0
![Not allowed!](images/buttons/up_dis.png)
http://www.businessday.co.za/article...?ID=BD4A278376
THE Southern Spears’ hopes of playing in the Super 14 series next year were dealt a cruel blow yesterday when Judge Dennis Davis granted SA Rugby leave to appeal against an August 4 ruling.
In essence, this decision gives SA Rugby, the commercial arm of the South African Rugby Union (Saru), more time to argue its case against the Spears participating in the competition in the 2007 and 2008 seasons.
Davis ruled on August 4 that the Spears should play in the series for the next two seasons. He ruled there was a “legal and binding agreement” between SA Rugby and the Spears — a decision was made at a presidents’ council meeting in Johannesburg on June 8 last year and it was ratified by SA Rugby’s board of directors on December 2.
The appeal will be heard by the Supreme Court of Appeal in Bloemfontein.
“The effect of the decision is to suspend the order granted earlier, pending the hearing of the appeal,” said SA Rugby’s acting MD, Basil Haddad, yesterday.
“To expedite the matter, our legal team will attempt to secure an early date for the hearing of the appeal.”
SA Rugby’s legal GM, Christo Ferreira, said yesterday they would try to arrange a date in November.
However, it would only be a request — meaning the matter could take longer.
As a backup plan to halt the Spears’ participation in the Super 14, SA Rugby has been trying to acquire shares in the commercial arms of the three unions making up the franchise — Border, Eastern Province and South Western Districts.
Border has agreed to sell 25,1% of shares in the commercial arm of its union and, according to reports yesterday, SA Rugby has verbal agreements with Eastern Province and South Western Districts to acquire 25,1% of shares in their unions.
Additionally, SA Rugby reportedly has a verbal agreement with South African Investment Limited (Sail) to acquire a further 24,9% stake in each member union.
However, there are issues that need to be resolved with Eastern Province, South Western Districts and Sail before formal agreements can be struck.
If it is successful in acquiring these shares, SA Rugby would have enough power to appoint members of the unions’ boards, thereby exercising a controlling interest in the Spears.
This, combined with Davis’s decision to grant SA Rugby leave to appeal, paints a bleak picture for the Spears’ Super 14 hopes.
Southern Spears CEO Tony McKeever was bitterly disappointed yesterday at the judge’s decision to grant SA Rugby leave to appeal.
“I was always hopeful that SA Rugby would understand the importance of the Spears playing because the franchise caters for a huge rugby contingency in the Eastern Cape region. You cannot ignore the three member unions and pretend they do not exist.
“We are only fulfilling that which SA Rugby created,” he said. “The decision to form the franchise was made consciously by the presidents of the provinces.”
McKeever said the court cases they had to attend over the past year had “regrettably” used up valuable resources and energy, which could have been spent on the development of rugby.
He suggested that SA Rugby work with the Spears to find a solution to the saga.
“There must be a strategic plan,” said McKeever.
“We had a three-year window period to operate in (2006 to 2008). But we can work outside of that and make it a five-year programme.
“Unfortunately, everyone looks for a quick fix instead of formulating ideas … how hard can it be for SA Rugby to get the CEOs of the Super 14 franchises and the Spears together to work out a recipe for success?”
SA Rugby’s pending appeal has created a barrier for the Spears regarding their preparations for next year’s competition because should SA Rugby’s requested court date be granted, the judgment on whether the team will play in the competition will be made only in November.
This gives them less than three months to prepare for the competition and resolve issues with SA Rugby regarding their participation, should the Spears be allowed to play in the series.
The five franchises participating in this year’s series added to the Spears’ woes by refused to agree to the clause in the competition’s participation agreement stating that up to eight national players from the relegated franchise — which would be the Lions, previously known as the Cats — would be allowed to play for the Spears.
The lack of time to prepare for the competition, could also be used as ammunition in SA Rugby’s case as one of the reasons the franchise should not play in next year’s series.
Dear Lord, if you give us back Johnny Cash, we'll give you Justin Bieber.
Big trouble at mill.
Shows how well the ARU does actually operate in comparison to other unions, sure there was a bit of pain during the VIC/WA bids, but common and smart business sense prevailed.
By this you would say if the Spears do get in, they will have 14th spot on the ladder sewn up next year.
80 Minutes, 15 Positions, No Protection, Wanna Ruck?
Ruck Me, Maul Me, Make Me Scrum!
Education is Important, but Rugby is Importanter!
How are the Spears going in the Currie Cup?
Smacks of sour grapes from the SARU to me, they encouraged the Spears by dangling the carrot of S14 rugby then when things don't go their way they seem to regroup with the existing franchisees and call it a closed shop. As for trying to buy shares to overide the board that is just unsporting.
