The "South African Quota" catch-all thread

[Bruce_ma gooshvili]

I fully agree with your "preferably one from a credible source with quotes from a primary source directly involved in the story in question (like when I provided links to quotes by the SARU or the Sports Minister)." statement that is one of the main requirements to determine whether an article is fake or not. Official sources is necessary in the creation of credible articles.
I'm glad foreign people is showing an interest in this and i encourage you to continue to do so. But i amongst others believe your opinion is incorrect although you have the right to express it. I hope you are willing to change your opinion if the necessary facts come to light as too many people in this world only want to stand by their opinion no matter the evidence proving the contrary. Secondly you are not experiencing this racist system at ground level the way we do and the only way we can try and translate what is happening on the ground here is via articles from respected media companies. The alternative is the South Africans on the Forum expressing their thoughts on the subject which you aren't really willing to believe. Which is totally
ok if you apply critical thinking principles in making a judgement. But dont be too dismissive of the South African posters comments. There might be hints of bias but even then elements of truth are present. The racial targets are not only present in sport but in almost all sectors of South African life such as Education and the Economic environment. I will try and link you to sources outside of rugby where they provide a clue of how this reverse discrimination affects other areas of life here. For one black people need a lower average than a white person in high school to get into university ( A relevant link to SA tertiary institutions will follow.) And yes i acknowledge your claim that some government and ANC officials has denied the existence of quotas but dont just believe the politicians look at their policy and actions such as the strategic transformation plan. A different name for quotas they use is transformation. Now they can deny quotas because its called something different. Transformation/ Black Economic empowerment/ Affirmative action etc.

i'd be surprised if there is a newer case then Tim Dlulane as players still playing would not want to risk their careers although guys like Duane Vermeulen has hinted about it.
There are many Sport 24 articles i would have liked more diversity in the articles i link but this site is by far the largest media organization in Sa and they are very liberal just go check out their homepage.


Links:
http://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/Spri...orced-jake-white-to-pick-me-for-boks-20171103 - A black player speaking about quotas
http://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/CurrieCup/bulls-hit-back-at-dlulane-allegations-20171031
http://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/sa-rugby-willing-to-defend-its-quota-stance-20170504
https://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/...-africans-oppose-sport-quotas-survey-20160531
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2...-turmoil-as-south-africa-arrive-amid-a-crisis
https://businesstech.co.za/news/lif...as-for-sa-rugby-cricket-and-netball-revealed/
https://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Local/South-Coast-Fever/quotas-at-medical-school-20170325-2
https://www.sapromo.com/racial-quotas-unconstitutional-irrational-says-sas-supreme-court/12262 - If you dont want to read everything atleast read this one.
http://www.sport24.co.za/Cricket/CricketWorldCup2015/Did-SMS-cost-Proteas-World-Cup-20150331
http://www.politicsweb.co.za/news-and-analysis/fikile-mbalula-punishes-sports-codes-for-missing-r
https://www.sapromo.com/new-affirmative-action-targets-sa-sport-coming-soon/12532
http://www.thedailyvox.co.za/transformation-targets-sa-sports/ (This has an infographic element to the quota issue)


Links about Racial targets/ transformation or whatever you want to call them for other sectors of life in South Africa

http://www.labour.gov.za/DOL/downloads/legislation/acts/employment-equity/eegazette2015.pdf



http://www.nwu.ac.za/sites/www.nwu....rnance-management/policy/3P-3.14-equity_e.pdf - this source go and check 5.2 and 5.4 they refer back to the source above on employment equity.
5.2 The university rejects unfair discrimination, whether direct or indirect, on all listed grounds, including but not limited to race, sex, marital status, religion or creed, age, HIV status, culture, pregnancy, language, sexual orientation, colour, ethnic or social origin and disability.
5.4 Selection and appointment processes must ensure that preference shall be given to candidates from the designated groups on grounds of merit as defined in the Act, in terms of the recruitment policy and as contained in the Employment Equity Plan.

