Goodbye Lions, Hello Kings?

February 22, 2012
Posted by

It can be goodbye Lions, hello Kings come 2013 as a political decision has been endorsed to allow only ONE TEAM per PROVINCE.

Lappe Laubscher reporting exclusively for RuggaWorld.com asks the question of exactly who is uninformed and who is trying to fool who?
PLEASE NOTE: The heading an intro is not the making of the author but was done in the editing process.

Newspaper stories in South Africa suggests that the South Africa Rugby Union is in a highly embarrassing situation after the board promised the Southern Kings franchise of Port Elizabeth that they will play in the Super 15 competition next year.

SANZAR is adamant that there is no place for a sixth South African franchise in the competition and SARU thus far has kept mum on the issue.

But facts tell a different story. A story of the behind the scenes influence of politics and big money.

Let us look at these facts.

  • Last month there was a major indaba between the Minister of Sport, the department of sport and the various stakeholders in South African sport at the historic Wanderers Club in Johannesburg.  At this indaba a document on the future of South African sport was presented by the department of sport was endorsed by the minister and the various delegates.The document is now the official document on the policy of the South African government on sport.In the document, among various other issues, it is stated that as from 2013 no sport will be allowed to enter more than one team per province in any competion. At the moment the South African teams in the Super 15 are Bulls (Pretoria and Gauteng), Lions (Johannesburg and Gauteng), Cheetahs (Bloemfontein and the Free State), Stormers (Cape Town and Western Cape) and lastly Sharks (Durban and KwaZulu-Natal).It is obvious from this document that the Gauteng province will only be allowed to enter one team and will have to choose between the Bulls and the Lions or combine these two teams.
  • The Southern Kings` home is Port Elizabeth and the Eastern Cape.
  • In the last week of January 2012 the Gumede group brought an application for the liquidation of the Golden Lions Rugby Union. There has been no decision on this application.  This group was a previous co-sponsor of the GLRU.  The group claimed that the Lions owe them more than R90 million.  Thus far Mr Kevin de Klerk, the president of the GLRU has denied this claim.  In his denial he was unclear whether he only denies the quantum of the claim or whether he denies the claim as such.
  • Sail (Pty) Limited, a group in the Rupert stable with a major interest in various sport and leisure activities in South Africa,  has an interest in most of the South African rugby franchises with the exception of the Lions.  Unconfirmed reports indicate that this group also has an interest in the Southern Kings.  The Rupert-group also has a direct interest in Supersport, the company who has the South African broadcast rights for the Super 15 and in Media 24, South Africa’s largest media group. The face of Sail is the highly respected former Springbok captain, Morne du Plessis.
  • Lastly it is also a known fact that rugby has come in for a lot of pressure from the South African government for their seemingly unwillingness to provide opportunities for black players to perform at top level.  The new CEO of SARU, Jurie Roux, has committed himself to rectify this position.

Allmost from the sidelines, the Tshwane Sports Council has already announced on its website that the colours for teams representing the region (that includes Pretoria and the Bulls) will in future play in be black, green and gold. This will mean the end of the famous blue jerseys that the Bulls used to play in.

In the meantime, the Bulls announced in a seemingly unrelated move that they will in future play in a jersey with diagonal  lines in various shades of pink across the chest in their games away from home.  According to a press release, that simply doesn’t make sense, this is to “scare” their opponents.

With all these facts as a background it only makes political sense to bring the Super Kings to the party as soon as possible.  The only stumbling block at the moment is sponsorship deals in which the players and some of the franchises are involved.

It seems as if SARU is deliberately delaying the announcement of who the Super Kings will replace till the end of the 2012 Super 15 competition to accommodate present sponsorships.

How all this will affect smaller unions like Boland and Border remains to be seen.

In the meantime Cycling SA has almost quietly announced that the sport has last weekend adopted a new constitution to bring it in line with the new government policy.

RW: Laubscher is a retired sports journalist and specialises as an historian in the fields of sport and the Anglo Boer War. He is resident in Pretoria.

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to MySpace

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

151 Comments

  1. avatar Boertjie says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 6:21 pm

    OK, so Saru pretending to get permission
    for a 6th SA franchise was all pretence?
    They must have known about Mbalula’s
    decision?

  2. avatar Boertjie says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 6:24 pm

    What we don’t know yet is exactly how
    teams like Boland will be affected.

    Will Boland be a subunion of WP and
    allowed to play Currie Cup as a
    separate entity?

    Ditto Lions: Will they still be an entity
    in Currie Cup?

    What will happen to Craven Week teams?

    Several provinces have e.g. more than one
    netball or hockey team.
    Will they be forced to amalgamate?

  3. avatar Kat says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 6:26 pm

    If this ends up happening it will not only harm rugby in Joburg but in Pretoria as well. Take away the Blue Bulls brand and the whole house comes down. The new team will then represent what most rugby supporters in that area loathes. Rugby as a whole will suffer. If SARU bends over for this then it is time for a break-away league. High time for that anyway.

  4. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 6:27 pm

    Reply to Boertjie @ 6:24 pm:

    Remember you have CC first and premier division (2 different comps), as it stands now only Griquas are in real trouble not being allowed to play in the premier division.

  5. avatar Boertjie says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 6:35 pm

    Reply to Morné @ 6:27 pm:

    Yes, with promotion/relegation.
    Griquas is safe – only team in Northwest Cape province.

  6. avatar Boertjie says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 6:37 pm

    There’s a whole lot of smoke and mirrors
    involved here.

  7. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 6:42 pm

    The other question is what about other sports?

    Like soccer (2 or more major clubs in Gauteng alone) or even cricket (Titans & Lions franchises)?

  8. avatar Kat says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 6:46 pm

    Morné, die politici kan planne maak en vergaderings hou en dokumente tik maar ander realiteite gaan bepalend wees.

  9. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 6:49 pm

    Reply to Kat @ 6:46 pm:

    Ja Kat soos Boer se, hier is moer baie smoke en mirrors wat hier plaasvind. Ek kan nie sien dat government policy die situasie kan bepaal nie. Nie net so nie.

  10. avatar Boertjie says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 6:54 pm

    •Lastly it is also a known fact that rugby has come in for a lot of pressure from the South African government for their seemingly unwillingness to provide opportunities for black players to perform at top level.
    ———-
    This does not make sense at all.
    Having LESS teams per province DIMINISHES
    the exposure for all players, including
    blacks.
    Also for the Kings to milk from the available
    talent?
    Cricket e.g. INCREASED the number of teams
    for exactly this reason.

  11. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 7:03 pm

    From where I sit this is what we know:

    The Indaba took place and this policy was endorsed, otherwise Cycling SA would not have adopted it.

    Just how government plans to enforce this on major sporting codes like rugby, cricket and soccer is a mystery and simply impossible.

  12. avatar Kat says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 7:11 pm

    Surely population numbers per province must play a role. How can Gauteng have one team when it represents so many people and the economic heart of SA? Again shows that politicians and logic dont mix.

  13. avatar Boertjie says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 7:12 pm

    Reply to Morné @ 7:03 pm:

    This policy was adopted in the first place
    to make room for the Kings.
    It is possible for the ANC to turn round and
    say it just applies to EXTERNAL competitions
    like the S15.
    Yet Cycling SA has accepted and changed their
    constitution – allowing only one team per province?

    Can one see the hand of Gupta behind this?
    The sudden exposure of the debt situation of
    the Lions in detail by City Press?
    They get Ellispark, sell it to Kaizer Chiefs
    (owned by a multimillionaire) and recoup the
    millions owed them by the Lions?

  14. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 7:16 pm

    Reply to Kat @ 7:11 pm:

    Kat you are referring to logic buddy – in rugby (and government) that does not really apply…

    Reply to Boertjie @ 7:12 pm:

    Government has the capacity, power (and reputation) to change their tune any bloody which way they like. Nothing will surprise me.

    What bothers me is this Indaba took place last month, surely this is not news to SA Rugby, Rupert (SAIL), Vodacom, SuperSport etc.?

  15. avatar IAAS says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 7:18 pm

    The rationale of all this does not make sense at all.

    Which province is the most populated in the country? It’s obvious that Gauteng deserves 2 teams.

