The Spammers have been SPAMMED, http://www.ruggaworld.com is back online!
Google

Friday, February 03, 2006

 

Super 14: 'Five franchises are ambushing SA rugby' - Spears CEO


Spears CEO Tony McKeever accused the other five franchises of having "ambushed" SA rugby and admitted that his side's participation is in jeopardy following yesterday's meeting between the five current franchises, the Spears and the management of SA Rugby (Pty) Ltd in Cape Town.

Speaking to rugby365.com McKeever pointed out that they have all been aware of the agreement reached by the President's Council in June last year and they waited until now to raise their concerns in an official forum.

He said the fact that the five waited until eight days before the participation agreement (for the 2006 Super 14) had to be signed and then not to sign, is simply not on.

"I just think it is an ambush of SA Rugby," McKeever said. "This promotion-relegation issue has been on the table, agreed to by the president's council, since June last year.

"For these guys to turn around now, on February 2, and say they won't sign [the SANZAR participation agreement] is simply not on.

"How would the Cheetahs have felt if we had won the rights to host the franchise and they now sat on my side of the table?"

McKeever also said his team should not be judged simply on the basis of just three warm-up games, when all five the other teams have been around for years and have had plenty of time to build.

"If we had been together for a year and had been able to build a team it would have been different. Just give us a fair chance," he said.


Comments:
What does the agreement state?

Can they play if they refuse to sign the agreement?

If they don't want to sign, then put the Spears, Boland, Griquas, SWD and the Leopards in to play.

They are not bigger than the game.

OK I know it is a bit drastic, but hell if you want to act like an arse, expect to be treated like one.
 
Touche Donner.

If they won't sign, don't let them play.

Blacklist their players or something.

Wonder what Murdoch thinks of this...
 
Davids,

I am just fedup with this childish behaviour.

If they don't want it give it to someone who will grab the opportunity with both hands.

We might be surprised. If we get two teams at the bottom of the log, what will be different from other years.

Imagine the talent that will be coming through the system then.
 
Not only Murdoch, David - every rugby administration anywhere in the world!
Please someone, tell me this is only a joke!
 
hey check this out!

i have looked into my crystal ball and i saw the following.

brian the circus lion will make 'secret' phone calls to each of the big 5 unions - telling them he will veto the decision made last year - using some piss poor excuse and offer the spears som piss willy reward or deal like promising to push cash into the region, bring a sponsor onboard, develop a team to be competitive etc etc.

in exchange he wants the big 5's votes at the AGM - the promise of sponsors will win him the votes of the 3 feeder unions in the spears region - that makes 8, add the leopards and their AB test into the equation - that is 9 votes....

that will give him a majority vote and he stays in office for 2 more years where he will drag the investigation out and our rugby is back to square 1...

actually, our rugby would have lost 10 years...

watch this space........
 
I agree. If they refuse to sign, don't allow them to play. They think they are mightier than Thou. It is not their birthright. The only reason they are as powerful as they are, is because they have been on the S10 then 12 now 14 gravy train and can bankroll they power by buying the players developed by the smaller provinces while spitting in these provinces' faces. Down with them and up with the small guys (like the Spaers).  
PissAnt,

The CEO of the "big" 5 is probably waiting to see who calls first, Circusmasteer VAn Rooyen or Hoskins.

Seeing that both said they won't play teh political game, I hope they keep to their word and this backfires in the franchises faces.
 
PA is very sharp today!
Ja, I suppose that's how things work when you have people involved with no principles, no honour and no honesty.
Move-move-move - lemme get my snout into the gravy trough. I'll leave you some if you scratch my back.
 
"How would the Cheetahs have felt if we had won the rights to host the franchise and they now sat on my side of the table?"

The point is Tony-

The Cheetahs were judged to be the No 2 Franchise when the 5 Franchises were awarded

Cheetahs are the CC Champs 2005

The 8 June 2005 deal were brokered because the Big 4- believed that it would be the Cheetahs going down in 2006- they are not so sure about that anymore.

Point is - the 8 june 2005 decision was based on political interference

It will never be a good decision- those who might be affected by it is taking astance against it- so live with it.

You know my stance on the Spears

whether they win or lose- they represent the asperations of a region- now it is for the rugby people of that region to build the Spears- first a fraudless infrastructure and then an ass-kicking field on the team

You guys are spinning the truth the way keo does- your integrity will end up on the same rubbish dump
 
OO,

you have to be careful here.

no matter what the reasons for the agreement and why it was taken - fact remains EVRYONE, including the cheetahs agreed to it.

there is a difference between spinning the truth and asking justified questions.

the article says ALL 5 unions, this includes the cheetahs - i dont give a fat shit who gets relegated, fact remains promises were made and plans and structures were put in place because of that.

now suddenly everyone is turning against it - questions about the integrity of the so called big 5 has to be asked.

and everyone is guilty, all th unions.

like you said, a better game for all, but how can we build a better game for all if decisions are made and carried out like it is now?

ask the questions and state the obvious - facts are facts and those responsible must be held accountable
 
PA

I am careful thanks

Was the 8 June 2005 a good decision yes or no

Was it made under duress- yes or no

Based on that I am still say - if you based a new order on the 8 June 2005 decision- you will still not get integrity in our rugby

Face it- integrity with regard to the S14 participation went out of the window when the SARU appointed franchises were not accepted.

