Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
Super Rugby
Southern Kings to play Super Rugby from 2013
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TRF_stormer2010" data-source="post: 480799" data-attributes="member: 39190"><p>^^^ I'd rather see the bullshit posts removed than the entire thread being closed.</p><p></p><p>EDIT; I ment this short paragraph in response to the lady's post above yours.</p><p></p><p>Anyway, back on topic; I read in the 'Rapport' today, and Hoskins confirmed this, that the 5 SA franchizes have put an ultimatum to SARU stating that it's all 5 of them, with or without the Kings as a sixth team, or none of them in the competition...</p><p></p><p>While I sympathize with our 5 existing franchises and the fact that they have to deal with the incompetence and political sideshows of SARU the fact remains that we signed off on contracts and I for one would be very embarrassed as a South African if we did end up going against our commitments. So there are a few possibilities;</p><p></p><p>- The Kings will have to wait to 2015 or for some other solution.</p><p></p><p>- SARU end up calling the bluff and send in 5 other teams (Boland, Griquas, Kings etc) and the 'big 5' will have to sort something out for themsleves. This would make a joke of the SA conference though and I can't see anybody other than the new franchizes and the SA politicians being happy about it. That said, SARU have the right to put whoever they want in the competition as I understand that the 5 franchises as it stands come to an end at the end of 2012 (with their rights only stretching so far).</p><p></p><p>- 16 teams compete from 2012 onward. </p><p></p><p>I had a look and what I'd propose for a 16 team format without doing away with the conference system that the Aussies management worked so hard to put togeteher would look something like this;</p><p></p><p>5 team in each of the Aus and NZ conferences and 6 in SA. With home and away matches in conference and not playing one of the other franchises' teams each that comes to 17 games for each of teh Aus and NZ teams (8 domestic and 9 games against foregin opposition) and 18 games for each SA team (10 domestic and 8 agaist foreign opp). That means more games (1 for Aus, NZ teams and 2 for SA teams) and thus more money to satisfy News Corp and we give each Aus and NZ team 4 free points to make up for them 'missing' a match against the SA conferences.</p><p></p><p>Any thoughts?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>There ihas been a lot of money allready invested in the Kings and the entire EP region (how much of that reached it's intended goal is up for debate though). I do think though that a franchise in the area could be very sucessful if they don't go all out for 'affrimative action' as they might. If they do get the chance to compete in S15 that will be all the draw they need to lure some top quality players IMO; they have the stadium and support ITO fans and money, they have a fantastic climate and beaches. I can't see many top SA players not wanting to play for them if they would get the chance to play a leading role. </p><p></p><p>The off-putting factors though are major political interference in sport in the area; much more so than in other areas in the country, which might lead to some bad decisions being made; political considerations may get preference over rugby considerations. Between the Lions, Cheetahs and overseas -based SA players there is more than enough player resources to help them out if they went that route. The Lions have major local competition in the Bulls being just a stones through away and the Cheetahs are on the other hand isolated ITO geography, population and finance-wise and don't have many of the draw-cards other regions have.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TRF_stormer2010, post: 480799, member: 39190"] ^^^ I'd rather see the bullshit posts removed than the entire thread being closed. EDIT; I ment this short paragraph in response to the lady's post above yours. Anyway, back on topic; I read in the 'Rapport' today, and Hoskins confirmed this, that the 5 SA franchizes have put an ultimatum to SARU stating that it's all 5 of them, with or without the Kings as a sixth team, or none of them in the competition... While I sympathize with our 5 existing franchises and the fact that they have to deal with the incompetence and political sideshows of SARU the fact remains that we signed off on contracts and I for one would be very embarrassed as a South African if we did end up going against our commitments. So there are a few possibilities; - The Kings will have to wait to 2015 or for some other solution. - SARU end up calling the bluff and send in 5 other teams (Boland, Griquas, Kings etc) and the 'big 5' will have to sort something out for themsleves. This would make a joke of the SA conference though and I can't see anybody other than the new franchizes and the SA politicians being happy about it. That said, SARU have the right to put whoever they want in the competition as I understand that the 5 franchises as it stands come to an end at the end of 2012 (with their rights only stretching so far). - 16 teams compete from 2012 onward. I had a look and what I'd propose for a 16 team format without doing away with the conference system that the Aussies management worked so hard to put togeteher would look something like this; 5 team in each of the Aus and NZ conferences and 6 in SA. With home and away matches in conference and not playing one of the other franchises' teams each that comes to 17 games for each of teh Aus and NZ teams (8 domestic and 9 games against foregin opposition) and 18 games for each SA team (10 domestic and 8 agaist foreign opp). That means more games (1 for Aus, NZ teams and 2 for SA teams) and thus more money to satisfy News Corp and we give each Aus and NZ team 4 free points to make up for them 'missing' a match against the SA conferences. Any thoughts? There ihas been a lot of money allready invested in the Kings and the entire EP region (how much of that reached it's intended goal is up for debate though). I do think though that a franchise in the area could be very sucessful if they don't go all out for 'affrimative action' as they might. If they do get the chance to compete in S15 that will be all the draw they need to lure some top quality players IMO; they have the stadium and support ITO fans and money, they have a fantastic climate and beaches. I can't see many top SA players not wanting to play for them if they would get the chance to play a leading role. The off-putting factors though are major political interference in sport in the area; much more so than in other areas in the country, which might lead to some bad decisions being made; political considerations may get preference over rugby considerations. Between the Lions, Cheetahs and overseas -based SA players there is more than enough player resources to help them out if they went that route. The Lions have major local competition in the Bulls being just a stones through away and the Cheetahs are on the other hand isolated ITO geography, population and finance-wise and don't have many of the draw-cards other regions have. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
Super Rugby
Southern Kings to play Super Rugby from 2013
Top