The "South African Quota" catch-all thread

[TRF_heineken]

What is the Ligua Franca of South Africa? English or Afrikaans.

I only know of South Africa from my Uncle who lives in Muizenberg. He has been there 40 years and has citizenship. He say's living in South Africa is amazing and nothing like the doom and gloom we read in the papers. It is the only other place in the world I would want to live and I have sometimes thought of emigrating to South Africa. Probably not going to happen now as I have a son (separated from the mother) and I couldn't leave him behind in the UK. I doubt his mum would let me take him!!

The Lingua Franca is english. I think only about 4 million people in SA's first language might be Afrikaans, but I suspect it might be even lower than that.

 

[Bruce_ma gooshvili]

I'm not sure what information sources you think I should seek? The BBC is the state broadcaster in the UK and is usually extremely accurate. They have repeatedly reported that in this decade Afrikaans has remained the official language of some of the top universities and that this has understandably provided a barrier to learning. Clearly something has changed, or the University of Pretoria wouldn't have provided a quote expressing their regret at the change. If the BBC reports are inaccurate or misleading then I'm ****** off at them. I intentionally ignored the sections that are subjective and unverified (e.g. quotes from students).

I'm happy to accept that these institutions have been offering some classes in other languages and that this reduces that barrier. I'm also repeatedly stating that I consider this a "good thing" that will help level the educational playing field. I'm not using it to rag on South Africa.

I am sorry if people find it tiresome. But if people continue to conflate 'injustice' throwing a ball about on a pitch with decades of economic and social injustice (and the impact that has on a child's ability to pick up the game), then I am going to reserve my right to make comment on that from time to time. I'd left this thread alone for many months, only for it to be revived by someone who had previously complained about its existence.

All I can say is that if I give the impression of someone who is hell bent on holding a position irrespective of evidence then you are mistaken. Thanks again for taking the time to respond - it is appreciated even (and perhaps more so) when the response comes from a different perspective.

 

[mdaclarke]

I think it will be quite interesting to see the Boks starting xv for the first world cup game in my opinion a pure merit team would only have the following non white players in the xv:-

Kilosi, Kolbe and N'Kosi. and possibly Beast

Players like Papier, Am, Willemse, Mbonamabi,, Jantjies, Dyantyi and possibily Nyakane would make the bench.

So by my count that is 3/4 in the starting 15 and 10/11 in the 23.

It is interesting to me that although the starting XV is not yet anywhere near the target, the matchday 23 is almost there (or on target with 11 players)

 

[mdaclarke]

My merit 23.

1. Beast
2. Marx
3. Malherbe
4. Etzebeth
5. De Jager
6. Kilosi (captain)
7. PSDT
8. Vermuelen
9. De Klerk
10. Pollard
11. N'Kosi
12. Estherhuizen
13. Kriel
14. Kolbe
15. Le Roux

16. Nyakane
17. Mbonamabi
18. Kitshoff
19. Snyman
20. Papier
21. Willemse
22. Dyantyi
23. Am

Think I may have 1 too many back on the replacements. Would consider swapping Dyantyi for Mostert, No room for Jjantjies

 

[TRF_heineken]

I'm not sure what information sources you think I should seek? The BBC is the state broadcaster in the UK and is usually extremely accurate. They have repeatedly reported that in this decade Afrikaans has remained the official language of some of the top universities and that this has understandably provided a barrier to learning. Clearly something has changed, or the University of Pretoria wouldn't have provided a quote expressing their regret at the change. If the BBC reports are inaccurate or misleading then I'm ****** off at them. I intentionally ignored the sections that are subjective and unverified (e.g. quotes from students).

I'm happy to accept that these institutions have been offering some classes in other languages and that this reduces that barrier. I'm also repeatedly stating that I consider this a "good thing" that will help level the educational playing field. I'm not using it to rag on South Africa.

I am sorry if people find it tiresome. But if people continue to conflate 'injustice' throwing a ball about on a pitch with decades of economic and social injustice (and the impact that has on a child's ability to pick up the game), then I am going to reserve my right to make comment on that from time to time. I'd left this thread alone for many months, only for it to be revived by someone who had previously complained about its existence.

All I can say is that if I give the impression of someone who is hell bent on holding a position irrespective of evidence then you are mistaken. Thanks again for taking the time to respond - it is appreciated even (and perhaps more so) when the response comes from a different perspective.

