Ken Borland

SA Rugby on Tuesday expressed their disappointment and frustration that millions of South Africans will not be able to watch the Springboks in action at the World Cup due to the SABC’s decision not to broadcast an event which lifted the spirits of the country in inspirational fashion in both 1995 and 2007.
Those were the two years the Springboks lifted the most prestigious trophy in rugby, with the 1995 triumph, on home soil and featuring the enthusiastic participation of then president Nelson Mandela, being cited as a major boost to race relations in the fledgling democracy. The current Springbok team is captained for the first time by a Black African in the hugely popular Siya Kolisi and they are rated as one of the strongest contenders when the tournament kicks off on Friday.
South Africa, who are coached by former captain Rassie Erasmus, open their campaign by playing defending champions New Zealand on Saturday in what will be one of the most important games of the tournament.
“We are looking forward to a strong Springbok challenge led by Rassie Erasmus and Siya Kolisi, and it is extremely frustrating for our sport that the national broadcaster is not in a position to show it. We share the disappointment of SABC licence-holders that they will be unable to follow the progress of the Springboks and other big matches in the tournament.
“The Rugby World Cup has been broadcast on SABC at every tournament since 1995 and like other mega sporting events has the power to bring the nation together behind a national team,” an SA Rugby spokesperson told The Citizen on Monday.
Although the television rights to the World Cup are owned by WorldRugby, SuperSport, who have bought the local rights, were willing to help the SABC show at least some of the tournament, but after months of negotiations the national broadcaster pulled out, according to MultiChoice, the owners of the sports pay channel.
“As far as television rights are concerned, the SABC, having initially made a commercial offer, subsequently withdrew that offer citing budget constraints and the scheduling of the RWC, being in Japan. Rugby World Cup broadcast rights are sold by World Rugby and its agents and all broadcasters (including free-to-air operators) are able to bid for acquiring these rights,” Joe Heshu, the MultiChoice Group Executive for Corporate Affairs, told The Citizen.
The radio rights are owned by marketing company IMG and not MultiChoice.
The Rugby World Cup would have cost the SABC $28m for broadcasting rights on television and $60 000 for radio, not factoring in production costs of R900 000, SABC CEO Madoda Mxakwe told Parliament’s portfolio committee on communications on Tuesday.

Social media reaction

Teddy Rubskins @walternatebeing
SABC was looted dry by ANC cadres, this is the real issue. In the 90s SABC showed F1, NBA, currie cup & springboks rugby as well as cricket. Also the ANC government will never break the monopoly Naspers holds as they love the tax revenue from their group companies.
The 2019 rugby world cup would have cost the SABC $28m for broadcasting rights on television and $60 000 for broadcasting rights on radio, he said. These costs do not factor production costs of R900 000.

Jy Nkosi sikelel’ iAfrika  Put SA 1st
@Joy_wa_Afrika
However, a nation that is being deprived of watching the 6 @Springboks games because of money grabbing @SuperSportTV We can only afford SABC but does the greedy @SuperSportTV care Absolutely not

Cornu Perold @CornuPerold
Will Sports Minister @NathiMthethwaSA and his Communications counterpart @Stellarated help find a resolution here too as they did in the saga that saw the SABC not broadcasting any PSL matches on their platforms? Surely Rugby is a sport for ALL South Africans?

OH LOOK…Squirrel
@Travesty_Kruger
I think it quite sad that SABC hasn’t made a plan for them to air the RWC. We always seem to be united when the Bokke are playing and sadly not all of us (myself included) have DSTV.

zwelitsha @zwelitshazwe

Thulas sport is an audience driver in broadcasting, note all the satellite dishes on rooftops from informal settlements (end result of PSL rights), SABC Board, Govt must wake up Fact, Ad revenue will NEVER = Sports rights, bt loss of sports rights = audience flight

uSumpa @Konkwane_K
I feel for those people who are let down again by the SABC. The most vulnerable people who love rugby they won’t watch the Rugby World Cup because SABC is useless beyond doubt.

