VS

 

Last night, one of our Authors, Just for Kicks, mailed me regarding the spreading spat between the Pro-HSM (Highbury Safika Media) crowd and the Pro-Joffers crowd (Greame Joffe and like-minded parties), for want of defining the parties better…

… and thrust in the middle is the dillemma of involvement of the Southern Kings in Super Rugby in 2013 versus possible relegation of the worst performing South African Super Rugby franchise, the Lions, as well as SARU’s apparent woeful handling of Super Rugby participation.

The matter has now escalated to a seemingly FREE-FOR-ALL !

The contents of this Article is long and sometimes laboured, but the serious South African rugby supporter would do well to read and listen to all of it, and form his or her own opinion about the subject matter.

It all started, well in broader terms, with well known radio personality, Greame Joffe, taking issue with Mark Keohane. This happened on Joffe’s online sportspodcast at Radio Today, called Sportsfire, regarding the biased reporting against the embattled Lions Rugby Union.

Rugby-Talk commented on this matter in a previous Article under the title A battle, I tell you, was fought here today. The Greame Joffe podcast can be heard in full at this LINK.

• Yesterday saw an Article by Mr Bonthuys (Bonty) at RUGBYBANTER.COM, under the title, The Keo Connection. (The Full Article appears below)
• This was followed by a telephonic interview by Darren Scott with Mark Keohane on BALLZ RADIO, (the online radio station), airing Mark Keohane’s viewpoints on the matter. (A link to the podcast of the interview follows below)
• Other folks also jumped on the bandwagon, including Ant Kaplan from AntsRant, once again washing the same dirty laundry and tumble drying it also in the process. (The Full Article appears below)
• Even our friend Morné of RUGGAWORLD, ventured his opinion on the “Kings Saga”. (The Full Article appears below)

 

All I know is that this is not how rugby is supposed to be run or reported on, and I hope that SARU makes the correct decisions on the matter later in May when this matter is debated at a Special General Meeting of SARU on the issues at hand.

 

OK, herewith the gory details:

 

RUGBYBANTER.COM – Bonty’s Article

The LINK

The Article:

Highbury Safika Media (HSM) is a publishing house boasting a portfolio of over 30 magazine titles and numerous online publications. Amongst these are SA Rugby Magazine and Keo.co.za – the website of Mark Keohane and other SA Rugby writers such as Ryan Vrede and Jon Cardinelli.

Keohane has been a public figure since his days as Springbok Communications Manager under the ill-fated reigns of both Harry Viljoen and Rudolph Streauli, until he resigned in protest over SARFU’s handling of the Geo Cronjé racism debacle involving Quinton Davids. Keohane went on to publish a book about the episode and the state of the Springboks in general, and was widely criticized by Springbok players (most notably Corné Krige) as deliberately attempting to sow division within their ranks and to undermine SA Rugby in general.

In recent times Keohane has been busying himself in the extensive business interests of HSM, as well as media relations of other entities, such as Jake White’s Winning Ways – a business partnership which ended in a heated law suit, kept hushed away out of the public sphere. Even more recently, however, HSM -and Mark Keohane in particular – were awarded the contract to manage the media, marketing and public relations of the South African Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee (SASCOC). The awarding of this contract was never put up for tender, as is standard government procedure, but was rather awarded directly to HSM (although Keohane states that normal application took place, the fact remains it should have gone to tender).

And this is where the Keo connection begins to reveal itself.

During his time at SA Rugby, Mark Keohane worked alongside the likes of Rian Oberholzer (President of SARFU), Songezo Nayo (Managing Director), Gary Grant (Marketing Director) and the current president of SASCOC – Gideon Sam (Springbok Team Manager).

All four names mentioned above are currently directors of sports marketing company Accelerate Sports, with Gideon Sam being appointed as Chairman. Gideon Sam also serves on the Lotto Distribution Board, but excused himself when dealing with the funding grant to SA Cycling, a grant from which Accelerate Sport received commission to the tune of R 26 million – a blatant conflict of interest.

Accelerate Sport, through their subsidiary Access Facilities and Leisure Management (AFLM), were also awarded the contract as operations manager of the Nelson Mandela Bay Stadium. It is reported that this contract brings in a whopping R 600 000 a month to the coffers of Accelerate. It is the duty of AFLM to source events to be staged at the stadium to generate revenue and keep the stadium sustainable.

And here the connection between rugby and Accelerate begins to become clear.