Now please carefully read the above policy specifically the bold ones. People will immediately say oh see its on merit. But that merit is only applying to designated groups. Which you can read about in the first link on employment equity. They reject unfair discrimination but this race based selection policy is then not unfair or discriminatory because the government policy encourages it.


https://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/...ion-bee-to-be-challenged-in-concourt-20171102





Here are links that challenges my point in the spirit of being as open as possible.
http://www.up.ac.za/media/shared/409/unfair-discrimination-on-the-basis-of-race.zp87166.pdf

https://businesstech.co.za/news/general/100000/whiteness-of-south-african-universities-questioned/

I will read every one of those articles at my leisure, thanks. I'll also make an added effort to not lump posters as "South African" if I've been perceived to do that.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Guys, I think this thread has run it's course, and it has become tedious to go to and fro, without getting anywhere in front.

I suggest that we lock this thread and leave it at that. If any of the evidence provided still can't sway one foreigner, then it's clear he won't be swayed, and he'll continue with his views.

Everyone else seems to be on the same page, so I think all would agree that there won't be a problem.

I'll leave this thread open until tomorrow, so reply on this thread if you agree or not.

 

[unrated]

Guys, I think this thread has run it's course, and it has become tedious to go to and fro, without getting anywhere in front.

I suggest that we lock this thread and leave it at that. If any of the evidence provided still can't sway one foreigner, then it's clear he won't be swayed, and he'll continue with his views.

Everyone else seems to be on the same page, so I think all would agree that there won't be a problem.

I'll leave this thread open until tomorrow, so reply on this thread if you agree or not.

The issue is going to continually resurface in the lead up to the next world cup. If this thread is closed the conversation will most likely move to match day threads.
Censorship is not the answer. I agree The Point has been discussed into submission but if you are tired of reading about it then simply avoid it for a while rather then blocking potential future participation by other members.

 

[TRF_heineken]

The issue is going to continually resurface in the lead up to the next world cup. If this thread is closed the conversation will most likely move to match day threads.
Censorship is not the answer. The Point has been discussed into submission in agree but if you are it then simply avoid it for a while rather then blocking potential future participation by other members.

It's not about censorship, and that's not why I want to lock it. If I wanted to censor, then I'd delete the entire thread as if it never existed.

I want to lock it because it seems we are at an impasse, and all that is currently happening is one foreigner throws a bunch of remarks and then there is counter arguments, but neither the foreigner nor the majority seems to meet halfway.

But if everyone feels the same as you, then I won't lock it.

 

[Brigantine]

unrated is right. This is a quarantine thread. No one expects an actual answer to emerge here - as long as you can tell people to shut up about quotas everywhere else, this thread is doing an admirable job.

Censorship is in fact the answer, and that's exactly why we have this thread

It hasn't been a problem for a long time that I can remember, but then neither has polio.

 

[Bruce_ma gooshvili]

Guys, I think this thread has run it's course, and it has become tedious to go to and fro, without getting anywhere in front.

I suggest that we lock this thread and leave it at that. If any of the evidence provided still can't sway one foreigner, then it's clear he won't be swayed, and he'll continue with his views.

Everyone else seems to be on the same page, so I think all would agree that there won't be a problem.

I'll leave this thread open until tomorrow, so reply on this thread if you agree or not.

I'm glad others were able to post a sensible response to this post, so I don't have to. Thanks for that. From the first post I've not been looking for bad blood, and it is clearly a major topic in international rugby that many posters bring up constantly on rugby forums.

As a humble user, and the OP, I would request a team decision by the TRF Mods before this thread is locked rather than it being the decision of one individual.

Primarily on the understanding that repeatedly reading throwaway remarks about "quotas" when wanting to read a thread that is meant to be about a rugby match is tedious for "foreigners" (like myself) and Saffas alike (like the journalist in the link in my second to last post above).