    The decision of the Kings to break away from the Sharks – and to take the cash – is coming back to bite them on the bum.

    If anyone in SARU had any balls they would go and tell Cheeky that the decision to admit the Kings was premature. And they can play in an expanded S16 from 2016, pending approval by Sanzar and acceptance by Newscorp.

    But no-one in SARU has the guts to look Cheeky in the eye and tell him the bad news.

    This is going to end in tears.

  16. avatar DavidS says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 7:19 pm

    Ja I agree with Kat

    Never going to happen…

    Like the unified legal practice

    Like killing labour broking

    Like doing away with medical aids

    Like the toll roads.

    The problems with these snoobabs is that they twenty years down the road forget that lots of their buddies are now in large corporations and businesses that get affected when they bow to the Cosatu pressure.

    If they take this stupid line it will mean that TUT, Tuks and UJ will not be able to participate in the Varsity Cup.

    The fact that all the sports are being ruled by professionalism means that money will win out.

    In the end this may… stress MAY end up applying to amateurs and school level sides whilst the likes of the Khozas and Motaungs will lay down the law…

    After all in PSL

    Sundowns
    Chiefs
    Pirates
    Swallows
    Supersport
    Tembisa Classic

    all hail from Joburg

    Does this mean that the Valke will have to move to Polokwane?

    And the Griffons?

    One unthoughtful remark though

    Morne

    Griquas is in the Northern Cape Province… the only provincial team from there… hence they’d be 100% okay…

    More trouble would be for the Queens, Eaglets and Bullocks (i.e. Bulldogs, SWD and Eagles) who all play out of the Eastern Cape.

    Griffons similarly would be in scheisse.

    Leopards and Pumas would be okay.

    This does not hold tred with the realities of the spread of talent.

    In any case…

    The heading is unRuggaworld sensationalist kak. It belongs in Sondag

    The guvvermunts are saying ONE team per province. This means the end for the Lions AND Bulls AND Valke in Gauteng and the creation of the Gauteng Gangsters playing in Green, Gold and “Bleck”

    I suppose Kaizer Chiefs and Pirates and Swallows and Sundowns and Classic and the like all get replaced with the Gauteng Australopithecines all playing with blue balls…

    The Guvvermunts also tried to dictate a “trensformation chattah” to rugby and cricket in 2006 which got middle fingered and forgotten like a teenage girl in a drive in…

  17. avatar Aldo says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 7:21 pm

    So then in other words, the Bulls and lions become a Bullion? And I will hold them to their promise and arrange protests should the orlando pirates and kaizer chiefs not merge. Hahahahahaha, fkn idiots, there goes your biggest money maker in safa, the soweto derby. Fools, go screw yourselves. Should this happen, methinks we should really get together and start a breakaway union. And allow the fatcat politicians to play around with saru and the puppets.

    This article has really f***ed up my day.

  18. avatar Aldo says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 7:29 pm

    DAvid it is too ridiculous to even try and rationalise. I hope this is just another screwey hope by government. Shyte I support supersport united, not any other sa soccer team. Ditto rugby, stay with the bulls. Same with titans.

    They can keep the gauteng gangsters, rather go paint theeir own arses green and black and whatever other colour. What about contracted players now losing jobs?

    Do they realise what a sundowns player gets paid, shit we pay peanuts in rugby, now suddenly merge 4 of the biggest clubs in the country. Rugby alone is not getting screwed over by this, this screws over safa as well.

  19. avatar DavidS says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 7:35 pm

    Allegation 1

    The document is now the official document on the policy of the South African government on sport.In the document, among various other issues, it is stated that as from 2013 no sport will be allowed to enter more than one team per province in any competion.

    Crap. In order to become policy the document needs to be published in the government gazette for comments by all stakeholders, there needs to be stakeholder engagement in public debates and then approved as subordinate legislation and signed into law. None of this has taken place.

    Allegation 2

    In the last week of January 2012 the Gumede group brought an application for the liquidation of the Golden Lions Rugby Union. There has been no decision on this application. * This group was a previous co-sponsor of the GLRU**. The group claimed that the Lions owe them more than R90 million. Thus far Mr Kevin de Klerk, the president of the GLRU has denied this claim. In his denial he was unclear whether he only denies the quantum of the claim or whether he denies the claim as such.

    * Exactly it is sub judice so how can there be a decision. What does this have to do with anything? I’ll answer… fuck all.

    ** It was NEVER a co-sponsor of GLRU… just a proposed equity partner so this is not a fact but a blatant unashamed lie.

    ** Another lie. De Klerk has always disputed the quantum of the claim and not denied that GLRU owes any money.

    Lie numbers three and four

    Sail (Pty) Limited, a group in the Rupert stable with a major interest in various sport and leisure activities in South Africa, has an interest in most of the South African rugby franchises with the exception of the Lions. Unconfirmed reports indicate that this group also has an interest in the Southern Kings.

    Sail had an interest (25,1% shareholding in the professional arms)in the Spears, Eagles, Bulldogs and Elephants.

    They divested that to SARU in 2006 when the Spears got killed and liquidated.

    At this stage the Kings is wholly owned (as shareholders) by SARU… Lappe… maybe get access to CIPRO before calling “Unsubstantiated reports” under the heading of “facts”.

    Irrelevant crap #2

    Lastly it is also a known fact that rugby has come in for a lot of pressure from the South African government for their seemingly unwillingness to provide opportunities for black players to perform at top level. The new CEO of SARU, Jurie Roux, has committed himself to rectify this position.

    What the fuck does this have to do with anything?

    Sorry this is poor journalism…

  20. avatar Timeo says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 7:35 pm

    Relax. Admin made a booboo.

    The article was meant for 1st of April.

  21. avatar Aldo says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 7:36 pm

    Kom morne, dis nou waar jy se april fool. A bit early, but Ill allow it. Shyte cos this is the type of crap that could lead to suicide and wife beatings. Put an end to the violence before it starts and say it is a joke.

  22. avatar Boertjie says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 7:40 pm

    Reply to DavidS @ 7:19 pm:

    Like moving the Springbok?
    (Saru: “Ja, Baas, Goed, Baas.”)

    You are free to change the heading
    which I think throws light on the
    most important question around in
    rugby circles.

    So why did no sports journo pick
    up on this?
    Because they are shit.
    Too lazy to attend meetings or
    read their e-mails.
    Or perhaps they were instructed
    (paid?) to let it lie?

  23. avatar Aldo says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 7:41 pm

    One can spot the lawyer, you keep calm and reply calmly even when you are mad, I lost all ability to make a well thought argument loooong before the end of the argument. All I could think is, groot bom op sport ministrie, f** hulle die ****, groot bom, d***, groot bom. You get the drift. Thank you for showing the obvious faults david.

  24. avatar Aldo says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 7:44 pm

    Oom boer, hierdie is n grooot gemors wat wag om te gebeur, ek huil sommer en voel skielik Baie negatief oor die fkn land.

  25. avatar Aldo says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 7:45 pm

    Waar is die whiskey, ek kort n dop en iron maiden op die radio.

  26. avatar Boertjie says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 7:47 pm

    In case anybody missed this part:

    At this indaba a document on the future of South African sport was presented by the department of sport was endorsed by the minister and the various delegates. The document is now the official document on the policy of the South African government on sport.

    Just ask for the minutes, anybody.

  27. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 7:53 pm

    Reply to Aldo @ 7:36 pm:

    Niks van daai nie tjom sorry. Die Indaba het plaasgevind (dis nie n geheim nie) en as jy kyk na die reaksie van ten minste een van die nasionale ligaam van een sport, lyk dit of so resolusie wel bespreek en aanvaar is.

    In watter kapasiteit dit plaasgevind het is enigiemand se guess.

  28. avatar CSB says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:04 pm

    This has to be the biggest load of Bullshit I have read in a very long time ….

    Dear lord what the hell is going on here …are they really implying what I think they the are ?!?!

    So in order to accomadate the bloody Kings all sports have to suffer …

    Lastly is this a reliable source …

    Quite frankly the whole lot can go and F%$£ themselves !!!