How about researching local media outlets? Get the info straight from the horse's mouth?

There are plenty of outlets, all from different backgrounds and some even with different point of views on certain matters. It doesn't help you use a british media outlet who also only get certain info from their sources in SA. They have an affiliate and won't always get all the info through. And they mostly focus on things that would be of interest to their own people, and what will sell newspapers/get viewership.

 

[User1245]

I'm not sure what information sources you think I should seek? The BBC is the state broadcaster in the UK and is usually extremely accurate. They have repeatedly reported that in this decade Afrikaans has remained the official language of some of the top universities and that this has understandably provided a barrier to learning. Clearly something has changed, or the University of Pretoria wouldn't have provided a quote expressing their regret at the change. If the BBC reports are inaccurate or misleading then I'm ****** off at them. I intentionally ignored the sections that are subjective and unverified (e.g. quotes from students).

I'm happy to accept that these institutions have been offering some classes in other languages and that this reduces that barrier. I'm also repeatedly stating that I consider this a "good thing" that will help level the educational playing field. I'm not using it to rag on South Africa.

I am sorry if people find it tiresome. But if people continue to conflate 'injustice' throwing a ball about on a pitch with decades of economic and social injustice (and the impact that has on a child's ability to pick up the game), then I am going to reserve my right to make comment on that from time to time. I'd left this thread alone for many months, only for it to be revived by someone who had previously complained about its existence.

All I can say is that if I give the impression of someone who is hell bent on holding a position irrespective of evidence then you are mistaken. Thanks again for taking the time to respond - it is appreciated even (and perhaps more so) when the response comes from a different perspective.

The article is misleading. Just look at the types of tweets were embedded in the article, sets the tone for the rest of it. Unfortunate that these days everything seems to have a spin on it.

I just checked on Wikipedia and the University of Pretoria has been bilingual since 1994 which sounds about right.

The article misleads in the what an "official language" means. This doesn't not mean that Afrikaans is the forced medium. Back in 2007 when I was looking at studying at UP all courses were English. Yes it has an Afrikaans flavour but I remember all buildings having both English and Afrikaans signs.
Just like SA has 11 official languages does not mean that everything is labeled in all of these languages.
I'm not surprised it's confusing to foreigners who are used to a homogeneous or even distribution of language in a country.

BTW nobody is saying you can't express an opinion about South Africa but it seems (to me at least) that you start from a position of skepticism with South Africans on this forum. It seems that you have your opinion cemented before you speak to people from the country. SA has its complexities which can be misrepresented.

One thing that is constant, like everywhere else, is that all the politicians are on power trip. Past and present.
The ANC has demonstrated that it's morally corrupt pre- and post-1994 and ANY program it implements should be met with skepticism. Especially when it limits the freedom of others, doubly so when it's a minority group. The ANC ruling for the past 2 and a half decades is starting to get into dictatorship territory and its starting to show.

 

[TRF_heineken]

This just in:

https://www.sport24.co.za/Cricket/Proteas/irr-poll-82-of-black-people-dont-want-quotas-20190405
https://www.sport24.co.za/Cricket/Proteas/no-quotas-at-world-cup-for-proteas-moroe-20190404

The South African Institute of Race Relations (IRR) has welcomed the news that there will be no official quota system for the Proteas at the upcoming Cricket World Cup in England.

The IRR added that the majority of South African sports fans want merit-based selections.

"And this is the way most South Africans want their national teams to be selected. A new IRR poll, which is to be released later this year, shows that 83% of South Africans (and 82% of black South Africans) believe that the only criteria for selecting national sports teams should be merit.

 

[unrated]

I'm not sure what information sources you think I should seek? The BBC is the state broadcaster in the UK and is usually extremely accurate. They have repeatedly reported that in this decade Afrikaans has remained the official language of some of the top universities and that this has understandably provided a barrier to learning. Clearly something has changed, or the University of Pretoria wouldn't have provided a quote expressing their regret at the change. If the BBC reports are inaccurate or misleading then I'm ****** off at them. I intentionally ignored the sections that are subjective and unverified (e.g. quotes from students).

I'm happy to accept that these institutions have been offering some classes in other languages and that this reduces that barrier. I'm also repeatedly stating that I consider this a "good thing" that will help level the educational playing field. I'm not using it to rag on South Africa.