 

[mdaclarke]

I've had enough of it. The reality is that nobody is going to change their minds and people are going around and around in circles.

 

[BobbyM]

Just finished having a read through all 11 pages, really interesting debate guys! I've spent a bit of time socially in SA as I have a number of friends from there, and this is one of their most common dinner table discussions. Great to see it brought out and chatted through here too!!!

 

[Bruce_ma gooshvili]

Links:
http://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/Spri...orced-jake-white-to-pick-me-for-boks-20171103 - A black player speaking about quotas
http://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/CurrieCup/bulls-hit-back-at-dlulane-allegations-20171031
http://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/sa-rugby-willing-to-defend-its-quota-stance-20170504
https://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/...-africans-oppose-sport-quotas-survey-20160531
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2...-turmoil-as-south-africa-arrive-amid-a-crisis
https://businesstech.co.za/news/lif...as-for-sa-rugby-cricket-and-netball-revealed/
https://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Local/South-Coast-Fever/quotas-at-medical-school-20170325-2
https://www.sapromo.com/racial-quotas-unconstitutional-irrational-says-sas-supreme-court/12262 - If you dont want to read everything atleast read this one.
http://www.sport24.co.za/Cricket/CricketWorldCup2015/Did-SMS-cost-Proteas-World-Cup-20150331
http://www.politicsweb.co.za/news-and-analysis/fikile-mbalula-punishes-sports-codes-for-missing-r
https://www.sapromo.com/new-affirmative-action-targets-sa-sport-coming-soon/12532
http://www.thedailyvox.co.za/transformation-targets-sa-sports/

Phew, that was some reading! I'll read the legal documents at a later time when I'll probably have to concentrate more, but thanks again for posting them (I will check them out).

In response to some of the links here are a few random thoughts.

- DDA is reportedly categorised as not "coloured" because he has a partially Hispanic bloodline. Mystery solved. Although any white South African who has gone outside seems fairly coloured to a peely-wally Scotsman.

- the player Dlulane who says he only selected because of government policy clearly supports transformation and states he believes he was good enough to be a Springbok, on merit. So in his mind he was selected on merit and he possibly appears to be having a dig at Jake White by saying White only selected him due to government policy (the unspoken assumption possibly being that Dlulane considered White to be reluctant to pick non-white players for whatever reason – I don't know if White has a reputation for that (like Heyneke Meyer did for some). It is not Dlulane saying he was an inferior player who did not merit a place who only got a crack because he wasn't white. But this player makes all kinds of allegations and I'm not sure of his credibility as an individual. I do think his words are possibly being intentionally misconstrued by the press to make it sound like he got a chance that he didn't merit. It's also still 13 years old!

- it is good you still have a judiciary where a union can challenge legislation and/or policy on matters of quotas – as is the case regarding the quotas around liquidators. But I'd note that one of the four criteria in those quotas is entirely non-racial. It is about ensuring there is female representation (regardless of ethnicity) in these roles. I'd therefore query why the union rep is painting this as a racial issue, rather than an equalities issue. Perhaps they consider it'd get more media coverage by doing so. And perhaps they'd be right in considering that. It's why I point out that the SARU Transformation documentation covers disability, gender and social background as well as simply race. Does that mean we should all agree with Transformation? Hell no. Does it reduce the chances that the object of Transformation is to embark on a race war? I'd like to think yes it does, others may think that disability, gender and social background are a fig leaf to try and make Transformation look less about race. If that's someone's opinion, then fair enough. Given some of the more fringe and hard line elements of the ANC I can see why some people might suspect that even if I don't agree with it. Still, like I say, judicial scrutiny of government policy = a good thing.

