most of the players in the Cheetahs “Aâ€? side will be, invariably – looking at present tendencies – from the Griffons and Griquas. Giving them more opportunities and putting more money in the pockets of those smaller Unions. Something that they in any case do not get with the present Vodacom Cup.
During this so-called International Season, all 14 Unions will place more emphasis on Club Rugby. Bringing Club Rugby to the main stadiums – together with School Rugby days. Developing rugby in their regions, bringing people back to the game. Making more money and preparing for the enhanced Currie Cup.
In June the Springboks play their home Tests and the Tri-Nations. The Currie Cup then also starts and runs until October after which the Boks go on their EOYT.
The Super 14 (February to May) will then be contested by the 5 best Franchises and, looking at this years performances it should be the Bulls, Sharks, Cheetahs, Stormers and the Spears. With their “A� Teams taking part in the ICI Cup. The Cats (presumed relegated) will then compete in the ICI Cup with their two teams allowing them to develop. At the end of next year (irrespective of where they finish in the ICI Cup) they play in a series of promotion/relegation matches against the lowest finishing SA Team in the Super 14 and, should they win they play in the Super 14 2008 with their “A� Team playing in the ICI Cup.
The ICI Cup will run concurrently with the Super 14 and consist of the following sides: (Current World rankings in brackets)
- 1. SA Relegated Side (Cats)
- 2. SA Relegated Side “A� (Cats “A�)
- 3. Bulls “A�
- 4. Sharks “A�
- 5. Cheetahs “A�
- 6. Stormers “A�
- 7. Southern Spears “A�
- 8. Namibia [26]
Invitation Sides:
- 9. African Side 2 (Morocco [21], Tunisia [34], Kenia [38], Ivory Coast [40], etc.)
- 10. European Side (Romania [13], Georgia [18], Portugal [19], Czech Republic [25], Russia [23], Spain [27], etc.)
- 11. South American Side (Argentina [9], Uruguay [16], Chile [24], Paraguay [30], etc.)
- 12. North American Side (USA [14], Canada [15], etc.)
- 13. Asian Side (Japan [17], Korea [22], Hong Kong [29], China [39], Arabian Gulf [41], etc.)
- 14. Pacific Islands Side (Samoa [10], Fiji [11], Tonga [20])
From June to October the Springboks play their home Tests and the Tri-Nations and we have a cracker of a Currie Cup Competition. November to early December the Boks go to the Northern Hemisphere and down here we get our contracts in order for 2008.
By that time, we will have another 5 – 10 Club players coming through the ranks, finding themselves in the different Franchise Elite Groups. Now, what more do we want?
The Big 5 playing Super 14 for the next 5 years and our rugby stagnating?
Sorry, I don’t think so!
But, then, are we, and our Administrators, really thinking about this?
Once again, sorry, I don’t think so. If they did, none of them would call a McKeever a maverick!
This is my proposal. What’s yours?
There is one alternative though. We can sit here four years from now and still argue the same things – one year before the 2011 World Cup. I’ll tell you one thing with certainty though. I wouldn’t be part of those discussions as I will be too emotionally drained!
Something needs to be done now.
April 10th, 2006 at 11:12 pm
Administered correctly.
At any level ,from high school upwards,
that is simply not possible.
Attempting to find a longterm,thorough solution
whilst dealing with shorttem,unorganised beings
is like trying to teach a dog
to play the flute.
The greatest exodus of SA players didn’t start
with qoutas,it started with malets legends.
When i return home its like visiting the States.
impossible to compare this generation and bothas.
Impossible to blame pienaar.
One of the greatest minds South african
rugby has ever produced.
I think eventually we will tumble to
the when-we valleys of wales.
We should let the Bok die with whatever dignity is left.
A new emblem for a new nation.
April 10th, 2006 at 11:25 pm
“One of the greatest minds South african
rugby has ever produced.”
Who, Duiwel?
April 10th, 2006 at 11:26 pm
Ag ou Kandas… Ek sou ook ‘emotionally drained’ wees met so ‘n moerse berig om te skryf. Good reading though.
