Danillergate: SARU need to show some balls

Written by Rob Otto (robdylan)

Posted in :Cheetahs, Currie Cup, Original Content on 3 Oct 2008 at 06:44
Tagged with : ,

The frankly mean-spirited actions of Western Province and South Western Districts notwithstanding, something just feels wrong about the Cheetahs-Griffons player loaning merry-go-round.

There’s a lot of bluster and feigned indignation coming out of the Cape, coupled with the usual “not in the spirit of the game” arguments. Fact is, the motives here are pretty bloody clear and Stag Cronje as much as admitted that both unions have “too much at stake” to just let the matter lie. Fact is, both Province and SWD have spotted a way to promote their owns teams up the log at the expense of the country cousins and are desperate to get as much leverage from that as they can.

Poor old Harold Verster and his much-maligned maatjie Christo Ferreira seem to have put their foot in it again, although the onus here will presumably be on their accusers to actually show which rule, if indeed there is one, they have breached. WP and SWD really do seem to be playing the “they’ve hurt our feelings” card here most strongly, without seemingly having a real case behind it, but hte fact of the matter is, this is a stupid situation that SARU should never have allowed to occur in the first place.

Fact is, the Cheetahs really do seem to have flaunted any and all common sense in this regard and it’s completely to be expected that questions would be asked when the same player represents two different provinces in the same weekend. I mean, come on, guys! That’s just stupid. If for no other reason than that they’ve acted foolishly, they deserve some sort of censure.

Can we expect our ruling body to stand up and be counted in this case? Can we expect a clear ruling, a fair decision which will be enforced, communicated and henceforth well understood by all parties? Or will this be another endless round of court cases, delayed rulings, shady backroom dealings and general ineptitude, all served with a healthy dose of gravy?

My money is on the latter.


  • I reckon once you’ve represented one team, you should be prevented from playing for another team that season unless you have signed a contract with the new team. So essentially a one-way move once a season is allowed

  • Comment 1, posted at 03.10.08 06:52:35 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • I have not followed this particular dramatic saga. So did this guy play for two unions in ONE weekend 😯 😯 or is that a mistake.

    If so, where are the over-played faction now??? 😈

    My view: I cannot see how any of this ” loan ” bussiness can be healthy for a particular Union. Or for the player in question. Gametime?? Not worth all the other implications.

  • Comment 2, posted at 03.10.08 07:21:02 by Silver Fox Reply

    Silver Fox
  • Well there is a lot of angles here.

    Firstly, WP did were not affected negatively by any of the loan shenanigans, so in my view, they should not benefit at all.

    I do feel for SWD though, they were directly affected by this with CC players being flown down after being in a premier team the week before to play against them.

    It goes against everything to do with good/fair sportsmanship.

    I believe the Griffons and Cheetahs to an extend abused the system, to gain an unfair advantage.


    Well yes, SWD cannot do the same because they do not have the same type of relationship with any premiership team to do the same. It is not a level playing field and therefore unfair.

    As I said yesterday it is like playing social cricket for the C-team in the C-league. Now your team made it to the semi’s or finals with the ballies but your opposition, also making it through, now stacks their team with A-league players to ensure they win…

    Games should be won and lost fair an square on the pitch, I think the Griffons breached this by these dealings. Surely they have another player that could have played instead of Danniler for them?

    So in my books, fine the Cheetahs and dock the points from the Griffons.

    These dealing affected SWD directly who now, will not play in the promotion/relegation matches because of this.

    It did not have any bearing on WP so they should not benefit at all.

  • Comment 3, posted at 03.10.08 08:13:43 by MorneN Reply
  • Now speaking of backroom deals…

    Remember SWD is on the brink of getting sponsors on board. The fact that they do not now stand a chance to play in the premier league might have massive implications for them.

    Also, this company looking to buy shares from SWD are buying SA Rugby shares…

    So here is what could well happen behind closed doors…

    SARU threatening SWD that if they do not back down they will not sell their shares, and if they do back down they will let the deal go ahead.

    So SARU grow balls?

    Not a chance mate.

  • Comment 4, posted at 03.10.08 08:15:42 by MorneN Reply
  • But here is another interesting angle on this whole loan thing…

    When the Sharks came up against the Valke a couple of weeks ago, they insisted that two players on loan from them to the Valke, not be included in the starting 15.

    One was allowed to come from the bench, the other not allowed in the 22 altogether…

    It was an article in Die Burger newspaper.

    Is this then a similar case? Did the Sharks abuse the loan system to their own benefit and by that, put the Valke in a worse position than what they already are as a small union?


  • Comment 5, posted at 03.10.08 08:17:49 by MorneN Reply
  • @MorneN (Comment 5) : It’s not like the Valke were going to win that game with the Sharks players starting….