- if I take the media reports at face value, then there are quotas (not targets) in international cricket for the Proteas i.e. an average of X amount of players in the calendar year must be of colour and X amount must be black. That is a quota. One of the articles successfully differentiates between the quota for the Proteas and the targets for the Springboks. I've spoken on that at length and while some may view it as a technicality (particularly if there is a perception of a sports minister making threats regarding failure to make targets) the distinction is extremely important. Again, I would query the accuracy and motivation of any media outlet that doesn't make this distinction and just talks about quotas in relation to the Springboks. I'd argue they are doing that in the interests of making their stories more "clickbait" friendly. I welcome the targets for the proportion of black participation in football to actually fall.

As for the controversy over Philander's selection in a RWC semi-final, I don't know the specifics in terms of his medical status at the time. But his ability with both bat and ball means he's a man I'd be wanting in pretty much any international one day side if he was fit. At test level he is well known for his consistency of delivery and economy rate / strike rate with the ball and shows flashes with the bat. I'd also be tempted to gamble on a player of his quality if he was only 90% fit depending on the quality of the next player in line (I don't know the Abbot kid who was mentioned as being dropped for Philander so can't comment on that – if he is been proven to be a high quality player then I could see why he would feel aggrieved to be dropped for someone who wasn't fully fit – but that sort of thing happens in sports and the cricket quota didn't apply to every game, it applied to an average over games played over 12 months. So there might not have been specific pressure on the Proteas semi-final side to select Philander for racial reasons and the person quoted as saying this story is BS might have a point).

- Fee paying schools and having to pay fees to attend university are great personal bugbears of mine (as someone who could only attend university by getting a bursary and a grant and because at that time tuition fees weren't in place). In terms of "transformation" they massively impair social mobility. If parents choose to pay a fee for their child's school education they are doing that for a reason. They are not idiots burning money when free educational alternatives are available. The reason they are willing to pay is that they believe that by paying for their kid's education they'll get superior grades and superior life chances (either through superior life skills / education or the alleged nepotism that surrounds fee paying schools when it comes to getting a job opportunity). This means if you put money in to your child's upbringing you'll increase their chances of being similarly wealthy to their parents when they grow up. This keeps the bloodline purer in terms of what sections of society are running the country and gaining the most wealth. This is the same the world over where such educational divides are allowed (including in Scotland).

In countries like Italy where such a divide does not exist (i.e. there is no such thing as fee paying schools) we see comparable educational attainment but with the bonus of a whole lot more social mobility. Where a kid ends up in life is far more based on how they applied themselves at school and university, rather than how deep their parent's pockets were. I may not be appreciating the full details of the educational links that were supplied, but bursaries and scholarships and such like are not a South African thing. In Scotland bursaries are awarded to get increasing numbers of kids from less affluent backgrounds to enter fee paying schools (there is a big debate brewing about that now).

 

[Bruce_ma gooshvili]

[part 2 of 2]
- Universities in many countries are encouraged to offer scholarships / places to children with lower educational attainment levels from disadvantaged communities. This is routine policy internationally and makes widening wealth inequalities more politically palatable. Due to historic discrepancies in South Africa this undoubtedly means that a proportion of university students who are awarded places will be black students with lower previous educational attainment than a white kid who doesn't get a place. People can call that unjust, but as I say, that is done internationally and is done so for a reason (particularly as in some countries wealth inequality returns to levels more commonly seen in the 19th century). If you were a white kid who was overlooked would you gladly swap your previous 18 years of existence with that of the black kid who "took your space" as it would give you an advantage in life? I'd doubt it. You've probably got the financial option to try getting entry into your second or third choice University instead and many further opportunities to make a "success" of your life.

