A sad tale of South Africa’s missing Super rugby franchise
By James Mortimer, 17 Feb 2009 James Mortimer is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- Rugby Union, SANZAR, Springboks, Springboks rugby, Super Rugby, The Springboks
As the fourteenth edition of Super rugby commences, most fans know little about the omitted groups of South African rugby.
When the Super rugby tournament began in 1996, South Africa’s position of allocating their contributing teams was not as clear cut as their fellow SANZAR partners.
New Zealand, with 26 provincial unions, decided to create Super Rugby franchises.
Based around five of their biggest separate unions, the country was divided from North to South, through the Auckland Blues, Waikato Chiefs, Wellington Hurricanes, Canterbury Crusaders and Otago Highlanders. Each franchise can draw upon players from the central and feeder unions.
They also employ a simple draft system to allow player exchanges.
Australia drew upon their states.
NSW and Queensland provided the first two teams as the traditional rugby powerhouse states, and the ACT Brumbies became the third team (the ACT rugby union was formed in 1938).
South Africa initially took another route.
For the first two years of the competition, they actually had their four semi-finalists from their provincial tournament – the Currie Cup – compete in the Super 12. In 1998, they created a franchise style system like New Zealand.
But it was there that the similarities ended.
Currently in South Africa there are 14 provinces. In the Currie Cup, the championship is split into two divisions. The top eight teams play in the “premier” division, and the next six play in a “first” division.
Although the format of the competition has changed, essentially the six teams in the first division play for the chance to be promoted and rewarded with entry into the Premier Division.
Of the current fourteen provinces, only eleven are represented.
The Border Bulldogs, the Mighty Elephants and the Eagles have no representation at Super rugby level. Three clubs represent a massive number of clubs and players that are not getting exposure at the highest stage.
When the competition expanded from the Super 12, there was much dispute as to what the fifth team’s identity was going to be. Months of inner sanctum disputes were held between the South Africa’s Minister of Sport, SARU, and the countries’ existing Super rugby franchises.
Two groups, one representing the Free State and Northern Cape, and another representing the Southern and Eastern Cape region, were essentially the two teams bidding for entry.
The Central Cheetahs, indicating the provinces of the Free State cheetahs, the Griffons and the Griquas, entered the competition.
However, the sixth group was guaranteed a place in the Super 14. This was represented by a team called the Southern Spears.
A promotion/relegation system was to be implemented.
In 2006, the concept was designed that the bottom placed South African franchise would be replaced by the Spears in 2007. The following year would then see the bottom placed team – but not the Spears – play a “relegation” match with the formerly ejected side to determine the 2008 participant.
The Spears in 2009 would then be subject to this system.
Provisions were made for sustainability of the Spears leading up into their exclusion to the competition, including granting of rights in which South African rugby would financially support the side, provide sponsors, and give them a season in the 2006 Currie Cup to prepare for their entry to the competition the following year.
On the 8th of June 2005 a legal binding agreement was signed by the South African Rugby Presidents council. This was then ratified on 2nd December 2005.
Needless to say, this has not occurred, irrespective on any legal binding contracts.
This ensured a long and almost bloody legal battle, which travelled through to the High court of South Africa. At the end of it all, the Spears did win the fight, although SARU and South African rugby had planned to contest this decision.
At the end of 2006, all parties reached a settlement. They won the fight perhaps, but for now, lost the war.
South Africa’s lowest performing Super rugby franchises have consistently propped up the table of the competition, prejudicing the non-represented players and rewarded poor performance.
The Spears, irrespective of concerns of competitiveness or any other argument, deserved representation to allow professional rivalry between the local South African teams.
More than a third of South Africa’s rugby players are not represented at Super rugby, and hence, international rugby level.
On June 16th, a new rugby franchise for the South Eastern Cape will be launched in Port Elizabeth, to coincide with the arrival of the British and Irish Lions.
This complex chapter in South African rugby continues. Like the controversial quota system, let us hope for rugby and South Africa’s sake, that it does not poison their game any further.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (201)
- Will South African rugby force a Super 21 by 2018? (173)
- The real story of how John O’Neill turned Manchester City down (70)
- Dan Parks and the unsolved questions of expat rugby (65)
- Australian teams at Super disadvantage (58)
- Pocock set to be named new Force skipper (56)
- Can the ‘Tahs win the battle after losing the Waugh? (51)
- France turns to Parra and Trinh-Duc
- Rebels look to lift for formidable Blues in rugby trial
- Mr Fix-It Lucas wants to nail down No.10
- Force roost loses ‘Mother Hen’ Sharpe
- Victory beat Mariners with Kewell winner
- Waratahs romp to 83-5 trial win over Samoa A
- Quade Cooper’s return to the Reds goes up a gear
- Wales show Southern Hemisphere how to play running rugby (29)
- What opening matches of Six Nations taught us (19)
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (202)
- Clinical Chiefs cost rusty Rebels in Corio (9)
- Six Nations shows rugby is a parochial game at heart (5)
- Goose’s Super Rugby up-and-comer XV for 2012 (29)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
- Explore:
- Rugby Union, SANZAR, Springboks, Springboks rugby, Super Rugby, The Springboks

sheek said | February 17th 2009 @ 7:30am | Report comment
James,
As previously mentioned in other threads, the S12/14 was conceived as an International Provincial Championship (IPC).
The idea was, as you partly suggest, for the top 4 SA Provinces from the Currie Cup; & top 5 NZ Provinces from the then NPC, to be included each year in the S12. NSW, Qld & ACT were guaranteed their places annually, because they were the ONLY 3 Provinces in Australia of any consequence.