    ANyhow, this is tit-for-tat stuff after FS complained about WP playing an away game against Boland last week at home and having the fixture returned to Wellington.

    Now’s their chance to get back at FS.

  • Comment 6, posted at 03.10.08 08:30:27 by Baldrick Reply

  • @robdylan (Comment 1) : 100% agree. That should be the ruling, end of story.

    This should be the same in club rugby to. Imagen a player playing for Maties in one game of the weekend and for UCT on the next day. Dont make sense at all.

    WeePee did not pull Ricardo Croy back from SWD when he went there and they ran out of 10s.

  • Comment 7, posted at 03.10.08 08:31:28 by PaarlBok Reply

  • @Baldrick (Comment 6) : Baldrick its not a matter who should have win if that player did not play or did play. Its the principle, it sucks!

  • Comment 8, posted at 03.10.08 08:32:42 by PaarlBok Reply

  • Now, didn’t province play JC Kritzinger in the U21 comp and the normal one? On the same day? Are there any debates about this?

  • Comment 9, posted at 03.10.08 08:34:36 by molly Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition Winner Author
  • @molly (Comment 9) : For the same province. 🙄

  • Comment 10, posted at 03.10.08 08:37:32 by PaarlBok Reply

  • cheetahs apparently checked with the saru lawyer first before loaning players, so this is a case of saru having to accept what happened and make sure a clear set of rules exists next year. we also cannot have big unions sitting with top players doing nothing. these players are needed to lift the standard of the 1st division, because if one player can single handedly win a game against the eagles doesn’t say much for the clas of player in the 1st division. and if the eagles can’t beat one player in a game, should they really be trying to get into the cc. lets put emotions aside and realise loaning players betters the game and standard so let it carry on.

  • Comment 11, posted at 03.10.08 08:38:09 by try time Reply

  • @Baldrick (Comment 6) :

    Like Paarlbok said, it is the principle and the precedent this sets.

    What if WP had a great relationship with Boland with the latter playing in the first division and WP in the premier division.

    Now a strong Boland is brilliant for the Super 14 so the benefits of the following scenario is obvious.

    Now WP fails to qualify for the semi’s this Saturday.

    Boland however goes through and has to play in a promotion relegation match 2 weeks from now.

    WP then ‘loan’ a Schalk Burger to Boland or a Jean de Villiers.

    The way this current system can be abused is bullshit.

    Forget the name players, look at how the system gets abused to gain an unfair, unsportsman like advantage.

    Also, leave the provincialism at the door, it is not about acusing any team, it is about how the rule can be bent, and obviously has been bent to gain an unfair advantage OFF the field of play.

  • Comment 12, posted at 03.10.08 08:38:42 by MorneN Reply
  • and because the fatties next in line played for Boland. 🙄 Same thing with the 10s, Dollie to Boland & Croy to SWD. They could not call them back again altho Croy legally but did not.

  • Comment 13, posted at 03.10.08 08:39:27 by PaarlBok Reply

  • the difference here is the sharks have loaned those players to the falcoms for the rest of the season with one request they may not take the field against the sharks
    the cheetahs have loaned to players to get more match time and used them again themselves within the same season

    in saying that the wp are being pathetic to try get log points from this

    theywon the game against the cheetahs with a bonus point so potgieters return didnt cost wp anything

    the team and only team that maybe has a case is SWD , who might lose a playoff for the premier division becasue of the loan system

  • Comment 14, posted at 03.10.08 08:40:18 by sharks_lover Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
  • @try time (Comment 11) :

    There is nothing that says the offical of SARU, Ferreira’s, interpretation of the rule was right, and this is what is being contested.

    I think legally SWD has a very strong case.

    Because a SARU official got it wrong does not mean Cheetahs and the Griffons were right.

  • Comment 15, posted at 03.10.08 08:40:56 by MorneN Reply
  • @molly (Comment 9) : thats within the same province the player is sighned to and is allowed

    its like cilliers playing for the sharks and the next week the under 21’s

  • Comment 16, posted at 03.10.08 08:42:51 by sharks_lover Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
  • @try time (Comment 11) : No probs but I agree with Robs one. Once the player pull on another province jersey he cant come back.

    Will be pretty interesting to see if this letter to Hakkel Helgaardt state in the same weekend.

  • Comment 17, posted at 03.10.08 08:42:57 by PaarlBok Reply

  • @sharks_lover (Comment 14) :

    That is still abusing the loan system?

    They put in a ‘request’ as you put it to gain an advantage against a smaller union they made the ‘request’ to.

    It is off-field drama affecting an on-field scenario and it is wrong in my opinion.