April 10th, 2006 at 11:28 pm
P.S. Kandas, I haven’t even read your piece yet!!!!
Apologies. Couldn’t resist interacting with Duiwel.
I’ve been Duiwel-starved for months.
Will respond to your epiphany in the morrow. It looks very promising.
April 10th, 2006 at 11:34 pm
Pienaar.
Ja broer or no,quick as lightning that boy.
he has the mark of eagles about him.
April 11th, 2006 at 12:01 am
Duiwel, many people don’t agree.
I do.
But
The Silent Assassin was even better.
I’ll raise you a Reuben
for your Francois
April 11th, 2006 at 7:59 am
Kandas
I agree with you on the fact that we need to put the correct structures in place. I would advocate that this must already start at school level.
At the moment most of the schools coaches are some teacher that happens to have a interest in rugby if you are lucky or someone who gets stuck with the job of coaching rugby. Most of these guys have very little formal training and are totally out of touch with the modern demands of rugby. Yes sure there are some schools with great coaches but most of them are rather average.
What I would propose is setting up a academy for trainers or incorporate some of the existing ones like the Tygerberg College’s sport management course and the Stellenbosh one. Get a proper coaching manual set up and teach the coaches how to coach, develop skills and other things that are neccesary to be a good player.
Then send them out to schools. Have 2 or 3 schools share a coach. Have them teach our youngsters how to pass both ways, how to sidestep, how to tackle etc. Teach them the basics while they are still young and before they develop the bad habits. Teach every player how to tackle and ‘fetch’ like Richie McCaw. Teach them how to pass like Stephan Larkham.
If this was put into place we would sit with a crop of players who, with their natural ability will also have the basic skills instilled into them at a very young age.
Have this done from Primary school and right through to High School and club level. Have a rule put into place that you can only coach if you have your IRB level 1 or 2 certificate. To many of our players are coached by “Oomies” who were a half decent player in his day but with no expierience or training in coaching.
My 2 c
Cheers
April 11th, 2006 at 9:05 am
An article that is just too long to read I am afraid. Again I beseech thee for a summary.
The single factoid that stood out was the contracting of 50 ‘elite’ players by each of the 6 franchises making 300 in total. You must be stark raving bonkers! There are not anything near 300 elite players in the republic. We need to half that amount to 150.
Any answer to SA rugby that ignores the need to compete with the European club teams fails the game. SA’s future is in the North.
April 11th, 2006 at 9:23 am
Great Article Kandas
I will reread it some more and will include and support in my drivelings- but it is a departure point for the Long March!
St Mike
Ever heard of Building something- out of the shambles that you are facing?
Go read why the new towns was needed in England
Go and read the the Republic of the Orange Free State Constitution- circa about the same time
Then tell me some more about your superiour schooling- maybe at Eton- but surely not for all in the inner cities
The my dearest tiffen consuming Rugby Support- only then, dare you speak to us on this site again from your exalted position- if you still feel that you indeed occupy that level of elevation
Enjoy the Earl Grey at eleven
April 11th, 2006 at 10:08 am
Kandas,
very interesting read. However, one thing that I cannot work out in your re-structure is the number of games that the Bok players would end up playing per year? it is probably likely that the answer lies in you artcle but it is too early in the morning for me to work the maths out.
StM,
Ok, I will rise to the bait just for the second time on this site and probably the last time. Opposed to what other people on this site might think, I find your comments condescending, inflammatory, patronising, demeaning and not to mention idiotic.
I find it difficult to comprehend how one individual can spend so much time harping on about the short comings of South African rugby and its players to the extent that you do. How you can call yourself a supporter of South African rugby and call it your 2nd favourite team indicates more than a little confusion on your part.
Extremely occasionally one of your posts will contain an interesting point but, unfortunately you tend to surround it with the most innate amount of drivel possible. Ruggaworld has done an excellent job to prevent this site from becoming another keo’esque place of gutter diatribe. Yet you persist in every single posting I have seen in adding some sort of insult to the supporters of South African rugby.
In a way I pity you because of the reflections your posting highlight of what type of person you are.