  29. avatar CSB says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:05 pm

    And I can assure you soccer won’t be affected.

  30. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:06 pm

    Reply to Boertjie @ 7:47 pm:

    Well that’s just it isn’t it?

    The Indaba took place, Cycling SA adopting this policy suggests this issue was definitely tabled (at least) so to get the full context of all this would be to get confirmation from the Ministry of Sport? (Minutes)

    No doubt this is one huge bloody mess and it’s no surprise to me government is sticking their fingers into this issue.

    The Kings afterall has always been a politically motivated issue before all else.

    It is time to ask some questions.

  31. avatar Aldo says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:06 pm

    Nee man morne, nie tjom nie, dit klink vulger.

    As for the indaba, it sucks! They can suck my gay neighbours you know what, cos I just need to google pipe bomb and the indaba is forgotten.

  32. avatar Boertjie says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:08 pm

    Reply to CSB @ 8:04 pm:

    Yes, reliable. Been in the game himself
    for many years.
    Check Post#26.
    We can debate the implications and the
    absurdities, but this decision was taken
    and endorsed.

  33. avatar Aldo says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:09 pm

    Morne the Kings isnt a political issue. All money, pety politics was just a cheap disguise.

  34. avatar Aldo says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:11 pm

    So what about we start an alternate leaugue? Who do I speak to? Im serious, I cannot support this shit.

  35. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:12 pm

    Reply to Aldo @ 8:09 pm:

    It’s a f-up of note, that’s what it is.

  36. avatar CSB says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:18 pm

    Reply to Boertjie @ 8:08 pm:

    Thanks Boertjie.

    I’ve had enough of this too and fro meddling especially in rugby …they must maar go ahead and screw it all up for all I care.

    Its no suprise cyclying seems to be the first to buy into this ..after all its NOT a team sport with a mass cult following and any cyclist cares rocks for which province they ride for ..they just wanna ride.

    Ive been involved in the development of black canoeist here in Gauteng and we are represented by clubs.

    Its amazing how one can see how transformation takes place when one actually starts from the bottom ..we sit now with some very talented canoists …even a top 10 at this years Duzi…

    Why are the feckers a decade on still meddling !!!

    I can’t think of a single country that acts this way when it comes to sport. It makes me sick !

  37. avatar brommer says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:19 pm

    Reply to DavidS:

    You must live in a different country. Since when must Government (ANC) policy be published in the Government Gazette? The sports Indaba was exactly what you asked for, consultation with all stakeholders. Two documents were circulated before to all stakeholders before the Indaba. It is a total different story when policy becomes law. That is the position in this country. You want to crucify the journalist and get totally carried away. Shame!

  38. avatar Aldo says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:19 pm

    Ja just about. Gelukkig het ek laasnag die laaste drank gedrink in die huis so ek kan nie dronk raak en dronk verdriet kry nie, dis n depressing storie.

  39. avatar CSB says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:21 pm

    Reply to Aldo @ 8:11 pm:

    Im with you there …but what chance does jo public have to start a ‘revolution’ and break away …

  40. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:24 pm

    Reply to Aldo @ 8:11 pm:

    I simply CANNOT see government enforcing this. They will have litigation cases coming out of their bloody ears from parties that stand to lose millions commercially not only locally but internationally (SANZAR).

    I mean just imagine this joke becomes reality (killing off of Lions and basically Bulls) how would Murdoch’s Newscorp react for suddenly being given a far more inferior product (to sell to TV audiences) in the middle of a contract (which lasts until 2015?).

    They would surely sue the shit out of SANZAR and effectively SA Rugby?

    What does concern me is that this is a perfect excuse for SA Rugby to say; ‘Well we are forced by government to do this so there we go’.

  41. avatar CSB says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:26 pm

    Perhaps this is a blessing in disguise from the journo ..a whistle blower if you like ..now that its out there it should force Saru to come out and make their intentions clear …

    Oh well I’ll enjoy the Lions last season and then I’m done with sport in this country !

  42. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:29 pm

    Reply to CSB @ 8:26 pm:

    Good point CSB (and glad to see you back btw), this issue has been ignored by SA rugby (stating publicly their plan and intentions) and might just force some real answers.

  43. avatar CSB says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:30 pm

    PA I do take issue with the heading of the thread …

    Its not just goodbye Lions now is it … ?

  44. avatar CSB says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:33 pm

    Its goodbye Chiefs , Pirates etc etc …

    Reply to Morné @ 8:29 pm:

    Cheers PA its kinda good to be back …I like the frankness at this site and also I learn alot from you and your followers ;-)

    Still maintain you should run SA Rugby …keen ?

  45. avatar CSB says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:34 pm

    Reply to Morné @ 8:29 pm:

    Real answers from SARU …aaaai that mayan calender may just have some truth to it … :-)

  46. avatar Boertjie says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:34 pm

    Reply to CSB @ 8:26 pm:

    Yes, it will be interesting to see if the
    main media pick up on this and what the
    reaction is.

    Our story is meant to open the issue and
    see what pops out.

    The only concrete fact is this decision was
    endorsed: What it implies or don’t imply is
    for the well-paid journos to investigate.

  47. avatar Boertjie says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:38 pm

    Reply to CSB @ 8:30 pm:

    As far as the Super15 this is the way
    I interpretted it.
    One team for Gauteng means one has to
    merge or disappear – leaving room to
    fullfil the promise to the Kings.

  48. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:41 pm

    Reply to Aldo @ 8:06 pm:

    Sorry Aldo, my Blou(pienk) bul broer!

    Onthou net een ding.

    Rugby survived two world wars and Apartheid, it will survive this too.

    The game is bigger than the clowns.

  49. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:43 pm

    Reply to CSB @ 8:30 pm:

    My apologies, perhaps a question mark at the end is appropriate since we are asking the question?

    Reply to CSB @ 8:33 pm:

    Ja boet, I trust the fans of the game more than those who run it, and I am planning a big party for December this year to celebrate the end of the world – keen? :)

  50. avatar CSB says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:44 pm

    Reply to Boertjie @ 8:34 pm: Reply to Boertjie @ 8:38 pm:

    Ruggaworld putting the troop of tigers amongst the pigeons …

    Look timing is not ideal but its better that this is out now … we are gonna be the laughing stock amongst our rugby peers .

    The thought of having to travel to Loftus depresses me 8)

  51. avatar CSB says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:46 pm

    Reply to Morné @ 8:41 pm:

    Amen ! very well said.

  52. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:46 pm

    Reply to CSB @ 8:33 pm:

    And as for running this circus…

    How much have you been drinking? :lol:

  53. avatar DavidS says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:49 pm

    Reply to Boertjie @ 7:47 pm:

    I just did a full search of SRSA website

    This document and alleged meeting is not recorded (and they have records of policy documents up to 7 February 2012) is A FUCKING LIE.

    I am sorry

    Whoever Lappe is. he is not telling the truth.

    The last national sports indaba was on 11 April last year.

    The last “national sports policy white paper (Draft #20) was published for comments closing in April this year in November last year.

    http://www.srsa.gov.za/

    http://www.srsa.gov.za/MediaLib/Home/DocumentLibrary/Nasional%20Sport%20and%20Recretion%20Plan%20-%20Draft%2020.pdf

    Differentiates between domestic and international competitions

    Nov 2011 doc says this on national comps ONLY

    Strategic objective 6: To develop talented athletes by providing them with
    opportunities to participate and excel in domestic competitions.
    Strong domestic competition is important for developing talented young athletes
    aspiring to be selected for national teams, as well as for providing competition
    opportunities for international athletes outside their international calendars.
    Performance indicators:
    • Number of domestic competitions hosted.
    • Number of athletes participating in domestic competitions.

    On international comps says…

    Regular international competition is, along with coaching, probably the most important
    ingredient contributing to international sporting success. NFs should plan their national
    programme in synchrony with their international competition.
    Performance indicators:
    • Number of medals won at identified international competitions.
    • Improved aggregated international ranking

    http://www.srsa.gov.za/MediaLib/Home/DocumentLibrary/Base%20document%20for%20Indaba.pdf

    Makes ZERO mention of provincial participation referring only to NF bodies meaning national code bodies.

    http://www.srsa.gov.za/MediaLib/Home/DocumentLibrary/16%20White%20Paper%20Sept%202010.pdf

    Refers to international competitions and says ONLY that SASCOC must arrange more participation.

    http://www.srsa.gov.za/MediaLib/Home/DocumentLibrary/schoolsportpolicy-draft.pdf

    Draft School sports policy DOES make provision that ONLY one team allowed per province… BUT has not been approved as legislation yet. Submission still open till March 2012.

