Ken Borland

One of the key features to come out of the discussions around racism in cricket has been the acknowledgement that it has to be okay for stakeholders who feel discriminated against or marginalised to speak out. Without that freedom, the status quo merely continues and we won’t know that the system is broken until there is something akin to an explosion of anger.

And there are certainly a lot of angry people in the cricket community at the moment, many with good reason because the leadership of the game has failed them so thoroughly. Many people are thoroughly disgruntled by how mediocre the returns have been after millions of rand have been spent on transformation over more than 20 years.

It is not okay, however, for people to spread division, blatant lies or push agendas designed to further the interests of only a select few. Unfortunately many of those divisive voices have been given prominence in the last few weeks.

The troubles in South African cricket seem to have given birth to an extreme version of Africanism that threatens to shut everyone else out of the game.

We now have a situation where White members of CSA management, specifically acting CEO Jacques Faul, director of cricket Graeme Smith and head coach Mark Boucher, are being pilloried, not for anything they have or have not done, but simply because they are White. No matter how often they express their support for BLM or for transformation, some people simply cannot get past their skin colour.

The corollary of this is the perception that Black Africans should not be held accountable for their actions. Suddenly suspended CEO Thabang Moroe, who left the game in such crisis last December that Faul and Smith had to be parachuted in, is the darling of certain sections of the media, who are pushing for his return. The irony that they are supporting someone who nine months ago took away the accreditation of journalists who were critical of him is totally lost on them. Are they are in favour of media freedom or do they support someone who has also looked to destroy the players’ trade union – the South African Cricketers Association?

Convicted matchfixers Thami Tsolekile and Ethy Mbhalati have also been given platforms that are far too exalted for the manner in which they betrayed the game. Tsolekile in particular spouted forth on a well-known radio talk show – with very little counter-interrogation – on how the whole matchfixing investigation of the 2015 T20 competition targeted Black players. He and his host conveniently failed to mention that the entire process was presided over by Bernard Ngoepe, one of the country’s most respected judges. Are they saying he is racist? Sounds like the typical protestations of the criminally guilty to me.

Equally appallingly, Tsolekile accused and named two White players of being involved in matchfixing without a shred of evidence. Their rights have been trampled on and I expect them to go to the courts to protect their names. CSA have subsequently released a statement saying the one player was one of their star witnesses because he immediately reported a corrupt approach and the other was just a name bandied about by arch-conspirator Gulam Bodi in order to get other people involved. They were both thoroughly investigated, by the ICC as well, and totally exonerated.

Even the legendary Makhaya Ntini seems to have been allowed to get away with a one-sided narrative. I’m sure in the early years of his international career there were days when he felt isolated and alone. But he has been unfair in his criticism of Cricket South Africa.

If it weren’t for Ali Bacher personally getting involved and organising proper legal representation for him, Ntini would have spent several years languishing in jail after being incorrectly found guilty of rape, and Proteas manager and team doctor Mohammed Moosajee has revealed the felicitations the great fast bowler received from CSA at the end of his career.

“What Makhaya said I think surprised every one of us because he was a beacon for every youngster. He was in the team with me for the last 8 years of his career and I never noticed him sitting alone. Many players ran from the ground back to the hotel. Many times when we went out to dinner, we would stick to our own, but there were also many other times when we would join the other guys.

“Even when his contract ended, he was paid an extra year of salary which had never happened before, and he was given a special benefit game at Moses Mabhida Stadium. He played his last game for South Africa in January 2011 and his CSA contract continued through to the next April and then he received another year after that,” Moosajee told an Ahmed Kathrada Foundation webinar on racism in cricket recently.

“I did not see him on his own, he always had other players around him, but we need to unpack the way he felt, we need like a Truth and Reconciliation Commission for cricket. I’m sure he felt isolated when he first came into the team because he was in the minority, international sport is very difficult and you feel nervous about where you fit in. It was probably the same for Hashim Amla, but once the colour of the team and the administration changed then a lot of that went away,” Moosajee added.