The contract between AFLM and the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro states that, above the R 600 000 a month, AFLM are to be awarded performance bonuses based on the revenue they generate, providing this amount exceeds R 12,5 million a year. The structure of this bonus is as follows:

The Operator will be paid 10% of any amount above R12.5 million but less than R15 million, and then:

·         12.5% of any amount in excess of R15 million but less than R20 million

·         15% of any amount in excess of R20 million but less than R25 million, and

·         20% of any amount in excess of R25 million.

It is thus blatantly clear that it is in the best interests of Accelerate to find events which will draw spectators, such as concerts etc.

But what better way to ensure constant revenue, week after week, than playing host to a top tier sports team. If only the Eastern Cape had one.

But wait, Accelerate have strong ties to SARU, they do after all boast an ex-president in their ranks. Would it at this point seem ludicrous to suggest that Oberholzer, Sam, Grant and Nayo used their previous connections to SARU to, excuse the pun, accelerate the Kings’ inclusion in Super Rugby so as to ensure that their business interest was being looked after, leading to SARU’s shock announcement at the Heyneke Meyer press conference about the Kings’ guaranteed inclusion in Super Rugby for 2013? Surely not.

So where does Mark Keohane fit into all this?

Keohane has recently stepped up his anti – Lions rhetoric in his articles, and while not directly naming the Kings in his most recent one, it is clear where his views emanate from. The vested interest he has in servicing his ex-colleagues at SARU (SASCOC contracts etc.) has clearly skewed the views of an already overly opinionated man.

But wait, there’s more.

After the establishment of the Kings, the son of Cheeky Watson – president of the Eastern Province Rugby Union (under which the Kings operate) – Luke, was brought back from Bath to play for the Kings. In May 2011 HSM (with Mark Keohane again at the forefront) announced that it had decided to enter into the field of player management, a first for the publishing company. Furthermore it was announced that their first client would be none other than Luke Watson. Queue the Mark Keohane propaganda machine.

The cover of the very next SA Rugby magazine was adorned by – yes, you guessed it – Luke Watson, with the rather flattering caption “Return of the King”.  This was to be only the start of the Keohane marketing hype surrounding Watson and the Kings.

At the same press conference where SARU dropped the Kings bombshell on an unsuspecting audience, Ryan Vrede, a HSM journalist, asked Heyneke Meyer if Luke Watson – a player languishing in the second tier of SA Rugby and who hasn’t been in Bok contention since mid-2008 – was a contender for the position of Springbok captain. These blatant attempts by Keohane to force the name of Luke Watson into mainstream media while he has done nothing to get it there serves to illustrate the hidden agenda and inherent corrupt nature of a man who has lived off the rise and fall of others for far too long.

Not only has the media machine being rolling for Luke Watson, but others being managed under yet another Accelerate Sport company – In-Site Athlete Management – have been enjoying a rise in publicity in SA Rugby magazine as well. Willem Alberts received some ego stroking in May 2011, as did another In-Site managed player -Joe van Niekerk – in March 2012, with the article stating that he is playing the best rugby of his career at Toulon. Buttering him up for a big money move back to SA perhaps?

It is clear that Keo’s connection into Accelerate stretches deep, with an “I’ll scratch your back you scratch mine” policy which benefits both sides. Gideon Sam made sure he looked after Mark with the awarding of the SASCOC account, Mark in turn ensures that the business interests of Accelerate Sport and its stakeholders remains in the mainstream media, and they all walk away happy.

The reason why Keo has gone on a Lions bashing campaign of late should come as no surprise when taking the above into account. Mark Keohane is no longer a journalist; he hasn’t been for quite a while. He is a businessman with a platform to promote his interests and those of others close to him, a platform which he uses selflessly and without shame.

 

BALLZ RADIO – MARK KEOHANE INTERVIEW

The link to this rather long telephone conversation, can be found HERE, listen to it… compare it to what is said above, then go on!

 

AntsRant – Ant Kaplan’s Article – The Keo-Kings

The LINK

The Article:

*** Note *** I started this article strongly against Keo, having fallen victim to, and being exposed to a lot of the commentary on Twitter. I have tried to look at this whole issue as objectively as possible, something I’m not usually good at, being an emotional character.

So there is a Twar raging at the moment. First up, I’m not surprised, as Twitter is brittle like that. What I DO find amusing, is just how much can be said in 140 characters or less.

Briefly explained, some allegations have been levelled against one Mark Keohane (hereafter referred to as “Keo”) regarding his punting of the imminent inclusion of the Kings into the 2013 SupeRugby competition, along with his incessant bad-mouthing of the Lions poor form over the past (read: all) SupeRugby seasons, and lastly, his perceived bias towards the Kings for financial gain.

I’ll address the issues separately and provide my simple-minded insight into the issues that have stirred up a hornets nest.