- The ANC are limited in what they can do as free education / scholarships / improved rugby training costs money. Money is in short supply since the global financial crisis of 2007/08 and so I'd imagine their hands are tied to some extent in a lot of projects they'd want to do to bring about more social mobility in a more natural way (e.g. investment in education in townships etc). The fact that the ANC have a reputation for being economically incompetent in the last decade or so probably doesn't help either. Social mobility requires a large initial investment before you see the benefits of it (the benefits being that the life chances of child at birth are not massively divergent depending on the wealth of their parents). If there is no money and the economy is floundering then the only options you are left with in terms of social mobility are the top down quota and/or target options. If you implement them you'll have parts of the country getting angry and upset. If you don't implement them you'll have parts of the country getting angry and upset. These are complex and difficult issues with no easy solutions, particularly if the piggy bank is running dry. In the UK and Scotland we have clear quotas at the very highest level. Throughout Europe it is not uncommon for the country to be governed by a cabinet with clear gender quotas (usually a 50/50 split). In the UK there are gender quotas on panel shows (be they comedy or current affairs). Lots of people will disagree with such things and lots will agree. Personally I take them on a case by case basis and have my own prejudices and experiences (having been educated in a system that blatantly provides better outcomes for females than males and working in some surprisingly female dominated sectors I do sometimes find myself questioning policies from time to time.)

- on black South Africans backing selection on merit, well of course they do. But ask those same South Africans if they are happy with less than a handful of Boks being of colour 20+ years after the end of apartheid and I think we can all guess what the response to that survey would be. What percentage of the black respondees consider that the likes of Beast, Mohoje, Lleyds or Jantjies were clearly not picked on merit? Probably note a huge proportion I'd guess.

- The South African sports minister in 2015 does sound not overly diplomatic or sympathetic in his language around the failure to meet targets. It doesn't sound like he had much interest in appealing to anyone outside of his own political base. His language certainly gives ammunition to those who think the SARU are being held at gunpoint to shoe-horn in players who are non-white. I get that. I'd argue that that Sports Minister has been replaced and the current Sports Minister should be judged on what they say and do, rather than what their predecessor says and does. I do think the previous Sports Minister makes a valid point in terms of the financial viability of the sport if 84% of the population isn't really represented in the sport. I also think he makes a valid point in saying social cohesion is more difficult if one section of society plays A, B & C and other sections play X, Y & Z. Of course, you can agree with him on that and still think his policies absolutely stink and don't do much in the interests of social cohesion.

 

[Bruce_ma gooshvili]

And finally, a couple of recent items came up that interested me. One was that my local club Edinburgh signed a couple of South Africans, one of whom (flyhalf Jaco van der Walt) appeared to suggest that they felt as a backup flyhalf at the Lions their career chances were limited due government policy back home. I have to respect the man's opinion as he is living and working in that environment (and on first impressions, he does seem a handy enough fly half). It saddens me to read stuff like this, although I think you'd struggle to argue that the Lions 23 in the past two seasons hasn't been picked entirely on merit – but maybe he thinks things will change with Ackermann leaving and that Ackermann was maybe standing up to the Transformation policy? Unfortunately, I can't find the link, but I'm pretty sure van der Walt was not ruling out becoming another of Scotland's foreign contingent of internationals and it is truly sad if he feels that Transformation has contributed to making playing for Scotland a more appealing prospect than fighting for a shirt at home.


On the flip side, we see in Kolisi someone who has made it as a player but is critical of the system for not doing enough. It is clear he doesn't think the solution to rugby's transformation issue is picking the occasional black kid out of their substandard township training regime and parachuting them into top rugby schools / universities.



Unfortunately the investment in rugby at grassroots level that Kolisi is probably looking for costs a whole lot of money. He is likely to be disappointed for some time to come regardless of government policy.

So yeah, just thought I'd end the year on the uplifting message of how both sides of the coin will have their setbacks, disappointments and grievances and we'll see more of the same in 2018! But it doesn't mean we are all enemies, or that one side is completely right and the other side is completely wrong.