Doc Moosajee, who has been a great servant of the game, went on to slam those for whom power in cricket is like an aphrodisiac.

“It’s important to remember that a number of communities contributed to the struggle but unfortunately some selfish administrators are looking to create divisions now. We need to move away from the idea that you need to be Black African to have a role in transformation; all communities, including Whites, have a role. Driving only an Africanist agenda has become divisive.

“We can’t continue to pay lip-service to transformation after 26 years, we need tangible action. In terms of Affirmative Action, the question we need to ask is whether the policies have benefited us or promoted racism? There is no doubt it has become polarised. Grassroots is where the issue is and there’s no doubt that has not been addressed. The numbers game has created challenges,” Moosajee said.

There seems to have been some misinterpretation of Jurie Roux’s comments this week to the extent that the Australian Associated Press news agency claimed that the SA Rugby CEO had made the call for legal action to be taken against New Zealand Rugby for their plans to basically pull out of SuperRugby as we know it.

The truth is likely to turn out to be almost the opposite. While Roux did say “New Zealand have kicked themselves out”, he also added that they had “every right to determine their own future” and that discussions were happening with all Sanzaar partners.

You see, the Covid-19 pandemic would almost certainly qualify as a ‘force majeure’, the trendy new legal term borrowed from the French for what we used to call Acts of God. A ‘force majeure’ is an unforeseen and uncontrollable circumstance that makes it impossible to fulfil a contract.

In terms of rugby, it is clearly impossible for SuperRugby in its usual format to happen in 2021 if international travel is not yet allowed, if there are strenuous quarantine measures still in place or if the paucity of flights makes overseas trips prohibitively expensive.

Roux did say that there are Sanzaar legal agreements in place and that if anyone ignored their commitments to them then they would be liable to legal action, but with that French word coming into play, it would clearly take some pretty soulless leadership to try and sue a union that is just trying to keep themselves afloat in this time of economic catastrophe.

The shoe is on the same foot when it comes to South Africa because even if New Zealand wanted to proceed with SuperRugby as per normal next year, our franchises probably wouldn’t be allowed into the country without quarantining for two weeks and the costs of travel would be unaffordable.

Roux is a shrewd man as well and, although he has never publicly dissed the brand, he would have been well aware that the current SuperRugby format had lost the support of the general rugby-loving public and was busy pushing SA Rugby into poverty. He admitted this week that for more than a year he has been looking at additional options for SA Rugby and said “we are a long way down that road already and some of those options probably suit us better”.
This surely means a move into the lucrative Northern Hemisphere market. The Springboks and our top four franchises have plenty to offer European competitions as well – it is not as if we are the peasants of the game, we are the world champions and one of the biggest broadcast markets for rugby in the world.

But while SuperRugby may well be discarded like the old, worn out pair of boots it is, there is no doubt South Africa want to maintain a good relationship with New Zealand, traditionally their greatest rivals. Roux spoke about how the Rugby Championship is not only a significant revenue-earner for SA Rugby but it also enables them to cross-subsidise so many of their other competitions.

Those Sanzaar legal agreements are going to force New Zealand, Australia and South Africa, and Argentina, to the negotiating table to thrash out whatever win-win-win solution they can come up with. Leverage is always the name of the game when it comes to negotiation and while South Africa have the numbers and therefore the money to bring to the table in a big duffel bag, and New Zealand also have a large bag based on their historical record as having the best teams in southern hemisphere competition and therefore the biggest drawcard, it would seem Australia and Argentina only have sachets to barter with.

Nobody would want Australian rugby to be isolated like their country was before James Cook arrived with his cutlass, but the fact is they are not in a position of strength when it comes to negotiating the future of Sanzaar.

