Ken Borland

The first week of the Social Justice and Nation-Building hearings have been a mere aperitif for what I sense many people are hoping are more sensational revelations from next week when former players start appearing before Advocate Dumisa Ntsebeza, the ombudsman appointed by Cricket South Africa.

But in many ways, this week’s “scene-setters”, as Ntsebeza has called them, have provided vital testimony because they have given a factual account of the transformation policies of CSA and how they have changed through the years. There have been successes, but there have been failures as well and surely no-one can question that the national team is not as transformed as it should be nearly 30 years after Unity.

The SJN commission did not have a promising start though. The first witness was Dr Eugenia Kula-Ameyaw, which was fair enough because the SJN was largely her idea. But the former CSA independent director produced a couple of hours of largely incoherent testimony riddled with factual errors. As a former Board member, how does she not know that the players’ association (SACA) don’t pay the players’ salaries?!

She then thought it would be appropriate to give Ntsebeza a cricket bat, signed by her, to commemorate the occasion. The ombudsman looked bemused and it was telling that he never mentioned Kula-Ameyaw’s presentation again during the week.

It was onwards and upwards from there though as Advocate Norman Arendse, former CSA president and current independent director, and Max Jordaan, CSA’s head of transformation, spoke of the steps taken to ensure equal opportunities for all before cricket was captured and the likes of Kula-Ameyaw took the reins.

Mary-Anne Dove, a doctor of sports and exercise science whose thesis was on the role of socio-ecological factors in talent development in sport, gave insights into how targets or quotas have to be accompanied by development and other interventions, and Zola Thamae, a former Board member and manager of the Proteas women’s team, gave shocking evidence of how the women’s national team was treated a decade ago.

Professor Richard Calland, an expert on sustainable governance and organisational culture, gave an interesting presentation too.

It is clear that CSA have made a meal of transformation, but it does not matter how many Black player quotas or targets they have, the failure of the Proteas to be truly representative of the country is firstly down to socio-economic issues.

Jordaan, who has been at CSA for 20 years, apart from the disingenuous comment that “nobody is missing out on selection because we are juggling numbers”, made the salient points that when the Proteas won the ICC mace for being top of the Test pile, targets were in place, and that transformation has to start at the many non-former-Model C and private schools and at clubs, but CSA runs into difficulties when they try and improve facilities in these areas due to recalcitrant city councils and the lack of support from the department of education.

Jordaan gave the example of a cricket facility in Welkom being taken over by the local council, who built a casino instead on the land, and buildings in townships “disappearing brick-by-brick”.

Instead of just congratulating themselves for having ticked the box of having a certain number of Black players in the Proteas and domestic teams (which is not a valid measure of transformation success because teams are forced to meet the racial targets), cricket needs to firstly make sure the pipeline at grassroots is working.

I believe CSA have actually done okay in this regard and have worked very hard to keep the pipeline flowing. But there is no doubt Black players still predominantly come from the former Model C and private schools – a much smaller pool.

This is due to structural, systemic problems that only national and local government can fix, especially with the currently constrained financial resources of CSA.

The frustration of Black African cricketers was evident in the presentations of Johannesburg coach David Mashiyi and former player Zonde Mbekeni.

The fact that Mbekeni feels as frustrated and angry about the lack of opportunities for Black Africans as he did in his playing days back in the 1970s is not okay.

But in many ways it boils down to a struggle for scant resources and opportunities.

John Mogodi of Limpopo, Daniel Govender of KZN, Craig Nel of Mpumalanga, Tebogo Siko of Northerns and Simphiwe Ndzundza of Border are the people elected by the Cricket South Africa Members Council, the body that pushed the sport in this country to the edge of the precipice before eventually seeing some sense, to the new Board that will run cricket.

Of those five, it is fair to say Nel and Siko are the only two who have not been opposed to the efforts of the Interim Board and, by extension, the sports minister, to rescue cricket from being flushed down the toilet. While that reflects on the embarrassing quality of leadership on the Members Council, it is a relief that the new Board appointed this week will be dominated by eight independent directors and there is plenty of leadership, financial and legal expertise and governance experience amongst that lot.

