The form, or lack thereof, of a major national sports team ahead of a global tournament always sparks robust debates about whether or not the best available players are part of it. It is, therefore, unsurprising that the Springboks’ three consecutive losses have resuscitated a polarising debate about the state of our rugby.
The Springboks – specifically their 1995 and 2007 Rugby World Cups victories – were overhyped as shining examples of the power of sport in uniting all South Africans.
While the demographics of rugby fans who fill the stadiums to watch the Springboks has transformed since 1995 to reflect the rainbow nation South Africa aspires to be, the playing fields, technical teams and boardrooms of rugby remain untransformed.
Therefore, to reduce the debate on transformation in rugby to axing Heyneke Meyer as coach of the Springboks, as advocated by Cosatu, is a myopic short-term relief that will not resolve anything substantial about the underlying causes of an untransformed sport.
Many of us who don’t agree with Cosatu’s politics could dismiss their claim that they were approached by five black players complaining about the lack of game time in the Springboks as expedient politicking.
The denial of this by Springboks players, most notably by Trevor Nyakane, raises questions about the veracity of Cosatu’s pronouncements or whether it is an attempt at damage control.
Notwithstanding this, Cosatu was right to revive the debate about the lack of transformation in rugby insofar as highlighting the lack of adequate game time for black players in the team.
It is interesting that the said players who approached Cosatu didn’t seek the help of their powerful union, South African Rugby Players Association (Sarpa) which has done well previously to fight for better remuneration deals for the players.
For his part, Meyer’s inferior tactics against superior opponents like the All Blacks, questionable selections, playing players out of position to accommodate those he has previously worked with and under-utilising some players without giving them a fair chance to fight for a spot in his team are contributing to disillusionment towards his team. In all of this, the biggest losers have mostly been black players.
Meyer is a part of a broad leadership collective, including his coaching staff and the management of the South African Rugby Union (Saru), who must collectively be accountable for the lack of transformation in rugby.
For as long as Saru fails to support the introduction and management of rugby in schools in previously disadvantaged communities, the sport will never be accessible to all young people.
Rugby commentator, Liz McGregor reveals in her book, Springboks Factory, that to date, two schools, namely Paarl Gymnasium and Grey College, have jointly produced the highest number of Springboks since 1992.
To their credit these school are doing an exceptional job to attract the best young rugby prospects to an environment with world-class facilities and decent coaching to rise to the apex of excellence in rugby.
Similarly, it exposes the weaknesses. For as long as Saru fails to invest in grassroots rugby development programmes as evidenced by its decision to stop funding its rugby academy in Port Elizabeth, it will continue to fail young black talented players. It is no wonder that many young black rugby prospects fall through the system in between school rugby and breaking into first teams of the provincial unions.
The failure of Saru’s transformation efforts to provide equal opportunities for all deserving players to assemble demographically representative teams is an indictment on the rugby union’s leadership.
It raises serious questions about the effectiveness of Saru’s transformation initiatives when black players who have consistently excelled for their respective clubs during the Currie Cup and Super Rugby season are somehow not good enough to be considered for the Springboks.
The reality is that there is a pool of excellent players who have performed consistently in the last local season who would make the Springboks team if selections were based on fairness and providing equal opportunities to the best available players without the stigma of being labelled as quota players.
However, it appears that it is difficult for black players, regardless of their form, to break into the starting 15 of the Springboks.
It is even more difficult for them to keep their places in the team on the rare occasions that they are selected.
The fact that we are still debating the conspicuous lack of transformation in rugby in 2015 is an indictment on all rugby authorities from past and present leaders of Saru, ministers of sport, national rugby team coaches and the provincial unions.
It shows that the sport has failed, and continues to fail, hundreds of rugby enthusiasts from historically disadvantaged communities to play a meaningful role in transforming rugby through its institutionalised failure to create sufficient equal opportunities for them, be it as players, match officials, administrators and board members.
There are many rugby-lovers who don’t identify with our national rugby teams because the sport remains inaccessible to many youngsters.
And until such time that those who endure the adversities to persist with the sport are given fair opportunities to compete and excel, transformation will remain an elusive dream.
*Solly Malatsi is the DA spokesman for Sport and Recreation. He writes in his personal capacity. - Cape Argus