Brian answers your questions
2004-03-09 09:53
Cape Town - News24 users have asked their questions and Sarfu president Brian van Rooyen has answered. Here's what he had to say.
Question 1. In terms of good corporate governance, and the fact the Sarfu will disclose the earnings of the rugby players, will Sarfu also disclose the earnings by the directors/executives/officials of Sarfu, and in particular that of the president himself, to the public for their perusal?
Answer: The annual earnings of Sarvu management are as follows:
President (Brian van Rooyen) R375 000
Chairperson (Tienie Lategan) R375 000
Deputy chairperson (Keith Parkinson) R180 000
Vise-chairperson (Mike Stofile) R180 000
Members of the executive committee receive R72 000 each and ordinary members R48 000 each.
Members of the board of directors of SA Rugby (Prt) Ltd earn R90 000 per annum.
The president in addition has the option of using a vehicle which is made available by Sarfu (at the moment I generally use my own transport). Management and staff do not earn remuneration for overseas trips, but do receive a daily allowance of R450. Members who represent Sarfu at meetings of the International Rugby Board receive an allowance from the IRB. The amount is determined annually by the IRB.
Question 2. Why don't we allow players to play overseas? In that way they can earn big salaries, without Sarfu paying them, they get to know conditions, players and rule interpretations, and it would allow more unknown players to play in the Super 12 and Currie Cup. It would also create a bigger group of players playing high level rugby to select a Springbok team from.
Answer: South African rugby players do have the right to play club rugby overseas, whilst at the same time they may represent their country. International experience and exposure undoubtedly contribute to cross fertilisation of game plans. Jake White and Sarfu underwrite such rights of the players wholeheartedly, but at the same time maintain that their country has first right to such players.
There are a number of well-known (and also lesser known) players playing their rugby overseas. Sarfu knows who they are and recognises their potential. We are currently working on a system which will address this situation in a meaningful way.
This year the selectors have already identified three players who are playing overseas for consideration with a view to inclusion in the Springbok side. The broader framework obviously has to be in place before the finer details can be sorted out.
Question 3. You have decided to revert to a 14-team Currie Cup system which is in direct conflict with the "strength versus strength" system advocated by most experts and by a consultant firm who were mandated by Sarfu. Is there any truth in the contention that you promised this return to a diluted Currie Cup to the presidents of the smaller unions to secure their votes? And thereby ensuring that their unions receive enhanced revenue by playing in this expanded A division. It is completely illogical and detrimental to Springbok rugby.
Answer: We have found that the principle of "strength versus strength" is ideal for the Currie Cup setup, but that the practicality of the system contradicts it. The reason for that is that the bigger unions lose their key players after June in a particular year because they are needed for the Tri-Nations series as well as incoming tours.
Matches in this period are therefore no longer showcases of "strength versus strength". Examples of this can be found in the losses suffered by the Lions and the Blue Bulls respectively against Griquas.
What is envisaged is that the unions which do not succeed in reaching the finals will still perform their duties as hosts. In such cases their matches will then be exhibition games, rather than cup games. The smaller unions will form part of this.
It was (and is) not necessary to make any promises to the smaller unions and there is certainly no weakening of the competition. The smaller unions have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that they can hold their own. To name a few examples: The Eagles beat the Lions, Griquas beat the Blue Bulls, the Pumas were too good for the Lions and Western Province lost to SWD.
The statement that the format is illogical and detrimental to Springbok rugby does, in my opinion, not hold water. In the past two years the smaller unions have produced no less than 27 Springboks. Examples are Ashwin Willemse (Boland), Adrian Jacobs (Falcons), Brent Russell (Pumas), Dale Santon (Boland/SWD), Lawrence Sephaka (Falcons), etc.
Question 4. Will Jake White be given a fair chance to prove himself, like Clive Woodward was given, or will we see him sacked in two years if things have not worked out yet?
Answer: Sarfu has the fullest confidence that Jake White will perform his task. Sarfu also does not intend to treat White in a way which will belittle him. He will be afforded every opportunity to prove his potential. He is an experienced coach who knows what he wants to achieve. It is because of this that he was appointed.
Question 5. Why were Nick Mallett, Alan Solomons and other foreign based coaches not considered for the position of Springbok coach?
Answer: If we had to labour under the impression that all the good coaches were working overseas none of the local coaches would ever get any opportunities. There definitely is a sufficient number of good coaches and undeveloped coaching potential everywhere in the country and it is only right that Sarfu should be able to select from local sources first. The Nick Malletts and Alan Solomonses also started at club level only a short while ago.
