Plumtree has a whinge

[Brisbok]

Ruggo went about it the wrong way, the Reds were definitely helped by a fantastic draw but that doesn't change the fact that the Stormers won more games in their conference than them so the conference system did not help them.

The overall table does not lie Qwerty. 3 teams in the bottom 5 and 2 teams in the top 7 vs 3 teams in the top 7 and 2 in the bottom 5.

 

[qwerty51]

So what? Your argument is that the Reds profited from playing our shit teams twice which is not the case. The Stormers did. It's irrelevant how their performed outside the conference isn't it?

 

[Brisbok]

So what? Your argument is that the Reds profited from playing our shit teams twice which is not the case. The Stormers did. It's irrelevant how their performed outside the conference isn't it?

We will have to agree to disagree, because the argument is going nowhere. Nothing you can say will convince me (and the majority of South African/NZ rugby fans and players) that the Australian conference is not the weakest and vice versa.

 

[kiap]

Over all Super Rugby, the bottom of the log has been 'dominated' by South Africans.

SA teams have 69% of Wooden Spoons. More than 60% of the bottom two spots. 50% of bottom three. 46% of the bottom five.

Lions and Cheetahs always at the bottom of the table. So many clown teams from South Africa for so many years...

 

[qwerty51]

That's not very fair, we had 3 teams whilst NZ had 5 and SA 4 for quite some years. Then it was 5, 5 and 4 and for the one year it's been even and we came last.

 

[kiap]

That's not very fair, we had 3 teams whilst NZ had 5 and SA 4 for quite some years. Then it was 5, 5 and 4 and for the one year it's been even and we came last.

South Africa still massively under-perform.

Their par score should be 34%. But they have 46% to 69% of those bottom rungs.

      Share    Par
----------------------
NZL    80/205  39%
SAF    70/205  34%
AUS    55/205  27%

 

[qwerty51]

yes but more teams dilutes the strength of each..

 

[PaarlBok]

Plumtree has a winge like me about the conferense system. Kiap. Boet relax now.

 

[kiap]

Qwerty - No, if the country merits the additional teams they get (as we all claim), the dilution should only last a few seasons (maybe 3 years or so, not 8 - 10 years).

NZ had the most teams at the start. They had teams under perform for a few years but then improved. SA have had about a decade of teams 'dominating' the bottom. Aus teams have also now dropped to the bottom when they got new teams.

Now, I do say that SA have more potential depth than Aus, but they've been slow to show that depth from their bottom teams.

Those bottom teams from SA have been spooners for over a decade. Now Aus teams are in the bottom positions - but it is a long way short of a decade.

 

[kiap]

Plumtree has a winge like me about the conferense system. Kiap. Boet relax now.

No worries, OomPB. I can see some of your side from the SA point of view, and I can also see the side from the Aus point of view.

Boet, as you probably know me by now, I always like to argue these things. But even better is to stay friends with good posters (or least keep some fun with posting on these boards). I will relax on this thread now, and give others a go.

 

[spooony]

No, if the country merits the additional teams they get (as we all claim), the dilution should only last a few seasons (2 or 3 years, not 8 - 10 years).

NZ had most teams at the start. They had teams under perform for a few years but came good. SA have had about a decade of teams 'dominating' the bottom. Aus teams have also dropped to the bottom when they got new teams.

Now I do say that SA have more potential depth than Aus, but they've been slow to show that depth from their bottom teams.

Those bottom teams from SA have been spooners for over a decade. Now Aus teams are in the bottom positions - but it is a long way short of a decade.

No it is because The Lions are controlled by SARFU. SAIL have a 50 percent stake in the Bulls, WP/Stormers 23 percent which means The Bulls have a better trust fund than any other franchise. Supersport owns part of The Sharks and The Cheetahs. where you will find Freestate feeding The Sharks with players. I think something is seriously wrong in our rugby when 1 Company have a certain percentage stake in all the teams.

That means the more stake they have in one the more profits they will see. Also that mean a team must be successful more or less. Now just think how one can control it by trying to make more profit. You control 90 percent of the Teams more or less so you just inject more into the one as and give the other franchises less and voila like The Stormers had to let a lot of players go cause they could not afford them and hang on to current experience players. Who took those youngsters leaving The Stormers/WP?

