The ink has not yet dried on the Blue Bulls contract of Griquas and Springbok wing Bjorn Basson and already there have been major consequences for the Griqualand West Rugby Union (GWRU).

It is believed that they did not consult Super 15 partners Free State and the Griffons in the decision to make Basson available to the Bulls.

The Cheetahs will now be seeking legal advice to determine whether the GWRU had disregarded the policy for the transfer of Super 14 players that had been signed by all three provinces.

If that has happened, legal steps may be taken against Griquas and in an extreme scenario his contract with the Blue Bulls may even be voided.

Basson is due to report for duty in Pretoria on November 1 once he has completed his Currie Cup duties with Griquas.

Cheetahs managing director Harold Verster was in a tele-conference with Griquas and the Griffons on Tuesday morning in which Basson’s move was discussed in depth.

The Cheetahs paid 60% of Basson’s Super 14 salary.

“In light of what has happened, the Cheetahs’ executive committee gave approval for us to seek legal advice on the matter,” said Verster.

“As soon as we have received the necessary recommendations there will be a special directors meeting where the findings, and the consequences thereof, will be discussed,” said Verster.

The Cheetahs are currently locked in a legal battle with the Sharks about the services of another wing, Lionel Mapoe.

The loss of Basson will be another setback for the Cheetahs ahead of next year’s Super 15.

“Bjorn is one of the Cheetahs’ top players. We are making every attempt to keep our star players in the region. We have to protect our interests,” said Verster.

Griquas chief executive Arni van Rooyen did not want to comment.

119 Responses to Storm brews over Basson

  • 31

    @ bos_otter:29 – Bos, I do feel for your union. They do lose many players cause they can’t afford to pay them what other unions can. Otherwise Cheetahs would be the powerhouse of rugby just about in this country. Somehow they need to find a way of paying them more and keeping them. Not too sure how. If they do lose a player there should be transfer fee paid. Then if it is a top player it should be a top fee paid. Might help a bit but there has to be another way.

    Okay out of here now. Back later.

  • 32

    What I would like to know is why the initial press release stated that the months of negotiations included the Cheetahs, but now its claimed they were never part of it?

    Seems the whole bloody lot are incompetent!

  • 33

    @ bloubulblog.co.za:
    Jy is 100% as jy se die bulle het die hele ding baie professioneel gedoen…hulle het die griekwas benader, die oordrag koste vastgestel en siedaar…puik werk. Die ding tussen Griekwas en Vrystaat…bietjie n grys area, so kom ons los dit vereers nou uit.
    Rede hoekom ek oorspronklik gereageer het op jou post, is bloubulblog.co.za wrote:

    en die manier wat hulle die mapoe saak hanteer, is net so pateties

    Mapoe het gedros…Natal het nooit die moeite gedoen om met die Vrystaat te loop praat en om die oordrag te bespreek nie. Nie die Vrystaat nie, maar die shjarks wat hier verkeerd is.

  • 34

    bos_otter wrote:

    @bos_otter

    duidelik is daar ‘n misverstand tussen griekwas en die cheetahs, aangaande hoe die spelerkontrakte opgestel is. die cheetahs sien hulleself as die senior vennoot in hulle verhouding met griekwas.

    het die cheetahs ‘n kontrak met basson? of het hulle ‘n kontrak met die GWRU om hulle spelers te gebruik vir die S14/15?

    Kyk, die vrystaat kan geregtig voel op ‘n gedeelte van die oordragkoste, maar ek kan nie sien dat hulle die mag het om die hele kontrak tot niet te wil verklaar nie.

    En een ding, die vrystaat het nie vir basson opgebou tot waar hy nou is nie. hy moes dan vodacombeker speel terwyl die cheetahs voortgeploeter het met demas en nokwe.

