SA Rugby: Where to Now?

Congratulations to the Australian Rugby Union who, against all odds, have managed (read carefully; meticulously choreographed) to bring the 15th Super Rugby franchise to Melbourne, especially when the ARU has 80,000 registered rugby players, and SA Rugby has over 500,000, over five times the number of players in Australia.

SA Rugby has had four years to plan for the inclusion of their sixth Super Rugby franchise from the Eastern Cape in Super Rugby, and now they are left with the most diabolical wrangle amongst each other.

Ten of the 14 South African rugby unions are on a collision course with each other, and if it's not sorted out now, South African rugby will be torn apart.

Let me declare at the outset that the tragedy in all of this has nothing to do with racism, performance, or money, but about a small group of individuals not adhering to the basic tenets of the SA Rugby Constitution.

Rugby must be fair and a game for all, without discrimination and rancour.

However, the Eastern Cape franchise has been unfairly accused of racism, low performance levels, and financial destitution—having been a drain on the resources of rugby in the country. For example, SA Rugby led the Bid process for the Southern Kings, but failed to attain a collective shareholder's agreement between Border, EP, and SWD; a fundamental cornerstone of its corporate structure.

Also, Eastern Cape has been a drain on resources, but it is mostly due to SA Rugby's implementation of a drip feed system.

The marker in all of this is performance, on the field, and off the field.

That, and only that, must be the determinant of progress, or failure. Had SA Rugby adhered to their Presidents Council resolutions of Jun. 2005, and abided by their constitution, the 2006 Eastern Cape would have cost R10m, and not the R220 million that has wreaked havoc on rugby in South Africa.

The staggering R220m of sponsors and all 14 unions money that was spent, lost, and forfeited on a dubious and sinister campaign deliberately flies in the face of a legal, and constitutionally binding agreement that first excluded the Southern Spears.

Now it has marginalised the Southern Kings.

The cost is so mind-boggling that it is almost incomprehensible that the actions of a few have been tolerated for so long, without recourse.

The past four years have been a reckless and negligent campaign, in direct violation of the SA Rugby constitution. It defies logic how an organisation could disadvantage rugby with a crazed 48-month spending spree because of fear.

Had this R220m been invested in the game in South Africa, we would have not only won the Rugby World Cup bid and the 15th Super Rugby franchise based on merit, but also established SA Rugby as true leaders of SANZAR. We would have been internationally lauded as true sports ambassadors of the game.

'05-'09 Costs to Exclude the South Eastern Cape & SA Rugby:

Cost of funding the Spears from Aug. 2005 to Mar. 2006: R6.5m (of the R10m discussed for 2006 only)

Cost of acquiring 50 percent shares in the three Spears shareholders: R13.5m

Legal costs against the Spears: R4.3m

Five years ('06-'10) of lost sponsorship to the EC franchise at R15m per annum: R75m

Lost gate receipts of five international games in the EC at R3m per annum: R75m

Liquidation costs: R5.7m

Loss of the promised SA Rugby Academy in Alicedale: R30m

COEGA rugby summit: R500K

SA Rugby’s deployment of Godfrey Afrika to establish the EC franchise: R3m

Southern Kings Jun. 16 2009 launch and game against the British Lions: R4.5m

SA Rugby Super 15 Bid: R2m

Subtotal: R220 million

The Eastern Cape franchise was all set up in Jun. 2005 with a unanimous Presidents Council resolution that is still legal and binding. Still, through bizarre self-interest and narcissism, the collateral financial damage to South African rugby has been the most reckless expenditure, in excess of R220 million!

The news out yesterday was that the Melbourne Rebels have won the 15th Super Rugby franchise and, despite all the advantages of the Eastern Cape, the ARU trumped SA Rugby.

It was really more a triumph of the ARU’s O’ Neill vanquishing and pillaging SA Rugby in the boardroom.

The pathetic excuse that the Southern Kings would cost an extra $400,000 of travel is a pittance compared to the $426 million SANZAR will share from 2011-2015. If anyone swallows that one, they need to take a few days off for post-traumatic stress disorder.

The fact that absolutely no contingency plan, or preparation has been made for the Eastern Cape Super Rugby franchise to play in an international rugby tournament in 2010 and onwards, even if they lost the bid, signals very serious capability and competency issues within SA Rugby Pty Ltd.

The trickle-down will assuredly hurt the 14 SA Rugby Unions as well.

This is where confusion, panic, and ugly infighting will set in, as one of the options has been to alter the Currie Cup to a six-team format comprising the six Super Rugby franchises. 

The Top Five would advance through to the Super 15 from 2011.

This option negatively impacts the Pumas, Leopards, and Griquas, who would stand down in favour of the Southern Kings.

A second option is that the last placed team of the Super 14 stands down for the Southern Kings, putting the Lions and Cheetahs in jeopardy.

A third option is to amalgamate the Cheetahs and Lions back into the Cats of old, to make way for the Southern Kings. Try discussing this with Harold Verster and Kevin de Klerk, Presidents of the Cheetahs and Lions respectively, and you will get a thousand-yard stare.

A fourth option is drop the Lions in favour of the Southern Kings for the 2010 Super 14 as the Lions have been the last placed South African side for the last three years. This causes apoplexy to the Lions.

Since SA Rugby has violated their constitution, deliberately misrepresented matters to government, and repeatedly broken promises made at the Presidents Council level, a fifth option is to invoke the Sports Amendment Act. SA Rugby’s leadership would be replaced with an interim curatorship, as SASCOC has carried out with the ASA.

A sixth option is for SA Rugby to assemble a Task Team within the next two weeks, that is mandated by SA Rugby’s Presidents Council, to remedy this problem by Dec. 31, 2009.

The scene is now set for someone to bring order to this chaos.

We must solve the enormous financial issues facing SA Rugby, take the conflict out of the sport, and deliver this to the 10 SA Rugby Unions that are under threat.

In two weeks, if an independent two-man panel appointed by SANZAR has chosen Melbourne to host the new franchise and take part in the 2011 Super 15, then so too can SA Rugby appoint their own Independent Expert Determination Panel to reach a unanimous position on remedying this terrible impasse in South African rugby.