  • Comment 18, posted at 03.10.08 08:43:02 by MorneN Reply
  • @MorneN (Comment 15) : yes but all province adhere’s to sarfu officals and laws

    if sarfu has granted permission the cheetahs cannot be faulted, it will how ever leave bad tastes in the mouths of swd for example

  • Comment 19, posted at 03.10.08 08:44:54 by sharks_lover Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
  • @MorneN (Comment 18) : loaning is permitted morne
    all that happens is the falcons pay the salaries of the players loaned to them
    they cannot however runnout for both provinces at will
    that is why the players loaned to the falcons cannot be recalled for the sharks again this year

  • Comment 20, posted at 03.10.08 08:46:48 by sharks_lover Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
  • then union b teams have to be allowed to play in the first division. the big unions cannot have players sitting around doing nothing. so the bulls sharks lions cheetahs and wp, should be allowed to have a b team to keep their players fit. then eagles lose out anyway, because these teams will be better than theirs. swd have created a catch 22. if they win they get a chance to lose another relegation and have to deal with b teams next year. if they lose they don’t get to play in the relegation playoff. it is a nasty can of worms.

  • Comment 21, posted at 03.10.08 08:48:39 by try time Reply

  • @MorneN (Comment 18) : the drama i agree with
    morne what worries me is that it took swd 4 weeks to complain about this??

    they knew a month ago when they played nfs the players involved had played for the cheetahs

    why not lodge a complaint that weekend ??
    this smacks of wp no doubt

  • Comment 22, posted at 03.10.08 08:48:44 by sharks_lover Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
  • @molly (Comment 9) : On the same day?

  • Comment 23, posted at 03.10.08 08:48:53 by just blackshark Reply

    blackshark - I'm back!
  • @try time (Comment 21) : there is even bulls players on loan to the falcons

  • Comment 24, posted at 03.10.08 08:49:32 by sharks_lover Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
  • @MorneN (Comment 15) : yes but as saru is the administrator they have to accept the decision their representative made.

  • Comment 25, posted at 03.10.08 08:49:47 by try time Reply

  • @MorneN (Comment 18) : I don’t know about rugby…but in soccer some teams do have a clause in loan agreements that prevents their loaned players to play against them. All is fair in love and contracts.

  • Comment 26, posted at 03.10.08 08:50:38 by just blackshark Reply

    blackshark - I'm back!
  • @just blackshark (Comment 23) : it is even allowed to be on the same day

    a few years ago i remember carstens havi0ng played b team and before the main game started a first team choice prop was injured

    carstens then also came onto the bench for the sharks and played in the 2nd half

  • Comment 27, posted at 03.10.08 08:50:50 by sharks_lover Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
  • @sharks_lover (Comment 19) :

    Again, the officials of SARU interpreted a law or rule, by all accounts it looks like they got it wrong – it does not make what they (Cheetahs and Griffons) did right.

    The crux is gaining an unfair advantage by abusing the system.

    Games should be won and lost what happens on the field, with level playing fields in all departments, which includes who is allowed to play and when.

    The Griffons got themselves in a position to which the SWD could not, that is an OFF-field unfair advantage.

    Which now has massive implications for the SWD.

    Remember, peoples jobs are on the line here too. It is not just about the essence of fair-play.

  • Comment 28, posted at 03.10.08 08:52:14 by MorneN Reply
  • @try time (Comment 11) : I disagree with the ‘betters the game’ part. If you play for the Sharks, after having given your all, and you then find there are about three players better than you, surely the last thing you would want to hear is sop stories about you just not making it but are so valuable blah blah.

    To me it is an insult for such a player. He should know he is not going to make it in his current environment. Then he should decide himself if he should settle on a lower league, where he can still enjoy some pride. Or if in moving ( he himself and permanently ) to another, weaker union would benefit his game.

    The bigger unions are just selfishly trying to control everything, should they maybe run into a problem or two.

  • Comment 29, posted at 03.10.08 08:53:30 by Silver Fox Reply

    Silver Fox
  • @sharks_lover (Comment 24) : exactly, the bigger unions need to keep their players active. who cares about the 1st division anyway, it is poor rugby. if it was improving i would feel sorry, but as the quality is declining, professional players on loan can only improve the quality.

  • Comment 30, posted at 03.10.08 08:53:47 by try time Reply

  • @sharks_lover (Comment 22) :

    They complained about another team gaining an unfair advantage in their view.

    And why does this smack of WP? SWD is hugely influenced by this scenario, i.e. not in contention to possibly play in the premier division.

    WP is simply riding this.

    @try time (Comment 25) :

    Rugby is a professional sport now. If unions do not play in the premier comp people’s jobs are on the line, so too sponsorships. So if SARU gets it wrong people should just accept it?

    No way buddy, not in my book.

    @just blackshark (Comment 26) :

    If the system is clear on this no problem – each team knows the implication when they enter into any agreement. Does our system do this?

    @sharks_lover (Comment 27) :

    If the medical team allows it, there is no problem.