As I said at the beginning, this is the 2nd and last time I will rise to the bait and will continue as i have been during the last few weeks, ignoring the majority of your posts. Enjoy your life.
April 11th, 2006 at 10:10 am
To the rest of the Rugrats,
Sorry about that little rant but I had to get it off my chest. But I cannot handle self inflated egoists.
Let the yellow valiant ride.
April 11th, 2006 at 10:12 am
All damned good stuff this. Personally I’d like to see a return to the proper names of the big 6. Don’t call them franchises but rather structure them as unions in their own right. Wherever possible give them their traditional names and livery. I would also lump SWD with Boland and WP, not EP and Border – logistically this makes more sense. You can also create more sub-unions where this makes sense (bring back Stellaland, EFS, NEC, etc).
So you would have:
WP – WP, Boland, SWD
EP – EP, Border, NEC
Free State & Central – FS, GW, NC, NFS, EFS
KZN – KZN, N KZN
Gauteng – GL, Valke, V Triangle
Northerns – BB, Mpum, NW, Stella, F North
Methos
Your idea is very sound. These same coaches should also be sent to the clubs, to also perform a role of school/club liaison. Craven Week to become an U18 tournament and you have to play for a club to go to Craven Week (ie if a kid leaves school at 16 he can still play Craven Week; also by making it U18 it serves as a good prep for the following year’s U19 WC and stops schools from keeping kids back a year to play 1st XV).
April 11th, 2006 at 10:40 am
cheers kandas very cool.
i would even venture as far that on this topic we obviously get some creative juices flowing from all readers.
more importantly, it is not sitting back and bitching about everything that is wrong, it is actually trying to find a solution.
on the strucuters, i like it, the VC is useless.
there is one area i am not quite happy with though. although i support promotion relegation i am not in favour of the so-called play-off mathces each year. make it simple, the lowest team drops, the 6th franchise moves up.
April 11th, 2006 at 10:42 am
and my spelling and typing sucks this morning
April 11th, 2006 at 11:05 am
Ollie I am gobsmacked by that post.
I was not aware I said anything inflammatory? Play the ball and the man my dear chap. I think you are over-reacting a tad to a valid contribution.
April 11th, 2006 at 11:32 am
There are a number of problems with SA rugby administration, they illustrate the same problems rooted in our businesses and government, namely corruption. Nothing short of ripping the whole thing apart and burning out the rot is going to fix that. With regards to our players and coaches, I think the problems are a pretty easy fix, communication.
I truly don’t think the players and the coaches understand who is responsible for what with regards of this new era of professionalism. It’s simple ball skills that let the players down, and it highlights what is bad in this system. Coaches expect players to be responsible for their own ball skills maintenance, players think it’s something that should be coached. It is completely understandable in the modern era, but someone needs to ensure that there is always clarity over these blurry lines where coaches and players meet.
Week after week we harp on about the basics and doing the simple stuff correctly, week after week we over complicate basic lines. Our most successful coaches have all shared one similar trait, they kept things simple and coached the basics of the game.
Lastly and most importantly, we seriously need to lose the air of superiority we feel we are entitled to as South Africans with regards to Rugby, a little humility and an open mind can teach a lot and we really need to shut up and start listening.
April 11th, 2006 at 12:00 pm
WEll said, DummyKick.
April 11th, 2006 at 12:05 pm
Welcome dummy kick
Thanks for the contribution.
Valid points. Everyone made valid points here.
Kandas
Give me a day or two to think and present my solution to this issue too.
I don’t necessarily agree with everything you said.
I do agree with a few things though.
First is that the structures controlling SA rugby are a joke. All politics and little boy secret societies. Chuck the lot I say. I dream for the day when a Cyrill Ramaphosa, a Tokyo Sexwale, Johan Rupert or Adrian Gore style person runs the show and gets to elect his own team of managers.
And CRACKS the whip on these politicians and game players.
Second:
dummykick is right about our over elaborating coaches who need to be canned forever.
In any other nation, a coach like Frans Ludeke and Kobus Van Der Merwe would NOT have lasted the season till now. After the Cjiefs lost three of their first matches their coach had his head on the block!!!!
The Reds replaced their coach because of what happened LAST YEAR!!!!!
