SA rugby in trouble

[ratsapprentice]

And if it's not for SARU to address representation in their national team then whose is it? Surely It's their job to make the game accessible, how they do it is beside the point.

How they do it is exactly the point - you are trying to justify an actively racist solution.

The solution to historic systemic racism, isn't more systemic racism... this isn't the Rooney Rule we're talking about here.

 

[smartcooky]

Any way you slice it, regardless of the pathetic weasel words anyone uses to try to justify it, a racial quota is racism. Its forcing selection of players based upon the colour of their skin and there is simply no way to deny this; anyone who does has their head up their arse. Race quotas will inevitably lead to a risk that players who are not good enough to win selection on their own merits will be rewarded, while at the same time those who are good enough are punished.

This the exact thing, but in reverse, that Mandela, Buthelezi and Tutu spent most of their lives (and for which Steve Biko gave his life) fighting against. All they ever wanted for South Africans was for everyone to have opportunities regardless of their race. For South Africa's sports teams , this means merit based selection; for participants to be selected on the basis of how good they are and not on the colour of their skin. Both Biko and Madeba would be very unhappy to see what is happening in South Africa now.

Sometimes the sports people play are about choice and about where their interests lie, and often, this is a cultural thing. In this country Rugby League attracts far more Maori and Pacific Islanders than it does whites. Cricket is the other way around; very few Maori or Pacific Islanders play the game. They mostly are simply not interested, and prefer to play softball instead.

If black South Africans want to change the ratio of black players in the Springboks, then the way to do it is a "ground-up" approach, not a "top-down" approach. They need to work to get young, black South Africans interested in playing Rugby in preference to other sports. The results won't come overnight because the prejudices of their parents and grandparents will be a strong influence on them.

It is emphatically NOT SARU's job to make rugby accessible to Black South Africans; its their job to make the game available to ALL South Africans, regardless of race, skin colour or cultural background. It emphatically IS the job of the South African government to put in place policies that will lead to an equal society for ALL South Africans.

 

[goodNumber10]

How they do it is exactly the point - you are trying to justify an actively racist solution.

The solution to historic systemic racism, isn't more systemic racism... this isn't the Rooney Rule we're talking about here.

I've repeatedly said I don't agree with the Quota system, or did you not read that bit? It's in pretty much every post i've made. at every point of this discussion I've said the issue is grass roots exposure, not that a quota system at the top is the answer.

Affirmative Action, Positive-Discrimination, or howevere you want to dress it up isn't necessarily racist. They can be useful weapons when used in the right areas, Elite sport isn't the right area - grass roots sport probably is.

So far the last, and about 10th time, quota system is not the answer, i dont' agree with the quota system, stop saying i support the quota system.

 

[ratsapprentice]

I was referring to the point in bold - in which you literally said "how they do it is beside the point".

As you've already pointed out though, the context in which these laws are being implemented is important.
Which is why any form of affirmative action at this level is clearly inappropriate, and possibly quite a bit more nefarious.

 

[nickdnz]

It's a terrible comparison because of all the reasons above, if the white community decided Football was the game they'd have the financial and logisitcal systems/power in place to excel at it.
Secondly Football is a much simpler sport it's easier to play, understand and excel at, there is no requirement for specialist training as we see across the world with kids in poverty stricken areas such as Brazil excelling.
20 years is nothing
No the problem is why do they make that choice? Saying blacks prefer football is an inherently racist statement (NB: to be clear i am not calling you racist, i'm making a generalist statement), there are a multitude of reason behind why that decision is made, and it doesn't change the fact that a massive % of the countries population are not involved in the National sport in anyway.

Clearly you're having a pop at my use of the term institutionalised racism, even though you are using it in the wrong context, and of course it applies here, how on earth can it not were talking about a sport that takes athletes and rewards them on a level undreamt of in the poverty strciken parts of the country.

With all that's on offer to a top class rugby player I find the statement "they just prefer soccer' incredibly distasteful. It's like using crime statistics to say that a certain race is predisposed to certain crimes without taking into account the socio-economic impact on the society these criminals come from.