Surely an option is for a S15 or even S16 to include both the Spears and a Vic side? More rugby for the fans I say!
Flat-top, now get a grip. How about a Pacific Island nation and maybe the Pumas. Politics abound in SA rugby. Its all their own work! Now for a team from VicOriginally Posted by Flat-top
Let them eat cake. Any more posts like this, im going to shop Bath and start supporting Saracens
![]()
Sorry touched a raw nerve, should have realised what sensitive types you WA boys are, i'll go and wash my mouth out now and promise not to say the name of that eastern state again![]()
![]()
Being serious for a minute I really object to this "ring-fence" approach, it takes away a lot of what is good about sport. It's just as important to have teams playing for survival in a league (relegation/promotion) as it is to have them playing for the championship otherwise seasons can tail off quickly for the weaker sides. Oh yes, that's what you do in the S14 anyway!!!![]()
TLH I cannot believe you would transfer any allegiance to the "fez", you know it makes sense to support the Blue, Black and White of Bath![]()
I'm a hearty supporter of increasing the S14 be it by numbers, or just increasing the number of rounds. Hate the idea of only seing seven home games next year, I'd pay more to see 13!
C'mon the![]()
![]()
and have our Super14 turn into the relegation farce that is English Football ??? I don't think so.Originally Posted by Flat-top
The only thing relegation and promotion encourages is desperate mismanagement and over spending in players salarys, where as long as you're winning it doesn't matter how much debt your club is in!
Chuck Norris has the greatest Poker-Face of all time. He won the 1983 World Series of Poker, despite holding only a Joker, a Get out of Jail Free Monopoly card, a 2 of clubs, 7 of spades and a green #4 card from the game Uno.
I am not a fan of "soccer" but that has nothing to do with relegation, it is to do with the mass viewing market and the broadcaster (Sky) placing such a premium on premiership status and games. Rugby in every country could only dream of achieving the same financial backing and support the English Premier League does.Originally Posted by Happy
Your debating from the wrong side of the argument, turn your statement on its head and you will see that you are suggesting that it doesn't matter how rubbish the team and product is because there is no relegation and therefore no incentive to be better. Furthermore by ringfencing the league in the way S14 does you prevent up and coming teams the opportunity to progress and allow the existing teams and structure to stagnate...I thought Australia was the forward looking progressive nation and England was the one left in the dark ages but pulling up the draw-bridge on S14 now that WA have a team within it is poor form. How would the Force have felt if the S12 had taken your (Happy) stance, I know I certainly would have missed the opportunity to watch the Force and take part in this forum, this opportunity needs to be extended to fans of the Spears IMHO.
Last edited by Flat-top; 29-09-06 at 16:14.
Flat-top, SARU brought this drama on itself with internal politics.
Im a firm believer in going up or going down. Survial of the fittest, as long it isnt based on purely monetary value. There is a thing called a salary cap in Oz in Rugby and AFL. The best thing that ever happened. I can see the merit in dropping of the lowest ranked team and promoting the next up and comer, even though there are ways to circumvent financial investigations.( Matt Giteau). English soccer is boring as batshit.
I feel sorry for the Spears as they represent the Eastern Cape. No Dutchman and mainly Black and Cape Coloured supporters. The future of SA rugby.
World rugby is better of with strong representations from teams in SA, get away from Pretoria and Jo/burg.The future is awesome.
TLH, I agree with your take on English soccer but like me you are in a very small minority - soccer, and in particular the English Premiership has a phenominal world wide audience, a level of support rugby would die for.
The Guinness Rugby Premiership also have a salary cap (although a few Chief Exec's do their best to get around this), and that does not prevent us from operating a promotion/relegation within the league. Trust me it is exciting (not sure if that's the correct word for it) when your team have to battle for survival. This season I watched Ulster crown champions in one league and Bath narrowly avoid relegation in another, I would be hard pushed to say which games made my heart beat faster.
Wrong of me to comment further on the SARU political influence as I am sadly ignorant on that subject and so wouldn't add much to the debate, I am a rugby supporter and that is where my interest lies...I just think it sad when other's (in this case Spears fans) are denied the opportunity to enjoy top class rugby for whatever reason.
Maybe, I agree having more viewers watching the game and more corporate sponsorship helps develop the game, but at what cost. See my points belowOriginally Posted by Flat-top
Are you saying that because I disgree with you or because I'm wrong? I'm on this side of the argument because I don't believe in a relegation system.Your debating from the wrong side of the argument
I'm not saying that at all ... in Australia I hope everyone would agree that the prize at the end of the rugby tunnel is winning a trophy. No players will run on to the field with the attitude "our team is just here to make up the numbers", they all run on to win! That's the different, in my opinion, in Australia's pursuit of achievements in our sport and alot of other countries in the world.turn your statement on its head and you will see that you are suggesting that it doesn't matter how rubbish the team and product is because there is no relegation and therefore no incentive to be better.