Keo himself:

His website, www.keo.co.za is the only rugby website I regularly read. Sometimes it is to get rugby scores when I am not near a TV, sometimes it is to read match reviews, and other times it is to satisfy my yearning for rugby news stories.

Apparently Keo has a finger in a lot of pies. He exposed the farce that was the build-up to the fatal 2003 Rugby World Cup campaign, and then used that platform to launch his journalist career. I say well-played. He exposed some shit and benefitted from it. I see nothing wrong with that. Many people play that game, feeding off their two minutes in the limelight and turning it into a tangible profit.

On the flip-side, I am also in possession of a rather incriminating document that says some pretty shocking things about him as a person, but whatever personal evils one has, I am not judging here. Just leave my rugby alone.

The Two Twitter-Trios:

Like my use of alliteration? Good.

Keo has copped it big-time on Twitter of late, along with his fellow writers / editors, Simon Borchardt and Ryan Vrede. These three comprise the first Twitter-Trio. Now I’m no Twitter expert, but I believe that they took the wrong approach in handling this. They should have, collectively, decided on a unified response that would have shown them to be professional. Their responses of late have been disappointing, given that Keo was media liaison officer for the Boks before. He should know how to be a spin-doctor, and I believe he’s missed a trick here. Perhaps he believes that there is no such thing as bad publicity – that only works in Hollywood. This is South Africa, and this is rugby, OUR game.

The second Twitter-Trio comes in the form of Francois Bonthuys, Graeme Joffe, and someone very dear to me, Chris Swart. I need to make my friendship clear here, as it may affect my objectivity – I, however, hope it does not, and hope I am big enough to avoid taking sides through familiarity. I first caught wind of what may be coming when Chris started tweeting Keo on some rather disturbing allegations, and it seemed to stay there for a while. Then it spread to Ryan Vrede, and Simon Borchardt. Soon, Graeme Joffe waded in.

And then it happened. An article was written. The original article, by Francois Bonthuys, was published here, but was removed (probably under duress / pressure) and re-published here. The article tears into Keo and co. Read it for yourself and draw your own conclusions.

Conspiracy? What conspiracy? (Seriously)

The article makes a series of allegations, but I actually fail to see what has actually been done wrong, or any kind of conspiracy.

A journalist has used his influence to further his income? That’s business, and is called a fair-go.

A bad business deal with Jake White? That’s also business, and many businesses fail.

A tender being awarded without the tender process being followed? If we are going to pick this one to pieces, we may as well go after any and all ANC-led cronyism. I am not agreeing with the process not being followed, and perhaps this could be looked into. Something to note here is that Keo-and-co’s conduct on Twitter does not inspire a sense of confidence, given that HSM will be handling the media, marketing and PR of SASCOC.

Keo is also linked (loosely, and via ex-colleagues) with Accelerate Sport, who manages Nelson Mandela Stadium. I don’t get what the conspiracy is here. If you have worked with people in business before, and you know that working with them works for you, or you believe that their business is good, sound and would work, why not help them out, from a punting point-of-view.

HSM announced it is moving into player-management and suddenly the Keo website is flooded with pro-Luke Watson articles? If my company had made that move and I had a platform like the Keo website to promote a player I was managing, I’d use it as often as I can. I can understand the pro-Luke Watson articles from a business point-of-view.

Out of principle, I cannot stand Luke Watson myself, and would never have taken him on as a client. I would rather chew off my own arm than have to deal with the political shenanigans and negative aura that surrounds anyone in the Watson family. I cannot find it in my heart to forgive what he said about the Springbok jersey, and I also remember reading in John Smit’s book that Luke was a cancer in the team.

But that’s me. Keo may see things differently to me, and that is his choice – not mine.

Another point to consider when talking about biased journalism: I hardly see any pro-ANC journalism on the News24 website. I also hardly see any pro-DA journalism in The Sowetan website. Why are we not taking on these giants of the internet for being biased? Because if we don’t like what we are reading, we go somewhere else and find what we are looking for, that’s why. The internet is free-to-all and free-thinking, full of opinions, and no-one is forced to go to any one website for all their requirements, be it sport, news or gossip. Keo has used his platform (which he owns and is entitled to write what he wants), to promote his own content. Again, who wouldn’t, when it comes down to looking after one’s own pocket?

The Watsons:

Hmmm. So Luke Watson is playing first-division Vodacom Cup rugby. I can see where the apparent-conspiracy may be here. He leaves SA in shame, comes back, plays for a second-rate team that gets promoted to SupeRugby, looks good because all the other players look bad, and gets a Bok call-up.