    Cabinet’s final white paper approved and submitted for comments in July 2011

    Pg. 35

    National Federations must host annual national championships. The focus of the junior championships must also be on talent identification and that of the senior championships to prepare athletes for international competitions.

    And on Sub elite sports (kak like cycling or hockey for instance)

    Role of Provincial Federations

    The development of sport at the provincial level is very important because this level is closest to the community and because this is where the champions of the future will be found.

    At a provincial level, the focus will be on the development of sport at the sub-elite level. At this level responsibility must also be taken for community sport and recreation. This gives provinces the responsibility of fostering sport at the sub-elite level, concentrating on the development and training of provincial teams in the interests of providing the highest possible level of competition domestically.

    Elite sports is defined as:

    Elite sport
    Elite sport is highly organised and competitive. It represents the top level of the sports development continuum. For the purposes of this White Paper it is used interchangeably with “high performance sport” and “a winning nation”.

    Professional rugby is thusly identified as an elite sports in the paper along with cricket and soccer.

    SO EK GAAN DIT NOU MAAR PRONTUIT Sê

    gEAGTE MENEER LAPPE LAUBSCHER… EK NOEM JOU ‘N KAKPRATER

    Al die getuienis dui daarop dat geen so vergadering of Indaba plaasgevind het nie en die finale witskrif maak geen voorsiening vir enige van die beweringe wat jy aanvoer nie.

  54. avatar CSB says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:50 pm

    Reply to Morné @ 8:46 pm:

    You got me there ..hence the anger lol

    I’m 5 Hansa’s strong and well into my house red …tough week u know :wink:

    Is it that obvious …

  55. avatar DavidS says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:53 pm

    Reply to brommer @ 8:19 pm:

    Read my post above… and suck it till it spurts and then come back when you want to talk sense…

    ps. the policy is published as part of the National Sports and Recreation Act 1998 and needs to be signed off by the minister as subordinate legislation before it becomes binding… learn some law before talking kak to me.

  56. avatar Tacitus says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 8:58 pm

    Morne

    Sorry to say this, but this Lappies Labuschagne has produced an extremely poor article for you.

    It tries to take a wide range of unrelated items of recent interest and pull them together into some massive conspiracy theory.

    You know who else does this type of stuff? Fox Mulder of THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE fame.

    I mean, this guy’s theory falls apart like so much candyfloss if you just interrogate it with a modicum of common sense.

    Only one sports team allowed per province, in any competition? OK, I guess then the Boland, Border, SWD and Falcons might as well all close their doors, as Currie Cup participation will no longer be possible for them. They all fall in the same province as some of the bigger uniones.

    Furthermore, this supposed edict means that all smaller towns and cities will be robbed of any representative sports teams, in whatever sport they were previously participating, as only one team per province inevitably means that only the 9 big towns in SA – one per Province – will be allowed to participate.

    Anyone can see the bogus argument here. This Lappies took something totally out of context to try and spin it into a Kings conspiracy.

    So long Wits United and whatever other soccer team shares Gauteng with Kaizer Chiefs.

    I mean come on. This article is utter nonsense.

    Next the Bulls pink jersey is somehow brought into the conspiracy, along with the Gauteng Sports Council’s idea for an ANC colour jersey for all sports in Gauteng.

    Well, sorry to burst your bubble, but firstly, that is an ongoing action from long before the latest Kings debacle erupted.

    And secondly and more importantly, Barend van Graan himself stated on the Bulls website that that body only has authority over amateur sport in the province. Professional sport does not fall under their jurisdiction.

    Lastly, the pink jersey was a concept suggested by the Bulls new kit sponsors, Puma, to try and broaden their market. It has nothing to do with changing the Bulls colours – as it is only an away jersey – and it is no different from the white jerseys that were used in previous years.

    To try and spin this into the Kings conspiracy is a laughable and utterly desperate act by your contributing “journalist” to try and build his conspiracy without any facts behind it.

    The pink jersey was in the headlines, so let’s include it in our conspiracy. It makes it more believable, right.

    A two headed calf was born in Kazakstan. That’s further proof that the Illuminati are conspiring with aliens to take over the world. As is the Asian tsunami, and the eruption of the Iceland volcano.

    Ja whetever. Pull the other one.

    I can only repeat. Poor article. Not worth the bandwidth it required to submit it to your site.

  57. avatar CSB says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 9:01 pm

    Reply to DavidS @ 8:53 pm:

    I see you still making friends and influenzing people after all these years :wink:

    Glad to have you in the Lions corner.

  58. avatar CSB says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 9:09 pm

    It does seem to me that every man and his dog that is a journalist in this country somehow has the inside track on behind the scenes of SA Rugby and sports in general …each with their own agendas.

  59. avatar DavidS says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 9:12 pm

    Reply to Tacitus @ 8:58 pm:

    We should seriously invest in a LIKE button on RW because I’d like your comment

    Reply to CSB @ 9:01 pm:

    Hollander… I have aded MMA to my repetoire of tricks… so nou wanneer daar ‘n tyd kom om op te hou praat dan bliksem ek NOU EERS hard…

    Back in SA or still in coffee shop land?

  60. avatar DavidS says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 9:13 pm

    I have done the honourable and integrity filled thing which appears to be lacking in some journalistic circles in sport and I have smsed GLRU and SARU media people to read and give me comment… something which should have happened before this was published by ethical standards.

  61. avatar DavidS says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 9:16 pm

    As I age I grow less and less immune to kak and more and more intolerant of it…

  62. avatar Kat says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 9:26 pm

    Ek is nou al super gatvol om te lees van die Leeus wat gaan val. ‘n Mens sal sweer die NIA sit agter dié ding. Elke vonkprop wil nou iets skryf oor die Leeus se ondergang. Gaan kyk hoe gesond is die Leeus se strukture en kom dan met ‘n goeie argument waarom hulle moét bly. Is daar ‘n journo daar buite met guts wat teen die stroom kan en wil swem? Het die Leeus nie al genoeg bewyse gelewer om te kan glo positiewe uitslae gaan meer gereeld gesien word nie? Wie de f*k sit agter hierdie smeer geveg?

  63. avatar Kat says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 9:33 pm

    Almal sê die Bulle moet bly en die Leeus moet waai. Hoeveel kompetisies het die Bulle en Leeus elk gewen in 2011? Gaan kyk ‘n bietjie. Die Leeus was 2011 se mees suksesvolste unie en dit sonder geld. Dink net wat hulle met geld sal doen. Maar dis seker waarvoor almal bang is. Feit is tussen die Leeus en Bulle het hulle 2011 besit.

  64. avatar CSB says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 9:33 pm

    Reply to DavidS @ 9:12 pm:

    U planning any gigs at the dome soon … ;-)

    Left Holland 3 years ago to return to the mother land …

    Awaiting the next big war to return to my coffeeshop …at the mo Syria looks a certainty …

  65. avatar Kat says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 9:35 pm

    Seker nie lekker om teen twee Gauteng spanne pak te kry nie. So kom ons maak hulle een dan kry ons net een pakslae.

  66. avatar CSB says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 9:42 pm

    Reply to Kat @ 9:26 pm:

    Ek stem saam ..daar is beslis n agenda teen die leeuws .dit kom nou al n lang tyd ..en ek ook is baie gatvol !!!

    Die unie het ge bloei om reg te kom en nou wil almal ons sien val. vir wat ?

    imho it would not suprise me in the least if Gumede and his Anc buddies have got together and plotted this media onslaught on the Lions.

    Its been from all angles and frankly I don’t get it ..WTF has the Lions union done other than sort its house out.