Regardles the Quota system is not racist, it's positive discrimination, that's a massive point of difference, and has been used across the world to redress the imbalance of many unfairly treated groups.

Is it right? Well no, as i've said i'm not saying Quota system is right, but if more had been done to demonstrate the development and opportunities afforded to the black population was the same as the white there would be no grounds for a quota system as everyone would be there on merit only.

And yes, it's linked to Economic development, which is why Rugby is so important within this discussion.

In fairness - saying "the black population prefers football" does not insinuate that there is anything inherent about being black and disliking rugby. It is quite clear that this is within the context of culture.

Having one ethnic group dominating in one sport is also not racist. In New Zealand - Badmington is played by many more Indonesian's than Europeans (at least through my own exposure to the sport). Why? Because there is a cultural link between Badmington that many New Zealand Europeans don't have, and therefore there isn't the level of participation to appeal to the majority of New Zealand (barring our national team being called the 'Black Cocks'...).

In South Africa it is entirely understandable that a section of the population just don't have a cultural connection to the sport. Should legitimate pathways be incorporated to encourage the black communities to play rugby? Of course. But setting crude - and in my opinion racist targets - is not setting a legitimate pathway in my view, as it doesn't work to get black players to be the best in South Africa, merely excludes some of the best players for black ones.

South Africa have made strides in developing black players. Of course they have. The number of black players you see in Super Rugby is testimony to that, and there are a tonne of players who are clearly there on merit.

And again: targeting any racial group based on a sense of perceived privilege is not new. And it rarely ends with justice for all. Historically, it can end in some of the greatest tragedies.

On a slightly different note which is perhaps too wide on the scope, here is my final point and it is not directed at anyone:

Part of the issue which I think can make this such an uncomfortable topic (for myself as well), is that there is a narrative that we fall into in regards to responsibility. South Africa is a country which has been extremely effected by colonization, in which a white minority oppressed a black majority over a long period of time. It is comfortable to criticize this. What I do not believe this means is that the world should ignore similar injustices opposed on a white minority, because it is easier to find excuses. It is "part of transformation, it is only natural over a huge period of oppression, the shoe is on the other foot", whatever. Crimes against people are crimes against people. Regimes of oppression are not fixed by regimes of oppression. As I have said before, if South Africa really wants equality to be a factor in South African sport - it should be working hard to give every South African the same chance at life and development early on - not taking away chances for those who have earned their spot. The people who are working hard and missing out are human beings, and it is not fair to tell them that what they have dedicated their life to is not enough, because of the colour of their skin.

 

[JJFlash]

If a black rugby player is good enough to play for the Boks, then fair enough. I know of Bryan Habana, JP Peterson, the Beast (M.....? sorry, can't spell his name) and Chester Williams, who have fully justified their selection. Tell me if there are others, please.
OK, we can say that rugby hasn't been "the culture" of the black people, and to a large degree, I believe this to be true, but a change will take many years to materialise and it appears to me that this "minority" partywho wishes to withhold the Springboks" passports has no patience and is only intent on stirring up racism.

 

[smartcooky]

I know of Bryan Habana, JP Peterson, the Beast (M.....? sorry, can't spell his name) and Chester Williams, who have fully justified their selection. Tell me if there are others, please..

Breyton Paulse
Zane Kirchner
Trevor Nyakane
Lwazi Mvovo
Lionel Mapoe
Oupa Mohojé
Chiliboy Ralapele
Siya Kolisi
Gio Aplon
Brian Mujati
Jongi Nokwe
Akona Ndungane
Ricky Januarie
Tonderai Chavhanga
Solly Tyibilika
Hanyani Shimange
Gcobani Bobo
Ashwin Willemse
Bolla Conradie
Adrian Jacobs
Lawrence Sephaka


There's probably quite a few more that I haven' thought of.

