robdylan

Fewer “professionals”, more professionalism


Written by Rob Otto (robdylan)

Posted in :Original Content, WP on 9 Nov 2016 at 11:21
Tagged with : , , , ,

It’s been a pretty turbulent couple of days for rugby fans in the fairest Cape, I’m sure, with the news coming out on Monday that the professional arm of WP Rugby has had to apply for liquidation.

I could write pages about this situation and bore you all to tears, I’m sure, with my views about what’s actually happened here. I’ll not do that, at the risk of sticking my nose too far into things that don’t really concern me. I will make a point, though, that serves to reinforce a long held view about our game. I want to ask how the hell it’s possible that a union with the level of investment and sponsorship that WP has could possibly go insolvent?

I mean, there are many who love to poke fun at the EP Kings, label them a disgrace and so on for the fact that they’ve gone down the same route, but I wonder if it’s dawned on those people that EP went under basically because they had no sponsors. WP had all the sponsors in the world and went under all the same and you can surely only point at one thing here: RANK AMATEUR administration from top to bottom.

It’s time for our rugby to get real. This WP thing really is just the tip of the iceberg and Sharks fans would do well to remember that but for an emergency SuperSport bail-out, we’d be in exactly the same position ourselves. It’s time for proper professionalism in the way our game is run, with proper administrators running a lean, mean game that maximises the value we get from broadcast revenue and sponsorships.

Let’s stop kidding ourselves that we can sustain this model. It’s time for the gravy train to end.



28 Comments

  • what makes this even more disgraceful is that the Stormers and W.P were playing in full stadiums by far the best attendance in the country.
    I seriously hope they hunt down the money and publicly humiliated the thieves responsible .

  • Comment 1, posted at 09.11.16 11:28:03 by The hound Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    The houndAssistant coach
     
  • Morne on this a while back:
    “”"
    Few simple but important things to take note:

    Rugby cannot sustain 1000 pro players (it is actually more than Craig states), it is literally impossible.

    80% (and sometimes more) of union funds are spent on salaries for players.

    Rugby will seize to exist if we continue.
    “”"

  • Comment 2, posted at 09.11.16 11:30:46 by gregkaos Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    gregkaosTeam captain
     
  • Perhaps the lightbulb will finally go on as a lot of people have a very naiive belief on the way things work. The current economy cannot sustain the number of people wanting their piece of the pie without actually contributing anything to make the pie bigger. And the notion that Rugby unions cannot go insolvent as sponsors will just bail them out is just rubbish. The Sharks were very lucky, very lucky indeed that Supersport bailed them out…but i can guarantee there will not be another bailout. Too many ‘professional’ players in SA producing amateur results/performances. And the same goes for the boardroom. It is why i really like the rumours coming out from the Sharks about how they are streamlining the Union with the professional arm at the top managing all under it. Rugby is business like it or not…ruin the business and there is no rugby.

  • Comment 3, posted at 09.11.16 11:47:18 by SheldonK Reply

    SheldonKAssistant coach
     
  • #MakeRugbyGreatAgain

    Too soon? :grin:

  • Comment 4, posted at 09.11.16 12:33:40 by vanmartin Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    vanmartinAssistant coach
     
  • @vanmartin (Comment 4) : Love it

  • Comment 5, posted at 09.11.16 12:34:47 by SheldonK Reply

    SheldonKAssistant coach
     
  • @vanmartin (Comment 4) : :roll:

  • Comment 6, posted at 09.11.16 12:40:44 by Bokhoring Reply
    Administrator
    BokhoringAssistant coach
     
  • @vanmartin (Comment 4) : #Make South AfricanRugbyGreatAgain

  • Comment 7, posted at 09.11.16 12:42:37 by The hound Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    The houndAssistant coach
     
  • Truely, the mind boggles at how this could happen.

  • Comment 8, posted at 09.11.16 13:34:20 by Salmonoid the Subtle Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Salmonoid the SubtleAssistant coach
     
  • For the question you ask Rob: I think it comes down to the problem with all unions spending that 80%+ on just the player salaries (never mind the management staff etc). It’s unsustainable and surely everyone involved were acutely aware of this. However, to break free of that likely mean’t putting the union at a massive short to medium term disadvantage to the other unions. I do wonder if it was a case of management hoping and praying the meltdown would happen to some other union first before been forced into changing their methods.

  • Comment 9, posted at 09.11.16 14:00:57 by gregkaos Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    gregkaosTeam captain
     
  • Exhausting

  • Comment 10, posted at 09.11.16 14:16:39 by Poisy Reply
    Author
    PoisyTeam captain
     
  • @gregkaos (Comment 9) : There is more to this than meets the eye,Stormers/WP,hardly had a star studded squad last year, compared to other years, they bought very few players and hardly any big names, they lost a lot of expensive baggage/Schalk/JdeV/Kitshoff/even second tier guys like Michael Rhodes.Coaching staff went from hugely expensive Eddie Jones to dirt cheap Robbie Fleck.There were no huge signings.Sponsorship was good and paid, gates good ,stadiums full,season tickets sold, where did the money go.
    If they are claiming that 80% of the loot went on salaries then PSDT and Etherbeth must be earning millions.