Here in Australia, we don’t get any Vodacom cup coverage, so I have no idea if he’s playing well or not. I DO know that I couldn’t judge him fairly when playing, as my hatred for what he did runs far too deep. So I’ll just leave it at a “no comment”.

Keo’s Lions-bashing

The Lions have been abysmal for the past few seasons of SupeRugby – there can be no denying it. Lions-bashing by all and sundry should be expected – just because someone appears to have other agendas in their reporting makes it look worse than it actually is.

Honestly, the Lions don’t deserve to be playing in this competition. But that doesn’t mean that the Kings do either, which brings me to the next point.

The Kings

I cannot, for the life of me, comprehend the decision made by SARU to include the Kings in the SupeRugby competition from 2013. It just blows my mind. Here we have a second-division rugby team being promised a place in (arguably) the world’s most difficult and competitive non-international rugby competition. One thing that is being punted is that the Kings would buy players and get onto the rugby band-wagon. With what money? Why can that money not be invested in getting the existing Lions sorted out, rather than starting fresh at another union?

The Kings, based on current form, do not deserve a place in SupeRugby.

If there is a business-decision behind the inclusion of the Kings in 2013, it is a very sad, dark day for South African sports.

And what’s this about the Cats?

A combined Free State and Lions team? Really? It doesn’t sound right to me – it sounds like a logistical nightmare, not to mention having to unify two unions and the upheaval that will be experienced by players, supporters and support staff.

No. Just no.

We have been down this path with the Cats and it failed (although they managed to contest one “Super Rugby” semi-final in 2001).

So, no. Just no.

So what’s the solution, hey?

Well, it’s simple. The most simple of solutions would be to allow the best-performing, non-SupeRugby team to be the token 5^th South African SupeRugby team. This makes sense, right?

Well, it does and it doesn’t.

You see, the winner of the promotion to SupeRugby may only be decided on the night of the final of the Currie Cup.

As an example, let’s say the Kings and Griquas play in the final (or don’t, in which case it comes down to log position). Both are non-SupeRugby-playing teams. The winner of this game gets promoted.

How long does it take for a team to prepare for a SupeRugby tournament? Aside from extra training, there are corporate deals, sponsorships, branding, fixture dates, travel arrangements, and so many more things to arrange that it doesn’t make sense to have a ”floating” 5^th spot that could change year-on-year. There is just not enough time to create the hype.

So I proposed a solution, and then argue myself out of it.

I will probably take a lot of flak for my thoughts on this blog. I do not question the motives of the writers of the original article that brought this to the surface – all I have done is look at this as objectively as I could, and I cannot find fault with someone pursuing their own agendas – just don’t interfere my rugby-watching experience.

 

RUGGAWORLD – Morné’s Article – King for a day

The LINK

The Article:

The Southern Kings are far from assured of Super Rugby participation in 2013.

As this Kings saga continues to unfold I am rather surprised by all the media reports stating that the Kings are currently the only franchise guaranteed of a spot in next year’s competition, with one of the remaining 5 having to make way for them.

It is not that I don’t understand these reports, I just cannot believe that people are so gullible!

Not soon after we heard that the general council voted unanimously for the Kings inclusion, a letter from the current five franchises surfaced in the media soon afterwards stating that; “None of the existing franchises shall be prejudiced by such inclusion [of the Kings] in any way whatsoever; none of the existing franchises shall be eliminated from the tournament in 2013 or at any stage thereafter as a result of the inclusion of the Kings.”

This prompted SA Rugby to hastily try and arrange a meeting with their SANZAR partners (New Zealand and Australia) to propose a change in the current format to include a 6^th South African franchise – a suggestion shot down numerous times by NZAR stating there can be no change in the current, 15-team conference format until 2015 when the broadcast deal comes to an end.

The meeting (scheduled for some time in March) of course also never took place, as the delegation selected to present the case felt they did not have enough information to present a good case.

It has now been reported that SA Rugby has advised the current 5 franchises, as-well as the Kings, that a meeting will take place between all the parties to try and sort this mess out later this month.  Exactly what the outcome of this meeting will be is anyone’s guess as there was no agenda attached to the email by SA Rugby sent to the unions.

Readers of this site might understand why all of this has a very familiar look and feel to it…

When we started out here at RuggaWorld one of the hottest topics was that of the Southern Spears, the Kings you know now in all but name.  Their CEO at the time, Tony McKeever, was well known to many on this site and he even posted his own comments, thoughts and news here.  And it is what unfolded in 2005 through to 2006 (and many years following) that has me thinking SA Rugby (who still has the same President in place since the 2005 fiasco) will again somehow find a way to screw the Kings over.

