Ken Borland

Eight teams in the top division and promotion/relegation are two good adjustments that Cricket South Africa have made to their domestic structure, but the fact that, from 2023/24, one or two teams will automatically climb from Division II to Division I is going to ask serious questions about the quality in depth of the competitions.

While the complacency that comes from teams being entrenched in the top division is not good for the game, automatic promotion/relegation means there is no guarantee that the team/s coming up are going to be better than the team going down. There should be a playoff game to make sure the top division is not being perpetually weakened.

And a lowering of standards seems inevitable because the team/s being demoted is going to lose sponsors and players, while the team/s coming up from Division II will not have the resources of the other Division I teams. Without television exposure, and the fact none of the Division II sides are based in major centres, there is not going to be a level playing field. In fact, the inequality is already written into the system because the Division I teams that will start playing next season will each receive R9.3 million from CSA and can contract 16 players with a maximum salary of R1.035 million.

Division II teams, however, will probably only receive around R5 million, can only contract 11 players with a maximum salary of R600 000 if private sponsorship can top up the CSA-prescribed maximum of R400 000. So it is clear that leading players are not going to be signing for Division II outfits.

The only feasible way a Division II side is going to avoid being relegated from Division I after just one season is if most of the players from the team they are replacing jump ship and join them. But those are the same players who were not good enough to avoid relegation anyway, so South African domestic cricket is set to be trapped in a merry-go-round, or more accurately a vicious circle, in which the rich get richer, the poor get poorer and there is precious little development of either players or teams.

The need for stability in the South African game has been the consistent call from the office of the South African Cricketers Association CEO Andrew Breetzke, but this new system does not seem to be bringing that. Even less so if the disastrous decision for two teams to be automatically promoted every season is made.

There are still so many questions surrounding the new domestic structure, not least of them being whether it is one or two teams that will be promoted every season and how the mechanism of promotion/relegation works. Will there be separate teams going up and down in each format or will some sort of averaging take place so that one team moves in all three formats?

These questions were also sent to those responsible for the communications portfolio at CSA but no response has been received. One would think for a decision of this magnitude to be passed, there would be a set of documents detailing the restructuring task team’s position on all these matters in order for the Members Council and the Interim Board to meet their fiduciary duties when approving the changes, but no-one seems to have seen them. At the moment they are as mysterious as the Fundudzi Report.

It is a massive change to make based on what, judging by what has been revealed so far by CSA, are flimsy reasons and little concrete financial planning. A good idea is at the kernel of the change, but, as has often been the case, CSA don’t seem to have considered the unintended consequences.

The process of doing away with the franchises and going back to provinces is a complex administrative task that includes dissolving companies, setting up new ones, sorting out all the tax implications and putting in place an entirely new contracting model for players.

And it all needs to be done within the next month because that’s when player contracts have to be finalised.

So far, the restructuring does not seem to make sense on many levels and the cynic in me believes the only reason the 15-strong Members Council have pushed this through is so the tail can wag the dog and two of the smaller provinces get to join the six major centres at the R9.3 million big table on a rotational basis.

SuperSport are all about the product out on the park, which is why they were delighted to hand a controlling stake in the Sharks to MVM Holdings, according to the broadcaster’s CEO Marc Jury.

SuperSport International and the KwaZulu-Natal Rugby Union were the majority shareholders in the Sharks franchise but last month they agreed to sell a 51% stake to the U.S. investment consortium headed by Marco Masotti. It has been the most high-profile equity deal thus far in South African rugby and Jury told The Citizen there were no qualms about handing over control of the Sharks because it provides a wonderful opportunity for all concerned.

“Private equity can provide some fantastic opportunities but it’s not just about who you partner with but also what their intentions are. And MVM Holdings have some wonderful ideas that will take the franchise to the next level and allow us to show the best rugby possible. Any investment in the game has to be a positive and this deal will allow the Sharks to retain some great talent.

“That’s what we as SuperSport want as well, to keep the best players here. We just want to show the best possible product which is why we have invested such large amounts in local rugby and forged a very close relationship with the mother body. We have invested heavily in the Sharks for a long time but we feel this partnership can help South African rugby,” Jury said.

Jury acknowledged that it has been a difficult time for all involved in SA Rugby competitions. Playing in the heat and humidity of mid-summer was a new challenge and testing protocols played havoc with the usual training week of the teams.

“These have been tough times and we have to remember that Covid will pass. We have stayed very close to SA Rugby through the whole period and playing in a bubble and not being able to prepare properly has not been good for the players mentally. There have also been no crowds and a great degree of anxiety, so there have not been the ingredients for the players to produce their best rugby.

“I think the teams did the best they could with a very difficult situation. But everyone is just hoping for some normality soon and the thing people miss the most is the whole experience of coming together and watching their favourite team. Hopefully they have missed it so much that when normality does return they will watch the rugby more than ever,” Jury said.

As the Currie Cup approaches what will hopefully be a thrilling end, there have been some apocalyptic comments about the poor quality of the rugby and how South Africa are allegedly once again miles behind the rest of the world.