 

[AM_Bokke]

And finally, a couple of recent items came up that interested me. One was that my local club Edinburgh signed a couple of South Africans, one of whom (flyhalf Jaco van der Walt) appeared to suggest that they felt as a backup flyhalf at the Lions their career chances were limited due government policy back home. I have to respect the man's opinion as he is living and working in that environment (and on first impressions, he does seem a handy enough fly half). It saddens me to read stuff like this, although I think you'd struggle to argue that the Lions 23 in the past two seasons hasn't been picked entirely on merit – but maybe he thinks things will change with Ackermann leaving and that Ackermann was maybe standing up to the Transformation policy? Unfortunately, I can't find the link, but I'm pretty sure van der Walt was not ruling out becoming another of Scotland's foreign contingent of internationals and it is truly sad if he feels that Transformation has contributed to making playing for Scotland a more appealing prospect than fighting for a shirt at home.


On the flip side, we see in Kolisi someone who has made it as a player but is critical of the system for not doing enough. It is clear he doesn't think the solution to rugby's transformation issue is picking the occasional black kid out of their substandard township training regime and parachuting them into top rugby schools / universities.



Unfortunately the investment in rugby at grassroots level that Kolisi is probably looking for costs a whole lot of money. He is likely to be disappointed for some time to come regardless of government policy.

So yeah, just thought I'd end the year on the uplifting message of how both sides of the coin will have their setbacks, disappointments and grievances and we'll see more of the same in 2018! But it doesn't mean we are all enemies, or that one side is completely right and the other side is completely wrong.

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.

 

[User1245]

[part 2 of 2]
- Universities in many countries are encouraged to offer scholarships / places to children with lower educational attainment levels from disadvantaged communities. This is routine policy internationally and makes widening wealth inequalities more politically palatable. Due to historic discrepancies in South Africa this undoubtedly means that a proportion of university students who are awarded places will be black students with lower previous educational attainment than a white kid who doesn't get a place. People can call that unjust, but as I say, that is done internationally and is done so for a reason (particularly as in some countries wealth inequality returns to levels more commonly seen in the 19th century). If you were a white kid who was overlooked would you gladly swap your previous 18 years of existence with that of the black kid who "took your space" as it would give you an advantage in life? I'd doubt it. You've probably got the financial option to try getting entry into your second or third choice University instead and many further opportunities to make a "success" of your life.

- The ANC are limited in what they can do as free education / scholarships / improved rugby training costs money. Money is in short supply since the global financial crisis of 2007/08 and so I'd imagine their hands are tied to some extent in a lot of projects they'd want to do to bring about more social mobility in a more natural way (e.g. investment in education in townships etc). The fact that the ANC have a reputation for being economically incompetent in the last decade or so probably doesn't help either. Social mobility requires a large initial investment before you see the benefits of it (the benefits being that the life chances of child at birth are not massively divergent depending on the wealth of their parents). If there is no money and the economy is floundering then the only options you are left with in terms of social mobility are the top down quota and/or target options. If you implement them you'll have parts of the country getting angry and upset. If you don't implement them you'll have parts of the country getting angry and upset. These are complex and difficult issues with no easy solutions, particularly if the piggy bank is running dry. In the UK and Scotland we have clear quotas at the very highest level. Throughout Europe it is not uncommon for the country to be governed by a cabinet with clear gender quotas (usually a 50/50 split). In the UK there are gender quotas on panel shows (be they comedy or current affairs). Lots of people will disagree with such things and lots will agree. Personally I take them on a case by case basis and have my own prejudices and experiences (having been educated in a system that blatantly provides better outcomes for females than males and working in some surprisingly female dominated sectors I do sometimes find myself questioning policies from time to time.)

- on black South Africans backing selection on merit, well of course they do. But ask those same South Africans if they are happy with less than a handful of Boks being of colour 20+ years after the end of apartheid and I think we can all guess what the response to that survey would be. What percentage of the black respondees consider that the likes of Beast, Mohoje, Lleyds or Jantjies were clearly not picked on merit? Probably note a huge proportion I'd guess.