 

[nickdnz]

If a black rugby player is good enough to play for the Boks, then fair enough. I know of Bryan Habana, JP Peterson, the Beast (M.....? sorry, can't spell his name) and Chester Williams, who have fully justified their selection. Tell me if there are others, please.
OK, we can say that rugby hasn't been "the culture" of the black people, and to a large degree, I believe this to be true, but a change will take many years to materialise and it appears to me that this "minority" partywho wishes to withhold the Springboks" passports has no patience and is only intent on stirring up racism.

It's interesting but most of the players you have mentioned don't actually qualify as black, but rather coloured. Race has been so worked into South African sport that guys like Habana and Pieterson are classified as 'coloured', while Beast was born in Zimbabwe so doesn't count...

As for what players who are considered colored or black who have been good enough, there are plenty. De Jongh, Guthro Steenkamp, Bjorn Basson, Ricky Januarie (once upon a time), Eddie Andrews, Breyton Paulse, Gio Aplon, Elton Jantes, Conrad Jantjies I believe are all considered colored. Tonderai Chavhanga and Brian Mujati were both born in Zimbabwe as well. Jongi Nokwe, Solly Tyibilika, Chiliboy Ralepelle, Lwasi Mvovo, Siya Kolisi, Trevor Nkanyane, Hanyani Shimange, Ashley Johnson..

Most of those players were good enough to play games for the Springboks, and that's off the top of my head. I'm sure there are more. What is a shame is a few of those names probably don't get some of the credit they otherwise would because they were also being used as pinups for quotas.

 

[JJFlash]

Thanks. That's more than I would have thought. I hadn't realised that Steenkamp is considered as coloured.

 

[goodNumber10]

In fairness - saying "the black population prefers football" does not insinuate that there is anything inherent about being black and disliking rugby. It is quite clear that this is within the context of culture.

Having one ethnic group dominating in one sport is also not racist. In New Zealand - Badmington is played by many more Indonesian's than Europeans (at least through my own exposure to the sport). Why? Because there is a cultural link between Badmington that many New Zealand Europeans don't have, and therefore there isn't the level of participation to appeal to the majority of New Zealand (barring our national team being called the 'Black Cocks'...).

In South Africa it is entirely understandable that a section of the population just don't have a cultural connection to the sport. Should legitimate pathways be incorporated to encourage the black communities to play rugby? Of course. But setting crude - and in my opinion racist targets - is not setting a legitimate pathway in my view, as it doesn't work to get black players to be the best in South Africa, merely excludes some of the best players for black ones.

South Africa have made strides in developing black players. Of course they have. The number of black players you see in Super Rugby is testimony to that, and there are a tonne of players who are clearly there on merit.

And again: targeting any racial group based on a sense of perceived privilege is not new. And it rarely ends with justice for all. Historically, it can end in some of the greatest tragedies.

On a slightly different note which is perhaps too wide on the scope, here is my final point and it is not directed at anyone:

Part of the issue which I think can make this such an uncomfortable topic (for myself as well), is that there is a narrative that we fall into in regards to responsibility. South Africa is a country which has been extremely effected by colonization, in which a white minority oppressed a black majority over a long period of time. It is comfortable to criticize this. What I do not believe this means is that the world should ignore similar injustices opposed on a white minority, because it is easier to find excuses. It is "part of transformation, it is only natural over a huge period of oppression, the shoe is on the other foot", whatever. Crimes against people are crimes against people. Regimes of oppression are not fixed by regimes of oppression. As I have said before, if South Africa really wants equality to be a factor in South African sport - it should be working hard to give every South African the same chance at life and development early on - not taking away chances for those who have earned their spot. The people who are working hard and missing out are human beings, and it is not fair to tell them that what they have dedicated their life to is not enough, because of the colour of their skin.

Did you actually read my posts or did you just pluck a bunch of random sentences out and decidce to answer those?

Discussions like this are a total waste of time because people absolutely don't want to hear that their view might be prejudiced.

People will pluck any thing out to justify their comments.... Indian/Asians play badminton. Indeed they do, they also play cricket and rugby and field hockey. But they have a choice to follow rugby if they so choose to, and that's the fundamental point choice, and THAT's equality.

