Uncontrollable economic forces dictate player movement, so let’s not fart against thunder says Tank Lanning in his Sport24 column this week, but instead rather focus on players wanting to stay.
Tank Lanning
“Well, at least they have the same sponsor!” came the reply on Twitter after I cheekily suggested that next year’s Super Rugby tournament may look a lot more like the Vodacom Cup given the deluge of top players set to leave our shores after this year’s World Cup.
Throw in the fact that our player resources will also then have to be spread across 6, rather than the existing 5, franchises, and I might actually have been a bit generous. Perhaps a comparison with the Varsity or Community Cups is more realistic?
Well, SANZAR wanted different, and they are certainly going to get that! I am picturing Kings vs Singapore at a 1/3rd filled NMMU stadium different …
But I digress … Back to that deluge of players departing our shores, which now includes Michael Rhodes who is going to Saracens, and is likely to include Willem Alberts, who is said to be in talks with a club in France.
Much talk this week about SARU implementing plans to try and keep players in South Africa, but when a 21 year old prop is being offered £ 925 000.00 (Yep, that is R18 million) per season to play overseas, are we not just farting against thunder?
Taking on the All Blacks is tough enough, but taking on the bastion of a free economy – simple demand and supply – borders on suicidal. Think Financial Rand, and think Frans Steyn.
Last year SARU chose to break the piggy bank in the hope of keeping Steyn in South Africa. They structured a unique (and complex) deal that saw him being the only player in the country receiving extra payment for his image rights. And we all saw how that ended, which was not particularly well.
Not only was it piggy bank breaking in an attempt to cripple a free economy, but it also saw SARU singling out one player for special treatment. A cardinal sin in a team sport.
That the Boks did not really miss him, with his absence instead allowing for a potential gem in Damien de Allende to be unearthed, is a topic for another column, but it does bring me to the point I want to make today …
Let’s focus less on the players departing (given that we only have the Rand to play with, and it is not something we can control), and more on the players on our amazing talent conveyor belt that now get their chance to shine.
Given what I have heard about it thus far, I like the proposed SARU strategy to keep players. They plan to contract around 40 ‘principally young’ players to form an elite group who will be obliged to inform SARU before 30 April each year if they intend to move abroad. The suggested 90-day moratorium period – during which time the player is forbidden to negotiate with any overseas club – then kicks in, giving SARU time to prepare their best financial offer. They also plan to claim a development fee from the French clubs contracting our players that are under the age of 23 through not releasing these players from their current contracts until they are paid the fee.
Let’s just hope they have learnt from the Steyn debacle though, and that “Best financial offer” does not leave poor old piggy in pieces on the floor.
Contracting ‘principally young’ players does require a little gambling though. Just ask the Bulls. And when it does not come off, it can get expensive. But without being able to contract every professional player in the country like they do in New Zealand, this seems a good option.
So in a nutshell, let’s wish those players who really want to leave well at the airport, but let’s treat those who would prefer to stay as best as we possibly can.
Can one say that there is players who want to stay regardless of money, and then there is players who must stay who are not yet good enough to play abroad. Lets forget about the latter and only focus, as per Tank’s article, on the player who genuinely wants to stay, play and make a living in SA.
I agree with compiling an Elite group, and then set a career path with each off them. By that I mean not only developing their rugby skill and exposing them to the best of the best coaching and training facilities etc. But also looking beyond the playing career or retirement due to injury etc. Help them players to study into a field in rugby or management and groom them to one day take up positions in SA rugby, from physio to CEO.
In so doing we might keep the player here during his playing career as well as keep that knowledge gained in all matters rugby, after he stops playing, in the form of him plowing it back into the new generation.
One can even go that far as to help their spouses as well by trying to provide them employment inside SA rugby. thus forming a family business so to say. I don’t know can one even go that far to give them shares of some sort in SA Rugby?
To make sure the back door stays shut or if it is opened, the player’s contract must state that should he which to exit the contract at any time he must give X amount of notice as well as repay all expediencies invested in him plus interest. This will make them think twice about that lucrative Japan contract.
James, that is an AMAZING idea. And it is that kind of thinking that will get players to stay. Thinking outside of only money, and trying to use other assets we might have to keep players in the country. And I can promise you that there are lots of players who would prefer to stay, but given the short time they have to earn money, they chase that while they can … Understandably … Nice thinking
Hi Tank.
I find my self asking a question… What is it all for, when it comes to rugby?
I feel it all comes down to the world cup. Having the best Springboks squad available and ready to play for the world cup. I think it is a good thing having more SA players playing all over the world and improving them self to become a better player for the Springbok squad.
And when the Castle Champions or the end of year tour comes, one might implement a rule that we only pick players, playing for a local team.
Yes, the argument that you make about local provincial teams that are going to struggle next year is valid and is a cause for concern. But the fact is it comes down to the money factor. But I don’t think we should punish players, who goes abroad to earn more money. At the end of the day, very few players, given a choice, will stay to earn less money.
To leave a player out of the team, at world cup time, for the fact that he played oversees is crazy.
I take Jacques Potgieter, a good player while he was playing for the Bulls. More than a year with the Waratahs, and he has become an even better player. I believe that no mater what, he should join the Springboks later this year at the world cup.
Another positive in my books…
Chiliboy Ralepelle former Bulls hooker. Went to France and unfortunately was sent home after a doping scandal. But that’s not the point I’m trying to make. The point is when he left the Bulls, they had a hooker problem, then came Adriaan Strauss. Adriaan is another player I want in my world cup team. And now he is playing with the Bulls and feeding the line out to Matfield. Matfield I believe will be going to the world cup by default.
I don’t have a final thought to express my view about this subject. At the end of the day SARU is going to make the final decision.
Shot Martin. It annoys me beyond belief how obsessed the rugby world is with world cup performance. Perhaps their should be another coveted award in rugby like the Mace in cricket, that goes to the top ranked side at the end of each year?
I am sure we will end up as per the football model, selecting people from all over, but I still like the idea of trusting the talent base in SA, and using the Bok jersey as currency.
Rugby also VERY different to football. Can players really afford to play all year round. Prof says no. Eventually one of the paying parties is going to get short changed …