  • 35

    bos_otter wrote:

    @ bloubulblog.co.za:
    Jy is 100% as jy se die bulle het die hele ding baie professioneel gedoen…hulle het die griekwas benader, die oordrag koste vastgestel en siedaar…puik werk. Die ding tussen Griekwas en Vrystaat…bietjie n grys area, so kom ons los dit vereers nou uit.
    Rede hoekom ek oorspronklik gereageer het op jou post, is bloubulblog.co.za wrote:
    en die manier wat hulle die mapoe saak hanteer, is net so patetiesMapoe het gedros…Natal het nooit die moeite gedoen om met die Vrystaat te loop praat en om die oordrag te bespreek nie. Nie die Vrystaat nie, maar die shjarks wat hier verkeerd is.

    ok, sharp. wat ek bedoel met die mapoe sage, is dat hulle, in my opinie, moet vrede maak met die feit dat hy nie by die cheetahs wil speel nie. hy het sover gegaan as om te se, hy sal eerder sy stewels ophang, as om vir die cheetahs uit te draf.

    glo my, mapoe en die sharks was heeltemal verkeerd met hoe hulle die dinge gedoen het. SA Rugby moet die Sharks HARD oor die vingers tik.

    en ek kan verstaan dat dit vir die cheetahs ‘n bittere pil is om te sluk, maar as die speler so graag elders wil speel, laat hom gaan. watter lojaliteit gaan jy uit mapoe kry, as hy deur die hof beveel word om terug te gaan cheetahs toe.

    maak vrede met die saak, al is dit moeilik om te aanvaar, en vat die oordraggelde van mapoe, en bele in ‘n jong speler of drie. voordat die hof dalk in mapoe se guns beslis, dan sit harald met eier op sy gesig, en sonder die speler en die oordragkoste.

  • 37

    Ashley wrote:

    winston @ 16
    sooooooooooo
    does that make province the only honest rugby outfit in south africa?
    amazing!!

    After the Jaque Fourie escapade. NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • 38

    Ash … just for you 😀

    Father Murphy walks into a pub in Donegal, and asks the first man he meets, ‘Do you want to go to heaven?’ The man said, ‘I do, Father…’ The priest said, ‘Then stand over there against the wall.’ Then the priest asked the second man, ‘Do you want to go to heaven?’ ‘Certainly, Father,’ the man replied. ‘Then stand over there against the wall,’ said the priest. Then Father Murphy walked up to O’Toole and asked, ‘Do you want to go to heaven?’ O’Toole said, ‘No, I don’t Father.’ The priest said, ‘I don’t believe this. You mean to tell me that when you die you don’t want to go to heaven?’ O’Toole said, ‘Oh, when I die, yes. I thought you were getting a group together to go right now.’

  • 39

    @ Winston:
    The only honest Rugby outfit are the Lions!

    Mainly because they can’t afford to pay anyone huge amounts of money to break their contracts!

    They’re so honest they don’t think it necessary to give players legally binding contracts!

  • 40

    bloubulblog.co.za wrote:

    maak vrede met die saak, al is dit moeilik om te aanvaar, en vat die oordraggelde van mapoe, en bele in ‘n jong speler of drie. voordat die hof dalk in mapoe se guns beslis, dan sit harald met eier op sy gesig, en sonder die speler en die oordragkoste.

    ek hoor wat jy se, en glo my, ek glo niemand in die Cheetah span wil hom terug in die span he nie. As n ou se hart nie reg is nie, gaan hy jou punte kos. Ek wens hom alle voorspoed in sy toekoms…die man het talent…is net jammer hy kon nie die eerbare ding doen nie.

  • 41

    bos_otter wrote:

    bloubulblog.co.za wrote:
    maak vrede met die saak, al is dit moeilik om te aanvaar, en vat die oordraggelde van mapoe, en bele in ‘n jong speler of drie. voordat die hof dalk in mapoe se guns beslis, dan sit harald met eier op sy gesig, en sonder die speler en die oordragkoste.ek hoor wat jy se, en glo my, ek glo niemand in die Cheetah span wil hom terug in die span he nie. As n ou se hart nie reg is nie, gaan hy jou punte kos. Ek wens hom alle voorspoed in sy toekoms…die man het talent…is net jammer hy kon nie die eerbare ding doen nie.