    Sure we’ve been kak but show me a Union that hasn’t been through this …

  67. avatar CSB says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 9:44 pm

    Reply to Kat @ 9:35 pm:

    :lol:

    Ding is nou dat ons ook pak kan gee is almal vol stories …

  68. avatar Kat says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 9:58 pm

    Where the article doesn’t gel – giving it away – is where the whole of Gauteng will be forced to be represented by a team playing in the colours of Tshwane. Why should Joburg be represented by a team in Tshwane City colours? Logic not so lekker.

  69. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:00 pm

    Okay just quickly as I am bloody tired and will catch up with this tomorrow. (Kid is sick so my time is limited).

    Quick google search (love that shit) revealed the following:

    * From what I can tell this ‘policy’ as stated in the article refers to a unanimous endorsed decision by SASCOC (on the 18th of Feb).

    * SASCOC stands for “SOUTH AFRICAN SPORTS CONFEDERATION AND OLYMPIC COMMITTEE” – their website here: http://www.sascoc.co.za/ – Basically they are the guys that decides on how national colours are awarded, the emblems, what they are etc. I am sure you will get the basic shit from their site.

    * SA Cycling confirms adopting this decision on their website here: http://www.cyclingsa.com/Article.aspx?uid=704

    * Part of this release states: All provinces have until the end of December 2012 to amalgamate their sub structures into single provincial structures.

    The constitution as endorsed by SASCOC is currently being adopted by ALL the sporting codes, not just cycling. Our constitution will be effective immediately.

    * Obvious question is whether SA Rugby falls under the SASCOC jurisdiction which I cannot answer definitively but yes, they are a member as found here: http://www.sascoc.co.za/the-organisation/membership-information/ (Membership information doc).

    If anything, it makes for interesting interpretation…

  70. avatar Kat says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:03 pm

    The current Lions trashing must be one of the biggest smear campaigns ever in our rugby. Rugby is clearly up against forces stronger than what was experienced in the past. Gumede? I wonder.

  71. avatar Kat says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:06 pm

    Is SASCock not where Keo is involved?

  72. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:07 pm

    Reply to Tacitus @ 8:58 pm:

    Good post Tac, and again you confuse my opinion(s) on this (Kings) matter as supporting them (or their inclusion) blindly.

    As for the article, we are a blog, we will post opinions of journalists, retired journalists (as with this article) and plain old nobodies (like me and you) because everybody has a right to an opinion (if you can take the criticism as was evident in this piece).

    It is a platform to raise issues, debate issues and having everyone have a say in a sort of civilized manner.

    In fact, you will find that comments are actually more valued than articles over here which in itself is different from the normal shit.

    Stick around, we love the fact people don’t swallow every single fact or opinion that is printed as an article. And we don’t take offense.

  73. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:07 pm

    Reply to Kat @ 10:06 pm:

    I believe he is their media manager of sorts?

  74. avatar Kat says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:08 pm

    Ahhhhhh.

  75. avatar Kat says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:11 pm

    So Poison Dwarf is pushing the SASCock agenda. Helping it on a bit.

  76. avatar Boertjie says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:12 pm

    APOLOGY
    I’ve had word from the author complaining
    about the heading and intro.
    That was my making and not his.
    His intro to the story was the second
    paragraph as it now stands.
    I apologise unconditionally for doing
    something with good intentions.
    IMO the Lions is the team that can be
    mostly affected if this decision about
    one team per province is carried out
    - hence the heading and intro.
    You may all hold it against me – not
    against the author.

    MESSAGE TO DAVIDS
    You have made rude remarks to a dear
    friend of mine under a pseudonym –
    that is the way of a coward.
    You may criticise a writer without
    using foul language.
    You complain about “sensationalism”
    that is not RuggaWorlds style.
    Neither is begin rude our style, but
    you have AGAIN overstepped the line.

    The one thing that sets RW apart from the
    other blogs – Keo in particular – is mutual
    respect and good manners. I will tend to
    keep it that way and ask for your support.

    You have made sure that he will NEVER
    contribute again. And he is not the
    first blogger you have chased away.

  77. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:14 pm

    Reply to DavidS @ 9:13 pm:

    Really? Like the Lions took the time to respond to any other previous opinions we gave them an opportunity to answer?

    What was stated above and my post in in 69 is in the public domain, Lappe just took the opportunity to state his opinion on information that is already out there.

    I thought that is what a blog was about?

  78. avatar Kat says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:17 pm

    Thanks for that Boertjie. Sensitive topic.

  79. avatar Kat says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:20 pm

    Morné, understand that Lions fans ars very upset and angry at what feels like a smear campaign. Expect strong reactions when a heading reads like this one did. Ons strip ons moere net daar.

  80. avatar Kat says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:23 pm

    Wees nou die een journo wat die Leeus se saak opneem. Wat tans aangaan is belaglik en onregverdig.

  81. avatar CSB says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:25 pm

    Reply to Boertjie @ 10:12 pm:

    Thanx for that Boertjie ..glad the heading has been cleared up :-)

    Seriously though ..I’m a believer where there is smoke there is fire and I’m rather sure there is alot of truth to this …I guess time will tell ..but nothing suprises me anymore.

  82. avatar Kat says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:26 pm

    Kevin kan nie elke ou antwoord wat sy en die unie se reaksie wil hê nie. Hy sal tans net daarmee besig wees. Wat Kevin reeds gesê het staan steeds. Niks het verander nie.

  83. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:27 pm

    Reply to Kat @ 10:20 pm:

    No doubt, and for my money it is a smear campaign against rugby full stop!

    I said this many times – today it’s the Lions, tomorrow its WP or the Stormers, hell if this came to pass in 2001 or 2002 it would have been the Bulls! Our game we all love is being run to the bloody gutter by clowns. This is not about the Lions specifically or any other union, it is about what is being done to our game.

    I think we all know this but given how attached we are to our own teams and the history that goes with it (specifically in SA and the provincial rivalries that exist and define us) I can fully understand how supporters will get extremely offensive and protective of what matters to them.

  84. avatar CSB says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:30 pm

    Reply to Kat @ 10:20 pm:

    I have to agree …I’ve lost count of how many times a Lions article has been accompanied by slander or negativity in the last few months …and as a blind loyal supporter I tend to take offence especially now when things seem to be back on track after such a long time.

    We’re a old and very proud union ! like most …

  85. avatar Kat says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:31 pm

    If SASCOC is on this track and Mark Keohane is involved with them (and close to the Kings and Solomens in particular) then at least this article made a few things clear for me.

  86. avatar Kat says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:34 pm

    Use the Kings debacle to drive the SASCOC agenda and help the Kings in the process (and make money off them later).

  87. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:37 pm

    Reply to CSB @ 10:30 pm: Reply to Kat @ 10:31 pm:

    In my opinion, all this amounts to are little chunks being chewed away in the scheme of much bigger things being planned down the road.

    What is important here is that issues, and in fact all issues and factors surrounding issues are raised so when actual concrete decisions are made you know where it all comes from.

  88. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:39 pm

    Reply to Kat @ 10:34 pm:

    This specific story shows me that SA Rugby has an easy out should the shit in fact hit the fan. Remove all responsibility from themselves and cite government policy.

  89. avatar Kat says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:39 pm

    Agree Morné, and we appreciate this blog for that. We must scratch until the mess that is SA rugby is opened up for all to see.

  90. avatar CSB says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:41 pm

    Reply to Morné @ 10:37 pm:

    Agreed.

  91. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:42 pm

    Reply to Kat @ 10:39 pm:

    S-truce Bob!

    On a different (but similar note) I read with amazement how Tobie Titus yesterday (or the day before) cited a media conspiracy of sorts against WP Rugby and its admin (him and his tjoms) for all the negative shit that has come from that union in the last couple of months!!!

    Can you believe that kak?

    I suppose it is the media that forced Rassie to resign…

  92. avatar Kat says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:47 pm

    SA Rugby … The circus with the sad clowns. Like a Russian circus where Vodka must make the clown look happy and funny.

  93. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:47 pm

    Folks I am out, have a good evening, and again don’t stress Lions boys – there is no way in hell they can follow through with this.