  • Comment 31, posted at 03.10.08 08:56:16 by MorneN Reply
  • @Silver Fox (Comment 29) : thats rubbish, sharks have a wildebeest team the first half of the year, then suddenly nothing. what do you do with these players. secondly the bigger unions get raided for boks. now these borderline players are needed as stop gaps. there is also the matter of injury to key players. s14 also requires a large backup contingent to keep sa teams competitive, so to say the players in the bigger unions aren’t going to get game time is rubbish.

  • Comment 32, posted at 03.10.08 08:59:41 by try time Reply

  • @try time (Comment 30) :

    Easy for you to say if you do not play for those first division unions, or get paid by them as you work for them.

    It is a job people, think of it of any of your competitors gaining an unfair advantage by abusing the system. Will you simply keep quiet if the advantage they gain puts you at a disadvantage?

  • Comment 33, posted at 03.10.08 09:02:14 by MorneN Reply
  • @MorneN (Comment 31) : : mate i agree it doesnt make it right , but then you cant punnish cheetahs for sarfu fuckup ,
    but i believe the nfs should have points docked and swd should be given the points and then be the one playing off for the premiership

  • Comment 34, posted at 03.10.08 09:02:52 by sharks_lover Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
  • @try time (Comment 32) :

    They should do what they do in the Super 14 – pick a squad of 30 and klaar.

    Only way you are allowed to bring other players in then is because of injury.

  • Comment 35, posted at 03.10.08 09:03:38 by MorneN Reply
  • @MorneN (Comment 31) : it smacks for this reaason. it didnt effect province at all and they jumping on the band wagon to gain from it

    does SWD have the right to lodge a complaint?? HELL YEAH

    is SWD and WP one province??

    thats my point mate and wp should stay out of it , you forget they loaned players to griquas , just like the sharks did

  • Comment 36, posted at 03.10.08 09:05:16 by sharks_lover Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
  • @sharks_lover (Comment 34) :

    I dont think the Cheetahs should be docked points, because if this happens then it would benefit another team (WP) who has nothing to do with this and would in effect, gain an unfair advantage (same thing we are discussing now) over the Cheetahs if this happens.

    I believe however they should be fined. As Naka said, they studied this and did their homework in the beginning of the season on this specific matter.

    They found a loophole, and abused it.

    They, along with Ferreira who is an idiot in my view in anycase, should be fined or reprimanded in some way.

    It is like insider trading. You knowingly abused a system, just because someone allowed you to do it for a period of time does not make it right.

  • Comment 37, posted at 03.10.08 09:06:43 by MorneN Reply
  • @sharks_lover (Comment 36) :

    I am not fighting a WP cause here mate. I am saying the system was abused.


    The team directly affected by this should be compensated in some way, and that is SWD.

    I am in no way saying what WP is doing is right, in fact it is wrong, but even that still does not make what the Cheetahs did right either.

  • Comment 38, posted at 03.10.08 09:09:03 by MorneN Reply
  • @MorneN (Comment 37) : then mate i agree with you 100%

  • Comment 39, posted at 03.10.08 09:09:11 by sharks_lover Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
  • @try time (Comment 32) : Realistically, how many players would you want in one position? I am not talking about the Wildebeest team. I am talking about the Sharks in this particular example. If your third or fourth best player in a position are satisfied to play in a Wildebeest side, that is good and well.

    If he however feels he could further his career better by playing CC for the Valke, why not. But let him be the judge of that. And let him move to the Valke, not being loaned to the Valke. In essence it comes down to what Rob said about a year, but I say bollocks with the loan thing. It is disgusting.

  • Comment 40, posted at 03.10.08 09:09:33 by Silver Fox Reply

    Silver Fox
  • @MorneN (Comment 31) : sorry to say but yes. if your bosses say you can go on leave, the company loses a job because of a relationship you have with a client. jobs are lost. it isn’t your fault it is the administrators that let you go on leave. so why should you be punished for your bosses decision. same thing applies saru are the bosses, they said the loans could happen thats it case over. all that needs to be done is prevention next time.

  • Comment 41, posted at 03.10.08 09:10:11 by try time Reply

  • @Silver Fox (Comment 40) : is playing in the wildebeest worse than playing in swd. i doubt it. you have more opportunities in durban than you do in the sticks.

  • Comment 42, posted at 03.10.08 09:11:36 by try time Reply

  • Morne, you speak about abusing the system and bending the rules. Richie McCaw and Schalk Burger, 2 IRB Players of the year, do that along with most other flanks on a weekly basis.

    Anyhow, Western Province failed this season not because of other teams, but because of themselves. The Sharks suffered a similar player drain through Bok call-ups and injuries and look where they are.

    This smacks of last ditch tactics to try and force their entry into the top 4 not through their performances, but laws that were OK’d and that might be unethical or incorrect or wrong, but were allowed.