    SA Rugby hou mos nie daarvan om ongewilde besluite te maak nie, maar hierdie sou nou die perfekte geleentheid gewees het vir hulle om in te tree. die sharks moet ten minste ‘n boete of iets kry. mens kan nie so blatant die stelsels en reels minag nie.

    straeuli is een van die groot drolle in rugby drinkwater. hy het blykbaar op ‘n stadium met die ebersohns begin onderhandel. toe hulle vir hom sê hulle is nog onder kontrak, en mag nog nie begin met onderhandelings nie, het hy blykbaar aan hulle gesê hulle moet mooi dink, want die aanbod gaan nie vir altyd op die tafel wees nie.

    kom nou, SA Rugby. doen bietjie iets.

  • 42

    Read some of the comments and let me just add the following:

    * Super 14 or 15 contracts are done on a year to year basis from the best of my knowledge and also negotiated with the players individually by the Super rugby union. Unless this changed the Cheetahs have no leg to stand on but I seriously doubt whether they have a Super rugby contract with Basson for 2011.

    * Players are contracted to their unions first, unions themselves fall under Super rugby franchises who by design, can contract players from their feeder unions from which the union is also compensated for the player’s services during his time with the franchise. Most of the details of such agreements and contracts is contained in the Super rugby participations agreement to which all unions agree to and sign. Fact of the matter is, unions control players contractually and agrees to extend their player’s services to franchises, not the other way around.

    * Cheetahs has no contract with Basson, effectively giving them no say as to where, when and for how much he moves from one union to another, even if they are the senior member of the Cheetahs franchise.

    IN conclusion, the Cheetahs has no say over Basson’s movements and who Griquas contract, or sell, unless specifically stated in their participation agreement but for that, it would have to include specific player names too. The only real difference this could have made is that Griquas may have approached the Cheetahs, informed them on their intention of selling Basson for which they received and undisclosed transfer fee, and ask the Cheetahs if they were willing to match that fee for participation of said player in the Cheetahs super rugby franchise.

    It is also quite well known that Griquas are in financial trouble, players are their assets and as in any business, you sometimes increase your capital by selling off assets. The Cheetahs can not, and do not control this area of Griquas rugby and cannot prescribe to them how they conduct their business, with their assets.

    Lastly, the player’s choice in this regard is very important. Even if the Cheetahs offered him a contract, or financial assistance to Griquas similar or even greater than what the Bulls offered, the player might feel that for his career, it is best to move.

    The Cheetahs believe they have a case because they base their projections on who their feeder unions have on contract, and Basson’s contract with the Griquas union was for the end of 2011, which would have made him available for selection for the Cheetahs next year of course in the Super 15 – but again, they do not control, develop or pay this player’s union salary who are effectively, the ‘owners’ of that player.

    The Cheetahs obviously expected the Griquas to inform them of any plans to sell top players as their Super rugby partners, and for that they have a case to be agrieved with the Griquas if this was not done – but they remain pretty much powerless in any case as to the actual result.

    The Bulls have a legal binding contract with Griquas over the Basson move. I cannot believe that any action by the Cheetahs will make that agreement null and void where the most they can and might be able to do, is take legal action against Griquas for selling off assets as a Super rugby partner without consultation and therefore put the franchise and its success in jeopardy for not doing it. Best they can therefore hope for, is financial compensation from Griquas but the deal is pretty much done and dusted.

  • 43

    One last thing, this can be very easily turned around against the Cheetahs where they have to inform and negotiate player acquisitions and sales with their Super rugby partners first before they can conclude a deal.

    Because just as easily as contracting of players can affect the main union, it can also affect the member unions with less of their players being included in the Super rugby franchise for which they in effect will earn less in compensation from the main union or franchise who make use of their players.

    Example, if the Cheetahs contract Lions Cronje or any other top flyhalf to the Cheetahs union, chances are Naas Olivier may not be needed by the Cheetahs Super Rugby franchise, Griquas then potentially loses out on money they would have earned from releasing Naas for Super rugby duty.