The Super14 franchise is not "ring fenced", it is on the most part "carefully planned". If they were to allow another half dozen teams and make the top Super14 the "A" league and the other 6 a "B" league, you would find the same things happening here which I argue is the crippling effect on clubs in English football. Take as an example, Arsenal. They insist they have plenty of cash available for transfers despite the club's debt raising to over £262m. Is that what you want Rugby Clubs to do? Spend Spend Spend to stay in the "A" league and win at all costs?Furthermore by ringfencing the league in the way S14 does you prevent up and coming teams the opportunity to progress and allow the existing teams and structure to stagnate...
In my opinion that is exactly right - we play the greatest rugby in the bestest run Union organisation in the world all within financially sensible franchises. I don't want to see the Force be kicked out of the S14 and only play in the APC because they finished last. Someone has to finish last every year, whether it be due to injuries, wrong balance of players, retirements, wrong balance of support staff, the list goes on. But the bottom line is next year you strive to do better with what you have. I do not ever want to see the Force rip out the cheque book and buy the top 22 players in the country just to win the season and end up almost financially unviable. Who here wants to see that - prove me wrong, I doubt one TWF member would. But that is what happens overseas when you don't have salary caps and franchise limits. The public and corporate dollar is limited and can only support so many teams - look at the VFL ripping teams out of Melbourne and becoming the AFL. That is a great success story.I thought Australia was the forward looking progressive nation and England was the one left in the dark ages
Where did I say pull up the draw bridge, I'm all for more teams entering the SANZAR competitions, as long as they meet certain conditions just like we had to. Conditions like public support, corporate support etcbut pulling up the draw-bridge on S14 now that WA have a team within it is poor form.
If the perth rally had never happened, the State government had not supported our bid I wouldn't have expect us to have gotten a team.
That isn't my stance, I'm all for the S14 growing into an S16 to include the Spears and their fans and hopefully a Pacific Islanders team too - I'm against relegation!How would the Force have felt if the S12 had taken your (Happy) stance, I know I certainly would have missed the opportunity to watch the Force and take part in this forum, this opportunity needs to be extended to fans of the Spears IMHO.
Chuck Norris has the greatest Poker-Face of all time. He won the 1983 World Series of Poker, despite holding only a Joker, a Get out of Jail Free Monopoly card, a 2 of clubs, 7 of spades and a green #4 card from the game Uno.
Today's West Australian mentions that SAR has purchased a controlling share in the consortium that controls The Spears, enough to withdraw them from Super 14, therefore The Cats will remain in 2007.
You would think that with SA now having to play a specific number of "black" players in their National team that The Spears would have to be an essential part of the future of South African Rugby.
A very sad day for South African Rugby in my opinion.
Last edited by The InnFORCEr; 04-10-06 at 09:48.
80 Minutes, 15 Positions, No Protection, Wanna Ruck?
Ruck Me, Maul Me, Make Me Scrum!
Education is Important, but Rugby is Importanter!
Great thread, with some excellent posts. I`d say that i agree with Happy in that relegation is not the way to go. It is simply a form of punishing the team which has the most improvement to make, so deflating a lot of support in the process, In my opinion anyway....
Good, Spears shouldn't be in the Super14, it'd be like us dumping Queensland to put in a combined team of Warringah, Gordon and Eastwood... actually that has a nice ring to it...Originally Posted by The InnFORCEr
The Currie Cup log is currently
1. Cheetahs
2. Bulls
3. Western Province (Stormers)
4. Sharks
5. Lions (Cats)
The three leagues that the Spears draw from (Border, SWD and Eastern Province) are not even in the top league of the Currie cup. Sure the Cats are pretty ordinary when they play the might of NSW Waratahs, but they can be competitive against lesser teamsYou can also be assured that they are a heck of a lot better than this new Spears conglomerate will be.
There are ethnic black people all over South Africa (about 50 million I think), so you can't say they have to give the Spears a shot cause they have more black people than the other provinces. If a player is good enough coming from the Spears catchment area they will shine in the second division of the Currie Cup and be bought by one of the higher teams.
The only reason we are talking about the Spears is due to internal corruption.. I can't remember the exact reason, though I think it was Van-Rooyen buying votes to cover up a corruption scandal or something like that
SAR buying shares in the member unions of the Spears have been allowed to do so on the agreement that they will develop rugby in these areas. Lets hope they do.