It is a debate that has been raging for a good 10 or 15 years now, should the Currie Cup include all 14 unions, or just the so-called big 5/6?
There are interesting times ahead in SA Rugby in the next few weeks with the announcement of the Australian Super rugby franchise.
Hoskins and Co are pretty positive in their belief that they have a great chance to outbid the Melbourne franchise and be awarded the very lucrative deal in their bid as the Southern Kings.
More interesting for me however would be the impact Super rugby, whether the Kings win the bid or not, will have on the oldest domestic competition in the world, the Currie Cup.
If the Kings do get the franchise there will be a massive push to include them in the local competition in 2010 to prepare them for the rigours of Super rugby set to kick off with the new 15-team format in 2011. Should they not get it you can be sure there will still be a massive push to include them in something given the history of the region and the pressure on SA Rugby to assist them in getting some form of professional setup going, which in all probability will mean inclusion in the Currie Cup in 2010 in the very least.
Currently the Currie Cup runs as an 8-team premier league, and a 6-team first division league with the top 2 teams in the premier league involved in a promotion relegation battle with the 2 bottom premier league teams.
Last year saw the Leopards take the place of the hapless Valke in the premier division when they won their promotion/relegation play-off against the then premier division Valke.
Subsequently, the Valke has lost every single game since their demotion in the ‘weaker’ first division league. Mainly because they lost just about all their players, coaches and sponsors. It is a massive fall from grace and highlights the huge problem we sit with in SA Rugby.
In addition, the promoted Leopards has only managed one win so far in the premier division and that was against bottom of the log Boland who has occupied one of the bottom two spots in the premier division since the current competition structure was implemented.
Simply given the obvious results anyone can make a very strong case for Currie Cup rugby to reduce the numbers in the premier division from 8 to 6 where there will be a greater emphasis on strength-vs-strength in the premier division of the competition.
The benefits of this is obvious but no more so than for the money men who know that a strength-vs-strength format means more people through the gates, and more viewers on the tube.
But is this beneficial to SA Rugby in the long run?
If the new Super rugby competition has the expected influence on the Currie Cup and how the competition will be structured, you can prepare yourself for an almighty battle from the smaller unions, who by the way makes up the majority of the President’s Council (the body that control most decision making in SA Rugby).
Personally I think a smaller premier division group (strength-vs-strength), or even a split in how the local competition is structured in a premier and first division to whichever numbers, is not healthy for South African rugby.
There are reasons the current big 5 are in the positions they are, they have money. More importantly, that money was mainly generated through their entrenchment in the very lucrative Super rugby competition for more than 10 years now.
Of course the argument will be that it is useless to have a Bulls play against a Border and score 100+ points against them in a league match, and that a strength-vs-strength format will be much better for the game, even if it means that Border has to play against a first division team rather than a premier division team because they are more on par – but we then also have to ask ourselves why we cannot get a Border, or Boland or Valke to start competing at the level of a Bulls, Sharks or WP?
There is no shortage of player numbers in South Africa to sustain a 14-team competition, hell a country like New Zealand does this successfully and they do not even have a quarter of the playing numbers we have.
So it has to come down to how these unions are administered and the finances they generate.
Of course most will highlight the historical cases of corruption and gross mismanagement in most of these smaller unions, but that can be sorted out through proper management and implementation of structures from SA Rugby – if Griquas could do it, so could any other small union.
There has been many suggestions on what we could look to do in South African rugby to improve structures and distribute the wealth of our rugby evenly throughout the 14 provinces. The question now remains whether it should be done or not?
I believe it should, because just as the political history in South Africa will show you, control by a small minority, no matter how successful or beneficial to those in power, means nothing for the development and growth of the country itself, or the nation. Our strength lies in our numbers, and for as long as the minority controls the power and money in SA Rugby, we will never realise our full potential.
If you limit the CC to just the top 5 to 6 teams you will eventually limit the growth of the game. 5 to 6 teams has short term games.
games is gains
Morne
We were saying yesterday. Imagine we had the 100+ SA players playing their rugby overseas spread over the 14 unions. We would have one flippen strong CC!
@Supa Die Bloubul – 3
Hi Supa,
Ja, if we had those 100+ players back here that would make a difference if the CC was extended.
I agree with Morne to a extent, that if we limit the CC to 6 teams the development of some franchise will never grow.
Then on the other hand I personally don’t want to see any of the Big 5 get 100 plus against some of those teams. That too brings down the standard. I personally enjoy strength verses strength. But then it also does not allow other franchises to develope. So not too sure which way we should go.
How you Tripples. See you up there.
You done well on Superbru in the cricket.
@Puma –
I refer you to this article for a suggestion as to how this could possibly work…
http://www.rugby-talk.com/?p=1845
South Africa has 6 major regions where rugby is concerned.
The Western Cape (currently Stormers), the Southern and Eastern Cape (currently Kings), the Central and Northern Districts (Cheetahs), the East Coast (Sharks), the Gauteng midlands and South Eastern Gauteng (currently Lions), and the Northern Gauteng and North West Province (currently Bulls).
These 6 regions represents all 14 union members currently under the SA Rugby flag. However, where we totally missed the boat in my view was to marry each of these regions, or franchises, to a central province in each of those regions.
The net effect was that the 5 major provinces enriched themselves through the lucrative deals and benefits Super rugby brings, BUT at the expense of the smaller unions who has no hope in hell to ensure growth and development and self-sustainability in competing with the traditional Big 5.
This effectively ensured that we created a bottle-neck effect in South African rugby, where close to ½ million rugby players can only develop successfully into top class professional players, through 5 unions only. You do not need to be Einstein to spot the problem here.
The only way to effectively de-centralize this current structure, is to have the 6 franchises operate completely independently from any one union, but actually act as the mini-SA Rugby of each of the regions (and unions) it represents.
