A recent discussion between myself and an acquaintance prompted me to assess the general mindset in South African rugby.
The person I spoke to said he recently met a sports marketing agent, and what was interesting for him is how he did not realise that we have come so far in sport in South Africa.
I reminded him that rugby in this country has been professional for a good 15 years almost so it should be hardly surprising that certain individuals make their living of promoting the game, and players from the game for financial gain.
He then asked how I reckon we compare against the likes of the same sports marketing agents in other professional sports and all I could do was smile…
I know I have covered this topic to boredom in the past on the professionalism in SA Rugby, but having read a recent article by one of the better rugby writers out there, Dan Retief, I was again reminded of something I said (I am sure Dan stole it from me!) a while back on how we conduct ourselves as professionals in a sport worth millions, and how even failure is celebrated or how we celebrate mediocrity.
Dan in his SuperSport column wrote: “Each team plays 13 matches and you pretty much need eight (8) wins to reach the last four – the unpleasant reality being that finishing fifth is as good as ending up in 14th place.”
Pretty much what has been mentioned before that even though one of our teams finish a South African best 3rd or 5th, they are nothing more than the best of a bunch of losers. They might be better than the next team, but they are still losers.
It got me thinking on the South African teams who are constantly ‘re-building’, or on an ‘upward curve’, or going through a ‘transition’ period, or (enter your own cliché here).
Of course in large the ‘system’ in which competitions run under the guidance of either SANZAR (Super 14) and SA Rugby (Currie Cup, etc.) allows for these ‘bragging rights’ or feelings of content for teams, coaches and supporters of the specific teams whether that is ending 3rd, or 10th.
It does raise questions however on how professional our approach is in the expectation of any team (specifically South African for the context of this column) for the Super 14 each year. One or two of our teams have ‘realistic’ expectations or goals of reaching the play-off’s every year, while the rest ‘aim’ to end in the top 10!
Is this really good enough for professional institutions or teams?
Just what does it say about teams like the Stormers, or Lions, or Cheetahs who have been in this competition for 5 to 12 seasons now? Are expectations of ending in the top 10 or top 7 really good enough or should we insist that the level of professionalism is lifted to that of; “Top 4, or don’t even bother pitching up please”?
Of course we cannot expect all four or five of our teams to end up 1 to 5 on the log, but my question is really more to the approach of these so-called professional setup’s where they ‘aim’ for mediocrity masking behind every conceivable clichéd excuse one can imagine.
Perhaps it is the system that needs changing, where the fear of loss is not only confined to the scoreboard or log every end of the season, but also directly influence the organisation itself, through a lower league relegation system.
In the real world failure over a period of 5 years (or even less) is simply not tolerated, there is accountability.
Every day I hear about how we want to know how coaches gets hired and fired year in and year out (being blamed for losses and failure), yet the professionals sitting in the boardroom and in the offices directly responsible for the product (rugby) being delivered by said organisation, remains the same…
I think the answer is quite simple isn’t it?
The system does not allow for real change or change where it matters. The scariest part of all this, is that the only people that can really affect a change towards a more professional structure, are the ones protecting the current structures of mediocrity for very obvious reasons.
So forgive me if from this day forward, I laugh at anyone who dares put the words rugby and professionalism in one sentence.
Morne
My question is… What will change this, because like you clearly stated the ones who need to ring the changes are often the ones at fault, and the ones protecting themselves.
The structures as is works well when your team performs, but when that goes a drift they ( top dogs ) are untouchable so to say.
I don’t have a comprehensive understanding as yourself, but would think that a public interest ( owning the team in some way, for example with shares ) could adress this matter in a way.
Is this not what is happening at other sports that can truely be seen as proffesional.
I’m asking, maybe you can clarify …
Blouste,
It is such a difficult question to answer and I suppose all we can do is to compare and relate rugby to similar organisations (which will be sports organisations) and see how it owns up.
Rugby essentially in many ways has to run in a similar way that it is currently running, specifically referring to the commercial and amateur arms in which both are crucial for the game.
We cannot run rugby like a Sanlam, or Standard Bank or whatever – there are core business principles which will always be different.
For me, it is essentially a shift that is required where the commercial side of rugby, has a larger stake or say in the running of the game, than the amateur side which is currently the case.
I think let me explain it this way.
The commercial side of rugby or the commercial arms of unions and organisations in rugby, needs to run the game of rugby, with the amateur side of rugby ensuring the values of the game is still important and applicable.
Currently the amateurs run rugby and control the commercial side of things too. That needs to shift to a more balanced approach before it can become professional or as professional as sport is allowed to become without losing its historical as well as future appeal.
Essentially you have to get commercial people (businessmen and women) to make the business (professional) decisions surrounding the game, and rugby people making the rugby decisions.
Does that make sense to you at all?
Absolutely.