Now all of us must deal with the consequences

I care Habba about Harold verster and his dealings- but yes as the Cheetah Representative his dealings is binding to us. But yesterday was 2 February 2006-not 8 June 2005- so maybe some of the incorrect powerplays that went on then- is in for a review.

The point i am making is that politics caused this problem- now the power mongers wants to fix it - their way

I stand by my take on integrity- especially the spinning part.

it is my view
 
OO,

sorry this damn blogger pissed out again, in response:


was the decision good - no i have said it many times.

was it made because of outside pressures - most definately.

and yes we must deal with the consequences, that is exactly what we want, and what are they?

as you mentioned the power mongers (unions) want to throw their weight around because the 'promises' passed last year, holds absolutely no relevance to the situation they are now faced with.

again integrity is what everyone wants. how do we get it? by taking a stance against shit like this.

it is because of situations like this that rugby in SA is in chaos.

to get this right integrity and honouring agreements according to the constitutions of the organisation is vitally important.

ask the question that has been asked a million times already - why do they scream blue murder only now?????

and we should give a shit about the harold versters and koos bassons and all the monkey's and what they do - their decisions shape not only the unions they are in charge of but also that of the springboks.

to clean rugby out and make it a 'better game for all' we need leaders with integrity and honour - otherwise where is this going to stop - killing rugby completely?

because that is where it is heading to.
 
PA

I am supporting the fact that the Spears must not be abandoned but supported- by all

I am supporting the total cleaning out of South African Rugby- I am somewhat reserved on the people that we will be getting, but lets keep that for later.

I am not supporting the fact that non- compliance to the 8 June 2005 "AGREEMENT" is making all a villain.

You are- that is why we are in dis
 
let take it further from there

You are- that is why we are in disagreement

I am for a clean out of self serving individuals- and would like to see the rugby environment changed in such a way that individuals like kyle nel, Bvr et al who is currently being investigated- should be unable to do what ever they are being suspected of.- A BETTER GAME FOR ALL is my slogan - courtesy of the ANC of course

My point on the 8 June 2005 is:

It is not the Holy Grail of interity- in trying to create that impression you are spinning like Keo- albeit for a different purpose

Donner

"to get this right integrity and honouring agreements according to the constitutions of the organisation is vitally important.

ask the question that has been asked a million times already - why do they scream blue murder only now?????"

Again, the 8 June 2005 decision is not an above board( hella-a pun there) decision, so do sanctify it just because it is profitable to the Spears.

They scream about it now, because it suits them- or must they only plays to the tune that you want to play Noot vir Noot on?

I will not post on this again- not because i cannot defend my stance- just that I do not want to be associated with the Spinning process.

Have a good day then
 
OO

HUH??????
 
Again, the 8 June 2005 decision is not an above board( hella-a pun there) decision, so do sanctify it just because it is profitable to the Spears.

They scream about it now, because it suits them- or must they only plays to the tune that you want to play Noot vir Noot on?


whether you post again or not i still dont get what you are saying.

are you saying that what happened on june 8 was not a legal decision and holds no water or grounds?

because that is my whole argument. and if it is your view that we are spinning like keo on that it is your opinion, i see it as simply stating a simple fact that illustrates exactly why rugby in this country is in the state it is.

do you think BVR, prinsloo, nel are the only ones corrupting and killing the game?

do you think this type of thing will be accepted in any business (non sport related)?

integrity is not the holy grail or the saving grace of rugby, but it sure as hell would be a nice place to start if we are to change things in SA rugby.

i actually fail to see how this is spinning at all?

keo spinning works on simple principle's, take information, manipulate it in order to promote oneselve or organisations that is of interest to you.

we are simply stating facts there for anyone to see.

forming an opinion on the facts.

and stating it.

what we do welcome is debate on these issues which does affect the game we love. we wont always agree of course, but we need to ask questions otherwise we become mindless sheep.
 
I am not supporting the fact that non- compliance to the 8 June 2005 "AGREEMENT" is making all a villain.

somehow i missed that first comment.

okay so then we will not agree because i believe this agreement, (8 june) and the turn about now is exactly what is wrong with our rugby, whether it was done in principle or paper, does not matter.

if this is the way rugby in SA is governed, we are in a lot of shit.
 
Man, this argument is getting hectic.

PA and OO,

I agree with both of you to a certain extent.

PA, I agree that it is a sin to now go back on their words that they gave last year.

OO, agree that the decision was a bad one to start with in the first place.

To argue about it is not going to help. Someone is going to take someone to court about this no matter what happens.

None of the big unions are going to just accept that they are going to lose that revenue while the Spears will argue that they have been awarded a contract.

Die kak gaan spat, wat ook al gebeur.
 
PA,

By the way, that scenario you described about van Rooyen making promises and keeping his position scared the living daylights out of me.
 
Generaal,

Touche. Shit I hope it is not the case.
 
no doubt general,

i would just like to see rugby win for a change.

maar die kak gaan definitief spat
 
Sharp?

PA is very cynical today is more like it.

Maybe some aged decrepit semi senile old judicial officer is the best person to make the call.
 
It would actually fit in with the circus like proportions this is taking on.  
Post a Comment


<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?