Ken Borland

The independent arbitration panel that cleared Graeme Smith of racism allegations found that Thami Tsolekile was not selected to replace Mark Boucher in 2012 for cricketing reasons, saying the wicketkeeper/batsman himself accepted that AB de Villiers being chosen ahead of him was better for the team.

Tsolekile testified at the arbitration in support of Cricket South Africa’s claim that Smith had used his influence as captain to persuade the selectors not to include Tsolekile based on his race, after Boucher suffered the eye injury that ended his career.

But while finding that Smith, the Proteas longest-serving and most successful Test captain, did have an influence on selection, the arbitrators, advocates Ngwako Maenetje SC and Michael Bishop, ruled that he did not actively seek to exclude Tsolekile because of his race. Instead they found “it is more likely that Smith just wanted his team to win”.

Andrew Hudson, the convenor of selectors at the time and current CSA Board member, and Linda Zondi, who was also a selector before succeeding Hudson as the convenor, gave evidence that De Villiers had been selected for the tour to England in 2012 as the reserve wicketkeeper and both the selectors and coach Gary Kirsten agreed that De Villiers replacing Boucher behind the stumps would allow them to play an extra specialist batsman in JP Duminy, himself Black.

Smith was consulted about the decision and agreed with the strategy.

In Paragraph 90 of their findings, the arbitrators state: “Tsolekile … agreed with the proposition that this was ‘a strategy that will make complete sense and was something which played very strongly in favour of the Proteas cricket team’. He accepted that there were ‘very good cricketing reasons to prefer AB de Villiers to yourself for the position in the Test starting XI’.”

CSA then tried to change their argument and alleged Smith was guilty of discrimination by omission because he had an obligation to speak out on behalf of Tsolekile because the wicketkeeper/batsman was previously disadvantaged.

But the arbitrators found this change of tack was prejudicial to Smith, describing it as “a trap sprung on him” and they also criticised CSA for making submissions that were inconsistent with the facts.

The arbitrators did have sympathy for Tsolekile, describing his non-selection as “unfair” and his subsequent involvement in a matchfixing scandal as only “exacerbating the tragedy” of his story of adversity.

Sport being big business these days, it stands to reason that administrators believe that the more content they can provide in terms of matches, the better it is for the game and the players just need to avail themselves of these increased opportunities.

But what administrators forget, as their eyes are distracted by shiny piles of cash, is that they are in the entertainment business and quality of performance is more important to the consumer than quantity. As more and more sport is played, we see more and more jaded athletes, especially in these tough days of Covid restrictions, unable to reach their previous heights.

As former Springbok captain Jean de Villiers said this week: “For too long administrators have thought that more is more, but actually less is more. That way you get a high-quality product that people look forward to and don’t want to miss out on watching. The players are the main assets of the game and we have to make sure they are looked after.”

While I would not go as far as former Sports Minister Fikile Mbalula – that’s actually probably a good rule for life – in describing our sports stars as soldiers doing battle for South Africa, there is no doubt they are still representing our country and often providing great joy to a land that has known more misery than most in recent years.

Form is a fickle thing at the best of times – I was chatting to a former Proteas batsman recently and he told me of the time he came off a great century and then in his next innings he could barely get bat to ball – but a relentless schedule of games and travel will eventually wear down even the best.

Just look at former India captain Virat Kohli, who a couple of years ago was trumpeted as the best batsman in the world. And then came Covid with bio-bubbles and severe restrictions added to the grind of playing and captaining in all three formats for the richest and most scrutinised team on the planet.

Little wonder then that Kohli has now gone 100 innings across formats without scoring a century and his former India coach, Ravi Shastri, is in no doubt that too much cricket is to blame.

Shastri was quoted this week as calling Kohli “overcooked” and he implored Indian cricket to have the empathy to give their star player six months away from the game otherwise he will end up with “a fried brain”.

