The Kings’ request to the South African Rugby Union (SARU) to allow them more than two foreign players in Super Rugby has been rejected.
Sport24
The Eastern Cape franchise has five overseas players on its books – three more than the allowed number for South African teams in Super Rugby. They are fullback Hadleigh Parkes, scrumhalf Nicolas Vergallo, utility forward Daniel Adongo, hooker Virgil Lacombe and loose forward Tomas Leonardi. They were all recently included when the Kings announced their Super Rugby squad.
The Kings’ request was rejected by SARU at the end of last year, but the men from Port Elizabeth were still hoping on a change of heart from the country’s rugby administrators. Their president, Cheeky Watson, said two weeks ago they were “still talking to various role players”.
However, it appears that SARU’s decision was made final at a meeting on Friday, with an official announcement regarding the matter expected to be made on Monday.
The Kings will play in the Super Rugby competition at the expense of the Lions. It will be the first time a team from that region has played Super Rugby since 1994 when Eastern Province played in the old Super 10 series.
The Kings start their campaign against Australia’s Western Force in Port Elizabeth on 23 February.
Good one SARU, at least some balls showed in this regard!
Well saru do something right. If only two foreign players are allowed by other teams then it has to be the same for Kings.
It would have been easier to hate them if they had more foreign players. Even though I hate the way they came to play super rugby, I just can’t get myself to support a OZ or NZ team over a SA team. Most of the players are South african after all.
I will probably support them when they play overseas teams.
3 @ leon: I wont.
Don’t think I will/can support a team that used their political connections instead of on-field talent to break into super rugby. If I’m not mistaken, the Kings (or Southern Spears) was suppose to utilize the local Eastern Province talent… But instead they’re trying to bend SARU’s arm into granting them 4 overseas players.
I really don’t think the Lions should worry about their poor Super Rugby records, it will only last until the end of this years Super Rugby.
IndestructiBULL wrote:
Whoops… I meant five overseas players
Eish….
IndestructiBULL = xkreniwp
@ IndestructiBULL:
Yes, but the players have nothing to do with the politics. They still just earn a living.
Why didn’t the Eastern Cape get a franchise back when super rugby started? Wasn’t they still playing Currie cup premier division back then?
Also, to expect the Kings to only use local EP players is not fair. None of the other SA franchises only use local regional players. As long as they use SA players it’s fine with me.
Do you think the Lions still deserved their place in Super rugby?
@ leon: Tough! The players still joined a union knowing that the union gained access to Super Rugby through political connections.
I agree that to expect the Kings to use local EP talent is not fair, but then they should not have used it as their primary reason/excuse to be included in Super Rugby. And to top it all of, they are trying to use five overseas players instead of South Africa talent.
The Lions might not deserve their place in Super Rugby if you take their performance of the last few years in consideration, but I HIGHLY doubt that any of the other franchises in the Currie Cup First division will do any better. If the Kings did beat the Lions in a relegation system/tournament instead of using their political connections then my view might have been different.
leon wrote:
They had a Super Rugby franchise back in 1994. They lost all their matches and ended last on the log in Pool A and the overall log. In other words, they blew it. Not much better than the Lions…
@ leon:
Leon you waste your time. As long as their is any Watson involvement dont expect any forgiving from the majority here. It just not possible, 7×70 does not work for the Watsons, no ways.Not here.
I also see it the way you are seeing it, it is a bunch of pro players who is trying their utmost to form a good team. Hope their is a fresh new style of play from the NZ coach. Rugby needs renewal. They have a goal and the bar is not high at all.
The Lions set a very low benchmark to reach. Winning only 6 games out of 45 played in the last 3 years. I really dont know why we are still crying. 13.3% winning , eishhhh.
I wish the Spears luck, beat the opponents , just leave My Bulls team out. (funny the EP plays out of their skin when facing the Bulls, i expect a almighty onslaught against us)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_10_%28Southern_Hemisphere_competition%29
Go feast on the Super 10 logs and stats HERE – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_10_%28Southern_Hemisphere_competition%29
The mighty Bulls only played one year , no wonder i reckon it was a insignificant little tournament
@ superBul: If I look at the logs between 1993-94 it really looks like the Bulls lost a relegation match against the kings?
Look, I am sure that people all have their pecking order in their minds about who one supports and who thereafter…
To me it is as follows in Super Rugby and Domestic Rugby:
No 1: Bulls & Blue Bulls & Springboks
No 2: Cheetahs & Free State Cheetahs… my family’s roots are from the Free State (Kroonstad – from father’s side and Clocolan – from mother’s side) and my father donned the Free State jersey as a rugby player (hooker) and in swimming and boxing, with Grey College playing a vital role through 4 generations in the family.
