Ken Borland

Watching South African rugby on television at the moment may be a bit like being in a canoe stuck in a stagnant backwater – the still water means not much is happening – but there is a deadly waterfall up ahead if the Independent Communications Authority (Icasa) get their way.

Icasa, which regulates broadcasting in this country, are concerned that subscription TV, i.e. Multichoice, have a monopoly on showing live sport in this country and they want to make the market more competitive. To do this, they propose that broadcast rights can only be bought for a maximum three-year period, there are to be no exclusive deals and rugby’s properties must be split and dispersed between as many broadcasters as possible.

But as SA Rugby so ably illustrated in their presentation to Icasa during public hearings this week, these so-called remedies will have the exact opposite effect. Because they will have such a drastic economic impact on the sport, for whom the sale of television rights makes up 58% of their income (sponsorship, which largely depends on TV exposure, makes up another 26%), the market won’t be competitive at all because professional rugby, already brought to its knees by the Covid-19 pandemic, will all but cease to exist.

Spreading the rights around may sound like a lovely socialist plan in an ideal world, but in the real world of free market economies, and the absence of any other broadcaster remotely capable of doing and paying what SuperSport does, rugby is in the canoe going over the Victoria Falls if they can no longer sell their rights as a single package, in long-term, exclusive contracts.

Given the abysmal record of almost all parastatals in this country, I have a healthy scepticism when it comes to them poking their noses around wherever they sniff money or gravy. But I was squirming with discomfort when, following SA Rugby’s presentation, one of the Icasa councillors asked if the federation would consider producing movies, documentaries or news if they could no longer do rugby.

I was so shocked by the sheer idiocy of the question, coming from someone who is no doubt earning a healthy slab of taxpayers’ money and is in a position to draft laws for the people of this country, that I fired off a derogatory tweet. Shortly thereafter, after a rant by the Chairperson about people disrespecting authority on social media, I was removed from the virtual meeting.

It’s a bit like asking a company that specialises in making hand sanitizers if they wouldn’t mind switching to car manufacturing because the government wants to fiddle with the market.

As SA Rugby CEO Jurie Roux pointed out, it costs millions of rand to build a competitive rugby system that will find a player with talent in the grassroots pipeline, take them through the youth age-levels, through provincial and franchise rugby and hopefully then to the Springboks. That money largely comes from the sale of television broadcast rights and sponsors who are willing to pay for the exposure they get on TV.

Apart from their clearly undemocratic and anti freedom of speech tendencies, Icasa also failed to do a Regulatory Impact Assessment before drafting their findings, according to SA Rugby’s legal counsel, Ngwako Maenetje SC. He also accused Icasa of paying scant regard to a written submission SA Rugby had previously made, which gave a thorough indication of the dire financial impact the proposed regulations would have on rugby.

A court date undoubtedly beckons for Icasa if they continue with this idiocy.

Roux also mentioned SA Rugby’s mandate is to produce compelling content and the current standard of the Currie Cup has been a subject of much discussion recently. It certainly has not been a top-class spectacle, but there have been mitigating factors for that such as the heat, humidity and rain at this time of year and the disruptions caused by Covid outbreaks.

But a look at the laws of the game could help. I like a suggestion made by coaching gurus Nick Mallett and Swys de Bruin that being able to mark a kick anywhere in the field should be considered, scrum infringements should initially just be free kicks and the attacking side should not be held to the same offsides lines as the defence.

Barring the development of further Covid infections in the next week, Sharks coach Sean Everitt said on Thursday that he will have a full squad to choose from for their Currie Cup semi-final against Western Province at Newlands next weekend.

The Sharks had their last round-robin match – also against Western Province in Cape Town – cancelled after several positive Covid tests in their camp, but the outbreak would now appear to be over as the whole squad tested negative this week.

“At the moment no-one is ruled out and as things stand we will have a full squad to choose from for the semi-final. And I’m extremely confident that it will stay that way because the players have really tried hard to isolate at home, and I believe the other three teams are the same. Nobody wants to miss out on a semi-final and potential final, and we control what we can.

“We have a good week’s training, although some guys still need to work through the Covid protocols and will only return to training later. The return-to-play is a different process for the number of guys that tested positive and some of them will only return to training on Saturday. The severity of symptoms vary, but we’re in a pretty good space at the moment,” Everitt said on Thursday.

The Sharks had just notched a highly-impressive win over the Bulls when the virus struck their camp, leading to weakened teams being well-beaten on the road by the Lions and Free State Cheetahs. But the KwaZulu-Natalians bounced back with a commanding 47-19 win over Griquas in their last outing on January 2, and Everitt believes they have the potential to carry that momentum all the way in this year’s Currie Cup if they can eliminate individual errors.

“Since those defeats we’ve been able to get the show on the road and prepare properly, and when we’ve been able to pick our best team, we’ve been able to deliver a performance. Obviously our rhythm has been disrupted, but we came back strongly after our last break to beat the Bulls, we have a full squad to select from and the guys are raring to go.

“It’s always easier going to Cape Town than playing on the Highveld and if we can eliminate the individual errors, then I’m not too concerned about whatever conditions we’ll face. We all know Western Province have a good set-piece, and I’m sure they’ll try and use their strengths to dominate us, but if we get that right then I’m sure we’ll have a very good chance of winning,” Everitt said.

