Should South Africa have racial quotas for rugby?

[ravagon]

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
Well, I wouldn't blame NZ's recent years' lack of rugby success on the attitude of the Admin, but the World Cup stuff is just an amazing demonstration of their stupidity.

What exactly was the issue at stake there? We've gotten precious little info beyond the fact that it had something to do with the advertising rights at the grounds where the matches were to be held.
I only hope the fallout will be sufficient to ensure that such petty blundering never happens again ...

They lose their best players to Europe because they - the SA Union - can't match the money that European teams offer. In fact, it's said that most of the current Springboks side will be gone before the next World Cup.

Quite. Its a little unfortunate that rugby had to go professional just as SA started running out of sufficient cash to compete as effectively salary-wise...

[MrWhereItsAt]

Well, ravagon, I'm no expert, but then again few here seem to know exactly what was the problem, let alone what the NZRFU was even thinking, but IIRC one of the demands on World Cup venues was that the stadia be advertisement free. For some reason the NZRFU refused this criterion and hence the problem. They tried to get away with it by showing the cleanliness of the stadia, to no avail.

I really can't say any more, not even the local news has been very enlightening. Basically we don't know what's wrong, and I'm shocked that there's no huge scandal currently decimating the ranks of the NZRFU.

[Hydey]

South Africans should prevent there blacks from playing stupid sports like rugby, they should all play cricket.

[Case]

Did any South African rugby officals in the Apartied era ever complain about not being able to include blacks in the national squads?

[finbar]

Originally posted by ravagon


What exactly was the issue at stake there? We've gotten precious little info beyond the fact that it had something to do with the advertising rights at the grounds where the matches were to be held.
I only hope the fallout will be sufficient to ensure that such petty blundering never happens again ...

The NZ administrators were stupidly stubborn. The World Cup required advertising-free grounds. The NZers basically said their advertising was more important to them than the World Cup. All up, the NZers thought they could call the World Cup's bluff. It didn't work.

Quite. Its a little unfortunate that rugby had to go professional just as SA started running out of sufficient cash to compete as effectively salary-wise...

Well, rugby had to go professional or wither and die. SA rugby's money problems are symptomatic of the country's economic problems. The rand is buggered and has been for a long time.

[finbar]

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
Well, ravagon, I'm no expert, but then again few here seem to know exactly what was the problem, let alone what the NZRFU was even thinking, but IIRC one of the demands on World Cup venues was that the stadia be advertisement free. For some reason the NZRFU refused this criterion and hence the problem. They tried to get away with it by showing the cleanliness of the stadia, to no avail.

I really can't say any more, not even the local news has been very enlightening. Basically we don't know what's wrong, and I'm shocked that there's no huge scandal currently decimating the ranks of the NZRFU.

The NZ administrators were quoted as saying their national provincial competition depended on the advertising signage and the national provincial competition was more important than the World Cup. As I suggested elsewhere in this thread, I think they believed they could call the World Cup's bluff. And it didn't work. The Australians took advantage of their utter stupidity.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Case
Did any South African rugby officals in the Apartied era ever complain about not being able to include blacks in the national squads?

South African rugby's main man in the apartheid area was very much pro-apartheid. Most of the administrators were. They supported apartheid to its dying days. Rugby was Afrikaans-dominated. There are vestiges of those days still around.

A number of the South African players of the time were very much anti-apartheid, to the extent that they risked their careers outside rugby by speaking out against it. There were two brothers in particular - twins, in fact, whose name, sadly, I can't recall - who were the most outspoken. They actually risked their lives.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by finbar


The NZ administrators were quoted as saying their national provincial competition depended on the advertising signage and the national provincial competition was more important than the World Cup. As I suggested elsewhere in this thread, I think they believed they could call the World Cup's bluff. And it didn't work. The Australians took advantage of their utter stupidity.

This sounds a little one-sided to me. I dont really know the full story, but wasnt there also the issue that under the conditions stipulated (ie no advertising) it would not be financially feasable for NZ?

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by finbar

in South Africa, it competes - unsuccessfully - against soccer in the non-white communities. That's the real problem the South African rugby people have to confront.