I am sorry if people find it tiresome. But if people continue to conflate 'injustice' throwing a ball about on a pitch with decades of economic and social injustice (and the impact that has on a child's ability to pick up the game), then I am going to reserve my right to make comment on that from time to time. I'd left this thread alone for many months, only for it to be revived by someone who had previously complained about its existence.

All I can say is that if I give the impression of someone who is hell bent on holding a position irrespective of evidence then you are mistaken. Thanks again for taking the time to respond - it is appreciated even (and perhaps more so) when the response comes from a different perspective.

Thanks for participating in this discussion about this but I don't think you fundamentally understand the arguments of both sides regarding the issue. It is widely acknowledged, what past our parents and great grandparents had in this country. Most of the people on this forum have spent most of their lives in the aftermath of Apartheid and was not part of the original system.

Now for me growing up in a post Apartheid society, I have faced discrimination based on my skin colour, language and culture in multiple facets of society including the sports I wanted to play since I was a primary school child. This was justified as redress for what our forefathers did. The roles are reversed now and the ANC government is exacting revenge on the offspring of the creators of Apartheid. However, in the field of International relations, you have to be careful about what you say and what your public policy is, in this regard, the ANC is playing a smart game and kudos to them. You do have to grow the economy in order to remain in power, and for this to happen they cant be receiving international sanctions for actions that are considered an international crime. So they have to act within a situation where they juggle morality with economic gain.

They can passively attempt to change the injustices of the past by means of justified moral racism and discrimination based on skin colour and language. Its official ANC sentiment (This means you can literally go read ANC members professing this) that they consider Afrikaans a symbol of Apartheid and therefore has to be eradicated from universities, the next step would be all representative elements of South Africa on the international stage including sports teams. It's an embarrassment for them that teams such as the Springboks have the majority of white players 20 years after they took power. So don't necessarily be fooled by if they state their intentions for transformation as noble and ethically correct. This might be a side issue but the core of their intentions is rooted in the above argument.

There are other political parties who plays the more direct game and calls for radical solutions, including the slaughter of white people (I doubt that this would happen but its the rhetoric that is being circulated in the political circles of the so-called left in South Africa *remember the EFF is socialist in nature and socialism is considered left on the political ideological spectrum). So in this sense, the ANC is much more PC and I thank them for that. They do understand that having such radical ideas can destroy the economy for ALL South African.

So back on the topic of sport, the other side to the argument says ok the children of the beneficiaries of apartheid has higher living standards in a majority of cases in South Africa. Inequality causes animosity and therefore it would be in the best interests of all South Africans to strive for a more equal society. Race relations would improve. Both the black and white sides of South Africa acknowledge that almost everything in this country still has to change, but its the method of going about it that differs. Everyone would want a very successful Springbok side if we win the world cup with a 90% black team then I will be happy. And it's acknowledged that if we can get the majority black population of South Africa interested in rugby then our sport will thrive and we would become damn near unbeatable. But why do it at the expense of one race? Why not go for a solution where one race does not feel targeted by its government?

The one side is saying that with regards to sport, don't impose quotas on a national level as it's ethically wrong and amounts to nothing else but direct racialism. Wich is the the exact thing that the ANC did not want then they were the opposition. Oh, the irony.

The argument is yes, a majority of South Africa is living in poverty, and not all has equal opportunities. But instead of restricting those who currently have opportunities lets get more people to have them. Unfortunately this will take time as it is directly connected to economic growth and job opportunities, once this happens descendants of the current disadvantaged populations would have more options on where to send their children in terms of education and then ultimately what opportunities their children have in the job market (Professional sports would be included here). The issue is that this is not happening fast enough and quotas and large scale forced transformations is seen as a band-aid to fast track the end goal by questionable ethic means.

So yes in the short term help needs to be given to those with less opportunities to get into rugby if that's what the ANC wants, but the method again is where people differ, the one side says: "do it at grassroots level and do it more effectively than you have been doing it", government can really be investing more in grassroots programs, they should not just rely on the private sector. And to be honest this would be small money for them in the greater scheme of things. The other side to the argument is well it's taken too long and the national teams are too white, its an embarrassment so let's take radical action and make them have a certain amount of black African players in the team irrespective of merit.

