Do you have a quote from Jaco van der Walt? It is my understanding that he was not a "backup flyhalf" because he was out of contract before he was picked up by Edinburgh. The Lions simply decided that he was not a priority. Not sure what went on behind the scenes and SA Government is undermining career confidence in all sectors of the South African economy not just white rugby players. Lots of people around the world like to blame governments for their own under-performance. I wouldn't necessarily assume that transformation is the root cause of his, and other player'rs, moves.
I couldn't find the article sorry (which is bizarre, because I definitely read it, I think in The Scotsman and I''m certain it was him and not the new South African winger Edinbrugh have (van der Merwe?)). From my recollection he wasn't direct enough to conclude what he was alluding to; just that he felt opportunities were limited back home. I didn’t realise he’d been cut (I assumed a trip to the northern hemisphere would be a promotion in terms of salary). I see the Lions are reportedly having a big cut to their budget, which would then be the most likely explanation of why van der Walt felt his opportunities were limited.
https://theoffsideline.com/edinburgh-linked-south-african-playmaker/
That completely changes things and I apologise if I’ve misinterpreted the lad and I’m glad he’s landed a contract. He’s a bit of a godsend for Edinburgh given their dearth at flyhalf and seems pretty decent.
I'm calling bullsh*t on the parts I bolded as evidence that you're talking through your hat now. I'll get to that in a second.
As you said we're not enemies and most contributors have some truth to their argument. You used the word "side" which raised my eyebrow. What sides are these? Every South African on here has basically mentioned that they want there to be more (black) players in the mix because it will make the Springboks stronger. What side are you on?
Like I mentioned before you're not bringing anything new to the discussion. Your replies have been focused on explaining away evidence being presented to you in the form of first hand experiences, news articles and court rulings. Most of which are explained away as not credible, some kind of mass media conspiracy or a choice of vocabulary (targets vs quota). It's quite clear that you're in a corner and are clutching at straws. Your next assignment is to explain that the Final Solution was not genocide because the Nazis never used the word "genocide"!
To the bolded text... The Sports Minister of 2015 was not a blimp in the radar as you seem to be implying. He was Sports Minister from 2010 to 2017.
Your comment about a white person not wanting to swap "18 years of their existence" to be a black person is sooo naive and racist. The black middle is 3 times the size of the white middle class, and the black upper class is the same size as the white upper class. Why the heck wouldn't I want to part of the black middle/upper class? And like white people are entitled to 2-3 other universities of their choosing. You clearly have no clue. Sorry to call you out but what you are proposing is the reality in SA is so far off.
Where is your evidence that the SA government is cash strapped since the GFC? The ANC's hands are tied? Are you kidding me? The ANC comrades stole more than ever after the GFC. There is plenty of money around. Read the book "The President's Keepers" and see for yourself.
I'm old and ugly enough to know that you can't change people's minds so just to be clear that is not what I'm trying to do. People believe that the earth is flat despite overwhelming evidence. But I will call you out every time I know you're talking through your hat. This debate is at a dead end as you don't seem anything more to offer besides dismissing evidence.
So is more polite to not to respond to a poster that kindly posted links to various articles? I can only given an honest appraisal of the information put before me. The legal intervention and the somewhat inflammatory language used by the previous sports minister are certainly good points, well made. I’m not surprised some people read that and think the government doesn’t have the best interests of society or sport at heart – everyone has a different political take on things. I didn’t mean to indicate the previous sports minister was a flash in the pan, only that policy can be changed or implemented differently depending on who is behind the wheel at any given time. I feel there have been indications that the current sports minister is perhaps a bit more consensual than the last guy.
As for the use of the word “sides”, I’d hoped that was pretty clear (but obviously not). On the one hand a player that I felt was insinuating that opportunities are limited at home due to government policy and on the other a player that feels government policy is inadequate in identifying and harnessing talent in townships. Too much interventions vs too little. Of course my point is undermined by not being able to find the article on van der Walt but I held my hand up to that. And I say above, I stand corrected and it may be he was alluding to the financial cuts at the Lions (which I wasn’t aware of).
As for my evidence that the South African economy has not grown since the global financial crisis. Is that really contentious too? We’ve had so called “austerity” (i.e. reductions to public spending) all over Europe for a decade, even though the EU GDP has still managed to grow during that period. Googling GDP for South Africa sadly doesn’t paint the rosiest of pictures in recent years, certainly worse than the overall EU. If they are remotely accurate then I struggle to see how there can have been extra money going into the treasury to pay for the sort of programmes that advocates of transformation would want. I can’t think of an example of a government that was able to roll out a raft of social programmes at a time when the economy and budget is contracting.
When I talk about “swapping 18 years of life” and life chances of my two imaginary people, I am drawing a comparison on the average wealth and opportunities of different ethnic groupings. Just because 90% of the country is black and there is large number of black middle class kids doesn’t change the situation of the average situation (or mathematical “mean” if you prefer). I take on board the point that there will be many middle class black kids who don’t need scholarships and bursaries and may even be wealthier than middle class white kids who get overlooked due to education policy on admissions. That would be an unfortunate circumstance if a privileged black kid was admitted at the expense of say a disadvantaged white kid. I’ll confess I don’t have enough knowledge of South African education admission policies to know if such a thing could be possible.
So to return to my point, and replicate the example to Scotland when a kid with a bursary / scholarship gets a spot in a fee paying school and a kid from a family that could have paid that fee is overlooked. I’d argue that you’ve still got more life chances if you are the overlooked kid with the parents who can pay many thousands of pounds a year on your education (than the kid with the scholarship / bursary). So I can make the same point as I intended using a completely non-racial example. I appreciate I could have been clearer on that point and spelled it out fully, but I was trying (and failing) to be concise! I will tread with more care in future.
I think the bit I was closest to talking BS about was about Dlulane, if there was any sort of policy back in 2003/04. There sure didn’t look like it to a neutral.
I’ve still not had time to look at the legal documents sadly. But 2018 is still young!