Yes coaching continuity is a good thing as Jake White has proved. But when the coach is an awful coach, no amount of coaching is going to change that.
The Kiwis never do things by the book that our coaching handbook on the goispel according to Jake White and media accolytes will have us believe.
They do chop and change coaches successfully (giving the lie to that nonsense)
They do chop and change teams successfully (giving lie to the ‘consistency’ god ghosting in our rugby)
They do have players who play 40+ games per year and lose almost nothing (Giving lie to the ‘player burnout’ legend)
They STILL are the BEST team in thge world.
April 11th, 2006 at 12:47 pm
****
dummykick is right about our over elaborating coaches who need to be canned forever.
In any other nation, a coach like Frans Ludeke and Kobus Van Der Merwe would NOT have lasted the season till now. After the Cjiefs lost three of their first matches their coach had his head on the block!!!!
The Reds replaced their coach because of what happened LAST YEAR!!!!!
Yes coaching continuity is a good thing as Jake White has proved. But when the coach is an awful coach, no amount of coaching is going to change that.
The Kiwis never do things by the book that our coaching handbook on the goispel according to Jake White and media accolytes will have us believe.
They do chop and change coaches successfully (giving the lie to that nonsense)
They do chop and change teams successfully (giving lie to the ‘consistency’ god ghosting in our rugby)
They do have players who play 40+ games per year and lose almost nothing (Giving lie to the ‘player burnout’ legend)
They STILL are the BEST team in thge world.
****
Hear Hear DavidS
I sommer copy & paste that again!!!!
April 11th, 2006 at 3:53 pm
Heheheheh
Thanks OO
April 11th, 2006 at 4:01 pm
StMichel
Jy bly maar net n groot doos.
April 11th, 2006 at 4:04 pm
DavidS
I just can’t seem to stop nodding my head…..
April 11th, 2006 at 4:13 pm
Howzit castro
Bitter time to be a Jozi supporter huh?
Even those Sundowns upstarts are still in with a shout to get the Premiership…
April 12th, 2006 at 3:47 pm
Of course this whole article is predicated on the view that it is worth saving?
April 14th, 2006 at 3:20 pm
Time for radical change
From SA Rugby View
It is time for radical change. South African rugby is in danger of losing appeal. No one likes watching a losing team. And if results speak for themselves, then we have to be brutally honest and say that is what our teams have become – losers.
It may be unkind to refer to our Boks this way, given their global ranking and their Tri-Nations results, but. Let’s keep this to the facts – they lost games they should have won last year, and it takes a brave man to bet on consistent winning performances against all comers.
But the Super Rugby is where our house of cards is creaking. Administrators have ignored results for years, protecting their interests on the back of loyal paying support and TV revenues. As angry supporters turn their backs on struggling teams, and advertisers ponder the wisdom of spending their millions of sponsorship rands, one of two outcomes is likely – rugby becomes / remains a minority sport or a radical change is sparked.
Before we consider how such a change might be sparked, let’s diagnose the problem. There is a lot of diagnosing going on.
Dan Retief believes our club rugby needs an overhaul.
Joel Stransky and Naas Botha believe our coaching needs a new structure.
Nico le Roux, a South African ex-pat who has been living in New Zealand for the past five years where he has been involved as a skills coach and technical advisor to Waikato and North Harbour (NPC), the Chiefs (Super 12), the Junior All Blacks and All Blacks, believes that our players skills and reading of the game are below par, and our gameplans have been slow to evolve.
Kandas believes that our competition structure needs to change.
PissAnt believes that the answer lies in commercialising the unions and better player pay management.
Rasputin believes our players need to be stronger and better conditioned.
Gavin Rich believes our players need to think a little harder and Dan Retief wondered if our players had the brains to do that.
And there are a vitriolic bunch of forum commentators such as Tackler that scream quotas in their bitter voices.
Our rugby has many other issues, such as violence and poor facilities, but if we have only limited resources and need to pull some big levers to change things, which ones should we choose?
