On 10 March 2011 the Eastern Province Rugby Union (EPRU) was found guilty of breaching Regulation 4.2 of the Player Status, Player Contracts and Player Movement Regulations by fielding two Mpumalanga Rugby Union (Pumas) players, Hannes Franklin and Jacques Coetzee, in four matches (two in the Vodacom Cup for EP Kings and two friendlies for the Southern Kings) earlier this year, without the necessary clearance certificate.
EPRU were fined R15 000 in respect of the two friendly games against the Bulls (R5 000) and the Cheetahs (R10 000), and will forfeit all log points accumulated from the Vodacom Cup games against the Welwitschias (25 February 2011) and the Leopards (4 March 2011).
The Mpumalanga Rugby Union brought the complaint saying that Franklin (Current EP vice captain) and Coetzee were used by EPRU without a clearance certificate as required by Regulation 4.1.
EPRU subsequently appealed the outcome and were notified today that their appeal had been denied by the SARU Judicial Officer.
EPRU Chief Executive Officer, Anele Pamba today expressed his disappointment in the outcome of the appeal saying; “… it is disgusting and sad that the two judicial officers went against us.”
Disputing the Mpumalanga Rugby Union’s, CEO Koos Kruger, who told iafrica.com that the MRU only received a request for a clearance certificates on Monday 14 March, Pamba produced an e-mail dated 23 February 2011 from the EPRU to MRU asking for clearance for Hannes Franklin and Jacques Coetzee and replied to by Koos Kruger on 24 February 2011 with this short (translated) message; “Please be informed that the Clearance Certificate will not be signed until such time as the transfer fees have been paid. My office lady will send the invoices again as soon as she returns to the office”
The ‘return time’ for attending to a clearance certificate is accepted as three day.
Pamba then says that when the EPRU tried to pay, the MRU stalled and appeared that they ‘didn’t want to accept payment’.
The MRU were seeking R400 000.00 transfer fees for Hannes Franklin and R350 000.00 for Jacques Coetzee.
BUT, the plot thickens somewhat when Pamba says that to this day the MRU have not been able to provide the EPRU with copies of current contracts for both Franklin and Coetzee. In fact both players say that they did not have contracts and that Franklin was out of the contract period as at 1 November 2010. Should this be so then EPRU have a very valid leg to stand on to have their (victorious) day once again in court.
In fact Pamba is so convinced of the EPRU’s innocence that they are; “… willing to consult with Senior Council with the view to taking this matter to the High Court.”
As a layperson I can see some shall we say, loose, interpretations of words in Section 4 of the denial of appeal notification under the heading of “THE FACTS’:
- “Two players who are registered with MRU….” – The EPRU contention is that registration cannot happen in the abscence of a contract.
- “…. from 1 November 2010 MRU stopped paying the players.” – as a ‘new’ union surely the MRU, SARU or even the players agents should have ensured that the correct procedures were followed OR was it genrally accepted that the players could go to EPRU?
- “…. EPRU did not request clearance certificates.” – we now know that they did.
Section 6 – FINDING – States:
- “…. no province/member of SARU may play a player in a match if that player is not registered with that member or a club within the jurisdiction of that member/province.” – so we are back to the registered vs clearance certificate vs contract dilemma, nowhere in the ruling can I find if the Judicial Officer tried to find out if the players were properly contracted or registered to the MRU or not.
Simply, it appears that someone saw a gap and took it. Now the two unions are embroiled in a ‘he said, she said’ scenario with the EPRU so p*ssed off that they are now refusing to pay any transfer fees even if they do get sight of a valid contract for both players. Surely it would be better if the MRU were the greater man, produced the contracts, re-negotiated payment, stopped whining and let rugby win instead of making lawyers and SAA richer?
Alan Straton
Latest posts by Alan Straton (see all)
- If AI Can Now Do the Work, Who Checks the Work? - 29 September 2026
- UK Music Titans Marc Marot & Jeremy Marsh Join #MEX26 in Cape Town - 29 September 2026
- The Countdown On – Mind Matters Is Taking Over Cape Town Before Taking the Conversation Global - 28 September 2026
- BurnesSEO Study Finds South African Small Businesses Invisible in AI Search Results - 28 September 2026
- BurnesSEO Study Finds South African Small Businesses Invisible in AI Search Results - 28 September 2026
Sport is big business and we all know that big business is corrupt…
Allen, Thanks this gives us a better understanding of what is really happening
Coming from you I take that as a great compliment – thank you.
I have said from the start that WP has a finger in the pie here, because they are the ones that get the benefit from the docking of the points, not the Pumas The first JO was Koos Basson, who is also a WP rugby union board member and as said in the article someone saw a gap. That gap was to improve WP’s position on the log.
It is simple.
Give SARU 7 days to consider the appeal and thereafter slap them with a damages claim in the Cape High Court – they will be unable to endure the expose.
This whole process is flawed.
Whack them in he High Court with an urgent order