The Union that always do The Bulls. They can afford them I wonder how because their gate receipts, payments from SARFU are more or less the same. They do not have bigger sponsors as Vodacom also owned by SAIL is the Sponsor. So it is not spreading the depth it is the money paying their salaries otherwise they go somewhere else or chuck off oversea. That is why some teams struggle over here.

 

[Brisbok]

No it is because The Lions are controlled by SARFU. SAIL have a 50 percent stake in the Bulls, WP/Stormers 23 percent which means The Bulls have a better trust fund than any other franchise. Supersport owns part of The Sharks and The Cheetahs. where you will find Freestate feeding The Sharks with players. I think something is seriously wrong in our rugby when 1 Company have a certain percentage stake in all the teams.

That means the more stake they have in one the more profits they will see. Also that mean a team must be successful more or less. Now just think how one can control it by trying to make more profit. You control 90 percent of the Teams more or less so you just inject more into the one as and give the other franchises less and voila like The Stormers had to let a lot of players go cause they could not afford them and hang on to current experience players. Who took those youngsters leaving The Stormers/WP?

The Union that always do The Bulls. They can afford them I wonder how because their gate receipts, payments from SARFU are more or less the same. They do not have bigger sponsors as Vodacom also owned by SAIL is the Sponsor. So it is not spreading the depth it is the money paying their salaries otherwise they go somewhere else or chuck off oversea. That is why some teams struggle over here.

The Bulls being able to afford the likes of Sadie, J J Engelbrecht, Lionel Cronje etc. wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that they are no longer paying salaries for Matfield, Bakkies, Danie Rossouw, Gurthro Steenkamp, Fourie du Preez, Gary Botha would it Spoony?

You honestly make absolutely no sense with your posts and your bias for the Stormers and hatred for the Bulls is quite ridiculous.

 

[spooony]

The Bulls being able to afford the likes of Sadie, J J Engelbrecht, Lionel Cronje etc. wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that they are no longer paying salaries for Matfield, Bakkies, Danie Rossouw, Gurthro Steenkamp, Fourie du Preez, Gary Botha would it Spoony?

You honestly make absolutely no sense with your posts and your bias for the Stormers and hatred for the Bulls is quite ridiculous.

Oh really? And here I thought Matfield, Botha, Steenkamp and all those old guards were contracted by the SARU?

South African Investments Limited (SAIL) is a market leader in the sports brands business in South Africa with shares in eight rugby unions, six golf practice and tuition centres, and a professional soccer club. It also owns a number of sports websites. The company is the largest sports and rugby brand owner in South Africa, and in the southern hemisphere . The company, which was founded in 1988 became involved in the sports industry by building and financing suites at rugby stadiums in South Africa (Msomi, 2000:2). Luna Corporation Limited(Luna) is the holding company of SAIL, holding 83,4% of its shares

SAIL is involved in the commercialisation of rugby brands and in so doing creates brand value for the rugby brands. This is evident in the fact that only 20% of SAIL’s total revenue comes from gate sales. The balance is mainly from sponsorships, royalties and television rights. This entity of SAIL receives its revenues from broadcasting rights, sponsorships and advertising, corporate suites and admission fees, which include season tickets, gate money, membership sales and ball sales.

Primedia Limited (Primedia) and SAIL Sport and Entertainment each holds a 50% share in PSM Marketing (Pty) Ltd (PSM Marketing). The joint company has been formed to realise synergies and unlock the media value arising from the ownership of sports brands and sports marketing expertise . PSM Marketing focuses on elements such as the promotion of sporting events, development of stadia and broker sponsorships of SAIL’s sports brands including Blue Bulls, Eastern Province Rugby, Falcons Rugby, Border Rugby and South Western Districts Rugby.

SARFU relies exclusively on contributions from SA Rugby for income, and from 2001 to 2002 SA Rugby had a 50% increase in net profits . The main income of SA Rugby is generated from the 10-year US$550 million broadcast deal with the Australian television broadcast company, Newscorp .