Competition structure
I believe we’re stuck with the bloated Super 14. I think the way of dealing with this might be indirect. Let’s limit the Currie Cup A-section to 6 teams playing one another on a round robin basis, with a final and semi-finals, bringing in the Spears. The top 5 teams go through to the Super 14 the following year. This would ensure that there are no protracted arguments about promotion relegation as the promoted team and relegated team would have played one another during the round-robin.
The B-section is a bit of a headache and is where the scope for radical action lies. Can we afford a B-section provincial set-up and to strengthen our club rugby? I doubt it. Of course, not having a B-team for the A-section teams makes succession planning and talent spotting difficult.
Perhaps the way to go is to have the provincial B teams playing in a localised club competition during the Super 14. This allows the exposure of clubs to senior level rugby and should see the provincial B team emerge as the winner. But the kicker is that the winner goes into a national championships taking place during the Currie Cup and held as curtain raisers to the big 6. This does offer a carrot to clubs to perform.
Perhaps the top two B-teams / clubs could represent us in a global competition.
I am not sure we can afford a major intercontinental club championships. I also think our clubs need to bridge a divide between age-group rugby and provincial rugby – not themselves be elevated to super status.
I think the solution to this one is complex, but I do believe it involves holding our Super 14 teams accountable for performance (through relegation), making our Currie Cup more focused and raising the visibility of our clubs.
Restructure the pay pool
Again difficult to do, because unions will argue that how they structure their pay pool is up to them. SA Rugby might argue that they deserve a say due to the allocations they dole out.
I think the essence of a solution is to treat the pay pool on a portfolio basis. A portion should be allocated to contracted Springboks, a portion to contracted provincial players, a portion for promising players, and a portion for performance.
That last portion is the big deal. Making it meaningful means impacting the other portions. There are only two ways of doing this – reduce the number of contracted players or reduce the amount you pay them. I would argue for the former. We have to make contracts lucrative to keep our players in South Africa. Now imagine if a player can become wealthy through being contracted and competition winnings. More to play for for everyone.
I understand SA Rugby operates on a similar basis to this at the moment, but I doubt the performance based portion is big enough. And, vice versa, I think too many players are too secure in their contracts.
A sidenote to this is that I think a portion of the Springbok budget must include money to buy Springboks out of Super 14 and provincial games. This together with the right to do so, would give our coach more say about the amount of rugby our players play.
Situate a national academy at the promoted Super 14 province
This should be for the entire year (Super 14 and Currie Cup) and players in the national academy should be available to the promoted team in both competitions.
Other unions should be required to name a squad of a certain size for their season and players outside of this should be eligible to train with the academy (I believe our Super 12 teams operate like this – hence the use of Grant Esterhuisen and Willem Stolz by the Stormers).
Should a more sophisticated draft system be used, I believe it might target 1 top player from each province. Targeting development players will not work – it removes the incentive for a province to invest in development – a complaint we are already hearing.
Jake White should direct the academy (perhaps not being available full time).
Coaching
Jake White does not want a director of rugby for South Africa. Given his success, he has perhaps earned the right to call some shots.
Clearly though, SA skills and perhaps coaching are not up to scratch. Perhaps something can be done to make provincial coaches accountable to White for players skill levels and fitness. The most practical way to doe this is to give White a say on their pay review meetings. If coaches were aware that White had a say in their bonus, they might be more cooperative.
This cannot be one way traffic. White must be required to give coaches monthly feedback and scoring during the year.
Governance
The most difficult yet crucial issue of all.
What we have does not work. It is biased to the interests of the majority by number and mitigates against the success of the best outcomes.
I believe a modified corporate board structure might work. Rather than partisan regional representatives, perhaps members can be elected representing constituencies. Those that spring to mind are: the players, the sponsors, the coaches and the referees. It is difficult to see how fans / supporters can elect a representative, but perhaps someone, somewhere is aware of somewhere, perhaps in soccer, that this is done. But sponsors should have supporter’s interests in mind.
What is clear is that our regional representation does not work and results in sub-optimal decisions.
Conclusion
There are many issues in SA Rugby. Radicalism must be managed with caution. But this may be the last season the watching fans and sponsors maintain their support.
