Mapoe tug-of-war unresolved

Written by Warren Smith (war1)

Posted in :Currie Cup, In the news on 15 Aug 2010 at 15:00
Tagged with : ,

Mapoe tug-of-war unresolved
By LIAM DEL CARME, Sunday Times
The career of sought-after wing Lionel Mapoe’s is in limbo as lawyers try to determine for whom he will play.
Mapoe, who is contracted to the Cheetahs until October 31 next year, has defied an arbitration ruling to return to the province and is believed to be in Durban, where he is hoping to play for the Sharks.

His agent, Jan-Harm van Wyk, said Mapoe had “no intention of going back to the Cheetahs. The trust has broken down completely”.

The player’s disaffection stems from his remuneration package, which the Cheetahs have increased to around R150000 a year. The Sharks are apparently willing to pay him around R1-million a year.

Mapoe was dealt a blow earlier this week when advocate Bertus van Rhyn ruled at the conclusion of the arbitration process that the contract with the Cheetahs was legal.

The player, however, is refusing to budge. “He is still in Durban but it is difficult to say how things will turn out. The lawyers are discussing the matter and I’m hoping he will return to the field as quickly as possible,” said Van Wyk.

The Cheetahs are also digging in. “We have said from the outset that he has a binding contract,” said Cheetahs chief executive Harold Verster.

“As far as we are concerned the situation is quite simple. Lionel must come and play for us. The arbitration process ruled he has a legal and binding contract so we don’t have to make adjustments. We have, however, substantially adjusted his salary.

“Unfortunately, I cannot divulge how much he earns because it’s confidential.”

The case has raised moral and ethical questions. It is clear Mapoe is worth more than the Cheetahs have been and intend paying him. He was apparently paid R6000 a month in his first year, R8000 in his second and R10000 in his third.

His remuneration is now believed to have been adjusted to R13000 a month, the minimum amount for contracts in that bracket.

Mapoe would have been paid R29500 between February and May for his participation in the Super 14, although he was injured in April.

The Bulls were apparently also interested in his services but kept their distance when it became clear the Cheetahs were not prepared to release him.

The Cheetahs are weighing up their options. “We have disciplinary options that can be explored but I really don’t want to speculate about what is likely to happen,” said Verster.


  • The plot thickens! Funny enough, I expected something like this to happen

  • Comment 1, posted at 15.08.10 15:01:10 by war1 Reply
  • I’d love to know what the overrated Ebersohn brothers earn. 13K a month is a freakin joke!
    No wonder most Cheetahs players end up leaving.

  • Comment 2, posted at 15.08.10 15:07:30 by wpw Reply
  • @wpw (Comment 2) : this is the union that won the currie cup 3 times in a row from 05 to 07, surely they could pay their players better, or maybe they missed out on a fantastic marketing opportunity there and subsequently lost out on cash, my brother-in-law told me the streets of bloem were pretty much orange when they won the currie cup

  • Comment 3, posted at 15.08.10 15:10:58 by war1 Reply
  • Pathetic. It is criminal to pay him less than a sixth of his worth

  • Comment 4, posted at 15.08.10 15:36:12 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • @robdylan (Comment 4) :

    I’m trying to get hold of you? 😛

  • Comment 5, posted at 15.08.10 15:42:28 by KSA Shark © Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • R13G a month. I’m sickened that a kid who has a 10-year career should be happy earning that for 2 years.

    Puts all the “poaching” from the victimised FS in perspective. All those on their high-horses obviously don’t care about the players’ best interests.

  • Comment 6, posted at 15.08.10 15:57:08 by Big Fish Reply
    Big Fish
  • Just speaking to someone and he suggested the Sharks should just pay the Cheetahs for mapoe.

    What’s the bet the Cheetahs want more to release mapoe than they are prepared to pay him if he plays for them?

    THAT is where a labour court needs to get involved.

    “this is what you consider the player to be worth to you in term of salary therefore you cannot ask for more than that in compensation.”

  • Comment 7, posted at 15.08.10 16:05:05 by KSA Shark © Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • @Big Fish (Comment 6) :

    If they did care they would have ploughed some of that cash from the CC trophies back into the game and not into their pockets.

  • Comment 8, posted at 15.08.10 16:06:23 by KSA Shark © Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • I think Juan Smith takes up about 80% of their wage bill. 😈

  • Comment 9, posted at 15.08.10 16:46:21 by McLovin Reply

  • @McLovin (Comment 9) : :mrgreen:

  • Comment 10, posted at 15.08.10 17:03:01 by KSA Shark © Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • If I am Mapoe I will pay them back the R13G a month if he can R80G from the Sharks, he will still make a profit 😉

  • Comment 11, posted at 15.08.10 18:43:06 by Charlie Reply

  • Damn Cheaters 👿

  • Comment 12, posted at 15.08.10 18:46:55 by Charlie Reply

  • Only R13000 per month???????????? No wonder all our players disappear overseas, i dont blame ’em!!!

  • Comment 13, posted at 15.08.10 19:05:55 by The Sharks Sharkie Reply
    The Sharks Sharkie
  • @The Sharks Sharkie (Comment 13) : Freestate overseas = Anywhere not in the Freestates. :mrgreen:

  • Comment 14, posted at 15.08.10 19:15:11 by McLovin Reply

  • @The Sharks Sharkie (Comment 13) :

    No that is a Cheetah salary a Shark gets 6 times that

  • Comment 15, posted at 15.08.10 19:15:35 by KSA Shark © Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • @The Sharks Sharkie (Comment 13) :

    Cheetahs have increased to around R150000 a year. The Sharks are apparently willing to pay him around R1-million a year.

  • Comment 16, posted at 15.08.10 19:17:26 by KSA Shark © Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • As a young lawyer I’m a bit perplexed by the decision reached in the arbitration!

    The Precedent set in the High Court case (incedently the Free State HC) Troskie en ‘n Ander v Van Der Walt, The court was of the oppinion it would not be possible to compel a rugby player to play for a club, and cited various reasons for its decision reached!So damages could be ordered but not specific performance

  • Comment 17, posted at 15.08.10 19:26:52 by hannass Reply

  • @hannass (Comment 17) :

    Hmm interesting point that. i didn’t know that, but then i know little about the law.

    It does make sense as to how Mapoe can say “I don’t care what the court says, I’m staying here”

  • Comment 18, posted at 15.08.10 19:36:50 by KSA Shark © Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • @hannass (Comment 17) : The decision reached in arbitration, as I understand, is that the contract is binding. The arbitration result doesn’t compel him to play for freestate, his contract does.

  • Comment 19, posted at 16.08.10 13:06:09 by Greg Reply

  • @Charlie (Comment 11) : Hehe good point… but alas if things were just that simple.

  • Comment 20, posted at 16.08.10 13:09:16 by Farlington Reply

  • @Greg: I understand that much, but following the reasoning of Troskie decision, where the High Court found that the player had a valid contract with the union, and that the player refusing to play for the union amounted to a breach of that contract (as in the mapoe saga), the difference however was that the court said an order of specific performance( which would have the effect of compelling the player to play)would not be the appropriate relief, and rather that what would be availible to the applicant would be the right to claim damages sufferred (which they would need to prove)

  • Comment 21, posted at 16.08.10 16:01:29 by hannass Reply


Add Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.