"What? we are not racist by saying our national teams should be picked according to skin colour! You are racist for suggesting that transformation is wrong! You are an Apartheid denialist! Our people feel that the national teams are too white, we don't care that you say more people are interested in certain sports and we don't care about your arguments about how participation numbers affects player representation at the highest level, we care about one thing and that is to make the teams more representative by any means necessary. Even if the teams are currently being picked on merit then we don't want that because we simply can't allow a white majority team more than 20 years after we took power, our voting base won't allow that. Therefore we claim that this thing you accuse us of - institutionalised racism and discrimination is merely you actually being a racist!" -ANC

 

[mdaclarke]

Thanks for participating in this discussion about this but I don't think you fundamentally understand the arguments of both sides regarding the issue. It is widely acknowledged, what past our parents and great grandparents had in this country. Most of the people on this forum have spent most of their lives in the aftermath of Apartheid and was not part of the original system.

Now for me growing up in a post Apartheid society, I have faced discrimination based on my skin colour, language and culture in multiple facets of society including the sports I wanted to play since I was a primary school child. This was justified as redress for what our forefathers did. The roles are reversed now and the ANC government is exacting revenge on the offspring of the creators of Apartheid. However, in the field of International relations, you have to be careful about what you say and what your public policy is, in this regard, the ANC is playing a smart game and kudos to them. You do have to grow the economy in order to remain in power, and for this to happen they cant be receiving international sanctions for actions that are considered an international crime. So they have to act within a situation where they juggle morality with economic gain.

They can passively attempt to change the injustices of the past by means of justified moral racism and discrimination based on skin colour and language. Its official ANC sentiment (This means you can literally go read ANC members professing this) that they consider Afrikaans a symbol of Apartheid and therefore has to be eradicated from universities, the next step would be all representative elements of South Africa on the international stage including sports teams. It's an embarrassment for them that teams such as the Springboks have the majority of white players 20 years after they took power. So don't necessarily be fooled by if they state their intentions for transformation as noble and ethically correct. This might be a side issue but the core of their intentions is rooted in the above argument.

There are other political parties who plays the more direct game and calls for radical solutions, including the slaughter of white people (I doubt that this would happen but its the rhetoric that is being circulated in the political circles of the so-called left in South Africa *remember the EFF is socialist in nature and socialism is considered left on the political ideological spectrum). So in this sense, the ANC is much more PC and I thank them for that. They do understand that having such radical ideas can destroy the economy for ALL South African.

So back on the topic of sport, the other side to the argument says ok the children of the beneficiaries of apartheid has higher living standards in a majority of cases in South Africa. Inequality causes animosity and therefore it would be in the best interests of all South Africans to strive for a more equal society. Race relations would improve. Both the black and white sides of South Africa acknowledge that almost everything in this country still has to change, but its the method of going about it that differs. Everyone would want a very successful Springbok side if we win the world cup with a 90% black team then I will be happy. And it's acknowledged that if we can get the majority black population of South Africa interested in rugby then our sport will thrive and we would become damn near unbeatable. But why do it at the expense of one race? Why not go for a solution where one race does not feel targeted by its government?

The one side is saying that with regards to sport, don't impose quotas on a national level as it's ethically wrong and amounts to nothing else but direct racialism. Wich is the the exact thing that the ANC did not want then they were the opposition. Oh, the irony.

The argument is yes, a majority of South Africa is living in poverty, and not all has equal opportunities. But instead of restricting those who currently have opportunities lets get more people to have them. Unfortunately this will take time as it is directly connected to economic growth and job opportunities, once this happens descendants of the current disadvantaged populations would have more options on where to send their children in terms of education and then ultimately what opportunities their children have in the job market (Professional sports would be included here). The issue is that this is not happening fast enough and quotas and large scale forced transformations is seen as a band-aid to fast track the end goal by questionable ethic means.

So yes in the short term help needs to be given to those with less opportunities to get into rugby if that's what the ANC wants, but the method again is where people differ, the one side says: "do it at grassroots level and do it more effectively than you have been doing it", government can really be investing more in grassroots programs, they should not just rely on the private sector. And to be honest this would be small money for them in the greater scheme of things. The other side to the argument is well it's taken too long and the national teams are too white, its an embarrassment so let's take radical action and make them have a certain amount of black African players in the team irrespective of merit.