I would hazard a guess that this would be a much greater factor in keeping black players out of rugby than racism. As you said, the players in the apartheid era were more anti-apartheid than the admin, so with those players of yesterday becoming coaches and administrators today I would think that racist attitudes have improved in the last few years.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Hydey
South Africans should prevent there blacks from playing stupid sports like rugby, they should all play cricket.

Sacrilege!! Begone evil one!!

[Carver]

Caligastia, once again trying to pretend white racsism doesn't exist (or almost doesn't exist). South Africa's democratization was only eight years ago. Racsism pervades every sector of white society. Blacks will not get a fair shot without affirmative action. The National Party apartheid government tried to imprint the notion of white supreamacy on the minds of blacks from every angle. Politics, business, movies, the racsist Republic Day celebrations, the pass laws, "Bantu education" - which SA's Minister of Education said was designed to teach blacks that they are inferior.

After that horror - which you cannot imagine (really, you can't) - the government needs to ensure that blacks become active in all sectors of SA society. Many whites in positions of power insist blacks are inferior and refuse to give them any respect; for example the Afrikaaner soldiers who refuse to salute their black superiors. Knowing that kind of attitude exists, the only way to ensure equal access is to force these institutions to include a number of blacks - hence, affirmative action.

Sometimes there aren't all these other factors besides racsism that you seem to want to find. You need to realize blacks don't just make up racsism. In South Africa it is very real.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Carver
Sometimes there aren't all these other factors besides racsism that you seem to want to find. You need to realize blacks don't just make up racsism. In South Africa it is very real.

I never said white racism doesnt exist, I just think in this case it is not the main reason why blacks are not playing much rugby in SA.

As Finbar said:

in South Africa, it competes - unsuccessfully - against soccer in the non-white communities. That's the real problem the South African rugby people have to confront.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Caligastia


This sounds a little one-sided to me. I dont really know the full story, but wasnt there also the issue that under the conditions stipulated (ie no advertising) it would not be financially feasable for NZ?

Well, that's what they said. It was, at the time, part of a bigger gripe the NZers had about the funding of, apart from other things, the Super 12 competition. They wanted a better deal in relation to the TV rights. Which was the main reason why NZ denied the Australians an extra Super 12 team. Somehow, NZ allowed the fiscal argument to bleed across into the World Cup debate.

Cal, it was never a case that there would be NO ADVERTISING allowed at the grounds. The point was, the World Cup has its sponsors who would be advertising - which is to say, in temporary place of the existing advertisers. In fact, what the NZ administrators stood to lose from the temporary disappearance of the existing advertising would, obviously, have been made up for by the massive income the World Cup would have generated in other ways. The NZ administrators DID try to argue that it would cost them the existing advertising revenue, but the argument was always fallacious.

I can only think that the NZ administrators were trying to call the World Cup's bluff. If they weren't - if there was no strategy behind their thinking - then they're even bigger idiots than I thought.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Caligastia


I would hazard a guess that this would be a much greater factor in keeping black players out of rugby than racism. As you said, the players in the apartheid era were more anti-apartheid than the admin, so with those players of yesterday becoming coaches and administrators today I would think that racist attitudes have improved in the last few years.

Without a doubt. It explains the quota system. They're doing their damndest to promote black players. Whether it's the right way of going about things is another matter.

We had a farcical situation here in the Summer with the SA cricket team. The SA selectors picked a team for one of the Tests, but the head of the SA Cricket Board overruled the selectors and included a non-white player to make up a quota. Which only succeeded in putting intolerable pressure on the poor guy involved. He failed dismally in the first innings and battled personfully in the second.

[ravagon]

Originally posted by finbar

We had a farcical situation here in the Summer with the SA cricket team. The SA selectors picked a team for one of the Tests, but the head of the SA Cricket Board overruled the selectors and included a non-white player to make up a quota. Which only succeeded in putting intolerable pressure on the poor guy involved. He failed dismally in the first innings and battled personfully in the second.

That would have been Justin Ontong?
Actually he struck me as looking like a rather talented player, albeit as you say under a bit too much pressure. He reminded me very much of Ken Rutherford just starting out in his first encounter with the Windies in the Windies. Ended up at the end of the series with a high score of about 60 or so and an average of about 8 IIRC.
I hope he manages to bounce back the way Rutherford did.

Ntini OTOH (whose first name completely eludes me) had a pretty successful series overall with the ball. Was he another brand new introduction or had he played in ODI's/Tests before?