Riccardo Dobloni @superdoct
Money hungry, no national interest at all. SuperSport fine keep you rights, keep your advertising money, but surely you can see the benefits of letting everyone watch the national team in a world cup! go back to Open Time or sponsor SABC to show at least the #Springbok games

Cameron MacKenzie MP @CameronMacKenz2
When @MultiChoice ask for US$28million & @sabc trying to get on an even financial footing, it’s competing priorities. Why not pressure @MultiChoice instead to help out in the interests of those who can’t afford DSTV? The new SABC board are doing the right – tough – thing.

LLOYD L. MAFA @MafaLloyd
Really no broadcast of Rugby World Cup then why are we still paying the TV licence. SABC please get your act together.

Pale Rider @Pale_Rider7
Multi Choice should come to the party and as a gesture of good faith at least allow SABC rights to broadcast the Springbok games. With their messed up image lately it can only do them good.

SABC Too  @SABCtoo

Obviously, young children in South Africa don’t deserve to see a multiracial world-class national team captained by a man who came from nothing but hunger in one of the worlds largest competitions. #RWC2019

azania mboya @azaniamboya

SABC are a national disgrace by refusing to broadcast the Rugby World Cup thus leaving millions of African rugby fans without coverage. A huge blow against African transformation in Rugby. No wonder so many ppl dont want 2 pay T V Licences !!!!

–

Given the financial crisis at Auckland Park, it is easy to attack the SABC for their coverage of cricket, but an incident during the third Test between the Proteas and Pakistan at the Wanderers got me thinking about the influence of SuperSport in South African cricket.

I have an early disclaimer to make – I used to work, on contract, at the broadcaster and I do believe South African sport would be much worse off were it not for the millions of rands SuperSport pumps into the various codes through broadcast rights.

But there is also an unseemly, monopolistic and dictatorial element to this relationship.

I experienced it first-hand when I happened to call Tony Greig a “loudmouth commentator” in an opinion piece I wrote for their website. The instruction came from on high from Imtiaz Patel, now the executive chairman of MultiChoice and apparently still ruling with an iron fist from Dubai, and I was told in no uncertain terms that I had to withdraw the article and send Greig a written apology.

I was tempted to use the famous apology former English fast bowler Andy Caddick once received from a West Indian journalist, who described him in his report as being “the big-eared Caddick”. The cricketer stormed into the media centre, found the journalist and demanded that an apology be printed in the next edition.

The apology was indeed there – “I am sorry that Andy Caddick has big ears”.

Last week’s incident also involved a commentator, but one that generally chooses his words with a lot more purpose than Greig did – Mark Nicholas.

The Englishman said on air on the first day that their lunchtime chat, which is sadly not easily accessed by those at the ground, on the second day would be with three South African legends of the past – Graeme Pollock, Barry Richards and Mike Procter.

Many viewers waited with huge anticipation for the interview – and we must remember that there is massive overseas interest in those three greats – but then there was nothing. The whole idea was quietly canned and never happened. SuperSport should have at least informed the public as to why what appeared to be a major snub had happened. Even Pollock, Richards and Procter were left in the dark.

Apparently, the interview was pulled due to one of those instructions from on high, seemingly because Cricket South Africa’s response to anything Richards has to say these days is akin to that of my wife when she discovers a Parktown Prawn in the house.

So instead of serving their viewers, and allowing cricket fans to enjoy a good chat with three of the greatest players ever, SuperSport preferred to score some cheap political points.

SuperSport have a terrible attitude when it comes to their responsibility as the most powerful media house in the country. They will avoid even the slightest hint of criticism aimed at the sports bodies that give them the broadcast rights, bending over backwards to fulfil every little wish of the administrators. Many of whom should be subjected to the harshest media scrutiny of all.

Cricket South Africa, who were captured themselves by the Guptas, have SuperSport captured although it is a more mutually beneficial relationship. But does it benefit the sport in the long term?

SuperSport have some very good broadcasters and journalists and they should be allowed more freedom to do their jobs. Certainly someone as experienced and sharp as Nicholas was highly unlikely to allow anything embarrassing to be said.

Instead, the embarrassment is all SuperSport’s now with their absurd banning of three absolute cricket greats, admired the world over.

https://www.pressreader.com/south-africa/the-citizen-gauteng/20190119/282656098637360

The SABC announced on Wednesday that they would only be providing live coverage of the limited-overs and T20 internationals between South Africa and New Zealand, and Cricket South Africa (CSA) are set to lose R20 million as a result.