"What? we are not racist by saying our national teams should be picked according to skin colour! You are racist for suggesting that transformation is wrong! You are an Apartheid denialist! Our people feel that the national teams are too white, we don't care that you say more people are interested in certain sports and we don't care about your arguments about how participation numbers affects player representation at the highest level, we care about one thing and that is to make the teams more representative by any means necessary. Even if the teams are currently being picked on merit then we don't want that because we simply can't allow a white majority team more than 20 years after we took power, our voting base won't allow that. Therefore we claim that this thing you accuse us of - institutionalised racism and discrimination is merely you actually being a racist!" -ANC

The trouble with the ANC argument is that quota's are against the IRB rules. Two wrongs don't make a right. I agree with extra support for people from disadvantaged backgrounds but the Boks and Super Rugby Teams must be picked on merit alone.

Is the ANC quote a genuine one?

 

[User1245]

What people don't seem to take into account is like Heineken mentioned there once was a time when apartheid didn't exist. South Africa deals with the same issues as other African countries: before, during and after apartheid.


For example this is the traditional practice of the largest ethnic group in South Africa:


Think about what difference emerge from that compared to your typical Western marriage.

Now think how those kinds of differences manifest when you start getting into top of competitive school rugby when most parents start taking an active role in carting their children back and forth from trials and sports days, and then attending these sports days.

I'm not saying it's objectively wrong or right either way but it needs to be considered if we're being intellectually honest.

This is what the dogmatic equal of outcome activists from first world countries don't get. Differences in cultures create differences in group outcomes. Sometimes it's nobody's fault that some groups are over represented in certain areas. It happens, and it happens everywhere for multiple reasons. And we sure as hell don't need the government to come in and tell people how they should live their lives when people have equal opportunity.

It's not a coincidence that the Blitzboks have a bigger black representation than the Boks. This claimed institutionalized racism within rugby doesn't suddenly suspend itself for that team. Your average Afrikaner is larger than your average Bantu African. Afrikaners will ALWAYS dominate the lock position and Bantu Africans with dominate the wings. Your Eben Etzebeth's and Bismarck du Plessis' of rugby will typically come from Afrikaners and your Aphiwe Dyantyi's and S'bu Nkosi's of rugby will typically come from Bantu Africans.

South Africa had the extra factor of apartheid which gets flogged more than it should especially these days. I have faith in the common sense of your average South African so that article which Heineken shared doesn't surprise me. All evidence points to your every day South African just wanting the best team to be out there. Nobody is in disagreement that we should be expanding the game at a grassroots level.

It's the ANC government and the spineless World Rugby that are keeping this worthless and divisive bottom down approach alive.

 

[unrated]

The trouble with the ANC argument is that quota's are against the IRB rules. Two wrongs don't make a right. I agree with extra support for people from disadvantaged backgrounds but the Boks and Super Rugby Teams must be picked on merit alone.

Is the ANC quote a genuine one?

No its not. It was a mock quote i used to sum up all their public comments on quotas over the years.

 

[Ospervat]

SA RUGBY REACHES TRANSFORMATION TARGETS!

https://www.sarugbymag.co.za/sa-rugby-reaches-transformation-targets/

 

[unrated]

SA RUGBY REACHES TRANSFORMATION TARGETS!

https://www.sarugbymag.co.za/sa-rugby-reaches-transformation-targets/

And then straight up they announce that quotas is not sustainable. "Simply counting numbers is not sustainable for the long term, we need to focus on grassroots"
https://www.sport24.co.za/OtherSpor...ey-to-transformation-sports-minister-20190424

 

[User1245]

And it finally happened, although it happened in cricket.

Below is a post I made a couple of years ago about how quotas could very easily disadvantage coloured players.

It's seems that simple but when you add some variables (form, experience, and talent) you can see why it becomes a game of musical chairs where some deserving black/coloured players are possibly even missing out.

For example the coach is probably sticking with Jesse Kiel mostly because he has Test experience, although Am probably desires a crack after a great season but has no Test experience, therefore Combrinck misses out. Being a white wing is a serious career limiting move. Anyway so you need to stick an ethnic black on the wing. He dropped Mvovo because he was terrible under the high ball against Ireland. Mapoe? Nope not an ethnic black... JP Pietersen!? Nope not an ethnic black and over the hill. But you need an ethnic black because Skosan is on the other wing and is not an ethnic black! Darn those slightly less than brown guys! (See how well I know my races!). Leyds? Not an ethnic black either. I'm sure you get my point. God forbid Kolisi gets injured, then there'll need to some more shuffling to balance the race books.

...