  • Comment 11, posted at 09.11.16 14:32:19 by The hound Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    The houndAssistant coach
     
  • @The hound (Comment 11) : I have a feeling that its not the top guys earning ridiculous amounts (although im sure they arent paid peanuts) but i think its more the volume of players they are paying from top senior guys all the way through to all the u19s they contract…

  • Comment 12, posted at 09.11.16 14:39:55 by SheldonK Reply

    SheldonKAssistant coach
     
  • @The hound (Comment 11) : Season ticket holders are down as have been bums on seats this year but I think they are still better than any other SA union. Maybe all the funds have gone into the stupid fireworks they set off before a game.

  • Comment 13, posted at 09.11.16 14:48:35 by Salmonoid the Subtle Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Salmonoid the SubtleAssistant coach
     
  • @The hound (Comment 11) : Ermm… there’s more than just the SR squad they have to pay.

    Article last year on WP U21s. I don’t even want to know the stats on the other catagories.

    “I would say we have an enlarged group of about 52 players who have been part of our planning up until now, with the hope that any one of these players could step up into the team when or if needed.”

  • Comment 14, posted at 09.11.16 15:02:15 by gregkaos Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    gregkaosTeam captain
     
  • @SheldonK (Comment 12) : Exactly.

  • Comment 15, posted at 09.11.16 15:04:48 by gregkaos Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    gregkaosTeam captain
     
  • @gregkaos (Comment 9) : And to continue that line of thought, smaller squads will eventually lead to even poorer showings in the bloated Super Rugby format which will in turn (hopefully) force the unions and ultimately SARU’s hand in the matter.

  • Comment 16, posted at 09.11.16 15:04:51 by vanmartin Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    vanmartinAssistant coach
     
  • Seems they typically use about 45 players for U19s. But I didn’t search long enough to find exact figure / quotes.

  • Comment 17, posted at 09.11.16 15:08:52 by gregkaos Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    gregkaosTeam captain
     
  • @gregkaos (Comment 17) : But would all those used be on contracts and what would those contracts be?
    I have heard that Wilco Louw (not yet a really high profile WP player) is on a huge contract and if so then I can just imagine what some of the bigger name contracted players are earning.

  • Comment 18, posted at 09.11.16 15:33:43 by Salmonoid the Subtle Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Salmonoid the SubtleAssistant coach
     
  • @Salmonoid the Subtle (Comment 18) : That is flipping scary. I tried to look for contract numbers but came up short. Would be interesting if we could get an avg salary for U19s U20s and U21s. cos thats probably around 150 odd players right there.

  • Comment 19, posted at 09.11.16 15:43:35 by gregkaos Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    gregkaosTeam captain
     
  • I still think it takes a lot of pies to keep Thefelo that size

  • Comment 20, posted at 09.11.16 15:43:55 by The hound Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    The houndAssistant coach
     
  • @The hound (Comment 20) : Province have been talking of a “player exodus”, but it’s a load of bull; all the departed players have been eaten by Jabba the Wakefield…

  • Comment 21, posted at 09.11.16 15:52:31 by Culling Song Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    Culling SongTeam captain
     
  • @Culling Song (Comment 21) : Careful there are sensitive people here

  • Comment 22, posted at 09.11.16 15:54:43 by The hound Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    The houndAssistant coach
     
  • I have a bit of a deferent view on this.
    Sharks tried to get out of financial trouble by “selling shares” to Supersport. They tried their best not to go “bankrupt” and to keep the ship sailing.
    What I read in the WP story is they seemingly wanted to get out of badly negotiated contracts/partnerships. The “best” way to do this is do what a lot of businesses do. Claim “bankruptcy” and start over “fresh” without the hassles of the “old” business!
    I’m sure if they tried they could have raised money from sponsors or selling “shares” like the Sharks did. Correct me if I’m wrong but I’m sure they own Newlands stadium and the ground it’s build on?! That’s worth millions so should place them in a way better position than the Sharks as they actually have fixed property that’s worth a lot of money!? So my question why did they not try to raise the money!? Something smells fishy and it’s not bokkoms I’m smelling!!!

  • Comment 23, posted at 09.11.16 16:56:41 by JD Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Administrator
    JDAssistant coach
     
  • @The hound (Comment 22) : @Culling Song (Comment 21) : well to more happy meals and he could qualify for his own postal code!

  • Comment 24, posted at 09.11.16 16:58:31 by JD Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Administrator
    JDAssistant coach
     
  • @Salmonoid the Subtle (Comment 8) : Do you mean how WP Rugby could go into liquidation or the political event van is referring to…? :mrgreen:

  • Comment 25, posted at 09.11.16 19:33:30 by pastorshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Administrator
    pastorsharkCoach
     
  • @pastorshark (Comment 25) : think a bit of both!? ;-)

  • Comment 26, posted at 09.11.16 20:28:56 by JD Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Administrator
    JDAssistant coach
     
  • @pastorshark (Comment 25) : @JD (Comment 26) : :mrgreen: ;-) ) :

  • Comment 27, posted at 10.11.16 09:11:54 by Salmonoid the Subtle Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Salmonoid the SubtleAssistant coach
     
  • @JD (Comment 23) : Yeh look i think you are partly right about filing for provisional liquidation as a result of bad deals. Part of those bad deals is why sponsorship money is not flowing to them. And then as far as i am aware Newlands actually belongs to WPRFU which is the amateur arm that owns shares in the PTY Ltd.

  • Comment 28, posted at 10.11.16 09:21:44 by SheldonK Reply

    SheldonKAssistant coach
     

Add Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.