Varsity Cup hit by controversy
Varsity Cup hit by controversy	March 16, 2013
TweetThe Varsity Cup has been dumped into controversy ahead of the last round robin games of the 2013 tournament.
Beeld newspaper reported that the University of Pretoria (Tukkies) have been accused and found guilty of breaking player eligibility rules for the competition by another university.
Tukkies was alleged to have broken the rule of fielding a minimum of 18 students in their match-day 23 on four occasions. In their matches against Maties, Wits, Shimlas and Ikeys they only fielded 17 full time students in their match-day 23.
Even though they have been found guilty on all four charges, adv. Jannie Lubbe SC, decided that a wrap over the knuckles in the form of a warning would be sufficient. Other universities however are apparently fuming over the outcome especially since they have been found guilty on a similar charge last year as-well.
It was expected that Tukkies would be deducted log points for the offenses which would have seen them drop out of the second place position they currently hold on the log – in fact, if they were to be docked log points for all those games (three of which they won and a losing bonus point against Maties) they would have been out of contention for a semi-final spot.
In their defence, Tukkies said that they did not attempt to break the rules deliberately, but that it was more a case of not interpreting the rule correctly as set out by the Varsity Cup organisers.
Social commentator and rugby pundit, Tank Lanning, suggested on social media that universities had until 13:00 today to appeal the decision, but one has to wonder why this is even necessary given this is a repeat offense by the same university.
If Tukkies does make it to the final and retain their title as champions, it might just cause the image of the competition more damage than what the organisers currently realise.
TukkiesVarsity cup	Previous article
Varsity Cup Final; Maties 5 v Tukkies 44	April 8, 2013
Tukkies give their side of the story	March 22, 2013
15 Comments on Varsity Cup hit by controversy	Boertjie
March 16, 2013 at 2:25 pm	Surely the rules should apply to all teams?
What’s this shit about “rapping over the
“not interpreting the rule correctly” –
so they just guessed instead of asking?
March 16, 2013 at 2:38 pm	Reply to Boertjie @ 2:25 pm: The ruling is a disgrace.
March 16, 2013 at 3:05 pm	Just an update – apparently Varsity Cup constitution leaves them with no room to appeal Lubbe’s decision. Nothing will happen to Tuks.
March 16, 2013 at 10:49 pm	Ja Ja and of course you two are squealing only because it’s Tuks…
March 17, 2013 at 8:34 am	Reply to DavidS @ 10:49 pm: How about they are cheats who break the rules? Twice? Varsity Cup Exco wanted to appeal this decision, their constitution does not allow them to.
Dawie you want to know which uni’s reported them?
March 17, 2013 at 9:48 am	Not sending my son to Tuks, that’s for sure.
March 17, 2013 at 10:57 am	Reply to Morné @ 8:34 am: Not to mention the Tuks 2012 Varsity Cup champion captain Zane Botha testing positive for steriods at the beginning of the year.
On the player eligibility, I don’t think that the Bulls Vodacom Cup team and the Tuks team should have the same coach. It’s just doesn’t seem to be be a healthy situation as they have broken the rules 2 years in a row. Nollis Marais should be replaced as Tuks coach and focus on his work at the Bulls.
March 17, 2013 at 11:02 am	Interesting article by Die Mol in Rapport on the issue today:
Die Mol: Jul knoeiery bring Varsitybeker in oneer, Tuks
Almal wat Die Mol ken, weet hy is beslis geen engeltjie nie.
En Die Mol kan nie stry nie. Hy het darem al te veel kere in sy lewe hopeloos te vinnig gery, baie keer heelwat meer geraas as wat werklikwaar nodig was, hier en daar nie genoeg geldjies in parkeermeters gegooi nie, en ja, ongelukkig ook ’n keer of wat aan te veel glasies druiwesap geteug.
Maar die een ding waaraan Die Mol hom nog nooit skuldig gemaak het nie, is oneerlikheid. Hy glo onwrikbaar in eerbaarheid en reg en geregtigheid.
En dís waarom Die Mol vandag meer as moerig is. Soveel so dat hy sy tassies gepak en na baie goeie vrinde van hom se vakansiehuisie by die Visrivier gevlug het. Daar waar hy kan wegkruip en nie heeltyd deur moegoes gepla en ontstel kan word nie.
Die rede vir Die Mol se erge omgekraptheid is die onregverdigheid wat die afgelope week afgespeel het toe die Universiteit van Pretoria op die rooi tapyt was oor die rugbyspelers wat hulle onregmatig in die Varsitybeker-reeks inspan.
In kort: Tuks het vir die tweede jaar agtereenvolgens nie die Varsitybeker-regulasies nagekom nie wat vereis dat ’n minimum van 18 spelers in jou speelgroep van 23 bona fide-studente moet wees.