The chance of radical change is limited given South Africa’s rugby governance system. The chances of a criminal voting for the death penalty are slight.
Will SA Rugby see the potential of an implosion made of deserting fans and sponsors? I am sure it is coming.
April 16th, 2006 at 6:15 pm
Comment left by Tony McKeever earlier today on The Spears issue laughing stock of SA Rugby thread:
Boertjie
Koos
Unfortunately what you guys invariably see or hear is an effect or process, that has taken a while to incubate over time.
It is a common extremely bad trait in rugby to allow issues to float, be deferred, which then ultimately compound themselves into a situation or circumstance that is more complex.
For example, and I am not throwing dates in the face of anyone, save for the fact, that I remind all, that a deal was struck in June last year and 8 commitments were made by SA Rugby.
Use this as a score card by fast forwarding to now 10 months later and see what I mean.
In the meantime, the day to day issues of building and establishing a Super 14 team, doing catch-up, with training, coaching, analysis, planning for 3 years, sponsor solicitation, sponsor fulfilment, continues unabated, but only now with the toxic spin put out by SA Rugby, which contaminates all the good that the Spears bring to South African rugby.
Quite apart from the positive attributes that The Spears bring to South African rugby in a breeze of freshness and excitement and youthful exhuberance, it has spotlighted, with startling effect, the gross incompetence and ineptness within the ranks of SA Rugby’s management.
These are people charged with running the game of rugby, for the benefit of the fans and the teams. Well they are ruining the game of rugby for these stalwart supporters and the dismal, bland and appalling performance is compounded by these so called managers.
I will name Kyle Nel, Commercial Manager and Christo Ferreira, GM Legal Affairs, who are the joint authors of the Franchise Participation Agreement, as having put together a quite outstanding definitive legal agreement in a 100+ page document, that binds the 6 Franchises to SA Rugby, so that SA Rugby’s properties (trade marks and Springboks) are protected and especially, those of SANZAR, Newscorp & Vodacom, the tripartite sponsors and organisers of the Super 14 Series.
For the rest, I can assure you that SA Rugby’s management has not yet even read this document and understood the terms of this agreement through to 2009.
The most unfortunate problem with SA Rugby is that it has become a reactive organisation, limping from one crisis to the next every few weeks rather than a proactive one, which is what the Franchise Participation Agreement set out to do.
Why then must the Spears always be compromised, disadvantaged and continuously harrassed, especially financially.
When has there ever been a declaration of positive support for the Spears from SA Rugby?
The answer quite simply is: NONE.
This is not a cry for help, but the Spears, have become a mirror for the ills within SA Rugby and they do not like what they see.
Comment by Tony — April 16, 2006 @ 10:54 am
April 16th, 2006 at 10:05 pm
Kandas, what absolute rubbish.
Do you think the IRB are interested in including SA’s provinces in some development tournament? They only just woke up to Argentina’s problems and they need help far more than SA. They have no interest in our domestic problems. Quite frankly SA has more money for rugby than is good for their health.
Saru’s income is being wasted on mediocre players. More money should be invested in coaching (well said Methos)
Our leading players are underpaid. We should have fewer professionals but pay them better.
Spears idea is a joke. It will never be successful. There is not enough disposable income in those areas to support professional rugby. On top of this, there is and will always be corruption. There is a good amateur base and this should be supported by Saru.
Professional rugby should only be played in Bloem, Cape Town, Jhb, Pta and Durban. 5 teams with reasonable economic environment to support such franshises. There should be 30 senior contracted players and approx. 30 junior contracted players.
Unchanged budgets supporting more streamlined squads would mean higher salaries. An average annual contract in SA is R425k approx. It should be R650k with the top players getting R1m – R1,2m.
Selection for Bok squad should mean an additional R300k minimum exc. match payments.
Our leading players like Schalk and Victor should get approx. R2,5m per year.
A coach should have to choose 30 contracted players for Super 14 and 5 team home and away Currie Cup. If there are injuries, he can draw on his youngsters who will be involved in an u21 tournament or club rugby.
14 provinces is healthy providing only 5 are professional. All the other provinces should just focus on development through good amateur structures.