A similar scenario played out at the Cape Cobras a few weeks ago.

Cricket South Africa to probe Cape Cobras for its failure to meet black players quota against Warriors

JOHANNESBURG: Cricket South Africa (CSA) is set to investigate the team selection of Cape Cobras after it fielded two black African players instead of the required three against the Warriors, thus failing to meet the board's transformation target in the ongoing domestic series.

The CSA expects all domestic sides in South Africa to field a minimum of six players of colour -- including three black Africans -- every time they take to the field as part of their commitment to facilitate transformation.

However, the Cobras were left one short after they included two black African players -- Thando Ntini and Tladi Bokako -- during the four-day first-class match in Cape Town on Monday.

Akhona Mnyaka had earlier been named in the squad, but he was not picked.

The Cobras, however, fielded seven players of colour in the side.

The Cobras later provided a written explanation for their team composition to CSA.

"CSA has noted the submission by Western Cape Cricket (Cape Cobras) in lieu of a request for a deviation from the administrative conditions. CSA will launch a further enquiry into this incident and will consider all the related and relevant information in order to arrive at a decision about the strength and the validity of the argument by WCC," Thamie Mthembie, CSA's head of communications told ESPNcricinfo.

The other five franchises, however, fielded the required number of black African players in the tournament.

It is not the first time that Western Province found itself at loggerheads with CSA, which had suspended the Western Province Cricket Association (WPCA) board and placed it under its administration citing concerns over financial and governance issues in September.

WPCA then took CSA to court, challenging the decision.

https://www.newindianexpress.com/sp...ack-players-quota-against-warrio-2054284.html

So the Cape Cobras exceeded their "players of colour" quota but missed the extra super special black African quota.
And what's their basic reasoning for doing so? Two coloureds = one black... I mean, where do you even start with this?

Thank goodness for CSA who is launching "further enquiry" into the validity of their creative race accounting. Got to balance the race books just right you know! Diversity at all costs, but only the government's prescribed version of diversity.
Ashwell Prince is most probably running a coloured cabal down in the Cape because remember the only reason for over/under representation is due to institutionalized racism and unconscious bias. /s

I have no doubt this has been happening to coloured sportsmen for a while now, and it's only coming to light now because Ashwell went against the status quo. Of course there's no mention of who deserves a spot in the team or the tactical reasons, that's clearly a secondary issue.
This will continue happening until this ridiculous system is done away with.

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

TBH I think the Cape Cobras and Stormers should be put under seperate quota requirements.

The European settlers arrived in the Cape and it was only the Khoi San with the Nguni peoples displacing them from the East. The European settlement stopped furtehr Nguni movement into the then Cape Colony.

Traditionally there has NEVER BEEN black people in the Cape. Its the Khoi and San. We moved to the Cape in 1992 and you'd not see a single black person. Even with the ANC actively importing blacks into the Cape en masse for votes (without here being work for them..) and foreign Africans they are still outnumbered by the Cape colored community.

Cape Cobras and Stormers' ethnic background is thus dissimilar to the rest of SA and we shouldn't be forced to misrepresent to the detriment of the local Cape colored community.

 

[TheOvalBall]

There was a survey done quite a while ago and it said the following languages are most spoken in the following order in South Africa:

1. Zulu
2. Xhosa
3. Afrikaans
4. English

and the rest are the rest of the tribal languages.

 

[TRF_heineken]

I'm actually glad this happened.

It just shows how moronic this transformation agenda is. Everyone knows that there's not that many Black african people living in the Western Cape, and they never really did ever since colonialism took place, actually, even before colonialism took place.

Plus, the Khoi and San are the oldest and actually only tribes traditionally in South Africa. The others all came down from central africa. Yet there is no clause which states that the teams must have a Khoi or San person in their team.

But what makes this even more interesting is that The Cape Cobras are basically saying to Cricket SA and Government, "Are our team not transformed enough"?? Are coloured people seen as a lesser ethnicity group than black and white people? 2 coloureds don't make a white...

 

[Bruce_ma gooshvili]

Maybe transformation will ruin cricket in the same way that having undersized black forwards like Beast and Bongi destroyed the Boks' chances of being competitive at the RWC, as predicted consistently by some of the enlightened souls who frequent this forum.

I will concede I know nothing about provincial cricket in South Africa, but you cannot easily have different targets for different teams. The story quoted simply says that the circumstances will be "investigated". Whooped-de-doo! Its hardly race riots people.