Volgens Tuks het hulle ongelukkig die reëls en regulasies tegnies verkeerd geïnterpreteer. Sóós verlede jaar.
En, sóós verlede jaar, is hulle slegs berispe: Moet dit nie wéér doen nie, anders gaan julle…
Bog, sê Die Mol. Julle het julle eenvoudig wéér nie aan die reeks se reëls gesteur nie, Tuks. Sóós verlede jaar. En wéér daarmee weggekom. Sóós verlede jaar.
In jul eie afrigter se woorde: “As jy in Pretoria grootgeword of nou hier speel, word daar van jou verwag om te wen. Om tweede te kom, is om laaste te kom. So jy wen alles. Dit word van ons verwag.”
Ja, dis presies dáárdie siening wat Die Mol bevraagteken en laat wonder of julle die reëls en regulasies wel per ongeluk wéér verkeerd geïnterpreteer het.
Sóós verlede jaar.
Al die ander universiteite het dan die regulasies reg verstaan? En daar is mos ’n sub-komitee vir wie jy kan gaan vra of ’n speler aan die regulasies voldoen om gekies te word indien daar enige onsekerheid is oor of hy ’n ware student of ’n beroepsrugbyspeler is.
Volgens Die Mol se bronne het julle nooit gaan vra nie. Julle het gedink julle weet alles.
Wel, geoordeel aan die uitspraak van skuldig soos vermoed, moet almal van Tuks wat betrokke was by die interpretasie van die speler-regulasies dalk teruggestuur word universiteit toe. Om behoorlik te gaan leer. Nie om rugby onder ’n dekmantel te speel nie.
Lank gelede toe Die Mol op die skone Stellenbosch gestudeer het, het ons as Maties geleer 1+1=2. Niks meer nie, niks minder nie. Geen ander interpretasie van dié som was toe of vandag tegnies moontlik en/of reg nie.
Tuks, julle verguis die gees van sportmanskap en het met jul optrede oneer aan die Varsitybeker-reeks gebring.
Die eerbare ding vir julle om te doen is om julle aan die Varsitybeker te onttrek.
En vir die goeie orde: Die Mol wil nooit weer iets van julle hoor nie. Aan die ander Varsitybeker-universiteite: Staan saam en skop Tuks uit die Varsitybeker. Dis julle kompetisie en julle het die mag om te besluit wie mag wat doen en wat moet almal doen. Moenie verder toelaat dat een universiteit julle aan jul neuse swaai en julle almal vir ’n pop aansien nie. Basta met knoeiers. Tegnies of hoe ookal hulle die reëls buig.
March 17, 2013 at 12:19 pm	Reply to Vetgesmeerde Blits @ 10:57 am: I don’t know what Dawie is really on about – in 2011 we were one of the only blogs to criticize the Ikeys for manipulating the rules to play Hilton Lobberts.
The Varsity Cup exco actually changed their rules to prevent this from happening again (not because of us of course).
Ikeys did not even break the rules, those rule did not exist.
But Tuks breaking the same rules, two years in a row and claiming ignorance? That really pisses me, and quite a number of other folks off.
March 17, 2013 at 2:15 pm	Tuks is net f@kken skelm en klaar!
March 17, 2013 at 3:48 pm	Reply to KingPaul @ 2:15 pm: Ek hoop actually Tuks wen die Varsity Cup hierdie jaar, miskien kan hierdie plonkers dan die reels van die kompetisie uitsorteer.
March 18, 2013 at 8:58 pm	The final log: 1. Maties 2. UP-Tuks 3. UJ 4. NMMU 5. NWU-Pukke 6. Shimlas 7. Ikeys 8. Wits
March 18, 2013 at 9:00 pm	Semi Final fixtures – Maties v NMMU and UP Tuks v UJ
March 18, 2013 at 9:54 pm	Maties to spank PE
Tuks to squeak past UJ
Maties win again
UCT to play p/l?
March 19, 2013 at 12:04 am	Can someone explain to me how come 18 is the magic number?
If Varsity Cup was a competition for student teams then surely the number should be 23. If it was a competition for clubs that are merely affiliated with the Universities, then 0 would also be just fine.
Instead the competition is a fake. It’s really a vehicle for the unions to employ some of their B-grade players. The “Varsity” part, merely a marketing ploy, to con fans into watching games they otherwise would ignore. The number 18 is arbitrary. Chosen as a value suitable to uphold the fake, whilst allowing enough room for the real purpose. If so, then Tuks’ interpretation of the rule being just a suggestion and not a hard limit is completely reasonable. The infringement is a trifle. Certainly, adv. Jannie Lubbe SC is of that opinion.