    Personally, I cannot understand the logic of the Cheetahs here.

    However, I also know there is bad blood between them and the Griquas so it is not really surprising.

  • 44

    RP @ 38
    😆

  • 45

    Eintlik is die Lionel Mapoe geval baie amusant.

    Mapoe bly afwesig van sy werk, verdien sy volle salaris, sit in Durban op die strand en rook sigare. Die Cheeters is veronderstel om disipliner teen hom op te tree. Maar hulle versuim om dit te doen want dan beteken dit sy kontrak word beeindig. En dis wat hy wil he.

    Al wat Mapoe hoef te doen is om te wag, dan verloor die Cheeters.

    Uiteindelik speel hy nie, Cheeters betaal sy salaris en Okt 2011 verstryk sy kontrak en die Cheeters verdien geen oordragsfooi nie.

    Durban se strand is ‘n lekker plek.
    Posted by Stapper (Pretoria) Wednesday, September 22, 2010 – 12:02

  • 46

    Sorry – one more post. I know I have posted a whole lot in a row, but this thing is getting under my skin. This whole thing with Basson has re-triggered my annoyance.

    So, the Sharks offer R 800 000 for Mapoe. To my knowledge, this is a good transfer fee to be paid in reference to the stratum he was rated at, and thus level of payment he was receiving at the Cheetahs.

    The Cheetahs however turned this offer down, and are demanding a transfer fee of R 1.5 Million if I am not mistaken (could be 1.2 Million – cant remember the exact figure).

    Many people were saying the Sharks were unethical, which may be so to an extent however, consider this with regards to the Cheetahs;

    The Cheetahs were clearly not paying Mapoe in accordance with how they rated him, but rather sneakily underpaying him. Now that he wants to move for 3 to 4 times what he was earning at the Cheetahs – they suddenly acknowledge that he was actually a higher stratum player and demand a transfer fee to match.

    So – its quite ok for the Cheetahs to demand additional transfer money for Mapoe after underpaying him, and when he wants to earn a salary comparable with his skill level they want to take legal action, and demand a transfer fee above the stratum they were paying him in ?

    I dont know guys – for me, that sounds really underhanded. I know a few companies in my industry that do this kind of things, and it is not just unethical, but almost evil to me.

    I dont condone the Sharks recruiting a player inside of a contract, but I think the Cheetahs have some major player management issues.

    Mr Verster – Are you Free or are you Dom ? If you are not Free, you must be Dom – so, I think there should be a name change – from Free State to Dom State.
    Posted by Sharko (Petoorsfontein) Wednesday, September 22, 2010 – 10:56

  • 47

    morne @ 42, 43
    well said

  • 48

    @ superBul:

    Good Post Super, agreed the Sharks did not go about things the right way but they are prepared to make things right but the Cheetahs are not.

  • 49

    Okay for the sake of balance I got some official news on his contract which makes the Cheetahs gripes valid.

    You all might have heard about the fact that the Cheetahs paid 60% of his salary and Griquas 40%…

    Now first of all this is only happening in this franchise which is a bit stupid in my view…

    Here is the complicated bit.

    The entity of the Cheetahs that pays 60% of his salary is not the Cheetahs Rugby Union, but the Cheetahs Super Rugby Franchise – two different legal entities…

    This salary is not only paid during the Super rugby competition, but over 12 months which essentially forms part of his normal pay as a Griquas contracted player.

    Cheetahs franchise did this because they want to keep him in the region.

    Effectively the Cheetahs pays 60% for a player CONTRACTED to another union…

    (How dof is that?)

    Add non-disclosures to this contract and this might get very ugly, very quickly.

    The Griquas may, and please I am only speculating here, not disclosed the full details of Basson’s legal contractual obligations to the Bulls on negotiating a deal on the player…

    Legally, the Cheetahs might actually have a say over this depending on exactly what this contract with Basson looked like while still a Griquas/Cheetahs player…

    So the Bulls might have bought a dud…

    All comes down to what his contract says and who has most or total say over Basson. Griquas no doubt pulled a quick one here, but they might have done so illegaly.