People going on about the end of the world being nigh should generally be treated with some scepticism and it was good to hear Director of Rugby Rassie Erasmus provide some much-needed perspective this week. In case anyone has forgotten, our Currie Cup teams are trying to play rugby in the middle of a global pandemic.

Obviously the major focus is to ensure nobody contracts the virus, which means there is regular testing being done on the players. Covid tests are not particularly pleasant, but the effects of this pandemic do not end there.

While Covid has disrupted the lifestyles of so many, it has had a terrible effect on the structured preparation rugby players have become used to in the professional era. According to Erasmus, rugby teams normally spend 280-300 minutes training together in the week before a game. But due to Covid protocols, that figure has now dropped to less than half of that.

That’s because after a match on a Saturday, teams can only do their Covid tests on Tuesday morning, because 48 hours have to pass before testing, otherwise contact tracing would have to be done in terms of who had too much physical contact during the last match. That means teams cannot train on a Monday in case anyone is positive and spreads the virus through the squad.

The results are only returned on the Tuesday night, which means all the scrum, maul and breakdown work has to be done on the Wednesday. A team could train on the Thursday, but that’s two days before the game and coaches and conditioning experts often are a bit wary of doing that so close to a match.

Captain’s runs on a Friday are now also mostly a thing of the past. When one adds in the effect of teams only being selected in the second half of the week, and the absence of coaches and players from week-to-week due to positive tests, it is clear there has been an awfully disruptive effect on the preparations of teams.

Players who do test positive return to action via a detailed nine-day quarantine period and then, once they return a negative test, a return-to-play protocol that measures the effect of the virus on the body through tests on the heart, lungs and other vital organs. It works out to be about 16 days – the equivalent of two matches – away from the game.

And even players or coaches who test negative, but are deemed to be close contacts of someone who has the virus, have to quarantine for 10 days.

These players and coaches, who have all taken pay cuts as well, are at the vanguard of keeping the South African game afloat in far from ideal circumstances. They deserve our thanks and appreciation, not our opprobrium.

With competing in Europe on the horizon, it really is a brave new world in so many ways for our rugby players. They will need our support.

They are taking the hits on and off the field, it’s midsummer when they have never been playing before, and the good thing one can say about the Currie Cup this year is that it’s still as uncompromising as ever.

Saturday’s matches between the Bulls and Lions at Loftus Versfeld, and Western Province and the Sharks at Newlands, might not be thrilling in terms of dazzling running rugby, but for sheer intensity alone they will hopefully be enthralling to watch.

“This just reaffirms what I’ve been saying about having a team together for a long time and being able to prepare properly – then you have a chance to win,” was coach Jake White’s response to his makeshift Bulls side being hammered 44-14 by the Pumas in their Currie Cup match in Nelspruit at the weekend.

Given the thoroughly unusual week they had, it was always going to be an uphill task for the youthful Bulls outfit to beat a fired-up Pumas side. Having emerged from their Covid outbreak, the Bulls had to play the Lions in a crucial clash in midweek with a weakened team. But they managed to sneak a win over their Gauteng neighbours, thereby ensuring they would finish top of the log.

They then had to wait 48 hours before they could do Covid testing again, leaving precious little time before Sunday’s match with the Pumas. White was always going to wrap his first-choice players in cotton-wool before their semi-final against the Lions on January 23, but he would have liked more time to prepare the largely U21 side he threw into action at the Mbombela Stadium.

“It was always going to be tough having just one training session together with this team, a guy like replacement flank Divan Venter only trained with us for 20 minutes because Nizaam Carr pulled out on the Friday. We’ve brought much better teams to Nelspruit and struggled, and this was a very new squad. But it’s never nice losing and I did hope for a better performance.

“I was pleased with the 7-10 score in the second half, but it was not ideal to go 31-0 down after the first 25 minutes. But all credit to the Pumas, we wanted to get those early points but they did it to us instead. They’ve been in Lockdown for a long time and made huge sacrifices, so it’s nice for them to get some reward. They should have won against some much better teams than what we brought here this time,” White admitted.

White said the best thing to come out of the game was that here were no injuries and now his team have the better part of two weeks to prepare for the knockout stages. The halfback pairing of Morne Steyn and Ivan van Zyl were probably the only two players who started against the Pumas and are likely to feature in the semi-final, and they were pulled off the field at halftime.

“The most important thing is that we didn’t get any injuries, which is quite nice. I was worried that we would lose one or two players, which is why Elrigh Louw and Johan Grobbelaar didn’t get on and Lizo Gqoboka only had limited time. I wanted to give Morne Steyn some game time and confidence, but two weeks out from a semi-final, you just don’t want the guys to get injured.

“I didn’t want to risk anyone and fortunately there were no injuries. I had still hoped we would be more competitive, like we were in the second half, but you’ve got to pay your school fees and a guy like Jan-Hendrik Wessels maybe lost just one game in his whole Grey College school career. But now we need to win our last two games, we’ve worked hard for a home semi-final and we have not lost at home yet,” White said.