  • Comment 43, posted at 03.10.08 09:11:49 by Baldrick Reply

  • @try time (Comment 41) :

    SARU is not the boss of any union, they are an affiliate partner.

    Unions answers to investors, season ticket and box owners, and sponsors.

    Because one entity f-ed up and you suffer because of it does not make it right, even if they are the organising body.

    Legally, I will screw them for every cent.

  • Comment 44, posted at 03.10.08 09:12:34 by MorneN Reply
  • @MorneN (Comment 35) : where are you going to get players with game time and are match fit?

  • Comment 45, posted at 03.10.08 09:13:04 by try time Reply

  • @MorneN (Comment 44) : who runs the and regulates the competitions?

  • Comment 46, posted at 03.10.08 09:13:51 by try time Reply

  • @Baldrick (Comment 43) :

    Mate I do not think we are even closely on the same page here.

    You think (by what I read you say) I am trying to justify WP in this.

    I will say it again.

    You should win and lose by what happens on the field. What McCaw and Schalk does is on the pitch, if they get caught they get punished.

    You should not be put in a disadvantaged position by off-field shenanigans.

    On-field vs. OFF field.

    Massive difference on what I am talking about here.

  • Comment 47, posted at 03.10.08 09:15:31 by MorneN Reply
  • @try time (Comment 45) :

    Do it legally and NOT TO GAIN AN UNFAIR ADVANTAGE then by all means send your players to wherever you want.

    Are you trying to tell me you do not think the Griffons was wrong here? They did not abuse the system to gain an unfair advantage?

    @try time (Comment 46) :

    President’s Council, elected member that represents the Competition Commission

    And funnily enough, guess who is in charge of this commission?

    Harold Verster…

  • Comment 48, posted at 03.10.08 09:17:40 by MorneN Reply
  • I am off for a bit, be back later

  • Comment 49, posted at 03.10.08 09:19:29 by MorneN Reply
  • Just before I go.

    If your employer does something wrong to you – do you simply accept it or take it to CCMA?

    Whatever a ruling body says or does is not right just because they said so.

  • Comment 50, posted at 03.10.08 09:20:17 by MorneN Reply
  • @MorneN (Comment 44) : screw them for every cent? that will alienate you and just create the split that could benefit sa rugby. the big unions dropping the weight of the money sapping small unions.

  • Comment 51, posted at 03.10.08 09:21:19 by try time Reply

  • @MorneN (Comment 48) : not at all, free state have drained the griffons team for years, it is good to see they give something back.

  • Comment 52, posted at 03.10.08 09:22:25 by try time Reply

  • @MorneN (Comment 47) : If WP had played last week’s fixture against Boland at Newlands, they may well not have been in the same position they now find themselves. That was SARU initially allowing it, and WP no doubt being more than happy to bend the rules on that ocassion to suit them when all the other big unions had to play on the marshland of Boland Stadium.

    (Conversely, if Naqualivuka (sp) had not spilled the ball for the easist of tries, again, they would have been in a better position to now.)

    As to SARU “not” being the boss, that is not entirely correct. They regulate the compeittions, do the fixtures and make the laws. They are the highest body and Unions are answerable to them to a certain degree (like following their laws).

    Just as SARU must follow the dictates of the IRB who are also made up of members of the affiliate unions.

  • Comment 53, posted at 03.10.08 09:23:15 by Baldrick Reply

  • @MorneN (Comment 50) : no-one said it was right. but they allowed it. when i grew up my old man always said to me when something unfair happened, lifes not fair. and sadly it is so. so deal with what you got and take the gaps before they close.

  • Comment 54, posted at 03.10.08 09:25:17 by try time Reply

  • @Baldrick (Comment 53) :

    Cheetahs rightly appealed that, and it did not happen, the rules were followed.

  • Comment 55, posted at 03.10.08 09:25:56 by MorneN Reply
  • @try time (Comment 54) :

    Ja deal with it, take them to court if necessary. I support SWD 100% in that.

  • Comment 56, posted at 03.10.08 09:26:35 by MorneN Reply
  • hey baldrick, any relation to blackadder?

  • Comment 57, posted at 03.10.08 09:26:45 by try time Reply

  • @try time (Comment 52) :

    This is not about the Cheetahs and Griffons.

    Who gives a toss about what has been taken and given, again this is not the issue.

    What they did affected, directly, another union – SWD.

    We are not on the same page here.

  • Comment 58, posted at 03.10.08 09:28:36 by MorneN Reply
  • @MorneN (Comment 37) : They found a loophole, and abused it.

    Isn’t that what loopholes are for?

  • Comment 59, posted at 03.10.08 09:30:50 by just blackshark Reply

    blackshark - I'm back!
  • @MorneN (Comment 58) : not being on the same page as try time is a good thing… it means there’s still a chance you’re sane 🙂

  • Comment 60, posted at 03.10.08 09:31:10 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • shit i think sharks should sign this danniller. a player that can beat the eagles single handedly is a champion amongst men, and deserves to run alongside the other champions amongst men the sharks.