  94. avatar Boertjie says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:48 pm

    Reply to Kat @ 10:20 pm:

    I have been on this blog pleading the
    case of the Lions, its history and
    supporters.
    The very last thing on my mind was a
    smear campaing against them, but raising
    a decision that was made and is bound to
    affect them – and all sporting bodies for
    that matter.

  95. avatar Kat says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:48 pm

    Nag Almal. Lekker doeks.

  96. avatar Kat says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:51 pm

    Boertjie, vrede. Ek ken jou darem al. Niks teen jou nie. Ons Leeus voel maar net disnis geslaan op die oomblik.

  97. avatar DavidS says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 10:54 pm

    Reply to CSB @ 9:33 pm:

    2 March EFC Africa 12

    I have two guys from my gym fighting.

    One a title defence and one a title eliminator.

    The eliminator is my BJJ trainer…

    At Carnival City though.

  98. avatar DavidS says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 11:07 pm

    Morne

    Sasscoc

    NGO

    It’s a Sec 21 company with a board and directors.

    Hardly “the government”

    http://www.sascoc.co.za/the-organisation/history/

    As opposed to:

    Last month there was a major indaba between the Minister of Sport, the department of sport and the various stakeholders in South African sport at the historic Wanderers Club in Johannesburg… .The document is now the official document on the policy of the South African government on sport.

    Uhm

    SASCOCK Constitution opening line…

    In terms of the Memorandum of Association, the main object is to promote and develop high performance sport in the Republic of South Africa as well as and to act as the controlling body for the preparation and delivery of Team South Africa at all multi-sport international games including but not limited to the Olympics, Paralympics, Commonwealth Games, World Games and All Africa Games

    Therefore not applicable to professional single sport tournaments…

    Dear all

    Thanks for playing

  99. avatar DavidS says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 11:07 pm

    Ergo, as per their Constitution seeing as Sevens is played at the Commonwealth Games and is in line for Olympic entry…

    SARU would be a member.

    BUT their policies and regulations would only apply to multisport tournaments and that would limit their ability to dictate to the sporting codes in their particular leagues and tournaments.

    Pg 2

    http://www.sascoc.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/sascoc_amended_constitution_july2008.pdf

  100. avatar Timeo says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 11:11 pm

    Reply to Morné @ 10:00 pm:

    Couple of good links there.

    In essence the GLRU and BBRU will have to merge all their amateur structures by the end of this year. Even if they claim Super Rugby is professional, it is going to very difficult to justify one union owning 2 distinct pro teams in the same competition.

    The soccer clubs have never been part of a provincial representative structure so it will not apply to them in anyway.

    If SARU does not want this they will have to completely disconnect the 5 SR teams from the Unions or leave Sascoc.
    I don’t think they want to do either.

    A merger merger to form a new gauteng team with a new identity will lose them a lot of fans (ie. money). At this point the least costly way to get to one Gauteng team is like I’ve said a few times before. The clubs that owns the GLRU to dissolve their union and affiliate with the BBRU.

    “Goodbye Lions” may not be so far of the mark after all.

  101. avatar Boertjie says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 11:24 pm

    Reply to Timeo @ 11:11 pm:

    I can’t see how the new merged union/franchise
    can accommodate all the current contracted players.
    Neither can the Kings accommodate them, and the
    smaller unions are hanging on by their nails.

    Then again none of the current political decisions
    are properly thought through.

  102. avatar DavidS says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 11:26 pm

    BOERTJIE

    Timeo says it is clown post for 1 April

    Aldo says it’s an April Fools joke

    Tacticus says it is written by a conspiracy theorist

    CSB calls it bullshit

    Kat says the writer is a vonkprop

    I take his piece, analyse it, do the research and call the writer out to be untruthful AFTER the journo suggests I don’t know the law (which I practiced for close on 15 years) and makes a disparaging “ag shame” comment and now I’m a bad guy… the only one….

    In the words of Jeremy “Pitbull” Smith

    Cute…. very cute…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ql6pqIQO0Dg

    As I show above… the jurisdiction of this organization applies only to multi sports tournaments.

    SRSA has not had a meeting to endorse this document and it has not been published as official policy in terms of subordinate legislation.

    It is a policy document of a controlling body aimed at ensuring sporting excellence in multisport tournaments only.

    Endorsement by Cycling SA means solely that in the next multisport games Cycling SA will select participants as representatives of various provinces and not regions like “North Gauteng”

    There was no indaba by the sports ministry

    There was no official adoption of the alleged policy by government

    The policy document has not been published as subordinate legislation (e.g. like this one below)
    http://www.ccma.org.za/UploadedMedia/CCMA%20Arbitration%20Guidelines%20effective%201%20January%202012.pdf

    The organization that DID publish a policy document was one that regulates ONLY the participation of “Team SA” in MULTISPORT events.

    I stand by what I said.

    The writer is plainly wrong. And some of the “facts” are assumptions (detailed above). And some others are pure opinion whilst even others are conjecture. Some are just plain untrue.

    Anyway this is not directed at you but the writer.

    If he takes offence at vigorous analysis and attack on the way he has written his piece I do not accept responbsibility for that. As an experienced journo he wrote the piece and he must be accountable for what he wrote as well as rigorous interrogation if he is found out.

    It is the way I am and have always been.

  103. avatar DavidS says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 11:32 pm

    Reply to Timeo @ 11:11 pm:

    Nope

    It refers ONLY to MULTISPORT tournaments.

    The only rugby participation in MULTISPORT TOURNAMENTS is Sevens in Olympic (maybe) and Commonwealth.

    So say SASCCOC held a tournament to select a representative Team SA Sevens side as well as a netball, cycling, athletics and whatever… the players invited from SARU would come from the different CC teams BUT they would be called say Riaan Viljoen from Northern Cape or Michael Killian from Gauteng or De Wet Barry from Eastern Cape.

    This does not affect single discipline tournaments at all and 15′s is not included.

  104. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 11:39 pm

    Reply to DavidS @ 11:07 pm:

    The main business of SASCOC is to promote and develop high performance sport as defined in the National Sport and Recreation Amendment Acto, no 18 of 2007… etc etc etc

    High performance sport is defined BUT NOT LIMITED TO world championship and other international multi-sport events… etc etc etc.

    SASCOC memorandum of association:

    SASCOC area of jurisdiction:

    SASCOC shall have jurisdiction in the Republic and over its members, officials and athletes through SASCOC membership.

    Subordinate status of members:

    Members shall be subordinate to SASCOC and must comply with the Constitution of SASCOC and any directives issued by SASCOC…

    Members’ constitutions and any rules or regulations formulated thereunder shall not be in conflict with the constitution of their international body, IOC Olympic Charter, and/or the Constitution of SASCOC.

    Lots of waffle, and now I am really out on this note – point being, SA Rugby is a member of SASCOC.

  105. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 11:43 pm

    Reply to DavidS @ 11:32 pm:

    So SASCOC can then tell SA Rugby; “Screw you, you are not going to the Olympics in 2016 with the Bok Sevens”

    ???

  106. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 11:45 pm

    IN addition, if I understand this and them being in charge of national emblems too, they can revoke the Springbok indefinitely?

  107. avatar Morné says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 11:50 pm

    Okay sorry but screw this, I will catch up with this tomorrow.

    Cheers all, stay safe.

  108. avatar Boertjie says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 11:57 pm

    Reply to DavidS @ 11:26 pm:

    AFTER the journo suggests I don’t know the law
    ——
    The journo is correct in his statement posted
    under Brommer. His post was a civil one.

    There was no official adoption of the alleged policy by government
    ——-
    This was never claimed.

    He does not take offence at critisism -
    he’s became used to it during his career.
    What he does take offence to is a personal
    and rude attack from a nameless person:
    SO EK GAAN DIT NOU MAAR PRONTUIT Sê
    gEAGTE MENEER LAPPE LAUBSCHER… EK NOEM JOU ‘N KAKPRATER

    You as a founding member IMO should set the example.
    You are not doing it. Continously.

  109. avatar Timeo says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 12:00 am

    Reply to DavidS @ 11:32 pm:

    I’m sure there are a number of loopholes that SARU may exploit if they want to. The thing is I think they are going to want to fight it.