April 16th, 2006 at 10:40 pm
What!!!???
Are you a players’ agent?
Or, even worse, a player?
Have you ever thought about this?
Or, no, let me guess, you work for Hennie Le Roux. Or you are Hennie Le Roux.
As if our players are not the most arrogant in the World already!
Talking about rubbish.
April 16th, 2006 at 10:42 pm
Actually, it is with old fashioned ideologies like yours that Rugby will never grow globally.
April 16th, 2006 at 10:44 pm
And looking at your comment on the Habana thread, I must be right.
April 16th, 2006 at 11:01 pm
The problem is most definitely not the amount of players.
The problem is the totally incapable, inefficient administrations and coaching staff! Real pre-historic dinosaurs!
April 16th, 2006 at 11:42 pm
Geez
Got me all uptight now.
Next thing you’ll tell me that two of the most professional leagues in the world, the Enlish Premier Football League (with 20 teams) and the English Premier Rugby Union League (with 12 teams) with automatic promotion/relegation clauses, are not successful!
Fact is our so-called administrators do not know how to secure sponsorships and how to generate income! But, then, how can they secue sponsors if they do not know how to treat sponsors? And our so-called coaching staff still believe treating players like schoolkids! But then, sorry, they don’t know anything different because that’s where they all come from – schools. School teachers and school coaches.
In these circumstances I don’t blame them if they feel threatened by real businessmen.
What I do blame them for is the fact that they do not stand back for the better of the game!
Oops, but then they lose their cosy salaries and have to become salesmen.
It’s time for the real stakeholders, the fans, to step in.
A better game for all!
And also jerry, I didn’t say the IRB must step in – I said we must take the lead and get the IRB involved. Big difference.
April 17th, 2006 at 2:45 pm
Kandas,
I agree that us bloggers have acertain power but I also believe this power is best utitlized within the confines of the PC.
For this reason I am with OO. We need to start a club from scratch that can in 3 years time challenge a Super14 franchise and beat them. Only then will we side-step the status quo and be able to negotiate for change.
So lets use this and other blogs to raise money and start a club with some super coaches and brilliant young players from SA and abroad.
April 17th, 2006 at 4:09 pm
This is only the second post today.
That has to be some kind of record????????
April 17th, 2006 at 4:20 pm
READ THE SIGNS!
A Police Officer was waiting along the side of a highway waiting to catch speeding drivers. There weren’t as many violators this day as usual.
The Police Officer sees an old car puttering along at 22 KPH.
He thinks to himself, “This driver is just as dangerous as a speeder!”
So he turns on his lights and pulls the driver over. Approaching the car, he notices that there are five elderly ladies – two in the front seat and three in the back – wide eyed and white as ghosts.
The driver, obviously confused, says to him, “Officer, I don’t understand, I was doing exactly the speed limit! What seems to be the problem?”
“Ma’am,” the officer replies, “you weren’t speeding, but you should know that driving slower than the speed limit can also be a danger to other drivers.”
“Slower than the speed limit” No sir, I was doing the speed limit ..exactly .. twenty-two kilometers an hour!” the old woman says a bit proudly pointing to the sign beside the road.
The Police Officer, trying to contain a chuckle, explains to her that “22″ was the highway number, not the speed limit.
A bit embarrassed, the woman grinned and thanked the officer for pointing out her error.
“But before I let you go, Ma’am. I have to ask .. is everyone in this car OK? These women seem awfully shaken and they haven’t muttered a single peep this whole time,” the officer asks with concern.
“Oh, they’ll be all right in a minute, officer. We just got off Highway 115.”
April 17th, 2006 at 4:38 pm
Jerry just read your post.
I fully understand what got KAndas so worked up. Where the hell did you come up with those figures.
If you say there is to much money floating around in SA rugby being wasted on mediocre players. Why can that not be used to assist with development in Spears country. If needed. The Spears have already expressed that they have the ability to get the required financial backing they need.
April 17th, 2006 at 6:42 pm
KSA Shark, I do think Saru should spend some money on developing the Eastern Cape talent (there is plenty of it). I just don’t think any money should be given to anyone in Eastern Cape. Send them development management, coaches, conditioners, nutritionists, supplements, gym equipment, just don’t send them money.