But surely these commercial people must have some financial interest, hence my referring to shares for example.
Morne
As always you raise points that MANY PEOPLE in Rugby (not only in SA) will be uncomfortable with.
I’ve just spent 20 minutes “sounding off” on the subject, but it’s pointless “preaching to the converted” so I deleted it.
I think I’ve stated enough how damned unprofessional the “professional” union that I am involved with is.
The sad part is that whenever anyone raises the subject or tries to give constructive critisism or advise, you are a traitor (or far worse).
It sickens me to my core at times.
# 3
Or are that currently the situation ?
Then they must have a bigger say, to look after their “investment” so to say…
#3,
Yes absolutely, otherwise there will be no commercial incentive or point for them to get involved. Rugby currently however is very inclusive.
Why do you think out of 14 unions in SA only 5, or at best 6 unions are competitive?
Take it further, why do you think out of over 100 IRB member unions/countries only 8 are competitive?
#4 Scrum,
Rugby currently still ‘works’ in South Africa, which is why the questions we raise now is looked at, but mainly brushed off.
Why do you think John O’Neill from Australia is coming forward with radical plans and suggestions for the game of union in Aus? Why do you think he is seen as a rogue and a threat to the game by the traditionalists?
Quite simply because union is in big shit in Aus.
Even soccer is more popular than rugby now in that country! Which statistically is shocking all considered.
We are fighting against people or custodians in the game of rugby today who waves a (fundamentally flawed) ‘successful product’ in our faces to which we cannot argue to those who don’t want to see the challenges this game is facing.
It is the old ‘don’t fix what ain’t broken’.
Problem is, for those who want to see, is that it has never worked in the first place and that essentially rugby as a professional sport has only survived thanks to the 100 years of history the game had and the following it built up over that time.
Problem is, that generation of followers are slowing dying out…
I have been saying for years now that unions in South Africa should stop thinking about rugby as a game, and start treating it like a business.
These contract debacles that we are having to observe coming from the Lions especially, clearly shows that they are still trying to make a player happy, playing on his feelings, instead of managing an asset, which is what rugby players are to unions.
We always blame the coach, or the players, but what about the idiots that hired them in the first place, who do they answer to? To a board, of which they are part, and which took the decisions with them.
In New Zealand all unions report to the central NZRU, as they realize that the provincial game is important to the national body. I think SARU might take a stronger hand in the hiring and firing going on always. Even though one has to ask exactly how professional SARU actually is.
May they should evaluate every 3 years or so and if a team is consistantly at the bottom off the log the get relegated(sp).
sorry should read maybe (am multitasking as usual)
Morne
When one looks at the countries that have purchsed the most tickets for FIFA 2010, Australia and the USA are 2nd and 3rd.
That must tell us something.
In 1974 I was a youngster growing up in the UK. During the FIFA world cup held in Germany Zaire got beaten 9-0 by Yugoslavia.
Some Rugby results around that time had seen teams like Japan and Romania taking hidings from more “regular” Rugby nations.
My school Rugby coach at the time gave us a lecture about how teams like Japan and Romania were the future of Rugby, and how by exposing them to harder opposition the level of their game would be lifted to that of the Rugby “giants”.
When one looks at the situation today, the likes of Japan and Romania are still taking massive hidings, but in Association Football (soccer) teams like the DRC (formerly Zaire) will almost never get thrashings like that at a World Cup Finals.
This indicates to me that the IRB founder members really don’t want to uplift the level of the game in “developing” nations. One only has to look at Argentina as a prime example.
Anyway, enough doom and gloom. A beautiful sunny afternoon in Darkest Africa. A 30 km trip home that should only take 20 minutes during the rush hour, and an ice cold beer in the pool to follow. Life’s not all kuk.
Sh1t, got to go to JHB on business tomorrow so now I’ve spoiled the whole week.
Top 4, or don’t even bother pitching up please… Morne, I like that.
Anyway, let me put this out there…
In the USA they now have a new league thats growing every day in terms of viewer-ship, support and money. Its called the LFL, Lingerie Football League, and all it is is a bunch of hot girls playing American Football in Lingerie. HOW on EARTH can this get launched of the ground and be more successful in every way before the Kings even have a coach or a captain? I am talking about an 10 team, two conference league… Its ridiculous! Its Fuck’n ridiculous!
Tells you a lot about SA Rugby Admin…
#11
Greenpoint…
Are you seriously asking how the Lingerie Bowl be more successful than the Kings? Read what you wrote… LINGERIE! For Vark Steaks man, your screwing with our Stormer reputation here!
GG,
You just gave me a brilliant idea to launch something in SA!!!
Users Online
Total 112 users including 0 member, 112 guests, 0 bot online
Most users ever online were 3735, on 31 August 2022 @ 6:23 pm
No Counter as from 31 October 2009: 39,453,854 Page Impressions
_