The ability of Ruan Nortje to tear around the rugby field in indefatigable fashion in the heat of summer has been one of the features of the season, but the Bulls lock said on Thursday he was grateful for the Covid-enforced break his team had to take, even though he is well aware and sad for the heartbreak the virus has caused for many.

The Bulls will certainly be relying on Nortje to bring unrelenting work-rate in their Currie Cup semi-final against the Lions in Pretoria next weekend and he is confident he will be firing on all cylinders. The 22-year-old has shown himself to be a player in the same mould as Springbok lock Franco Mostert, who was a key part of the Lions side that dominated local rugby between 2016 and 2018.

“The heat at this time of year definitely gets the better of you sometimes, but thanks to Covid – although I am sad for how much suffering it has caused – I had a really good off time over Christmas with the family, which helped a lot. Now I can prepare well and get my energy right for the semi-finals. I’ve been very blessed with natural fitness, or something like that.

“I’m not sure why I play the way I do, it’s just instinct, it’s how I grew up – just play as hard as possible even though I’m not the biggest guy. When I get on the field, I just want to go. I’m trying to add a bit more meat to my body and our conditioning coach says I mustn’t run as much on my own so I don’t lose weight. But I still run every now and then when I’m off,” Nortje said on Thursday.

And Nortje knows that the focus of the Lions challenge will be up front – in the scrums and lineouts. The Bulls struggled in those departments when they played their Gauteng neighbours last week and were trailing 9-0 after the first quarter. But the pack then stood up and led the SuperRugby Unlocked champions to a 22-15 win and ensured first place on the log and home advantage for the semi-final and final (if they qualify).

“The Lions have a very good scrum and lineout and they will definitely target us in those facets again. So it’s for us to put in the hard work over the next week to counter them. It’s the knockout rounds now so it’s a new game and we’ve put the previous game behind us. The Lions are a very good side, they can beat anyone on their day, so we’ve put a bit more focus on our systems and processes.

“To make the Currie Cup final would mean the world to me. As a little boy, we didn’t have DsTV, so we would go to my grandfather for prime time and watch the Bulls and every final. It was such a special time and I would kick the water bottle around in the garden. I guess I was imagining myself more as a flyhalf back then, kicking the winning penalty goal,” the two-metre, 113kg Wonderboom dynamo said.

SA Rugby on Thursday submitted to the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (Icasa) that their remedies proposed in their draft findings into the broadcasting of sport by subscription television will lead to a severe reduction in the investment by these broadcasters in professional sport and will ultimately cost the Springboks the chance of adding to their 2019 World Cup victory.

Icasa have proposed that broadcast rights should not last longer than three years, that there should be no exclusive deals and that the rights should be split between multiple packages and broadcasters.

But in public hearings held virtually on Thursday, SA Rugby CEO Jurie Roux said the ‘remedies’ would be an unreasonable burden on the federation and would mean they are likely to lose their fight for survival in these times of Covid uncertainty, while Senior Counsel Ngwako Maenetje said Icasa would be acting “irrationally” and ultra vires (beyond their powers) if they enforced the changes.

“If the regulations go through in their current format then we may never see a day like the 2019 World Cup win again. SA Rugby needs to produce compelling content that is commercially viable so we can develop the game from grassroots level to winning national teams. We are 99.7% self-funded, we only get 0.3% of our income from government, and broadcast rights bring in R752 million,” Roux explained on Thursday.

According to the SA Rugby presentation, broadcast rights make up 58% of their income, and sponsorships, which are largely dependent on TV exposure, make up another 26%.

“We are in a daily fight for survival, we are in financial difficulty having made losses between 2016 and 2018. We recovered a little profit in 2019 on the back of the World Cup and we looked forward to capitalising on that but no-one could have predicted what happened in 2020. Covid has pushed us into survival mode and had a massive detrimental effect. We’ve had to cut our budget by R1.2 billion.

“It has made insolvency a real and present danger, we’re on the brink, and if we had not been able to capitalise on broadcast rights, we would have been bankrupt by now. Exclusivity is the main source of our revenue and with less money it means there will be less rugby until we have to close our doors and only have club rugby. And then nobody will be interested in the game,” Roux said.

Judging by the presentation of Maenetje SC, Icasa would probably face court action if they enforce the regulations.

“No Regulatory Impact Assessment was conducted by Icasa, which makes the proposals irrational, they did not inform themselves of the adverse effect of these remedies. These effects are not proportional because they place such a burden on the rights holder, rather than broadcasters, such that they will not be able to sustain themselves. Icasa have paid scant regard to the dire impact we explained in our written submissions.

“By weakening one side of the equation you do not grow competitiveness in the market, SA Rugby will no longer be in a position to provide premium content and there will be an adverse impact on public interest. These remedies are irrational, not lawful and unconstitutional. They do not encourage investment so they undermine the Icasa mandate and exceed the statutory powers of Icasa,” Maenetje said.

Icasa launched their inquiry into subscription television services to ensure the broadcast market is sufficiently competitive, but Roux says “these remedies will have the completely opposite effect to their noble intentions”.

“The obligation is on the broadcasters and not on the rights-holders, which is where Icasa are acting ultra vires. There was no discussion of the economic impact in their draft findings,” Maenetje says.