The only coverage SABC are willing to provide of the two Tests against the Black Caps will be two highlights packages per day and, as a result,  CSA will only receive R11 million – R3 million from the SABC and R8 million from advertising time that has already been bought by the sponsors – for the television rights, when their actual value is R30 million.

“We are disappointed that the Tests will receive limited coverage and, although we are committed to the free-to-air broadcaster as part of our development mandate, we took a substantial cut in our broadcast rights fee to ensure we can take cricket to the South African public,” acting CSA chief executive Jacques Faul said in a statement released on Wednesday.

But behind the scenes, the cricket governing body is seething over the SABC’s unwillingness to fulfil their Icasa-stipulated mandate of providing live coverage of sporting events that are in the national interest. South Africa have been the number one ranked team in Test cricket since August, but the matches against New Zealand are their first on home soil since winning the pre-eminent ranking.

CSA sources told Business Day that Faul is so upset over the deal that he had to be talked out of considering whether to step down as CEO.

“The decision to broadcast these matches is a clear indication that we take our mandate seriously and we are cognisant that the public of South Africa deserve to see their cricket team – which is rated number one in the world in Test cricket and also highly in the other formats of the game.

“The SABC will continue to serve the public of South Africa and be true to their mandate of educating, informing and entertaining them,” SABC spokesman Sizwe Nzimande said.

CSA are now determined to handle their television rights differently next summer, with SuperSport likely to be offered exclusive rights and paying considerably more for them.

As one high-ranking CSA official said: “We’ve been falling over backwards to try and get cricket on free-to-air television because we know how vital that is to developing the game, especially amongst the disadvantaged communities. But now we’ve sold the rights to SABC at nearly one-third of their value. Where do they think most of our money to run our development programmes  comes from? It’s from selling the television rights and now we’ve taken a big knock in that department.”

Negotiations with the SABC had been ongoing for the last two months through world leading television rights company IMG, while CSA had also tried to get Sascoc and the sports ministry to intervene on their behalf as Faul acknowledges the importance of cricket being on the majority of TVs in the country.

“To grow our game, we need cricket on free-to-air. We see it as an obligation to all South Africans that they can see their number one team in action,” he said earlier this week.

http://www.bdlive.co.za/sport/cricket/2012/12/20/cricket-south-africa-seethes-over-sabc-test-rights-snub

The SABC looks set to deny millions of South Africans live coverage of international cricket this summer despite Cricket South Africa (CSA) offering them broadcast rights at massively discounted rates.

By late yesterday, the SABC had still not accepted CSA’s latest proposal which involved them broadcasting South Africa’s home internationals this summer for a minimal fee, but with the state broadcaster paying over the money companies have already committed to be broadcast sponsors.

“It would be an absolute disaster if the South African cricket-loving public don’t get to see the number one Test team in the world in action. To grow the game, we need it on free-to-air television. We see it as an obligation to take cricket to all South Africans. It will be very, very sad if cricket is not on SABC,” CSA acting chief executive Jacques Faul told Business Day on Monday.

CSA have been in negotiation with the SABC for two months, through IMG, the global leaders in televised sports productions, but so far the broadcaster has just offered to screen highlights.

While CSA are desperate to ensure free-to-air broadcasts, there is no commercial benefit for them to do so. In fact, it costs them significant amounts of money as SuperSport would pay considerably more than they currently do if they had exclusive rights.

In previous years, the SABC have signed a broadcast agreement as late as on the morning of the first international match, but CSA insiders now believe even this won’t happen. This would be in contravention of the SABC’s mandate as stipulated by Icasa, the South African communications regulator, which compels the national broadcaster to show sporting events that are in the national interest.

The amount of money CSA’s regular sponsors have already paid for advertising time on the SABC would cover about half the rights fee the cricket governing body is seeking from the broadcaster. CSA would then supplement this amount by selling further advertising themselves. But even this proposal has so far failed to win over the SABC.

The home international season begins on Friday in Durban with the first of three T20 internationals against New Zealand.