    This is a way out of a dilemma for SARU. The Bulls and the Lions will end up standing alone.
    Once they accepted only one team in Gauteng there are 3 options. Kill the Bulls, kill the Lions or kill both.
    Bad timing for the Lions.

  110. avatar Timeo says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 12:03 am

    oh crap.

    The thing is I DO NOT think they are going to want to fight it.

  111. avatar Timeo says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 3:39 am

    Better loophole.

    If they go strictly by province then WP, Boland and SWD will have to merge. Also: EP and Border, Lions, Bulls and Valke and Cheetahs and Griffons. Sharks, Griquas, Pumas and Leopards to remain as is.

    That makes 8 unions and leaves Limpopo with nothing!
    Bulls to represents Limpopo with the pro-teams playing at Loftus for financial and practical reasons.

    Viola: SARU complies with Sascoc requirements and the Kings are still screwed.

  112. avatar Stormersboy says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 8:23 am

    Fantastical article, but lekker to see the juices flowing here!

    Keep those hits coming!

    :applause:

  113. avatar Kat says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 8:36 am

    My wish is for all this crap to force Pro Rugby into private hands. Let Pro Rugby be run like the NFL in the States where politicians support their favourite teams like everybody else and not have any power over those teams (except if/when allowed by the owner).

  114. avatar Kat says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 8:37 am

    Then Gov can do what govs do best just about everywhere … f everything up.

  115. avatar Kat says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 8:39 am

    Time for some of the team CEO’s and Presidents to visit a few club owners in Europe and Japan. Start a new international league where the best from the East tackles the best from teh West in a global final.

  116. avatar Kat says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 8:41 am

    Viva la revolucion!

  117. avatar Kat says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 8:43 am

    Let those who overplayed their hands deal with the consequences … amateur rugby run by Gov … while the big boys do what big boys do … play for the money.

  118. avatar Morné says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 8:44 am

    Baylion your account has been approved, there is a problem sending you the confirmation email – just log in using the login details you chose.

  119. avatar DavidS says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 8:50 am

    Reply to Morné @ 11:39 pm:

    No Morne

    Read the Constitution

    Paragraph 3 defines the main object of Sascoc

    The main object of SASCOC is to promoteand develop high performance sports and recreation in the Republic of South Africa as well as to act as the controlling body for the preparation and delivery of Team South Africa at all multi-sport international games, including but not limited to the Olympics, Commonwealth, World Games and All Africa Games.

    The purpose of the organization is to look after multi-sport disciplines.

    In Re the Bok at Sevens…

    Have you seen what the athletes wear at Olympics and Commonwealth Games etc… the King Protea. There is STILL no official policy decision that the King Protea is the Only emblem of South African sport, but it is contained in the draft white paper. When the Sevens Boks play Sevens at multi-sport tournaments they will have to wear what SASCOC tells them.

    The Paragraph 5 says

    All ancillary objects that are not in keeping with the main object are excluded from the ancillary main objects of SASCOC referred to in Sec 33 of the Act

    The Act is the sports and recreation act of 1998

    BUT

    It only goes up to Sec 18….

    Nevertheless it is clear that SACOC does NOT regulate sports except insofar as they have to participate in multi-disciplinary sports events.

    Jurisdiction is prescribed in Para 3 as

    SASCOC shall have jurisdiction in the Republic over its members, officials and athletes through SASCOC membership, wherever they may be at the time while engaging in SASCOC or Team South Africa activities

    This clearly excludes control over any sports activities that are not in multi-sports events.

  120. avatar Morné says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 8:54 am

    Reply to Timeo @ 3:39 am:

    Timeo I read through the SASCOC waffle a bit.

    A few things concern me.

    The body was formed under direction from the Minister of Sport in 2005 or something I believe. So it is a relatively new organisation.

    Reading through their memorandums and trying to understand what exactly they do you find that as David pointed out it seems their focus is on multi-level sport – stuff that competes at all African games, Olympics, Common Wealth Games etc. – but it is NOT LIMITED TO that alone – SA Rugby is a member or subordinate of this body.

    Second point of concern – they deal with all things that represents ‘Team SA’ – that includes the emblems and stuff (and what teams are named – think Springbok here). A huge part of their focus as their documents state is INTERNATIONAL competitions in which SA is represented…

    Now my concern with that is this:

    The Currie Cup, PSL, Cricket etc DO NOT compete INTERNATIONALLY as ‘franchises or clubs or unions’ – Rugby, in the form of Super Rugby and the franchises DO. (Competition controlled by SANZAR).

    So this “One team One Province” scenario might not apply to codes like soccer and the PSL as the questions were raised above – or even cricket (two Gauteng teams) but it might well apply to Super Rugby where only ONE FRANCHISE will be allowed per province…

  121. avatar The Year of the Cheetah says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 8:56 am

    Wie wat waar? Wie moet ek bliksem?

    :twisted:

    Load of bullocks but somehow very typical of kind of government thinking we have come to hate.

    ..and still..

    the kings hardly field black players….

    …and hardly win anything, ever.

  122. avatar Stormersboy says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 8:58 am

    Putting the Coc in SASCOC.

  123. avatar Kat says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 8:59 am

    Remember that the PSL teams are privately owned entities so SASCOC has no control over them. SASCOC has control over soccer as a national sport and what happens at the amateur levels. Private ownership changes the dynamics and that is what I want in rugby as well.

  124. avatar Morné says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 9:02 am

    Reply to DavidS @ 8:50 am:

    Again I point to the first two paragraphs of my post at 104 – it was copied and pasted from the SASCOC docs and the sports act itself.

    It mentions SASCOC role as to develop and promote ‘High Performance Sport’ (In accordance with the act)

    The ‘Act’ defines ‘High Performance Sport’ “defined BUT NOT LIMITED TO world championship and other international multi-sport events… etc etc etc.”

    What am I missing here? Seems to me the wording suggests they can indeed fart in a few faces?

    And of course as mentioned, SA Rugby is a member of this body.

  125. avatar Kat says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 9:04 am

    The day SASCock tries to tell Kaizer Motaung and Irvin Khoza what to do is the day SASCock disbands.

  126. avatar Kat says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 9:07 am

    Reply to Morné @ 9:02 am: They may want to fart in a few faces but know they will get shit coming their way from the other side. This is a typical Gov instituted thing where it gets wide ranging powers on paper – paper tigers – but when the real world legalities and money get involved their teeth turns to powder.

  127. avatar Morné says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 9:07 am

    Reply to Kat @ 8:59 am:

    Good point, SA Rugby owns at least 51% of all unions – SA Rugby as a national body falls under government policies and rules and all this kak.

  128. avatar Morné says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 9:09 am

    Reply to Kat @ 9:07 am:

    Exactly – death by meeting this is.

    WHole lot of dudes sat and waffled about policies, roadmaps and plans until half the delegation fell asleep and when it was asked if this was accepted and endorsed the half-asleep congregation simply said yes without thinking for a second what the implications of all this will be or mean.

  129. avatar Kat says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 9:13 am

    Why my mind/paradigm is shifting away from national sport (patriotism) to club loyalty. I’m getting to the point where I don’t care what happens to our national teams any more. Where politics dominate sport I turn my back and walk away. Let Cheeky and his cronies run and ruin whatever they want with the ANC’s blessing. The real sport will go elsewhere where it is allowed its freedom … and that is where fans will focus their attention. In soccer I support AC Milan. In Baseball I support the SF Giants. In NFL I support the 49′ers. With TV I can follow all these teams. The world is getting flatter and flatter … globalisation is a reality. Those narrow minded enough to want to nationalise everything can enjoy the fruits of the stupidity.

  130. avatar Kat says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 9:21 am

    It’s similar to these governments trying to stop torrents on behalf of their wealthy corporate “clients”. The more they hit the likes of Pirate Bay the harder the other side hits back. The Spring Uprisings in the Muslim world is another example. The season of despots is over. Someone should tell Cheeky.

  131. avatar Kat says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 9:23 am

    DE OPPRESSO LIBER!

  132. avatar Baylion says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 9:38 am

    As a matter of interest the National Sports Indaba was attended by the Minister, Deputy Minister, provincial MECs and representatives of SASCOC so it involved areas under SASCOC’s “control”.