- The South African sports minister in 2015 does sound not overly diplomatic or sympathetic in his language around the failure to meet targets. It doesn't sound like he had much interest in appealing to anyone outside of his own political base. His language certainly gives ammunition to those who think the SARU are being held at gunpoint to shoe-horn in players who are non-white. I get that. I'd argue that that Sports Minister has been replaced and the current Sports Minister should be judged on what they say and do, rather than what their predecessor says and does. I do think the previous Sports Minister makes a valid point in terms of the financial viability of the sport if 84% of the population isn't really represented in the sport. I also think he makes a valid point in saying social cohesion is more difficult if one section of society plays A, B & C and other sections play X, Y & Z. Of course, you can agree with him on that and still think his policies absolutely stink and don't do much in the interests of social cohesion.

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.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Man that was a lot of drivel to read through on a monday morning after a good long holiday! And a triple post as well, which is against forum rules...

Anyways, so many mistakes in those posts. I didn't know that Vernon Philander played in the Rugby World Cup...

I'm feeling inclined to ignore what is going on in this thread as it just the same old problem just spiraling more and more out of control.

And now this foreign poster wants to talk about the quota issue in cricket too... My, my, I hope he's done his homework...

 

[Jason Wilson]

You should be able to pick the best coach and the best players available. Simple as that. Any system the prevents that from happening, especially if that system is only implemented for political point scoring, is wrong. The development at school level is where the SA government should be focused. Encourage the black and coloured populations to take an interest in rugby from when they a children, their numbers will swell and they will make their way through to senior level. The rest will take care of itself.

There are a couple of other arguments to be made, regarding the physical suitability of different sections of the population, exclusionary effect of the cost of rugby tickets when compared to soccer, and the basic numbers of white players in the senior pool compared to black/coloured players, but that is a whole new discussion.

With the exception of one or two overly conservative idiots, no South African white person has an issue with a player of colour representing the Springboks...as long as they deserve to be there.

 

[Bruce_ma gooshvili]

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!

 

[TRF_heineken]

Okay Bruce, so what now? What are you trying to accomplish here?

You make these extra long posts, get called out and then you make another long post to apologise, but try to mitigate the mistakes you made.

Are you just going to continue on this trend, knowing full well that there will be a barrage of South Africans ready to respond.

As for the whole Tim Dlulane thing, I'm inclined to think that based on the other players that were selected in 2004, that he was a quota selected player. The other flankers were Juan Smith, Schalk Burger, Joe van Niekerk, Pedrie Wannenburg, Jacques Cronje, Wikus van Heerden and Danie Rossouw.

All of these guys featured in many Springbok matches, most of them are legends in South African circles, some even in the

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

You should be able to pick the best coach and the best players available. Simple as that. Any system the prevents that from happening, especially if that system is only implemented for political point scoring, is wrong.

Just curious: how do you reconcile that with the fact that south african players in (i.e.) french teams cannot play for the national team?

 

[unrated]

Just curious: how do you reconcile that with the fact that south african players in (i.e.) french teams cannot play for the national team?

Those in the french team was never going to be good enough to play for South Africa. Guys like Rory Kockott was good at Super Rugby for the sharks but the national selectors was never interested in him and he knew this eventually.
Yes maybe they eventually reached an international standard playing abroad but basically they just weren't good enough for us when at home. If another Int team can profit from our castaways then i have no problem with that. Good for the foreign national team and good for the player. When it comes to SA eligible players such as Francois Steyn, Bismarck, Serfontein and Lambie then it firstly hurts but secondly there is hope that a solution can be reached where these guys can play for us again even while based abroad.

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

Not sure whether you misunderstood my point or you disagree. I said french teams (plural), but English and other teams apply. Not talking about national sides, but Racing 92, Munster, Wasps, etc.

As far as i understand, you need to have 30 tests to be able to play abroad and wear the springbok jersey. That intuitively conflicts with what Jason wrote, hence my question.