Professional rugby will not work in Eastern Cape. The Spears say they can get the required financial backing ‘they need’. ‘They need’ for what? The Cats have already got the financial backing and about 8 Springboks and they can not make it happen. They are situated in the financial stronghold of the country. The Spears is a political nightmare and the sooner Saru dumps the idea of professional rugby in Eastern Cape, the better.
Where did I come up with my figures? My salaries are very accurate. If you feel they are incorrect then why not suggest some salaries yourself.
Kandas, I appreciate your passion but your heart is speaking and not your head. There are 12 teams in English rugby, well 13 really if you include Quins. The 13 teams have approximately 150 non-English players making up the squads as well as benefactors at each club who financially back each club. (very similar in soccer) Combined with RFU grants, the rugby structure works, I don’t disagree. However this model is very different to SA rugby. Saru income plus sponsorship can only support 5 professional teams max. The professional teams can be very strong with perhaps one or two world class foreigners in each squad but there should be no professional rugby in the other provinces.
If you take the best ’small province’ – Griquas and you asked them to play against the worst English team – Leeds, Griquas would most probably lose 8 out of 10. This illustrates that the small provinces should not be playing professional rugby. Sure, let their amateur structures have access to all the best support Saru can offer but realistically we should only have 150-165 professional players in SA.
Arrogance has nothing to with payment.
You say our coaches all come from schools? Not many of the current coaches ever coached at school. I agree some of the SA coaches are poor but we also have some excellent coaches in SA. If you read my earlier post, I suggested Saru should improve coaching in SA. It is not on the same level as other countries. This will cost a lot and the money that is supporting a poor professional structure should rather be spent on improving the current amateur structure. I said this in my earlier post.
Your comment that our administrators can not procure sponsorship is inaccurate. The leading provinces currently have some highly lucrative sponsorships.
Why would the IRB get involved in SA Rugby?
Lastly, you make a flippant comment about my Habana posting. Why? What is wrong with the posting? It just spells out the fact that he was never officially approached by Brumbies.
What has this got to do with growing the game globally?
By the way, a faily intelligent person called Nick Mallett says one of the problems in SA Rugby is the number of professional players so perhpas you might want to re-think your statement ‘The problem is most definitely not the amount of players’.
If you reply by making some smart remark about Mallett then perhaps you are part of the problem.
Andre Hough is a perfect example of someone who is simply not good enough to play professional rugby. He is a good club player.
April 17th, 2006 at 7:03 pm
Jerry
I will answer as i read along.
So the CAts have eight boks and they cannot make it happen. How many do the Sharks. Who the hell says you have to have boks in your team to make it happen!!!!!!
April 17th, 2006 at 7:08 pm
Jerry.
My comment on your figures was directed at what you suggest the player should be earning not on the current figures.
Why on earth should SARU pay a leading player ZAR2,500,000-00 a year nad then he still has all his sponsorship deals as additional income.
Are you suggesting a player should become rich enough in his 10-12 year career to never have to work again??
April 17th, 2006 at 8:31 pm
If he becomes one of the top 10 players in world rugby then he should earn approx. R2,5m per yr. This is very good money in terms of SA Rugby. This would include his match fees e.g.
Burger – R1,2m (WP/Stormers), R800,000 (Boks) and then up to another R500k in match fees if he plays in 10 tests (R50k per test).
I do think if a player players for 10 years and is a leading player then he should retire as a wealthy man in SA terms.
If the same excellence was achieved in business, the individual would earn far more in the 10 years but still be looking forward to many more benefits in older age.
In the same vein, I feel that the excellence required to be one of the top 150 professional players will result in many journeymen or under-performing Super 14 players losing their livelihood. If the competition for employment was more cut-throat, it would result in a more professional approach. The rewards have to equal the performance.
My answer to your other question is ‘Nobody says you have to have Boks in a Super 14 team to be successful’. Name me one team in Super rugby history that has run out on the field without any internationals. You must be dreaming if you think it is possible to compete at Super 14 level without world class players.