    The only Adopted Resolution dealing with the matter of provincial boundaries in the Declaration of the National Sport and Recreation Indaba – 22 November 2011 dealt with Sports Federations and was:

    “11) Sports federations have to align their structures to correspond with the political boundaries as in the Constitution within two years.” i.e. end of 2013.

    They go on with resolutions regarding hubs and the expansion of hubs and clubs to service more communities, so rather than reducing the opportunity for sport participation the resolutions are aimed at expanding them.

    http://www.swimmersden.com/Correspondence%202011-2012/Declaration%20National%20Sport%20Indaba%20Resolutions.pdf

    Whether a provincial rugby union is a sports federation I’ll leave to the experts to answer but I don’t think so.

    As to Super Rugby, this is run by franchises which, while closely aligned to the unions, are separate legal entities running a professional non-provincial sport competition.

    On another point, it is a fallacy to say that the Lions and the Bulls represent the same province. The Lions (SR) represent three national provinces – parts of Gauteng, North West and Mpumalanga. The Bulls represent parts of Gauteng and Limpopo while the Cheetahs represent Free State and Northern Cape. For the Bulls and the Lions it would be simply a matter of one of them to base itself in one of its constituent provinces, i.e. the Lions based in Potch, to overcome the provincial issue (which isn’t an issue).

    And with this the basis for the conspiracy set out in the article falls flat.

  133. avatar Baylion says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 9:45 am

    Reply to Morné @ 9:07 am: Unions are not “owned” by anyone. The clubs elect officials to run the union which is affiliated to SARU. The franchises are owned at least 51% by their component unions and with a maximum of 49% third party ownership.

  134. avatar Morné says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 9:47 am

    Reply to Baylion @ 9:38 am:

    Very interesting, thanks – yes it was mentioned that Lions simply sell Ellis and move – problem sovled…

    As for rugby being a federation and falling under SASCOC’s control all I can go on is they are listed as a member of the organisation.

    But thanks for clearing up the fact that the ‘indaba’ did happen but more importantly, who was in attendance.

  135. avatar Morné says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 9:50 am

    Reply to Baylion @ 9:45 am:

    Yes, point I was trying to make is that no union can be ‘owned’ privately or by a third party as part of SA Rugby’s current constitution.

    All unions are owned by clubs, all unions are members of SA Rugby, SA Rugby is subject to government policies.

  136. avatar Deon says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 10:31 am

    :roll: :roll: :roll:

  137. avatar Kat says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 10:39 am

    Reply to Baylion @ 9:45 am: Bay, like in Gordons Bay?

  138. avatar Baylion says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 10:43 am

    Reply to Kat @ 10:39 am: Yes – Windhoek by the sea

  139. avatar Baylion says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 10:48 am

    Reply to Morné @ 9:47 am: SARU is a SACOC member, the unions are affiliated to SARU. So SARU is the “federation”, not the provincial unions.

    Super Rugby is a professional competition run by SANZAR, of which SARU is a partner, and falls outside SASCOC’s jurisdiction. So to the franchises, which are legal entities inter- but independent from the unions.

    My take on it anyway

  140. avatar Deon says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 10:52 am

    Reply to Boertjie @ 11:57 pm:

    You should know by now his dream is to be a proctologist. If not scratching in the shit, it is on his brain. :wink:

  141. avatar Morné says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 11:27 am

    Reply to Baylion @ 10:48 am:

    Yeah I agree, SARU seems to be the ‘federation’ – but I differ on the franchises issue.

    SARU, the federation, (as part of SANZAR) owns the Super Rugby franchise licenses and awards them (this expires the end of this year btw for all the current franchises) to teams/franchises they want to/qualify for them.

    SARU represents South Africa in an international competition of which from the docs I read and the sports and recreations act, falls very much under the jurisdiction of the sports department and SASCOC.

  142. avatar Boertjie says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 11:29 am

    Reply to Baylion @ 10:48 am:

    I hope we see more of you.
    The one value of RW is that we have
    bloggers with seemingly exceptional
    knowledge about certain things sharing
    it.

    Help me out of this minefield:
    If I understand your #139 the decision of
    one team per political provincial entity
    will not affect Lions and Bulls – Yes or No?

    What could it affect in the rugby sense?

    Will WP, SWD, Boland still be allowed
    separate teams at e.g. SA hockey and
    netball tournaments and competitions?

  143. avatar Baylion says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 11:43 am

    Reply to Boertjie @ 11:29 am: Nothing I read in the Declaration or in the adopted resolutions says there can be only one representative sports team per sport per province. What is does say is that federations should follow political boundaries. However it clearly encourages the expansion of sport into local communities. So what could happen is that SARU sets up provincial federations, i.e a Gauteng Rugby Union to which the BBRU & GLRU affiliates while maintaining their separate identities.

    BTW if this was applied to Super Rugby franchises the Kings are screwed before they even start as SWD falls under the Western Cape and not the Eastern Cape.

  144. avatar DavidS says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 11:47 am

    Reply to Morné @ 8:54 am:

    …but it is NOT LIMITED TO that alone – SA Rugby is a member or subordinate of this body.

    But it is.

    Read my 119 where in Par 5 of their Constitution they specifically EXCLUDE jurisdiction of any ambit on sports falling outside the main and ancillary aims of the Sec 21 company.

    Your interpretation of the aims of the Sec 21 is also wrong.

    It says it controls participation at ALL MULTI-SPORT EVENTS and then mentions some as examples saying those are examples but not limited to just those. This is straight from the Sports and Recreation Act with the 2007 amendments worked in and the 2011 version of the SASCOC Constitution.

    You are reading “including but not limited to” on its own instead of reading the preceding portion.

  145. avatar Boertjie says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 12:18 pm

    Reply to Baylion @ 11:43 am:

    The article says, in the beginning:

    In the document, among various other issues, it is stated that as from 2013 no sport will be allowed to enter more than one team per province in any competion.

    I know this indaba took place.
    I know someone who was present.
    I know this sentence exists in writing.
    I know it was unanimously accepted by all attending.

    What we don’t know is the context in which
    is was adopted and what it boils down to.
    I suppose we will just have to watch how
    things develop.

  146. avatar JT_BOKBEFOK! says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 12:24 pm

    in all this I see a silver lining! :soek:

    Maybe this year the SA sides will do their BEST and will fight to WIN each and every game to stay in the S15 – just the kick up the back-side they needed :whistling:
    :twisted:

  147. avatar Baylion says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 12:38 pm

    Reply to Boertjie @ 12:18 pm:

    I can’t find such a statement in the NATIIONAL SPORT and RECREATION PLAN ((Draft 20)), the White Paper presented at the Indaba, or in the Declaration of the National Sport and Recreation Indaba – 22 November 2011, issued after the Indaba.

    But you’re right, these documents don’t include everything discussed and are summaries of plans and resolutions. I did read somewhere the government wants the Nation Sports Plan in place by April 2012, only then can the implementation schedules start.

    So we might get some clarity in April

  148. avatar Morné says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 12:39 pm

    Reply to Baylion @ 11:43 am:

    Very interesting.

  149. avatar Morné says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 1:42 pm

    Reply to DavidS @ 11:47 am:

    Ja I suck at lawyer talk, someone should tell them plain bloody English is good enough.

    Reply to JT_BOKBEFOK! @ 12:24 pm:

    Something occured to me.

    Why are we pissed at government?

    This Kings/Spears saga has been dragging since 2005. Hoskins was present when the FIRST resolution was adopted (to include them in Super Rugby) back then!

    Since then it has dragged its ass – we are in 2012 now.

    SA Rugby should have nipped this in the butt, or sorted it by now – THEY are the ones at fault here.

    If I was government, I would also be sick of hearing the same promises year after year from them.

  150. avatar Boertjie says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 1:45 pm

    Reply to Morné @ 1:42 pm:

    If I was government I would close down
    the sports ministry and stick to running
    the country and getting rid of corruption
    and the deployment of useless cadres.

  151. avatar Oranje Orakel says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 2:03 pm

    So the BuLLs wont play next year in the JakarendahJersey? :weed:

Switch to our mobile site