  • Comment 61, posted at 03.10.08 09:31:41 by try time Reply

  • @just blackshark (Comment 59) :

    Depends if you are the one abusing it or the one affected negatively by someone else abusing it.

  • Comment 62, posted at 03.10.08 09:31:51 by MorneN Reply
  • @MorneN (Comment 58) : we are on the same page. swd got screwed because of a saru decision they must deal with it. i have to deal with the sharks losing the s14 final because of a refs decision. a mistake even more costly. so i really don’t care about a money sapping small union petty woes.

  • Comment 63, posted at 03.10.08 09:34:12 by try time Reply

  • @try time (Comment 63) :

    On-field – Off field.

    And dont forget, you were a ‘small’ union not too long ago…

  • Comment 64, posted at 03.10.08 09:37:42 by MorneN Reply
  • And they should not just deal with it, they should screw SARU. I would love that.

  • Comment 65, posted at 03.10.08 09:38:17 by MorneN Reply
  • @MorneN (Comment 64) :

    And you lost because Fransie cannot kick for crap from straight in front. 😈

  • Comment 66, posted at 03.10.08 09:38:52 by MorneN Reply
  • the sooner saru drops these unions and puts them under the control of the money making unions the better. then money can be put to contracting boks directly and development programs.

  • Comment 67, posted at 03.10.08 09:39:39 by try time Reply

  • @MorneN (Comment 64) : amateur era and professional era. its like comparing dinosaurs to man.

  • Comment 68, posted at 03.10.08 09:40:57 by try time Reply

  • @MorneN (Comment 66) : don’t get me started on fransie. now thats not fair.

  • Comment 69, posted at 03.10.08 09:41:34 by try time Reply

  • @MorneN (Comment 62) : Yeah it sucks if you’re on the receiving end…but just because something is unfair doesn’t make it wrong in the eyes of the law…that’s the f’d up thing about all laws. What matters is being on the right side of the law…as it stands at that time.

    The joke is… lawyers are capable of moving the right side of the law from one position to another…so whoever has better lawyers will win the case.

  • Comment 70, posted at 03.10.08 09:41:51 by just blackshark Reply

    blackshark - I'm back!
  • @try time (Comment 68) :

    Nope it is not.

    Any union can be professional if they are allowed to be.

    Not happening in SA at the moment. Because the bigger unions keep on screwing the smaller ones.

  • Comment 71, posted at 03.10.08 09:42:56 by MorneN Reply
  • @try time (Comment 67) : Maybe they should just do that…

  • Comment 72, posted at 03.10.08 09:43:10 by just blackshark Reply

    blackshark - I'm back!
  • you seriously think swd can stand on its own two feet without hand outs. doubt it. if unions like lions and cheetahs are battling what chance does swd have.

  • Comment 73, posted at 03.10.08 09:45:26 by try time Reply

  • GEEZ…you men can go on and on and on about the same thing… 🙄 🙄

  • Comment 74, posted at 03.10.08 09:46:28 by I'ce (Rebel With a Cause) Reply
    Competition Winner Ice
  • When can we start telling jokes? :mrgreen:

  • Comment 75, posted at 03.10.08 09:47:41 by McLovin Reply

  • @just blackshark (Comment 72) : unfortunately won’t happen cos these money sapping unions hold a bigger vote over the money making ones in saru. hence the stupid cross competition warm up games that have to be played, and the 8 team cc.

  • Comment 76, posted at 03.10.08 09:47:43 by try time Reply

  • @MorneN (Comment 64) : Yeah, but we rose above our station while most of the others fell into oblivion floundering in political infighting and amateur admin in a professional era.

  • Comment 77, posted at 03.10.08 09:51:52 by Baldrick Reply

  • @McLovin (Comment 75) :

    I like your spirit McLovin!!! Way better than the testosterone inclined “I WILL make you see it my way” debate going on here… 😉

  • Comment 78, posted at 03.10.08 09:51:58 by I'ce (Rebel With a Cause) Reply
    Competition Winner Ice
  • A man breaks into a house to look for money and guns. Inside, he finds a young couple in bed. He orders the guy out of bed and ties him to a chair. While tying the homeowner’s wife to the bed the convict gets on top of her, kisses her neck, then gets up and goes into the bathroom.

    While he’s in there, the husband whispers over to his wife: ‘Listen, this guy is an escaped convict. Look at his clothes! He’s probably spent a lot of time in jail and hasn’t seen a woman in years.
    I saw how he kissed your neck. If he wants sex, don’t resist, don’t whatever he tells you. Satisfy him no matter how he nauseates you. This guy is obviously very dangerous. If he gets angry, he’ll kill us both. Be strong, honey. I love you!’