And people who claim that impoverished black's have that choice are talking out their backsides.

They have far bigger issues to deal with like food, shelter, disease, violence, crime....

Because a handful of people, out of millions make it doesn't mean that the issues are resolved.

 

[Mcfadden]

I'm not sure what the answer is either. But I do not favor selecting people on the basis of how they look and how they were born. That is trying to correct one imbalance with another imbalance. Perfectly abled and better players (if they exist in certain positions) would miss out, even though their skills warrant selection. Racism is repugnant, but the proposed solution is not right and is equally insulting.

What current efforts are there between the Government and the Rugby Union to encourage a fairer balance in the national team besides quotas? Are black youths encouraged to participate in rugby through incentives? I'm not sure about a free pathway into the national side based on skin, but I wouldn't mind scholarships to attend rugby academies since many black families have significantly less financial resources statistically (through this way if the desire to play rugby is actually there, then there's a route to hone your skills and you don't need to be wealthy to do it), rugby integration in public schools where blacks are more prevalent (maybe special trips/camps for recreational purposes, i.e: a focus on rugby), maybe allow for a month dedicated to rugby in public schools, get more successful black Springboks to give motivational talks at a grass roots level? Look, I don't know. I'm just trying to do my best at having a stab at some policies aimed at a country I haven't lived in nor visited. I don't have the answers (though try as I might). I only know that the current way of going about things is not right.

If there are still predominantly white people in private schools in South Africa, and there isn't a reasonable mix then political policy needs to be looked at. Why are people of color so impoverished? What can the Government do better? etc. But I also think if rugby is more prevalent in private schools that needs to change. If rugby is to reach another gear then it's popularity shouldn't exist in enclaves so much. We do not want rugby to just be a rich man's sport. Soccer is hugely popular, so that won't be easy. None of this is easy.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Did you actually read my posts or did you just pluck a bunch of random sentences out and decidce to answer those?

Discussions like this are a total waste of time because people absolutely don't want to hear that their view might be prejudiced.

People will pluck any thing out to justify their comments.... Indian/Asians play badminton. Indeed they do, they also play cricket and rugby and field hockey. But they have a choice to follow rugby if they so choose to, and that's the fundamental point choice, and THAT's equality.

And people who claim that impoverished black's have that choice are talking out their backsides.

They have far bigger issues to deal with like food, shelter, disease, violence, crime....

Because a handful of people, out of millions make it doesn't mean that the issues are resolved.

The problem of food, shelter, disease, violence and crime is not just a racial or a poverty problem in South Africa, but a problem the entire country faces. Maybe the news doesn't travel as far as the UK about White Farmers being murdered on a weekly basis, but it's a major concern in SA. And this is a hate-crime. But perhaps this is digressing too far off topic.

The most watched and played sport on the African Continent is Soccer. And SA's broadcaster, Multichoice has now spread to the entire continent and even the islands as far as Mauritius. Soccer not just on the African Continent, but all over the World including the BPL, La Liga, Ligue 1, Bundesliga and others are all featured on the broadcaster's channel. It's clear that the majority of Africans, whether they were colonised or not or by whom, love and prefer Soccer. South Africa even has a 24-hour local soccer channel, and 2 dedicated international soccer channels. But no dedicated rugby or cricket channel.

The thing is Soccer gets a lot more exposure than any other sport in SA. And to get rural kids to choose a sport they don't have a cultural or historic bond, makes it way more difficult to get them to participate.

But, hey, what do I know, I'm talking out of my backside...

 

[smartcooky]

Did you actually read my posts or did you just pluck a bunch of random sentences out and decidce to answer those?

Discussions like this are a total waste of time because people absolutely don't want to hear that their view might be prejudiced.

People will pluck any thing out to justify their comments.... Indian/Asians play badminton. Indeed they do, they also play cricket and rugby and field hockey. But they have a choice to follow rugby if they so choose to, and that's the fundamental point choice, and THAT's equality.

And people who claim that impoverished black's have that choice are talking out their backsides.