  • 50

    Let me make it simpler…

    Union (Currie Cup and similar) contracts and Super rugby contracts are two different contracts (at most unions and franchises).

    Basson’s contract however, can well be argued that his Super rugby contract (Cheetahs Super Rugby Franchise) is an extension of his union (Currie Cup) contract and thus is one contract (given of how the payment of this is set up) of which the Cheetahs contributes most to, thus have the majority say…

    This is simply messy.

  • 51

    Kwasse moes die saak eers met Ctahs bespreek het, soos Sharks die saak eers moes bespreek het met Ctahs.

    Bulle moes by Kwasse uitgevind het of ander provinsies ook belange het in Basson, en of daar met hul gesels het en tot ‘n ooreenkoms gekom het.

    Natuurlik is dit Kwasse se eerste verantwoordelikheid en ‘n saak primêr tussen hulle en Ctahs, maar met deesdae se kontrak warboel, is dit net goed om van die ander party uit te vind of hy alles gedoen het wat hy moes doen, om probleme soos hierdie te voorkom.

    Lyk my alle agente leer nie uit die verlede nie.

  • 52

    @ Morné:

    The plot thickens..

  • 53

    Morné wrote:

    This is simply messy.

    agreed….getting more and more confusing

  • 54

    Well with all these contractual issues becoming a more common occurence, perhaps it is time that SARU lay down standard contracts with the obvious variations of whether a player is contractd to one of the Super Unions directly, or an additional comtract with a smaller union.

    What I do find strange is how many players these days want to make a move whilst still in contract with another union.

    Perhaps they mus follow a “draft window” at the end of every year. All Unions release the names of their available players, and then drafting and negotiations are open only during that time.

    Nowember month is most logic as all domestic competitions are in hiatus at this time, and this will be when coaches prepare for the next year’s competitions and will obviously be looking at his player group.

  • 55

    Sit nou net en wonder..SA se Superrugby structuur lyk as volg

    Bulls Pretoria
    (plus East Rand and Limpopo Province)

    Central Cheetahs Bloemfontein
    (Free State plus Northern Cape)

    Lions Johannesburg
    (plus Mpumalanga and North West)

    Sharks Durban
    (KwaZulu-Natal)

    Stormers Cape Town
    (plus northern Western Cape)

    Wonder of daar ening soortgelyke kontrakte is tussen ander spanne wanneer dit by S14/15 kom.

  • 56

    The bulls had been busy with this deal for months according to yesterdays report. Did they not know that Basson was paid 60% of his salary by the states?

    I wonder………

  • 57

    Anyway, what’s good for the Goose, is good for the Gander.

    Of wat sê julle?

  • 58

    @ bos_otter:

    I spoke to an agent that deals with contracts on a daily basis, he said this sort of thing like Basson’s deal, is only done in the states…

    @ Snoek:

    Ian Schwartz confirmed personally that they are not going to comment, suggesting the issue is with Griquas and the Cheetahs.

    This can lead one to believe that the Griquas might not have disclosed certain conditions of the contract or acted outside of their legal capacity representing Basson which will make a lot of people pissed off, and perhaps is the reason the Cheetahs are pissed off.

    But please note, I am only speculating on the non-disclosures if there was any to start with.

  • 59

    @ Morné:
    All speculation at the moment. Will have to wait and see.

    Too many contract disputes in SA rugby at the moment.

  • 60

    Wheres all the ous who were denigrating the Sharks earlier this week…what do you say now, seems to me the Bulls legal advisors are just as thick as the Sharks…klomp dose, they are probably taking lessons from Hoskins (or “Oregon Pine” because he is as thick as two short planks).

    Cmon rugby….get your house in order, this isnt SA soccer administration, show some pride and common sense!!!

Users Online

Total 76 users including 0 member, 76 guests, 0 bot online

Most users ever online were 3735, on 31 August 2022 @ 6:23 pm