Question 6. When will transformation be visible in SA rugby? As a black South African, I sometimes feel embarrassed to watch the team. In the stadiums, the Afrikaans anthems are always vocal while the African version is fairly muted. When will mind sets change so that all South Africans would feel proud to watch the team?
Answer: The process of transformation is the sum total of many parts and this process not only concerns players and administrators but also the rugby supporters in our country. To judge the success (or the lack thereof) of the entire process on the basis of one part only would be shortsighted.
The idea that the Afrikaans part of our national anthem receives more attention than the "N'Kosi sikelele" part is one such example. White and black and all the shades in-between shout equally loud when the Boks play well: whether it is Ashwin Willemse who scores against Australia or Andre Pretorius who gloriously puts one over the crossbar, or whether it is Lawrence Sephaka who by means of his excellent defence prevents the All Blacks from increasing their score.
And to return to the example of the national anthem, it is general knowledge that the players are coached to learn to sing this song with all their hart and be proud of it. To be practical, real transformation lies in the hearts of people and as South African rugby lovers each can contribute individually to bring about the ideal of positive change.
Question 7. Why do we need targets? Selection to any representative team should only be on merit. It makes no sense to repeat mistakes of the past by trying to qualify merit. Excellence will only be achieved if we select representative teams on merit. Please explain how targets will help create performance excellence?
Answer: I don't underwrite quotas in rugby and my fellow Sarfu members agree. To my mind quotas are an insult to any selected player who is not white. After all, each player who is selected for his provincial team or the national side wants to know that his selection was on merit and not really on the basis of the colour of his skin.
Merit selection is when we look at the expected standards and requirements of a particular position in a team, rather than the bio-antropological phenomenon with which we are so concerned - pigmentation.
As an example, if the selectors are looking for a strong hooker, they want to know that he has the ideal body weight, is fit and agile despite his size, that he has stamina and ball skills.
Sarfu will never again repeat its mistake from the past to focus on one population component for its players only. At all times players across the colour spectrum are being looked at in all provinces for their potential in order that the national side may be a real reflection of the top players from all population groups.
Question 8. Will the SA rugby structure be changed to give better support to clubs? For example remove the Currie Cup and choose eight clubs per province. Play a tournament at province level, then the winners at national level. From the clubs choose your Super 12 squads and from them the Boks. You have a wider net to choose from and better development.
Answer: Sarfu realises that clubs in the respective provinces are the feeding sources for the Springbok team. For this reason attention to clubs via the respective unions is an important part of Sarfu's strategy. At development level we are looking at direct involvement with clubs. We consult across the spectrum on how to adjust structures or create new ones which can accommodate all rugby activities from club to national level.
This has to satisfy the optimal number of parties concerned and must aid the smooth running of match cycles. For this reason Sarfu has extended its amateur competition to include the eight old provinces in the competition in order that more attention may be given at club level.
Question 9. Although it makes sense from a business perspective that the four rich province are allowed in the Super 12, what is going to happen if any of them finish outside the top four of the Currie Cup? Will it mean that we will not sent top performers to represent South Africa in the Super 12?
Answer: The idea of presenting the Super 12 matches in four metropolitan areas is aimed at optimising the physical infrastructure and supporter potential to the maximum. Recently we saw that the Free State could not present a Super 12 match profitably, simply because spectator numbers had decreased.
In respect of the hedging aspect of the four metropoles presenting the Super 12 matches, I state the following: If one of the teams does not reach the competition it will have to negotiate with Sarfu. The full agreement about the running of the competition will be drawn up in consultation with the unions. This should ensure playing opportunities for the players of the smaller unions.
Question 10. Women's rugby is one of the fastest growing sports in South Africa at the moment. In anticipation of the next World Cup for women in 2006 what is Sarfu doing to develop women's rugby through getting women involved in administration instead of men who try to manage like they do with the men? - We know they are not getting it right at the moment.
Answer: Women's rugby is here to stay and this code has the full support of Sarfu. The ladies are more than welcome to serve in Sarfu's management and structures; not only in respect of women's rugby per se, but for rugby as a whole.
I believe that in the near future we shall see many more co-ordinated actions to assist and promote women's rugby in a practical manner. It is a known fact that some unions have already elected women to their respective management structures. Free State and the Golden Lions are examples of this.
Other aspects which will receive attention is to get women involved at playing level (referring to men's rugby) as referees and line judges.
Talk Rugby