The believe currently in the Kings ‘guaranteed’ participation in 2013 is based on the fact that the general council voted unanimously in favour of this in January this year.  To me personally, that means about as much as what my horoscope tells me every morning in the paper… Let me explain.

In June of 2005 SA Rugby not only voted unanimously for the Spears entrenchment in the Currie Cup Premier division of 2006, but also guaranteed Super Rugby participation in 2007 and 2008 in addition to financially assist them up to then (Super Rugby inclusion) and find them sponsors.

This went further where this decision was ratified in December of 2005 culminating in the Spears actually signing a franchise participation agreement in 2006!  But wait, there is more (as they would say on Verimark)!  This agreement itself was found valid in a court of law in June 2006 when a judge ruled that the agreement was binding and that SA Rugby should make good on their promises.

Of course what followed was some of the best back-hand dealings to dissolve the Spears but that is another story.  The point here is; a silly vote recorded in the minutes of a SARU general council meaning which for some reason have most believing the Kings are ‘guaranteed’ participation in 2013 means absolutely nothing in my view.

As in 2006, none of the current 5 franchises will back down and give up millions of Rands of income from a share of the broadcasting deal not to mention the sponsorship money they get from just playing in the competition.  If you don’t believe me, read the letter they sent to SA Rugby following the meeting in January to include the Kings.

The problem SA Rugby sits with is the criteria they will use in order to eliminate any of the current 5 teams.  More than half-way through the season a decision that the ‘lowest’ ranking franchise is to get the boot will see a ton of litigation thrown in the direction of SA Rugby.  A decision to play a promotion/relegation match will not fly with the Kings who with their current player resources cannot make it past the quarter finals of the Vodacom Cup.

Another option could be to institute a condition to have all franchises comply with a minimum financial reserve in order to qualify for a franchise license (which are up for grabs at the end of this year actually) but that will also be a hard sell given the Kings themselves might not be much better off financially than the Lions.

You see boys and girls, when it comes down to it I see the same gutless approach by SA Rugby now which I did in 2006.  They are quite simply incapable of making tough decisions and would rather try and play a situation out than take responsibility for it.  And they are solely responsible for this mess using the Kings or Eastern Cape region as their banner whenever they try and win favour with government or government backing for something (like a Rugby World Cup bid).

I feel for the Kings, I really do. SA Rugby owes them this – but like the Spears in 2006, they will too not see the light of Super Rugby, at least not in 2013.  At least they were Kings for a day in January…

 

My Viewpoint

Some of what is said and alleged makes one think, does’nt it?

Whatever is said above, whatever inferences are made about interests in or wanting to promote the Southern Kings or wanting the Lions to fail and be relegated, the darker side of rugby journalism, rugby politics and shady connections between parties for the lure of money and power and / or the manipulation of the rugby playing field… SARU stands at the core of all of this.

SARU also stands at the solution to all of this.

I have no doubt SARU is responsible for a large amount of the uncertainty, the hoooo haaaa, the furore… and the dillemma. They are the only ones holding the keys to bring South African Rugby out of this mess as clean as possible.

More than that, SARU carries the hopes and aspirations of rugby in this beautiful country squarely on their shoulders, and they have the clear DUTY and OBLIGATION to see that the correct decisions are made from hereon in regarding the Southern Kings as well as the other SA Super Rugby franchises!

SARU has the duty to protect the Lions and prevent their downfall, similarly they have the duty to make rugby stronger and representative in the Southern and Eastern Cape and to do EVERYTHING IN THEIR POWER, everything humanly possible, to further the interests of rugby, and rugby alone, in South Africa.

That is their mandate, that is why SARU exists and why we have to tolerate them, however difficult it might be at times!

The buck stops with THEM!

Forget about favours for friends, forget about self-interest, forget about promises made, forget about bribery and corruption… just make the RIGHT DECISIONS in the interests of the game in South Africa we so adore!

 

Of course I have my own viewpoints about the parties involved and discussed, and of course I read between the lines, of course I hear the blunt denials!

I make up my own mind though, and I have indeed made up my mind about this issue and others… I ask you to do the same!

 

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this Article and in the contents of the LINKS provided in this Article, does not necessarily represent the viewpoints of this website (Rugby-Talk) or of any of it’s Authors or Proprietors. The viewpoints of commentators on this Article also do not represent the viewpoints of this website or of any of it’s Authors or Proprietors.

We urge you, the rugby public, to be responsible in formulating and expressing your views on the matter… but for goodness sakes do have your say and do have an opinion!