It is not too surprising that New Zealand do not want to accommodate all five Australian franchises, but if allegations that they have been in clandestine contact with a couple of them are true then that would be as offsides as the former SA Rugby president who fired the Springbok coach by fax.

Whatever comes of the negotiations, though, it would seem South African rugby fans can look forward to a stronger Currie Cup-type tournament locally, a refreshed, shorter, crossover event with the other Sanzaar teams and more of our franchises dunking their toes into European competition.

With the British and Irish Lions touring here next year, the stars of the UK game could become the same sort of attractions/nemeses as the likes of Dan Carter, Christian Cullen, Richie McCaw and Stephen Larkham.

And given the time zone, watching our teams playing in Europe will be much easier for those of us who tend to suffer from moderate dysania.

Boeta Dippenaar and Pat Symcox are two former cricketers I have admired and whose company I have enjoyed from time to time, but I hope their faces are as red as tomatoes after their ill-judged reactions to Lungi Ngidi’s comments that the Proteas need to make a stand against racial discrimination.

For the record, Ngidi was asked a direct question about the Black Lives Matter movement and whether the Proteas team would seek to support it as the West Indies and England sides have done in their return to action in the Southampton Test.

Ngidi said: “It’s definitely something we need to discuss in person but we are all well aware of what is going on. It’s something we have to address as a team, as a nation as well because we’ve had racial discrimination in the past. It’s something we need to take very seriously, we need to make a stand like the rest of the world.”

Now saying a stand should be made against racial discrimination is surely not something so divisive that the Proteas would be halved into different camps for and against? Surely Ngidi was standing for something everybody can support, like being against gender-based violence?

So why the furious reaction?

It was another former Protea, top-order batsman Rudolf Steyn, who fired the first shot with a social media post that read: “I believe the Proteas should make a stand against racism, but if they stand up for ‘black lives matter’ while ignoring the way white farmers are daily being ‘slaughtered’ like animals, they have lost my vote.”

Firstly, it has to be in very poor taste to start bartering over whether you will support someone else’s right to life depending on them supporting your cause. Yes, All Lives do Matter, but in the world as a whole, the priority has to be to ensure that the importance of Black Lives are upgraded so that we no longer see the shocking, senseless deaths of people like George Floyd and Collins Khosa.

If someone told you that their father had died of a heart attack, would you say “what about all the people who have died of cancer”? If someone asked you to support research into eliminating breast cancer, would you say “only if you support anti-HIV initiatives”?

By responding to a question about Black Lives Matter, it by no means suggests Ngidi is against any other lives mattering. In fact, a furious response to Black Lives Matter suggests an attitude that they don’t matter as much as other lives.

Both Symcox and Dippenaar then replied highlighting the plight of farmers and farm attacks. Also a worthy cause.

Many critics of Black Lives Matter say it has become politicised but this is also true, perhaps even more so, of Farm Attacks. According to AfriForum’s own figures, there were 57 farm murders in 2019 and, while every one of those deaths is a tragic injustice, to somehow extrapolate that into an organised campaign of racial genocide is ridiculous. In fact, 57 murders a year is quite close to the daily figure for all murders in our terribly violent country. The Transvaalse Landbou Unie released a statement this week saying there had been 26 farm murders so far this year.

Or do some lives take priority over others? Which I guess is exactly the point of Black Lives Matter. As West Indian great Michael Holding put it this week, we all know White Lives Matter, that has never been in doubt.

Cricket in general has often been halfhearted in responding to issues of social justice so the efforts of the English and West Indian teams, and even the ICC match officials, have been tremendous to see.

I was also impressed with how Cricket South Africa’s relatively new director of cricket, Graeme Smith, handled the grenade when it was tossed to him at the same press conference as Ngidi’s. He was a huge driver of diversity and inclusivity when he was a Proteas captain, but he has not been a ‘suit’ for that long and has had a couple of mishaps already when it comes to dealing with political issues.

