Cheeky Watson at it again...(td)

Cape Town - The Eastern Province Kings will get their wish to play in next year's Currie Cup granted, with the competition set to be expanded to eight teams.

According to the Beeld website, the presidents of the country's 14 provincial unions have already voted in favour of expanding the competition to eight teams from next year, with SARU set to make an official announcement later on Thursday.

The Kings and the Pumas are believed to be the two teams that will be added to the current six-team competition.

The Pumas have already made sure they'll finish top of this year's Currie Cup First Division log, while the Kings - who are currently in second spot - will be added to the Premier Division irrespective of where they finish....(td)

The Kings were demoted from Super Rugby when they lost a promotion-relegation series to the Lions early last month, and their automatic inclusion in the Currie Cup would thus be a decision made on political grounds.

Due to their relegation from Super Rugby, the Kings are reportedly also bargaining for a permanent spot in the Currie Cup, which would not go down well with other unions.....(td)

Smaller unions in the First Division would find it extremely tough to gain promotion to the top tier, while some of the bigger unions could face the risk of playing promotion-relegation games even if they finish ahead of the Kings.


........................................................................................................................................

Next Watson will negotiate a ''head start'' for the Kings in all competitions....

I don't think it is necesarily a bad thing - the Kings did beat the Lions at Ellis Park, so would not be totally out of their depth imo - and if the Pumas are in front of them on the log, it stands to reason that the Pumas must be included as well - also the current 6 team format does get a bit boring imo :S

So no matter where they finish they must be included, not on merit!!! or have i read it wrong??

gregbucks Wrote:

---

> So no matter where they finish they must be
> included, not on merit!!! or have i read it
> wrong??


Sorry I missed that part - politics raising its head again :X

They should finish second anyway but lovely stipulation.

Gregbucks...I'm not siding with Cheeky but I do believe that for the benefit of rugby development in the Eastern Cape, the Kings needs to be in the Currie Cup competition for at least 3 years.
How do I qualify this stance? Just think back to the 80's when a struggling Natal outfit could not get back into the Currie Cup from the B Division and they were given a free passage into the top division.
Just look at the development that took place...
Eastern Cape rugby if developed and managed properly can be a powerhouse in South African rugby.

I feel very sorry for the players (that's left) and the spectators that really embraced the Kings this past season. As Shrek said, I also think they will finish second and should get trough the play-offs to meet the Pumas in the final. But for Currie Cup rugby I cannot see any of the weaker unions troubling the big guns.

But on the other hand, I agree that it's sickening (puke ) to see the Watsons (anc & politics in sport) get handed everything on a silver platter. :X

Perpetual Wrote:

---

> Gregbucks...I'm not siding with Cheeky but I do
> believe that for the benefit of rugby development
> in the Eastern Cape, the Kings needs to be in the
> Currie Cup competition for at least 3 years.
> How do I qualify this stance? Just think back to
> the 80's when a struggling Natal outfit could not
> get back into the Currie Cup from the B Division
> and they were given a free passage into the top
> division.
> Just look at the development that took place...
> Eastern Cape rugby if developed and managed
> properly can be a powerhouse in South African
> rugby.

Why should the same argument not hold true for the Eagles or the Griffons, etc - surely it should be based on merit as determined by log poistions ?

Well let them become a powerhouse on merit and not the there political hospitality provided by Watsons affiliation to the ANC... I hope you right Perpetual especially the ''developed and managed properly'' statement...(tu)

Frodo Wrote:

---

> Perpetual Wrote:
>

---

>

---

> > Gregbucks...I'm not siding with Cheeky but I do
> > believe that for the benefit of rugby
> development
> > in the Eastern Cape, the Kings needs to be in
> the
> > Currie Cup competition for at least 3 years.
> > How do I qualify this stance? Just think back
> to
> > the 80's when a struggling Natal outfit could
> not
> > get back into the Currie Cup from the B
> Division
> > and they were given a free passage into the top
> > division.
> > Just look at the development that took place...
> > Eastern Cape rugby if developed and managed
> > properly can be a powerhouse in South African
> > rugby.
>
> Why should the same argument not hold true for the
> Eagles or the Griffons, etc - surely it should be
> based on merit as determined by log poistions ?

Guys...first answer the part on how Natal got into the Currie Cup in the first place...free passage it was with no thought given to Boland or any of the other smaller unions...
The EP franchise will be able to mix it with the big boys given the amount of talent in the region AND they have a terrific stadium and a huge support base. At the risk of infuriating many...they are the only franchise outside of the Currie Cup teams that has the potential to grow into a powerful union administratively and competitively...We are doing the SA game more harm than good by not growing this region.
Yeah, Cheeky is a tough old geezer who uses politics to further his cause but for many years the old "boere-mafia" have done excatly what they wanted so he's probably figuring that he's giving it back to them
Seriously though...Eastern Province as a force would be great for SA rugby...and before you say on merit...remember...Natal

Sorry, can't agree with that - in my book '2 wrongs do no make a right' - and I'm sure the good people of George can put up the same arguments (talent in the region, large support base, etc) - merit has to be the 'right' way imo

Frodo Wrote:

---

> Sorry, can't agree with that - in my book '2
> wrongs do no make a right' - and I'm sure the good
> people of George can put up the same arguments
> (talent in the region, large support base, etc) -
> merit has to be the 'right' way imo

You're right of course but in SA rugby nothing's as straight-forward as that...not sure SWD would have as strong a case as EP...the support base is nowhere as strong as what you claim and they do not have a stadium of note.I'm talking POTENTIALLY and there is really only one union that can potentially challenge the big guns. Cheeky knows this and you can't blame him for pushing for a reasonable amount of time in the Currie Cup...they were set up to fail in Super Rugby and yet almost pulled it off.In the Varsity Cup, promoted teams get at least 2 years in the top flight in order to make the step up.