And as for blacks and coloured. There is a widespread sense that the darker the skin tone, the less tolerance there is from Eurasian populations. My understanding is that coloured communities (mixed black, white & asian) can be quite segregated from black ones in South Africa. I dont find it surprising that they have seperate transformation targets given that there are also targets for women and those with disabilities.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Maybe transformation will ruin cricket in the same way that having undersized black forwards like Beast and Bongi destroyed the Boks' chances of being competitive at the RWC, as predicted consistently by some of the enlightened souls who frequent this forum.

I will concede I know nothing about provincial cricket in South Africa, but you cannot easily have different targets for different teams. The story quoted simply says that the circumstances will be "investigated". Whooped-de-doo! Its hardly race riots people.

And as for blacks and coloured. There is a widespread sense that the darker the skin tone, the less tolerance there is from Eurasian populations. My understanding is that coloured communities (mixed black, white & asian) can be quite segregated from black ones in South Africa. I dont find it surprising that they have seperate transformation targets given that there are also targets for women and those with disabilities.

Well, I think in Cricket SA's case, there is alot going on at the moment, and none of them are good for the country or the sport. There has been so many reports about the poor state of affairs in CSA, and it seems to just pile on every week.

There have been reports of maladministration for a very long time. And after the CWC they sacked the head coach and his entire coaching team, and appointed an interim coach with no international cricketing experience.

Then they advertised the position of director of cricket. Graeme Smith applied for the job, and everyone was singing his praise, knowing that he is the right man for the job. He went for the interview, and halfway through stormed out, and removed his name from the application. And what's worse, nobody else stepped up to take on the position. Reports suggests that the administrators gave him several issues they want him to impose on teams such as that the Proteas must have more black representation and that the provincial teams must have at least 7 players of colour on the field, of which at least 5 must be black african players. To which Smith refused and left the interview.

Then on Sunday, the reports were that Smith will reconsider the position, as CSA are willing to compromise and that they would assist Smith in his demands he set out for them.

But then, on the same day, CSA banned some of the more educated and experienced cricketing journalists in SA from attending press conferences and media briefings. This after one reporter asked the media representative of CSA who will be the selectors of the Proteas team for the upcoming England tour. To which the Media Representative responded with "I don't know".

The issue with CSA is that the administrators in charge don't care a single bit about the sport or the players. Most of them never even played cricket, and some of them are known as being political appointments during the Zuma administration, who are still there. Add to that, they are seemingly more interested in filling their own wallets with Cricketing money, while the sport in SA is at an all time low.

Our local T20 tournament, the Mzanzi Super League, is not even being broadcasted on Supersport. And up until yesterday, I didn't even know that they are showing the matches on SABC3. There is absolutely zero media coverage of this tournament. a tournament that has some of the best players from around the world playing in this league. The stadiums are completely empty.

As for the Cape Cobras and their investigation by CSA. It's just the tipping point. It's clear that CSA is on a fishing expedition, and should they find the Cobras guilty, all they will do is make CSA look even more despicable and incompetent.

 

[User1245]

Maybe transformation will ruin cricket in the same way that having undersized black forwards like Beast and Bongi destroyed the Boks' chances of being competitive at the RWC, as predicted consistently by some of the enlightened souls who frequent this forum.

I will concede I know nothing about provincial cricket in South Africa, but you cannot easily have different targets for different teams. The story quoted simply says that the circumstances will be "investigated". Whooped-de-doo! Its hardly race riots people.

And as for blacks and coloured. There is a widespread sense that the darker the skin tone, the less tolerance there is from Eurasian populations. My understanding is that coloured communities (mixed black, white & asian) can be quite segregated from black ones in South Africa. I dont find it surprising that they have seperate transformation targets given that there are also targets for women and those with disabilities.

What's your game Bruce? That is an extremely slanderous claim. Please show us who said that about Beast and Bongi?

You continuously try to paint the South Africans in the forum, and in general, in a bad light. Like we have some ulterior motive when attacking a bad policy.

Read the facts about what South Africans think about policies like this:
https://irr.org.za/reports/occasional-reports/reasons-for-hope-2019-unite-the-middle

I know you won't though or you'll spin it to fit your bizarre narrative, but maybe somebody actually wants to learn about what South Africans really think.

Edit: Sport selections is Table 5