These franchises should be privately owned and managed under the guidance and partnership (stakeholder) of SA Rugby and obviously still conform to the constitution and unionized rules of the National Governing Body (SA Rugby/SARU).
The unions of each region will be commercially managed by each franchise of the region, where the responsibilities of development, structures, transformation, etc. all now becomes part of the franchise’s direct responsibility and that of their board of directors.
The main aim of each independent, and privately owned franchise will always be;
a) To ensure they make a profit, and
b) To ensure a winning brand and culture is created in their franchise, feeder unions and lower structures of clubs and schools
Sorry Morne,
Just have to take a quick business call. Will read your article again and the last one you mention above.
Back with my answer in 20 min.
Hi Puma and Morne…
Did OK on Superbru Puma…..wanted to win though hehehehe
I went fir the blerrie souties in the first semi hehehehe that cost me
@Puma –
20 minutes!!!
Are my articles that long!!! 😉
@Tripples –
Morning
@Morné – #9 either that or he has a reading impediment 😉
So Morne, how do you think the rest of the CC will pan out?
Hi There RP!!!!!! Hows life treating you?
@Tripples –
Log:
Sharks
WP
Bulls
Cheetahs
Final: Sharks v. Bulls
@Tripples –
Hi Ms Trip-E … I have been as busy as a one armed paper hanger 😥 I thought we had turned the corner to a quieter few days but we just filled the hotel … again … dammit … no time to breathe …
What you been up to ? Kicking buts & taking names ?
There is too much mediocre rugby being played by professionals. Cut the CC down to 6 teams. Make all rugby excpet for the S15, CC and Boks semi professional. Replace the VC with a semi pro club competition.
@Morn̩ Р9
Your articles are long Morne but very interesting.
Answered in part from your other article above.
Still on the phone. Sorry mate these calls can last a long time. Boring but have to take them.
Back later.
I hear from one of our fellow writers here, who is deeply in the know, that Melbourne will get the bid on 21 October…. not the Kings.
@grootblousmile –
That is a fact
Boland is goodbye. Most of their players allready excepted other offers – and although the will play the relegation matches – the will not be able to help Boland next year.
I believe that 8 teams MUST stay in the CC – because if this article was written last year – most would call for Griekwas to also be excluded.
SARFU need to help the smaller unions with fund – because that is where a lot of Superstars are born – and spesially guys who bloom after school – like Pieter Russow (4th team at school) and Marius Joubert (2nd team – and 2 years later Boland and SA u/21)
Look at the Valke this year… stone dead last in the Currie Cup First Division after playing in the CC Premier Division last year…. why… because all their quality players were bought.
@grootblousmile –
The Valke actually went completely amateur this year. they did not contract a single player and all players were only paid match fees.
I heard a birdie however on how the new system will work…
Just wondering if I should keep you guys in the lurch for a wee bit longer… 😉
Maybe the answer is in the drafting system as used by the NFL etc. The cash rich franchises/provinces sits with to many players on their books that don’t get enough gametime. They should limit the amount of players you may have on your books or contracted to you. That way you can spread the talent around the country and make provinces more competitive.
@Polla – Polla – that is what Boland asked for loooong ago – and according to me the best sollution.
BB can pay their 5th choise scrummie more than Boland pay their 1st choice.
They must also help Boland to contract players for at least 2 seasons – without the Big Guns buying them out of a contract – because Boland falls for the money, and in the process can not built a team.
Bulle se span vir Vrydag:
Habana en Spies is beseer maar sal reg wees vir semi.
Vodacom Blue Bulls: 15 Zane Kirchner, 14 Francois Hougaard, 13 Jaco Pretorius, 12 Wynand Olivier , 11 Gerhard van den Heever, 10 Morné Steyn, 9 Heini Adams, 8 Danie Rossouw, 7 Dewald Potgieter, 6 Deon Stegmann, 5 Victor Matfield (captain), 4 Bakkies Botha, 3 Werner Kruger, 2 Derick Kuün, 1 Gurthrö Steenkamp. Reserves: 16 Bandise Maku, 17 Rossouw de Klerk, 18 Pedrie Wannenburg, 19 Flip van der Merwe, 20 Fourie du Preez, 21 Burton Francis, 22 John Mametsa.
@Ex Player – Yes, and an entry draft prevents expensive bidding wars for young talent and ensures that no one team can sign contracts with all of the best young players and make the league uncompetitive. To encourage parity, teams that do poorly in the previous season usually get to choose first in the post season draft.
25@bdb – sien Werner begin al weer. Sou hom laat rus het of op die bank gesit het, en de Klerk laat begin het.
22@Morné – Neeeeeee, flok…. spill the beans !!
@grootblousmile –
Ag ok.
Rumour has it the competition will change to a top 6, bottom 8 format.
All top 6 teams will play on Saturdays only at 3, 5 and 7 – all televised.
Bottom 8 games will be played on Friday and Thursdays at 5 and 7, with SuperSport televising at least 2 of the 4 games each week giving the smaller unions TV exposure – so we will have more rugby on our screens and rugby on Thursday evenings now (dont know what they are going to do with stadiums that have no lights…)
Promotion relegation will only be between the top first division side and lowest premier division side.
Smaller unions will get more live broadcast time to sell to sponsors and hopefully make more money.
We get to see more rugby and the premier division is strength v strength.
The 6th team will not be the Kings.
So the Lions supporters will be watching rugby on Thursdays and Fridays in 2 years time…lol!
Users Online
Total 145 users including 0 member, 145 guests, 0 bot online
Most users ever online were 3735, on 31 August 2022 @ 6:23 pm
No Counter as from 31 October 2009: 41,445,192 Page Impressions
_