The Currie Cup Premier Division will be contested by six teams from 2012 and eight teams will play in the Currie Cup First Division, the SARU General Council decided today at a meeting in Newlands.
The decision was confirmed after a majority vote was cast in favour of the format by delegates of SARU’s 14 provincial unions. The Currie Cup Premier Division currently consists of eight provincial teams.
“The General Council accepted by majority vote an Executive Council proposal of an Currie Cup Premier Division which will consist of six teams from next year. Our unions debated this proposal, as well as a counter-proposal, in a robust and mature manner and in the end they made a decision which will ultimately benefit South African rugby,” said SARU President, Regan Hoskins.
Mr Hoskins, James Stoffberg (SARU Vice-President) and Jurie Roux (SARU CEO) were also confirmed as the SARU delegates to SASCOC, the SA Olympic body.
Another point on the agenda was the discussion of South African rugby franchises’ participation in Super Rugby post 2012.
This topic was deferred for discussion at the President’s Forum to be held in November.
The decision of SARU to cut down the Currie Cup to only six teams disappoints me . By MET UYSH,
I know there are those that believe the Currie Cup should only be contested by the top teams (i.e the Top 6 that will survive this year) and that contests such as the Sharks vs Leopards are meaningless, and therefore the games played against these sides add nothing to the state of affairs in Rugby.
I differ a bit in my view about it.
There are several reasons why it is good for the top Currie Cup teams to play the less experienced teams.
1. It helps to develop the players from the smaller unions. We’ve seen how these boys pick themselves up when they play against the giants, like when the Pumas beat the Lions and Bulls last year, and nearly beat the Lions and Sharks this year. They can only get stronger and more experienced by playing against these top unions. Weakening their competition will weaken them.
2. It gives some incentive for the players to stay with the smaller unions. They know they get Currie Cup exposure and yes, they have a better chance to be spotted by scouts. Now that they won’t be playing in the limelight, they will opt to play for lesser teams at the bigger unions in the hope to be spotted there.
3. Increase depth in the country. You are now limited to probably six teams to pick your national side from, as you certainly cannot pick a player from a team that cannot make the Currie Cup premier division. This links up to point 1.
4. Financial stability. When the Bulls and the Sharks and WP and maybe the Lions visit the smaller Union’s home grounds, there is a massive spike in attendance and hence money. Also, sponsors want to be part of the Currie Cup and not part of some B rate competition that no one but the Benoni, PE, Witbank and Potch folks are interested in.
There were 14 Unions present at the meeting, yet a majority vote resulted in two of the current Currie Cup teams being relegated next year.
Now I can imagine those two teams and perhaps the Griekwas would not have voted for their relegation, while we could assume that perhaps the top 5 teams would have voted for the relegation.
That would mean that at least 3 of the 6 B Division teams would have voted for them to have more competition in the form of the two relegated teams. I can imagine that dear old Cheeky was one of those 3.
Its a wry pity as for one, I would not be so enthusiastic to go and watch the Pumas play the Eagles or Kings at Mbombela stadium and I wonder how this will impact on the possibility of all their future games being hosted there.
In terms of the national Rugby, this would only mean that each player will play 4 matches less in a Currie Cup season and those would most likely in any event not have included the Springboks who would be in need of rehabilitation.
So, I do not really see the benefit.
It would probably have made more sense for the Currie Cup to have included two more teams (10 teams) and all teams play each other once, with a semi final and a final.
That way you also could increase the talent pool and make the players as a whole stronger and build more depth for the Springboks.
The whole problem is the Stupid 15 which is now killing the Currie Cup which was supposed to grow and deveop our own talent.
If we could manage our players better int he Super Rugby and perhaps then include some of these unions’ players that are now left to the B division, it would help to get our top players time to be managed and in top condition for the International season.
I wonder if New Zealand will also be reducing the number of teams in their domestic competition. They have 14 teams playing the ITM Cup and from what I can see, they only play each other once, making it 13 rounds in the ROund Robin phase, a semi final and a final.
Why can’t we follow the example of the leaders in World Rugby?
superBul wrote:
and i agree, what the heck is SARU trying. They break everything up in SA for their own pockets.
Money , money , money.
No one serves the game anymore, just looking at their own fat paycheque.
What they should be doing is cutting the S15 and leaving the CC with 8 teams. Let teams 7& 8 [Bulls & Leopards]play a promotion / relegation match against the top 2 teams in div 1.
@ Loosehead:
You must have enjoyed nameing the Bulls in a relegation match :LOL:
I have had time to think about the new format, and it sucks!! Really some creativity could have been used. Include the SR derby matches as part of the CC, and then let the SR teams have home and away against the smaller unions is a possible way of doing it. Or any of the above points.
And Superbul, when was the last time one had to actually look for reasons to pick the Bulls to win against the Puma’s? I mean 1 from 4 is not good. Something that very seldom happens to the Bulls.
@ superBul::shock: What are you accusing me of? I just looked at the current table. 😆
Why would some B tier unions vote with the big 5, it must mean something goes into their pockets.
By having six teams inly in the premier league means that the top 5 Franchises will play each other 4 times per year. plus one extra round robin match vs the sixth.
Just stupid if you ask me.
To develop all unions it makes sense to go with the format of the previous super rugby competition when there were 12 teams.
play all 14 once, then have a semi and a final.
brings in money for all unions concerned. even if there will be runaway scores.
errrrm…I have mixed feelings about this. Good youngsters in smaller unions don’t get the right exposure against top players, but our top players will be playing less rugby, which is something I would like to see. Does this mean we are to have promotion/relegation playoffs again?…..I liked those.
@ superBul:
Super….ons het geweet dit gaan gebeur met professioneel rugby. Op die ou end is dit beter want die beste ouens bly in rugby….nie soos die ou dae waar n ou gewaai het want hy moes gaan werk.
Users Online
Total 29 users including 0 member, 29 guests, 0 bot online
Most users ever online were 3735, on 31 August 2022 @ 6:23 pm
No Counter as from 31 October 2009: 39,523,716 Page Impressions
_