They have far bigger issues to deal with like food, shelter, disease, violence, crime....

Because a handful of people, out of millions make it doesn't mean that the issues are resolved.

You're just talking right past Nick and everyone else here!

Of course impoverished blacks in South Africa are unlikely to have a choice.... impoverished people, of any race or colour have limited choices in everything, including what sport they might play, assuming that they even get the chance to play one.

However, get this through your head! Selecting players on the basis of the colour of their skin is NOT the way forward. All you achieve by doing so is to replace one injustice with another. And before you get up on your high-horse, we are all well aware that you say that you don't support a selection quota, but a good deal of your rhetoric implies otherwise!

 

[goodNumber10]

You're just talking right past Nick and everyone else here!

Of course impoverished blacks in South Africa are unlikely to have a choice.... impoverished people, of any race or colour have limited choices in everything, including what sport they might play, assuming that they even get the chance to play one.

However, get this through your head! Selecting players on the basis of the colour of their skin is NOT the way forward. All you achieve by doing so is to replace one injustice with another. And before you get up on your high-horse, we are all well aware that you say that you don't support a selection quota, but a good deal of your rhetoric implies otherwise!

Then you're genuinely much stupider than I ever gave you credit for.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Stop with the name calling and the personal attacks or you'll get a week ban. And that counts for everyone.

 

[goodNumber10]

Stop with the name calling and the personal attacks or you'll get a week ban. And that counts for everyone.

For a start saying someone is stupid isn't calling them a name, it's making an observation.

You want to ban me for that fine, it illustrates how poor the level of modding has become on this forum over the last few months with mods waging petty vendettas as much as regular posters - still have your message threatening to take things further for telling you you didn't understand something.

If people are going to accuse people of things, or deliberately misinterpret facts then they need to be called out on it....he's misinterpreting something on purpose.

 

[TRF_heineken]

For a start saying someone is stupid isn't calling them a name, it's making an observation.

You want to ban me for that fine, it illustrates how poor the level of modding has become on this forum over the last few months with mods waging petty vendettas as much as regular posters - still have your message threatening to take things further for telling you you didn't understand something.

If people are going to accuse people of things, or deliberately misinterpret facts then they need to be called out on it....he's misinterpreting something on purpose.

keep it civil and on topic and we won't have a problem.

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

I was pondering the same thought. Also, who would get their spot in the tournament? Zimbabwe (the next African side), or someone else?

That would be something. South Africa not going to the World Cup due to racial issues, only to be replaced by the country of the King of racism, Robert Mugabe haha

 

[goodNumber10]

keep it civil and on topic and we won't have a problem.

I have.

 

[Shaggy]

Did you actually read my posts or did you just pluck a bunch of random sentences out and decidce to answer those?

Discussions like this are a total waste of time because people absolutely don't want to hear that their view might be prejudiced.

People will pluck any thing out to justify their comments.... Indian/Asians play badminton. Indeed they do, they also play cricket and rugby and field hockey. But they have a choice to follow rugby if they so choose to, and that's the fundamental point choice, and THAT's equality.

And people who claim that impoverished black's have that choice are talking out their backsides.

They have far bigger issues to deal with like food, shelter, disease, violence, crime....

Because a handful of people, out of millions make it doesn't mean that the issues are resolved.

In all fairness, you make a number of points, so it's reasonable for another poster to pick a few out and respond to the ones that interest them, isn't it?

I don't think anyone on here is implying that because a handful of people have made it, that the issues is resolved, but cultural preferences to other sports, and cultural prejudices against Rugby are both legitimate factors that need to be overcome if the player numbers in rugby are to be increased.

Yes, there are bigger issues for any poor community to face than whether they should or can have the opportunity to play rugby or not (or any sport for that matter), but i would suggest that if (like some of our South African posters) have gone to the trouble of the trends of ethnicities vs the number of rugby teams in the schools, over a period of time, it does show that there is choice/opportunity to play, and that the Black population isn't choosing to play, and that lastly, that poster isn't talking out of their backside.