No 3: Stormers / WP… mostly because I respect them as the Bulls biggest foes over the decades
No 4: Sharks… mostly because I think their brand building and marketing strategies are quite good
No 5: Lions & Golden Lions, because they are South Africans after all
No 6 to No 12: Most of the New Zealand Franchises and THEREAFTER the Brumbies & Reds & Waratahs
No 13: Southern Kings… They are foreign to me on every level, from Cheeky right through to Luke, to their New Zealand Coaches and their political connections and antics
No 14: Western Force
No 15: Melbourne Rebels
That’s the way I see it and feel about it.
Internationally for me it’s the Springboks, then Argentina, Wales, France, New Zealand, Australia, Ireland, Scotland, Italy, All the South See Islands, Japan, Canada, USA…. all the lessor nations… and then last on the block England.
O, ok, ek sien hoe dit gewerk het:
The ten teams for the competition were arranged as follows:
Two Australian teams (New South Wales and Queensland).
Four New Zealand teams (the top four teams from the previous year’s National Provincial Championship).
Three South African teams (the top three teams from the previous year’s Currie Cup).
The winner of the previous year’s Pacific Tri-Nations between Fiji, Tonga and Western Samoa.
grootblousmile wrote:
expected this.
But like you said each one MUST feel the way he feels.
I used to like the EP boys back in the 80,s so it comes a long way.
There was a few real hard men in those days , some great Springboks came from there.
In those years my favorites were
Bulle
Vrystaat
TVL
EP
Natal
WP
en dan die ander klein spanne na aan my geboorte dorp, Verre Noord , Suid-Oos, Westransvaal en Oos Transvaal
Mine will be as follows:
1. Bulls and Springboks
2. Sharks (Yes… the Sharks. My wife has one big bauer pan in the kitchen)
3. Cheetahs (They went down a notch after I found out they voted for Kings)
4. Lions
5 to 10. New Zeeland Franchises (Because they CAN play some entertaining rugby)
11 to 20. Tier 1 International teams
21 to 29. Tier 2 International teams
30 to 121. Tier 3 International teams
122. The Mayans national team
123. Some rugby team on some foreign planet somewhere in the galaxy
124. WP (Just because my brother is a WP)
125. The Australians
17 @ xkreniwp:
Hehehehe
You rate WP high!
Hahaha
@ grootblousmile: Hehehe… Yeah, blame it on those damn ozzies!
19 @ xkreniwp:
Must say, I’ll support Pappegaaifontein’s 3rd team of Pappegaaie before I support the Southern Kings… hehehe
@ xkreniwp:
I dont share the Love of NZ teams that much.
There is a lot of respect they give away in my eyes because of the way they bent the rules, or more appropriately said , how they bent the interpretations and how the referees fall for that. They play that way for a year or 2 and when they are caught out they bend another law.
OK shrude businessmen might love it , but for me it is cheating. I you accept that why not accept Lance Amstrongs ways, or the Nkandla buildings
Maths teacher: I have 5 bottles in one hand, and 6 in the other. What do I have?
Student: “A drinking problem.
21 @ superBul:
It is built into your deepest fibres, after supporting the Bulls and Springboks, to always support the underdog… that’s who you are and have always been.
…. and good for you for doing that, that is your right and it still shows true character, a good trait to have…
@ grootblousmile: That makes two of us! There’s a grandma rugby team in Ivory Coast somewhere in the bush, I’ll rather support them before even thinking of supporting the Kings…
superBul wrote:
I think you meant the IRB changes the law to make it more complicated for the refs to catch them kiwi’s….
Oh, by the ways lads… we have gone over the SIX MILLION Page Impression mark here on Rugby-Talk overnight.
That is a massive number!
Laat ek gou opstaan en myself op die rug klop, voor ek elke deelnemer hier se hand skud en sê ‘n opregte dankie en dankbaarheid!
You can all go and have a shooter on Rugby-talk now… make it a stiff one!
@ grootblousmile: Geluk mater! My site is nie eers naby daai syfer nie…. Gooi sommer ‘n ekstra klop daar op jou rug.
@ grootblousmile:’n Baie snaakse ding het nou hier gebeur… Met my vorige komment op “Submit” geclick to gaan ek na die Lions vs Cheetahs thread toe…?
Ai… Parental duties, sal weer een of ander tyd chat! Cheerz
28 @ xkreniwp:
Nee flok, ek weetie hoe jy DIT reggekry het nie…
Users Online
Total 195 users including 0 member, 195 guests, 0 bot online
Most users ever online were 3735, on 31 August 2022 @ 6:23 pm
No Counter as from 31 October 2009: 41,450,884 Page Impressions
_