Smith said: “We are all very aware of what is going on around the world and our role as CSA. When the team gets together again we will figure out how to play an effective role in the Black Lives Matter movement. It’s important to have buy-in and for everyone to be invested. I have no doubt that will be the case, but to have the discussion is important. There certainly needs to be something done and we will discuss various ways of handling it in an effective and authentic manner.”

And the Titans, who have won more domestic cups than any other franchise, have also led the way in responding to the cause. The squad unanimously agreed that coach Mandla Mashimbyi should issue the following statement:

“We know only too well how important the Black Lives Matter movement is. We bat vehemently against discrimination of any kind, and we will always strive to provide opportunities within our Titans family for all the colours and cultures of our rainbow nation. We also want to lend our voice to those shouting for the scourge of violence against our mothers, sisters and daughters to stop.

“The only way we can stand against evil is by showing acts of love to people no matter their race, religion or gender. We should see love as the foundation that helps us find solutions, find refuge and hope because love is the foundation of life. If we can begin to view things through the perspective of love before race, religion or gender we will move forward as a society,” Mashimbyi said.

Cricket South Africa’s Board can look forward to more legal action against them as dismissed Head of Sales and Sponsor Relations Clive Eksteen announced on Tuesday that he was taking them to the CCMA for unfair dismissal.

Eksteen was sacked at the weekend based on a single charge that was added to his disciplinary hearing after he was suspended on October 29 for his alleged role in the non-payment of image rights to the players’ union. That extra charge was related to a loss of $100 000 the CSA Exco alleged the organisation suffered because Eksteen negotiated a deal with Amul, the multinational sponsors of South Africa’s T20 series in India last year, for an amount less than had been approved by the CSA Exco.

While Eksteen said he was cleared of all charges related to the non-payment of image rights – the presiding officer finding that the former Proteas spinner was in fact instrumental in the South African Cricketers’ Association eventually being paid – and an additional charge involving an agreement he was not even part of between the SABC and a sponsor, he was found guilty of Charge 5 and dismissed.

Eksteen said this was despite him providing evidence that the agreement with Amul was signed by his superior, chief commercial officer Kugandrie Govender, and that she knew how much they had offered before she informed Exco.

According to CSA disciplinary processes, any appeal can only be over sanction and needs to be handled by the chief executive, who is the legal officer. But acting CEO Jacques Faul is not allowed to be involved in disciplinary matters according to his contract, so he forwarded the appeal to the CSA Board, who last weekend upheld his dismissal.

“The Chair’s finding that revenue was lost was directly contradicted by the evidence of CSA’s employees, evidence she ignored. Subsequent to my conviction, I presented evidence in mitigation. This included a variety of reputable testimonials. The Chair refused to accept pertinent testimonials into evidence. She also refused to accept that Charge 5 was a minor charge, way less serious than the SACA charges on which I had been acquitted.

“In addition, I am in possession of evidence which exculpates me, which has come to light after the conclusion of the disciplinary inquiry, which evidence was known to CSA at the time. In these circumstances, I shall immediately be referring a dispute to the CCMA regarding my unfair dismissal. All of the evidence presented at my disciplinary inquiry, as well as the additional evidence which has now come to light … will be laid out before the CCMA. My attorney and I are totally confident that I will be vindicated in due course. Unfortunately, I believe I have been made a scapegoat for the shortcomings of others and I believe further that relevant evidence has been ignored or overlooked,” Eksteen said in his statement released on Tuesday.

The CSA Board, who thus far have failed to take any action against former CEO Thabang Moroe, who is suspended on full pay after losses of millions of dollars under his watch, even had the gall last weekend to issue a statement saying Eksteen had been fired after “transgressions of a serious nature”. They failed to mention it was over a theoretical loss of only $100 000 and that it had nothing to do with the dispute with SACA, who have even come out in support of Eksteen’s handling of their image rights dispute with CSA, which involved a reported amount of R2.4 million.