Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

'At this rate there won't be sport in five years and there won't be the Springboks'

Springboks captain Siya Kolisi and Aphiwe Dyantyi (Photo by Warren Little/Getty Images)

SA Rugby chief executive Jurie Roux has claimed the future of the Springboks is in serious danger if plans for new television rules making key sports free-to-air in South Africa are implemented.

ADVERTISEMENT

With South African rugby losing key players to lucrative contracts in European rugby, Roux believes the loss of television revenue would sound the death knell for the professional sport in the country over the next five years. He made his claim while appearing before the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA) who are planning to implement the draft broadcasting regulations.

ICASA want to amend the sport broadcasting services regulations of national sporting events that are of national importance to receive full live coverage on free-to-air. Events included in the proposed compulsory category for free to air are the Olympic Games‚ Paralympics‚ Fifa World Cup‚ Africa Cup of Nations (men and women)‚ Rugby World Cup‚ ICC Cricket World Cup‚ International Boxing Federations‚ national Netball‚ Commonwealth games and IAAF.

“Our doors will close in the next five years if these regulations are implemented‚” Roux told hearing chairperson Palesa Kadi. “Exclusivity is key in sport and the current regulations strike a good balance. But at this rate there won’t be sport in five years and there won’t be the Springboks.”

Roux revealed that 57 percent of South African Rugby Union revenue comes from broadcasting‚ 26 percent from sponsorship and 17 percent from Tests‚ events and grants. “Rugby is a business‚ we don’t receive money from government (0.3% to be fair)‚ we don’t have charitable status and we have zero donors‚” he said. “We don’t have a rich uncle or a trust fund‚ we don’t pay dividends or make payment profits for shareholders.

“The income we earn is reinvested for the benefit of rugby and South Africans. Sponsorships will never cover the value of broadcasting revenue and without income and funding we will have no sport. Our plea is to protect the sport which is a national asset because it will not survive. We will not have funding to start grassroots projects and in sport around the world‚ exclusivity is the basis on which rights are sold.”

In other news: Pocock confirms departure from Australia

Video Spacer

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 5 hours ago
'Let's not sugarcoat it': Former All Black's urgent call to protect eligibility rules

Yep, no one knows what will happen. Thing is I think (this is me arguing a point here not a random debate with this one) they're better off trialing it now in a controlled environment than waiting to open it up in a knee jerk style reaction to a crumbling organtization and team. They can always stop it again.


The principle idea is that why would players leave just because the door is ajar?


BBBR decides to go but is not good enough to retain the jersey after doing it. NZ no longer need to do what I suggest by paying him to get back upto speed. That is solely a concept of a body that needs to do what I call pick and stick wth players. NZR can't hold onto everyone so they have to choose their BBBRs and if that player comes back from a sabbatical under par it's a priority to get him upto speed as fast as possible because half of his competition has been let go overseas because they can't hold onto them all. Changing eligibility removes that dilemma, if a BBBR isn't playing well you can be assured that someone else is (well the idea is that you can be more assured than if you only selected from domestic players).


So if someone decides they want to go overseas, they better do it with an org than is going to help improve them, otherwise theyre still basically as ineligible as if they would have been scorning a NZ Super side that would have given them the best chance to be an All Black.

147 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ What is the future of rugby in 2025? What is the future of rugby in 2025?
Search