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.
January 27th, 2013 at 13:36 SAST
Good one SARU, at least some balls showed in this regard!
January 27th, 2013 at 13:45 SAST
Well saru do something right. If only two foreign players are allowed by other teams then it has to be the same for Kings.
January 27th, 2013 at 16:19 SAST
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.
January 27th, 2013 at 16:30 SAST
3 @ leon: I wont.
January 27th, 2013 at 16:31 SAST
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.
January 27th, 2013 at 16:39 SAST
IndestructiBULL wrote:
Whoops… I meant five overseas players
January 27th, 2013 at 16:41 SAST
Eish….
IndestructiBULL = xkreniwp
January 27th, 2013 at 17:57 SAST
@ 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?
January 27th, 2013 at 18:20 SAST
@ 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.
January 27th, 2013 at 18:27 SAST
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…
January 27th, 2013 at 18:35 SAST
@ 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)
January 27th, 2013 at 18:48 SAST
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
January 27th, 2013 at 18:52 SAST
@ superBul: If I look at the logs between 1993-94 it really looks like the Bulls lost a relegation match against the kings?
January 27th, 2013 at 18:52 SAST
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.
January 27th, 2013 at 18:55 SAST
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.
January 27th, 2013 at 19:09 SAST
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
January 27th, 2013 at 19:14 SAST
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
January 27th, 2013 at 19:18 SAST
17 @ xkreniwp:
Hehehehe
You rate WP high!
Hahaha
January 27th, 2013 at 19:19 SAST
@ grootblousmile: Hehehe… Yeah, blame it on those damn ozzies!
January 27th, 2013 at 19:21 SAST
19 @ xkreniwp:
Must say, I’ll support Pappegaaifontein’s 3rd team of Pappegaaie before I support the Southern Kings… hehehe
January 27th, 2013 at 19:25 SAST
@ 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
January 27th, 2013 at 19:27 SAST
Maths teacher: I have 5 bottles in one hand, and 6 in the other. What do I have?
Student: “A drinking problem.
January 27th, 2013 at 19:29 SAST
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…
January 27th, 2013 at 19:29 SAST
@ 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…
January 27th, 2013 at 19:32 SAST
superBul wrote:
I think you meant the IRB changes the law to make it more complicated for the refs to catch them kiwi’s….
January 27th, 2013 at 19:32 SAST
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!
January 27th, 2013 at 19:37 SAST
@ grootblousmile: Geluk mater! My site is nie eers naby daai syfer nie…. Gooi sommer ‘n ekstra klop daar op jou rug.
January 27th, 2013 at 19:38 SAST
@ 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…?
January 27th, 2013 at 19:39 SAST
Ai… Parental duties, sal weer een of ander tyd chat! Cheerz
January 27th, 2013 at 19:40 SAST
28 @ xkreniwp:
Nee flok, ek weetie hoe jy DIT reggekry het nie…
January 27th, 2013 at 19:42 SAST
grootblousmile wrote:
January 27th, 2013 at 19:48 SAST
@ xkreniwp:
geniet dit, ek het die heel naweek my kleinkind saam ons gehad toe ons na my skoonouers toe was. Maar hy was darem n plesier, baie goed manierd. So al het ek nou nie my kinders kon tem nie het hulle tog genoeg geleer om hul kindertjies ordentlik en met goeie maniere groot te maak.
January 27th, 2013 at 21:28 SAST
What I don’t understand is:
Surely it should the Springboks first
Then any team but the Kings
Then the WP / Stormers
Then the Sharks
The Puke and Cheeky
Then whoeber………….
How can you put YOUR COUNTRY and your province on the same level.
January 27th, 2013 at 21:57 SAST
33 @ Loosehead:
YOU might have it different… different strokes for different folks.
If the Bulls had to play the Springboks (won’t ever happen I suppose), I would have a very tough choice whom to support… and would personally probably lean towards supporting the Bulls.
How’s that for forthright honesty about the support situation from me.
Of course, everybody would differ and might scoff at me for my allegiance, but hey, see the worry in my eye!
January 27th, 2013 at 23:53 SAST
34 @ grootblousmile:
The funny thing here is that I know fokkol about soccer, and have no interist in it at all. Yet SOUTH AFRICA were playing Morocco tonight, and I watched a bit of the 2/2 yawn fest, and then I noticed that it was on SS4, andthere was a game from Ingerland on SS3 (which is the premier soccer channel) and that got me thinking about this thread. I hate the current Springbok game plan and tactics, yet I support them as they represent my country. I may bitch and moan (a bit), yet the Boks come first.
If the Boks played against the Freestate, Shimla’s, Milnerton / Harlequins or Durbanville, I would support the Boks even though they are playing HM’s shit style of rugby.
January 28th, 2013 at 00:06 SAST
35 @ Loosehead:
And I think that any of the above mentioned teams (except the Freestat who can’t even beat the Lions) could beat the shit that that is being dished up by the Boks under HM. Not that I would support them against Hm’s Boks.
January 28th, 2013 at 07:53 SAST
Loosehead wrote:
Most of the time, the Bulls and Springboks are the same team…. *just kidding*
January 28th, 2013 at 07:56 SAST
@ superBul: Ja, dis lekker as die kinders by die huis is, maar bl*ksem hulle kan my party dae grys hare gee….
January 28th, 2013 at 08:01 SAST
xkreniwp wrote:
…AND you know how them ladies run around without clothing…
January 28th, 2013 at 08:12 SAST
37 @ xkreniwp: The sad thing is that you are right.