The Golden Lions Rugby Union is ready to "fight to the bitter end" to retain the services of star Springbok centre Jaque Fourie, as their tug-of-war with Western Province heads to arbitration later this month.

The contractual dispute between the GLRU, the Bok centre, Fourie and WP Rugby (Pty) Ltd is being "closely monitored" by the South African Rugby Players Association as a "watershed" case.

Fourie, who has an offer worth almost R4-million from WP on his table, claims that his contract with the GLRU is not binding - a statement disputed by his current union.

The two unions, the Lions and WP, have agreed to an arbitration meeting - scheduled for September 28 and 29, to be chaired by advocate Schalk Burger - but GLRU President Kevin de Klerk has made it clear they will not stop there in their battle to end the mass exodus that has plagued the Lions since Eugene Eloff was sacked as head coach in June.

Others who are leaving the union or have already left include lock Gerhard Mostert (Sharks), Anton van Zyl (Western Province), Dewald Senekal (Toulon, France), Cobus Grobler (Dax, France), Jannes Labuschagne (out injured, contemplating retirement again), Andre Pretorius (Western Force), Willie Wepener (Clermont, France), Ernst Joubert (Saracens, England) and Ethienne Reynecke (Saracens, England).

It is for this reason that the GLRU have decided to "dig in their heels" on the Fourie case.

Lions not budging

GLRU President Kevin de Klerk remains adamant that their contract with Fourie is binding, despite strong protestations to the contrary from Fourie, as well as his agent and lawyer.

De Klerk, speaking from his hospital bed where he was preparing for appendix surgery, told this website that it is the same 20-page contract all player sign in South Africa and is valid till next year October.

"We, as President and CEO [Manie Reyneke], will to go arbitration, but I can't see what they are going to arbitrate - because there is a contract.

"We feel very strongly about this, and we will dig in our heels."

Asked if they will abide by what happens at the arbitration hearing De Klerk said: "If it is in our favour. If it is not [in our favour] we will continue to fight, we are not going to let this go easy.

"There are players who are far to quick and too easy to depart.

"Manie [Reyneke, the CEO] and myself have decided to dig in our heels and we will not allow that to take place.

"If Saru and other unions want to be lax on it, good luck to them, we are not going to be a pushover."

De Klerk admitted that the departure of so many senior players - as part of the fall-out over Eloff's axing - is reason for concern.

"Very much so," he said when asked if they are concerned, adding: "That is the reason why we are digging in our heels.

"There are lots of reasons why people left, some of those are very valid and one or two maybe not so valid.

"We have taken a decision not to let our current [contracted] players go."

Sarpa monitoring case

Sarpa CEO Piet Heymans told us that they are monitoring the situation very closely, but are not directly involved.

"It is a watershed case," the players' union boss said, adding that they have spent a lot of time and money to draw up the 'collective agreement and standard players contract' and that this case could have serious repercussions for them as a players' union.

Heymans, who may have to give evidence at the arbitration hearing, said they will only make a call once the arbitration and subsequent actions of the two unions have reached its conclusion.

Christo Ferreira, the General Manager legal matters at Saru/SA Rugby, also confirmed that the national body is not playing any role in the matter - even though Western Province requested their intervention.

"Initially Western Province asked us, in terms of the regulations, to make a ruling on the release certificate, because there is a dispute between the two parties," Ferreira told us.

"We told them to sort out the validity of the contract and then come to us.

"They wanted a ruling because we ruled in the Brian Mujati case [also between WP and the Lions], but that [Mujati] was a different case, with very different circumstances and the rules don't make provision for us to rule on the validity of a contract."