Under the Sanzar agreement. SARFU receives 36,6% of the income from the US$550 billion deal. Of this percentage, 40% is paid to the 14 South African Rugby Unions, a further 20% is allocated to all the South African national teams and 10% is allocated to the company that brokered the deal with Newscorp. Although the 14 unions receive income from SA Rugby, they also generate their own revenue and manage their own finances, which rely mostly on sponsorship deals and ticket revenues.

Annually, SARFU pays a total of R17,9 million to the four South African Super Rugby regions.Each region receives R4,2 million, plus R1,6 million for domestic travel and R1 million for kit. Another R2,7 million is budgeted for advertising

Blue Bulls (50% held by SAIL)
Western Province (24,9% held by SAIL)
Border Bulldogs (24% held by SAIL)
Mighty Elephants (24,9% held by SAIL)
Falcons (24,9% held by SAIL)
Leopards (24,9% held by SAIL)
Griffons (24,9% held by SAIL)
Eagles (24,9% held by SAIL)

Cheethas (49% held by SuperSport)
Griquas (24,9% held by SuperSport)
Natal Sharks (24,9% held by SuperSport
http://uir.unisa.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10500/1831/03chapter2.pdf

 

[Blue]

Spoony you seriously risk losing it mate. Take some time to think before you post.

The general concept here is to post something that is related to the preceding thread.

Please also stop copying and pasting reams and reams of stuff. Use the quotes. Cite the source.

 

[PaarlBok]

You honestly make absolutely no sense with your posts and your bias for the Stormers and hatred for the Bulls is quite ridiculous.

Spoony is in this regard like my Mrs. Our biggest family fights usually are when the Brutes play teams from Aus and NZ. Her hatred regarding the Brutes also go back to Naas days and she'll support any teams playing the Brutes. My blood is way to green to not support SA teams against the others. Maybe easier for your chicken runners but for me its SA teams first.

 

[spooony]

Spoony you seriously risk losing it mate. Take some time to think before you post.

The general concept here is to post something that is related to the preceding thread.

Please also stop copying and pasting reams and reams of stuff. Use the quotes. Cite the source.

That is to do with the thread.
Read this
Scroll down to page 153

I do not hate anything. I just question why 1 Company owns a stake in all the unions but a bigger stake in one certain union? Then why do 1 company owns all the rights, controls the press and as well as the unions? Supersport are calling the game and trying to sell you decoders and subscriptions to have access to rugby. Like Mark Keohane said in the above linked they are THE GOD OF RUGBY and there is no such thing as free speech in the media anymore. Then your beloved Joost placed Province first country second. It is also written in Mark Keohane's book.

Apperently our patriotic players fake reports going abroad and playing there so they can get a fat contract from SARU like Joost did. Everything in our rugby is monopoly controlled and they decide what to print and how to print it. That is why anything coming of a Supersport.co.za page I do not trust one bit. And the sad news is that SAIL is looking to expand to Australia and buy stakes in the Australia franchises as well. Why do you think there is so much derby's and so much rugby this year? More games equals more money on tv

Decentralized control of teams is essential for the integrity of any sporting competition.
Distrust of the games' results could arise if all the teams were controlled by a single authority.

Where did I copy and paste? Don't you see the links under page or in a quote if I do so?

 

[MajorlyRagerly]

So after this weekend...

The 2 "top" New Zealand sides were beqaten by their lower placed sides. And our predicted to be crap team, won in the republic.

On this weekends results, Plumtree, you don't have a leg to stand on pal.

 

[qwerty51]

Oh man this is pretty funny after the Bulls just thrashed the Cheetahs 51-19 away.

 

[PaarlBok]

Oh man this is pretty funny after the Bulls just thrashed the Cheetahs 51-19 away.

The problem is that both teams are in the same conferense. I had a look overall of all the conferenses and I saw some Aussies are a bit worried about the differenses of quality between them and SA and NZ after round 2. Still early days and mostly derbies, we'll keep this one going. Dont shed a tear if this shite Cheetah team down the Brumbies on the weekend?

 

[PaarlBok]

When the Lions went to uncostested scrums I just knew they are going to struggle against the Hurricanes. Mitchell still have to learn to Saffer alter his gameplan against the Kiwi sides.