    His wife responds: ‘He wasn’t kissing my neck. He was whispering in my ear. He told me that he’s gay, thinks you’re cute, and asked if we had any Vaseline.
    I told him it was in the bathroom.
    Be strong honey. I Love you, too.’

  • Comment 79, posted at 03.10.08 09:52:43 by McLovin Reply

  • @I’ce (Rebel With a Cause) (Comment 78) : Been I long week, so not in the mood for serious praatjies. I’ll leave it to the adults. 😀

  • Comment 80, posted at 03.10.08 09:55:00 by McLovin Reply

  • @try time (Comment 73) : I thought WP were also in trouble after selling off all their assets, but they seem to have unlimited cheque-book funds with player recruitment.

  • Comment 81, posted at 03.10.08 09:56:55 by Baldrick Reply

  • @try time (Comment 76) :

    Difference between being a professional entity and not.

    Rugby is trying to find a middle ground between amateurism and professionalism.

    But I am not going into that now.

    It means I will not get all my work done before 12 and then it cuts into my drinking time.

  • Comment 82, posted at 03.10.08 09:57:11 by MorneN Reply
  • @McLovin (Comment 79) :

    :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

  • Comment 83, posted at 03.10.08 09:58:27 by I'ce (Rebel With a Cause) Reply
    Competition Winner Ice
  • For McLovin and Ice

    The Lone Ranger and Tonto went camping in the desert.
    After they got their tent all set up, both men fell sound asleep.
    Some hours later, Tonto wakes the Lone Ranger and
    says, “Kemo Sabe, look towards sky, what you see?”
    The Lone Ranger replies, “I see millions of stars.”
    “What that tell you?” asked Tonto.
    The Lone Ranger ponders for a minute then says,
    “Astronomically speaking, it tells me there are
    millions of galaxies and potentially billions of
    planets. Astrologically, it tells me that Saturn is in
    Leo. Time wise, it appears to be approximately a
    quarter past three in the morning. Theologically, the
    Lord is all-powerful and we are small and insignificant. Meteorologically, it seems we will have a beautiful
    day tomorrow. What’s it tell you, Tonto?”

    “You dumber than buffalo shit. It means someone stole tent.”

  • Comment 84, posted at 03.10.08 09:59:25 by MorneN Reply
  • @Baldrick (Comment 81) : what like lions selling their stadium to pirates then pirates getting the lions share of the coke deal?

  • Comment 85, posted at 03.10.08 10:14:03 by try time Reply

  • @McLovin (Comment 79) : yeah sad state of our justice system when we laugh about rape.

  • Comment 86, posted at 03.10.08 10:15:54 by try time Reply

  • @MorneN (Comment 82) : yeah it is a long argument. unfortunately international rugby has no place for amateur, so trying to accomodate it in a professional setup just wastes money that should be going to stopping our players leaving our shores. thats why i say let the professional unions carry the amateur unions as part of their player development.

  • Comment 87, posted at 03.10.08 10:19:03 by try time Reply

  • @try time (Comment 86) :

    Although truth in what you’re saying…I just dont think it was meant that way…and not everyone chooses to see the “ugly” in everything…so I believe it was really innocent…

  • Comment 88, posted at 03.10.08 10:32:49 by I'ce (Rebel With a Cause) Reply
    Competition Winner Ice
  • @I’ce (Rebel With a Cause) (Comment 88) : no no ice i wasn’t attacking mclovin. i have heard the joke before and seeing it again made me think what i wrote.

  • Comment 89, posted at 03.10.08 10:55:14 by try time Reply

  • @try time (Comment 89) :

    Okay…. 😉

  • Comment 90, posted at 03.10.08 10:59:39 by I'ce (Rebel With a Cause) Reply
    Competition Winner Ice
  • @MorneN (Comment 82) : That’s been going on since RWC 1995. EP was one of the Big Unions, hosted Tests and had great teams. Amateur admin put paid to that and they, like the rest of the EC rugby setup are now a begging basket.

  • Comment 91, posted at 03.10.08 11:33:41 by Baldrick Reply

  • I say relegate the Cheetahs to the b division for flagrant flaunting of the rules. 😈

  • Comment 92, posted at 03.10.08 13:06:40 by Sauce Reply
    Worcestershire Sauce
  • @Sauce (Comment 92) :

    And WP and SWD can be banned for 10 years for complaining!

  • Comment 93, posted at 03.10.08 14:21:35 by walter van Reply

    walter van Lions World
  • I say…everyone is getting old on this…

    Cheethas and Griffons cannot be penalised with log points as neither team enjoyed THAT advantage.
    Secondly they cleared it with SARU.
    So it is about time WP and SWD shut up on this specific saga….