The Kiwis quickly realised this system would not work for them, as leading All Blacks from weaker Provinces, would totally miss out on S12 action. Thus they went to the 5 regions system.
The Saffies took a few years longer to work this out, as you have disclosed, before they also moved to the regional system. However, I was unaware Eastern Province, Border & SWD were unrepresented, as I was under the impression they fell under the Stormers franchise.
I do know they tried to win inclusion as the 5th region – Southern Spears – but lost out to Central Cheetahs when they split from the Cats franchise. The other region becoming Goldfields Lions, or whatever (Cheetahs + Lions = Cats. Clever, huh!).
In my suggestions of truncating the S14, I want to go back to the original concept of the IPC. While a truncated S14/16 of 9/10 weeks is running, the idea is for the remaining Provinces to play in a knockout comp of similar matches & duration.
Thus, leading contenders for All Blacks, Wallabies, Springboks & Pumas are not unduly affected irrespective of which province they play for, or whether they compete in S16 or not. basically, I’m adopting a southern hemisphere version of the Heineken Cup.
Of course, not everyone agrees with this suggestion. the alternative is to expand the S14 by including SA’s Southern Spears, Australia’s Victoria, Japan, an Islanders team, & a couple of Argentine Provinces, making it perhaps a S20.
Personally, I think this would be too large & unwielding, although I think this is the path we’re going down.
True Tah said | February 17th 2009 @ 7:42am | Report comment
Sheek
logistically the S20 you talk of would be a nightmare. It would prevent any meaningful finals series from ever taking place.
It is a bit of a joke that the Eastern Cape isn’t represented at Super rugby level, considering that it produces a lot of rugby players for other provincial sides – the provincial side is called the Mighty Elephants – although their results might suggest otherwise.
I suspect that if South Africa ever pulled out of Super rugby to focus on Currie Cup, reforming the domestic competition would be a priority, and a strong side in the Eastern Cape would be a necessity.
sheek said | February 17th 2009 @ 8:34am | Report comment
James/true tah,
Each of the 4 southern hemisphere countries could come up with a ‘big 8′ national domestic provincial comp. The following teams are suggestions, based on educated observations.
New Zealand – Auckland, Canterbury, Wellington, Otago, Waikato, Hawke’s Bay, North Harbour, Manawatu. South Island might argue a 3rd representative team, say Tasman.
South Africa – Northern Transvaal, Transvaal, Free State, Natal, Western Province, Eastern Province, Border, Griqualand.
Argentina – Buenos Aires, Mar del Plata, Mendoza, Tucuman, Rosario, Cuyo, San Luis, Salsa.
Australia – ACT, New South Wales, Queensland, Western Australia, Victoria, South Australia, Eastern Australia, North Queensland.
Sorry, can’t help myself………………..
Midfielder said | February 17th 2009 @ 8:47am | Report comment
Sheek
Sorry James this is totally off topic but I wish to pass on a message to Sheek hope you dont mine.
Sheek from your past posts I know you have a sift spot for Dasilva … well us poor Football folk have turned a serious thread into a musical one (often happens TBH) and Das has posted a youtube of himself singing and a couple of post latter a three songs from his band … the thread is http://www.theroar.com.au/2009/02/10/who-will-be-in-the-socceroos-team-of-the-future/ and I guess somewhere around half way you can find it, just tho you may wish to have a look.
Thanks James and agian sorry about the off topic post.
sheek said | February 17th 2009 @ 9:20am | Report comment
Midfielder,
Thankyou, & will have a look-see.
Brett McKay said | February 17th 2009 @ 9:29am | Report comment
Guys, not sure if you might have seen Wayne Smith’s article in The Australian today, it seems South Africa’s rumoured defection to the NH comps is gathering momentum again. I’ll add it to the recent thread on Australian and/or Trans-tasman comps too.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25064310-2722,00.html
I wonder if the Spears would also feature in such a move north??
sheek said | February 17th 2009 @ 9:40am | Report comment
Brett,
This is another reason why I have made my suggestion of truncating the S14, & giving glory back to the national domestic comps. In South Africa’s case, the Currie Cup.
My intention is to partly appease SA. I for one take their threat seriously to defect SANZAR. Unlike NZ, who needs Australia’s greater financial resources, SA doesn’t need Australia or NZ, either for finances, or players/teams. NZ on the other hand, have the players/teams, but require Oz’s greater financial resources.
A Trans-Tasman comp is still very feasible of course. However things pan out, Australia & NZ are more vulnerable than SA, which can stand alone if needs be. Oz & NZ need to work out contingency plans that may both include & exclude SA.
In any case, I have argued hard Australia is leaving itself exposed by failing to do something to develop a national domestic comp, however difficult the prospect may appear.
Brett McKay said | February 17th 2009 @ 9:57am | Report comment
Sheek, so as not to hijack James’ artcile completely by changing the topic, I’ll reply to your post on the Aus/TT thread that’s still going (http://www.theroar.com.au/2009/02/12/go-broke-or-grow-where-to-for-australian-rugby/)
Apologies James!! I recall the news about the Spears being the 6th SAf team, and that promotion/relegation was going to determine the 5th spot, but of course it all went quiet after the court action and SARU backflip…
LeftArmSpinner said | February 18th 2009 @ 5:37am | Report comment
Sheek, I am with you. local comps for the first part of the season. this them culminates in an international finals series between the best of the best.
Still called Super “something”! If SA defect north, the comp starts to develop on latitudal lines, AUST, NZ, Japan, and the Pacific Islands.
I am in favour of more local derbies without the hassles of jet lag and the costs of travel.
ohtani's jacket said | February 18th 2009 @ 9:52pm | Report comment
Can you imagine how rubbish South African rugby would become if they played in the Magners League?