Amongst the fans, too, there is an air of indifference to the wellbeing of our sports stars, with the expectation being that they must bring their A-game every time they compete. The old chestnut of “I pitch up to the office every day and give my best otherwise I’ll be fired” is often heard. But not many of us have jobs that require intense physical training every week and then an opposition hellbent on making sure you cannot do your job.

This is not, however, a call for sponsors and equity partners in sport to be sent packing like witches on their broomsticks.

Professional sport needs money to flourish and the best-performing teams are more often than not those with the deepest pockets. But there needs to be a balance between commercial demands and player welfare.

The best way to handle that balancing act is probably by ensuring there is greater depth in playing squads.

I know fielding second-string outfits does not fly well with fans, but if a team has sufficient depth and has looked after their pipeline properly, then rotating players should ensure improved performance and give exposure to potential new heroes.

United Rugby Championship frontrunners Leinster are a club that does this very well, and I look forward to seeing how they do, without 10 first-choice players, against the Sharks in Durban on Saturday night.

Not once has South African men’s hockey coach Garreth Ewing suggested that the FIH Hockey Pro League will be anything but daunting, and it will get no easier for his team as their next assignment sees them travel to Argentina to play the 2016 Olympic champions in two Tests on April 23 and 24.

Having hosted a leg of the tournament in Potchefstroom in February, in which they lost all eight matches and conceded 52 goals against Germany, France, India and the Netherlands, South Africa are now well aware of the high standards in the competition.

“It was harder than we expected, I must admit,” Ewing told The Citizen. “But it was really disappointing that it took us a bit long to adjust to the tempo, admittedly against very good sides.

“There was improvement through the tournament though and we were quite disappointed not to get a couple of results in the end.

“Although it was a mentally and physically tough tournament for us, it was a very valuable exercise based on the squad we had, the rotation of players and the opportunities we gave them.

“We also made some tactical progress in terms of the areas of the game without the ball – how you pressurise the ball and utilise space. And there were glimpses of good counter-attack,” Ewing said.

South Africa will be bringing a new-look squad to Argentina, due to the unavailability of some of their players, the bulk of whom are amateurs. But, on the positive side, regular captain Tim Drummond returns, having been absent during the local leg of the Pro League.

“We’ve had selection issues and the unavailability of players is an ongoing challenge. So there will be quite a few changes,” Ewing said.

“Having Tim back will make a big difference, especially in terms of his experience and leadership. We’re playing in Buenos Aires, so we’ll be up against big crowds, which we are not used to over the last couple of years.

“There are still some technical weaknesses we need to sort out, both in attack and defence, in terms of how we hang on to the ball when we have it and the pressure we exert without the ball.

“There was a bit of a lack of continuity due to getting things wrong at just the wrong time. But at times we were really good but just didn’t get good outcomes. We would get to the circle but just not get the ball in the goals,” Ewing said.

It was the most unusual and bittersweet of Test debuts for Khaya Zondo on Monday morning as the second Test between South Africa and Bangladesh resumed at St George’s Park.

The 32-year-old Zondo was brought into the Proteas Test team for the first time on the fourth day of the match as a like-for-like Covid replacement for opening batsman Sarel Erwee.

Erwee and all-rounder Wiaan Mulder were feeling unwell on Monday morning, and tested positive for Covid, meaning they had to be withdrawn from the match. Under the ICC regulations, they are allowed to be fully substituted for the remainder of the game.

That means Glenton Stuurman, who made his Test debut in New Zealand in February, is allowed to bowl in place of Mulder. But because South Africa have already had both their innings in the match, there will no batting for the less fortunate Zondo.

One hopes that Zondo’s Test career does go further and he does not become one of those unlucky cricketers who play just one Test and do not bat or bowl.

The KZN Dolphins batsman has been prolific in first-class cricket this season, averaging 73.50. Having made two centuries in 2020/21, he went a step further this summer, notching his maiden double-century, 203 not out against Western Province at Newlands at the end of October.