Sport

South Africa, Sport

Cosatu cries foul over the lack of transformation in rugby

Cosatu cries foul over the lack of transformation in rugby

Cosatu claimed on Monday that a number of black Springboks had approached them to voice concerns over their lack of game time. The South African Rugby Players’ Association says that when they asked, they found no signs of unhappy players. Regardless of how seriously you take the claims, a serious conversation needs to be had about transformation and it needs to happen without white-tinted glasses. By ANTOINETTE MULLER.

The Congress of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu) caused a stir over the weekend when they revealed that five black Springboks, backed by two white players, have voiced their concerns over lack of game time. The trade union launched a scathing attack on the country’s rugby chiefs saying that a “white cabal” is controlling rugby.

A Cosatu statement said:

“There is a practice of reverse affirmative action in rugby, where certain positions are still maintained for the white players. This maintenance and control of the white establishment is reflected in who gets the most lucrative contracts and who gets to continue on in the sport in leadership and administrative positions.”

It took specific issue with Jean de Villiers, saying:

“The rugby establishment defends the privileged position of white players and the captain, Jean de Villiers, is an example of this. Any other player anywhere else in the world would have to play himself back into the team after such a long absence, yet he gets to just walk back into the team, when he is clearly not the form player.”

Cosatu did not name the players and did not mention if they are in the squad or simply part of the bigger Springbok set-up. The trade union has, for a long time, backed the move for quotas at national level and the latest revelation has, understandably, ruffled some feathers.

First and foremost, Cosatu argues for the team’s demographics to be more “representative” of the country’s demographics. That, 20 years after apartheid ended, South Africa still cannot field more than five black players in the Springbok squad is staggering. But the adequate representation argument is not without flaws. For comparison’s sake, and because Cosatu are strongly basing their argument on “representation”, these numbers are relevant.

The Australian Football League had 9% of players listed as being aboriginal in 2014. Yet they represent only 2.5% of the Australian population. Aboriginals suffered gross mistreatment in Australia and while the two countries are not comparable, it is a notable statistic.

In the 2014 Soccer World Cup, the squads are incredibly diverse. For example, African-Ecuadorians make up just 6% of the population but made up almost the entire squad of Ecuador. Algeria’s squad was born almost entirely in France while almost two-thirds of the Swiss team were of migrant descent, players of African-German and African-Spanish roots.

Again, the countries cannot be compared on their histories, but in terms of arguing for representation alone as Cosatu does, it’s relevant.

The debate about “representation” in South Africa is far more heated because of the wrongs of the past. Rugby was a “white man’s” sport and dismantling inequality has taken far too long. One cannot expect a structurally discriminative society that was built up over 300 years to simply sing Kumbaya and suddenly be normal. In some cases, new structures need to be created in order to break down old attitudes, but the approach also needs to seek to be holistic.

While it is true that South African rugby has had more than two decades to sort itself out, some issues cannot be ignored. At Super Rugby level, teams are failing spectacularly in producing black players, even when these players are coming through at age group level. The Lions and the Cheetahs could hardly field three black players this season while the Bulls hovered at around four. The Stormers were the most representative, something which is also reflected in the Western Province Craven Week team. But there is a distinct disconnect between franchise level and below. Still, there are a number of players who are in the system and perfectly capable of playing and concerns of being marginalised are not completely unfounded.

Players being played out of position while there are perfectly capable black players to choose from is an issue that’s been around for quite some time now.

In 2012, Lloyd Gedye, writing for the Mail and Guardian, observed a particular issue involving Francois Hougaard and Lwazi Mvovo. Hougaard had said in an interview that he wanted to specialise at scrumhalf and would not play wing anymore, even if that meant he didn’t get to play for the Bulls and the Springboks.

“I must say I have felt bad being on this tour and seeing Lwazi Mvovo on the bench because I am playing wing,” said Hougaard. “He has had an excellent year and maybe it’s time for him to be given an opportunity.”

Gedye argued that this justifies the point that the coach would rather use a white player out of position than pick a black player who specialises in that position and who has had a good season. Look a bit deeper and you will, without a doubt, find other examples.

The numbers are problematic. Since 1995 the Springboks have capped more than 180 white players and just over 50 black and coloured players. That over 40% of Boks come from privileged schools with world-class facilities is also a massive problem. Rugby, largely remains a sport for the elite, but to ignore some obvious questions staring at you in black and white (no pun intended) is to be an ostrich.

The fact that players felt the need to go to a third party raises some serious questions for the South African Rugby Players’ Association (Sarpa). They have since responded, saying none of their members have approached them regarding transformation, but they have spent a significant amount of time “engaging on the topic”, particularly on the South African Rugby Union’s plans for transformation. That players felt the need to go to a third party with their concerns without even bothering to approach Sarpa raises some serious questions about how deep the discontent runs. Or, for the more cynical, it raises questions about the claim as a whole.

Regardless of how seriously you take Cosatu’s claims, there are a few conversations that need to be had about South Africa’s lack of transformation. And it needs to take place without white-tinted glasses. DM

Photo: Argentina’s Joaquin Tuculet takes a high ball during their Championship rugby union test match against South Africa in Durban, August 8, 2015. REUTERS/Rogan Ward

Gallery

Please peer review 3 community comments before your comment can be posted

X

This article is free to read.

Sign up for free or sign in to continue reading.

Unlike our competitors, we don’t force you to pay to read the news but we do need your email address to make your experience better.


Nearly there! Create a password to finish signing up with us:

Please enter your password or get a sign in link if you’ve forgotten

Open Sesame! Thanks for signing up.

We would like our readers to start paying for Daily Maverick...

…but we are not going to force you to. Over 10 million users come to us each month for the news. We have not put it behind a paywall because the truth should not be a luxury.

Instead we ask our readers who can afford to contribute, even a small amount each month, to do so.

If you appreciate it and want to see us keep going then please consider contributing whatever you can.

Support Daily Maverick→
Payment options

Become a Maverick Insider

This could have been a paywall

On another site this would have been a paywall. Maverick Insider keeps our content free for all.

Become an Insider

Every seed of hope will one day sprout.

South African citizens throughout the country are standing up for our human rights. Stay informed, connected and inspired by our weekly FREE Maverick Citizen newsletter.