    Raise it in teh next council meeting as a general point if they feel a rule should be made…

  • Comment 94, posted at 03.10.08 14:28:16 by Hmmm Reply

  • @Hmmm (Comment 94) : Raise it in teh next council meeting as a general point if they feel a rule should be made…

    😯 I agree…

  • Comment 95, posted at 03.10.08 14:34:01 by just blackshark Reply

    blackshark - I'm back!
  • well justice has been served. the right decision made and the eagles can sulk. next time they can try and win on the field.

  • Comment 96, posted at 03.10.08 14:34:44 by try time Reply

  • If WeePee dont make the semis, send all the Bokke to SWD for next week semi. Just to give justice to this ruling. 😎

  • Comment 97, posted at 03.10.08 16:06:56 by PaarlBok Reply

  • Would that be nice if Boland can draw back at least one point from the Cheetahs leave is wit a less then 18 to let them go.

  • Comment 98, posted at 03.10.08 16:49:03 by PaarlBok Reply

  • Rugby 365 poll 😆

    Should the Currie Cup be decided in the boardroom or on the field?

    On the field 45%
    In the boardroom 3%
    Give WP their own Cup, then they can stop whining 51% :mrgreen:

  • Comment 99, posted at 03.10.08 18:08:57 by KSA Shark © Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • @PaarlBok (Comment 97) :

    And there would be nothing legally wrong with that!!!!!!!

    This is such a crock of shit ruling. It is the Currie Cup competition, is it not? Or has the 1st division suddenly got a different name for their competition?

  • Comment 100, posted at 03.10.08 18:11:50 by KSA Shark © Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • Will Saru now remove the eight tries that John Daniels scored in the Bankfin Cup competition?

    It was after all a different comp than the Currie Cup? 🙄

  • Comment 101, posted at 03.10.08 18:15:02 by KSA Shark © Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • Being a lazy and somewhat ‘quick-fix’ type of blogger… could someone please give me 30 words or less synopsis of what has transpired here with the ‘loans’?


  • Comment 102, posted at 04.10.08 03:54:29 by bryce_in_oz Reply

  • @bryce_in_oz (Comment 102) :

    Essentially players have been moving freely between the two unions depending on the Cheetah needs. If the Cheetahs don’t need him in their 22 then he playes for the Griffons. If they do, then they pull him from the Griffons.

    Daniller Played for the Cheetahs on a friday night and the Griffons on the Saturday afternoon on the same weekend.

  • Comment 103, posted at 04.10.08 05:55:19 by KSA Shark © Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • @bryce_in_oz (Comment 102) :

    Daniller, Jandré Blom, Jacques-Louis Potgieter, Hendrik Meyer and Ashley Johnson have been moving between the two unions during the season


  • Comment 104, posted at 04.10.08 05:58:21 by KSA Shark © Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • @KSA Shark © (Comment 103) :

    If it was a once off move in one direction during the season, ala Dolly to the Boland or even Olivier to Griekwas to an extent then it would be cool. But the guys have been been moving backwards and forwards as needed.

  • Comment 105, posted at 04.10.08 06:00:58 by KSA Shark © Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • @KSA Shark © (Comment 105) :

    Thanks KSA… why can’t they though… I was under the impression that this was permitted eg Boland/WP?

    I could understand the other minnows taking offence but not the other way around?

  • Comment 106, posted at 04.10.08 06:07:00 by bryce_in_oz Reply

  • Did Daniller get two wages for that… lol?

  • Comment 107, posted at 04.10.08 06:07:51 by bryce_in_oz Reply

  • @bryce_in_oz (Comment 107) :

    That actually went through my mind as well. 😆

  • Comment 108, posted at 04.10.08 06:43:51 by KSA Shark © Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • @bryce_in_oz (Comment 106) :

    I can’t think of any occasions where Boland WP players moved back and forth though. Unless you are refering to S14 where it IS allowed because the teams are supposed to be regional teams.

    This however was within the same competition, although it now seems that The premier Div Currie Cup is not considered the same competition as the 1st Div Currie cup.

    That said, WP ARE a bunch of ninnies for trying (or should that be crying) to get their own way.

  • Comment 109, posted at 04.10.08 06:47:11 by KSA Shark © Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • @KSA Shark © (Comment 109) :

    Got it now… cheers…

  • Comment 110, posted at 04.10.08 06:52:07 by bryce_in_oz Reply

  • are you guys dumb. there is only one currie cup. and each year only 8 teams get to contest for it. the other competition is another division and another trophy. there is no relation other than a chance for two teams to have a go at getting into the cc the next year. two seperate comps so deal with it.

  • Comment 111, posted at 04.10.08 09:03:23 by try time Reply

  • @try time (Comment 111) :

    What’s your point numnuts?

  • Comment 112, posted at 04.10.08 15:33:00 by bryce_in_oz Reply


Add Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.