If you ever wanted to see a prime test case of a story running away with itself, last week’s hullabaloo over the South African teams in the Investec Champions Cup would make a great example.
It all started on Thursday when SA Rugby President Mark Alexander spoke about being re-elected to his position to lead the organisation for a fourth term. Alexander was asked about a number of issues, including a realignment of competitions under the governing body’s umbrella.
And he answered as he should have. He spoke of the problems with player welfare - South Africa’s never ending season and how SA Rugby would have to relook at all of the competitions that it either runs, or participates in to see what is the best for the country.
This is nothing exceptional. There is a problem that has been acknowledged ever since Covid that top rugby players don’t have the prescribed six week off season as other clubs do across the world. Playing from the Vodacom United Rugby Championship into the test season - which is now the Nations’ Championship into the normal Rugby Championship means there is no time for top Boks to rest and put their feet up for a few weeks.
SA RUGBY HAS BEEN LOOKING FOR A SOLUTION
This is nothing new. South Africa has been looking for a solution to this for years now, and World Rugby has been talking about a Global Season for 14 years but to no avail.
We’ve written countless words on why it is necessary, and anyone with an understanding of the South African landscape believes that the current system is unsustainable.
So what did SA Rugby do? As always, they convened a stakeholders meeting in July to talk about the competitions and look for solutions. This meeting includes broadcasters, sponsors, franchises and all other interested parties.
It is a brainstorming session for the way forward.
But the headline that came out was “SA to leave the Champions’ Cup.”
I must say, my initial reading of it was a shock as well. That’s a massive story. Until I read Alexander’s quotes, which focused more on player welfare and never mentioned the Champions’ Cup.
I then spoke to a fellow journalist who was at the briefing, and he confirmed that Alexander never mentioned the Champions’ Cup? So where did the story come from then?
It seems it was a line in an Afrikaans article that said - and this is my rough translation - “While Alexander never mentioned the Champions’ Cup, sources have said it will be discussed.”
That’s it - from what I can see that is the entire basis for the articles that have left many people showing their true colours up north, frothing at the mouth at the hope South Africa follows through.
REALITY BITES
But what is the reality? It’s simple. South Africa joined the URC as a shareholder, and as a consequence was invited into the EPCR, European Club Championship's governing body. But this wasn’t a free ride. SA Rugby had to buy their shareholding over three years, investing around R290-million per year to become full shareholders in the EPCR. There was another caveat - South African teams in this time could not host home playoff games, and needed to host them in Europe.
But at the start of this year, SA Rugby fulfilled its obligations and became a full member of the ECPR. That investment - which is mind-boggling figures - means something, as does the partnership in the URC.
So why would SA Rugby want to leave? It makes no sense. Even if it did, leaving the Champions’ Cup means losing a few weekends a year, hardly enough to solve the workload and player welfare issues?
It’s a red herring. A great headline but not much below it.
Talk to any franchise and they want to be in the Champions’ Cup. They just want to have a squad that doesn’t limp to games and a season that makes sense.
MOST OF IT COMES FROM ONE COUNTRY
But it didn’t stop some English writers - ones who have written off the URC and South Africa in Europe for years now - jumping on the bandwagon and saying “good riddance”.
It didn’t stop one particular big broadsheet in the UK from running the story as if it was a done deal, despite a lack of evidence, and then following up with an opinion column the next day warning SA that Europe would be happy to get rid of you.
Funny, in this past week I have spoken to colleagues in Wales, Ireland and Scotland, and they’ve all answered in disbelief. The general consensus is that South African sides have made the URC stronger.
In a way I can understand the English viewpoint. The Champions’ Cup was tribal, it was local and you could travel to away games. South Africa joining made the convoluted draw weird and nonsensical. But we all agree the tournament structure needs a rethink. But without a global season that is an impossibility.
LIFE IS HELL IN BUSINESS CLASS
But instead of sorting out the cause, there are those who attacked the system. Raphael Ibanez, the former French captain, was one of those who were pleased. “Now we don’t have to make those 15000km round trips in the middle of the season”, he opined on Twitter.
Tough life - business class seats and five star hotels - it must be hell for some people.
The competition deserves a rethink - as does the global season - which is becoming more essential with talk of a World Club Cup and the new Nations’ Championship concept.
But the vitriol coming from a country that has 8 of its 10 teams automatically qualify for the Champions’ Cup is ludicrous. If a conversation is to be had, perhaps it should be whether Gloucester, who have only won 4 of their 15 games this season, and are 8th out of 10 teams, deserve to be in the Champions’ Cup?
The point is, the issues lie deeper than South Africa, but for some it is the perfect starting point to flog that horse, and make a lot of noise.
And all it took was a headline to set them off.