Andrew Hudson, whose post-playing career has been centred on the banking world, is the only director with top-level cricket experience and it perhaps would have been nice if more former players had been appointed.

And the lack of female representation is an even bigger blot on the Board. Independent director Ntambi Ravele and acting chief financial officer Christelle Janse van Rensburg are the only two women out of a board of 15, and that’s even after sports minister Nathi Mthethwa made it clear that he wanted to see a greater push towards gender equality.

It is typical of the double-speak nature of the Members Council that president Rihan Richards should speak of their full commitment to greater female representation and then, when the vote was tied for the fifth non-independent director’s post between Anne Vilas and Simphiwe Ndzundzu, they chose the man.

And Ndzundzu is not just any man. He is president of one of the most dysfunctional provinces on and off the field, and someone who is being investigated over a charge of assault involving the elderly mother of a colleague he had a dispute with as well as a broken arm for his rival’s sister.

And Vilas is not just any woman. Acknowledged as one of the best administrators in South African cricket and very successful in business, as president of Central Gauteng Lions she has overseen their rise to arguably the best team in the country.

So it is fair to say that there will still be small pockets of resistance to progress in South African cricket, but hopefully our cricketing family can start to heal. CSA has been a dysfunctional organisation and the events of the last few years have demoralised so many people involved in the game. Good leadership was replaced by an environment of suspicion.

Hopefully this new Board can bring some much-needed stability after their predecessors did so much to kill the hopes and dreams of young cricket fans. Critical to that becoming a reality is for the right person to be elected chair of the Board and also whoever represents CSA at the International Cricket Council requires much thought.

It’s been a depressing time for those cricket lovers looking for moral leadership as the CSA Board and incompetent Members Council were captured by vested interests and a downright crooked culture developed in the running of the game. But this new, majority independent board will hopefully ensure good governance.

Cricket’s governance issues have, without a doubt, affected the on-field performance of the men’s national team as well, but after a lean period, the victory in the first Test against the West Indies provided some encouraging signs that the Proteas might just be regaining their mojo.

So let the healing begin, and thank you to the six members of the Interim Board for their top-class work which saw their vital task through to completion, shouldering a massive burden in the process.

Tens of thousands of people will probably die tragically of Covid in India over the next week, which should give all South African sports fans pause to think as we clamour for the return of spectators to stadiums.

The daily death toll from the pandemic climbed to over 3600 in India this week, with at least 300 000 positive tests per day.

Having been to India three times, it is the country that most reminds me of our poorer communities, the places at the wrong end of the most unequal society in the world, and I cannot but imagine what might happen here if another wave of Covid strikes during winter.

The sudden resurgence of Covid in India has been partly attributed to the government allowing a series of mass nationalistic or religious gatherings, that rapidly became super-spreader events in the populous country.

So one can understand government’s caution when it comes to allowing spectators back into stadiums for rugby or football or any other sporting event. I thought Sports Minister Nathi Mthethwa gave a very reasonable explanation on Friday for why there has been no date set yet for the return of fans.

“In terms of fans, we have to look at the codes’ plans from a health perspective. It’s not up to the Minister of Sport, we are not going to decide as individual departments. The National Command Council weekly meeting guides society as a whole, not just one aspect. Our medical advisors are telling us that between May and July there is the possibility of a third wave.

“They say we are facing a storm and we can’t just kill people by allowing them back into stadiums. So each sport has to put together a plan. For example rugby has proposed 50% capacity for the British and Irish Lions tour, which will be looked into. But if the FNB Stadium has capacity of 90 000, that means 45 000 people and how do we ensure that does not become a super-spreader event?” Mthethwa said.

Of course all rugby fans want crowds to be able to watch the Lions matches and recreate the sort of atmosphere that electrified proceedings when Tendai Mtawarira began dismantling the legendary Phil Vickery in the scrums at Kings Park or when Jaque Fourie squeezed over for his improbable try at Loftus Versfeld the last time Britain and Ireland’s finest toured here in 2009.

But is it worth tens of thousands of people dying? Even though SA Rugby’s budget will take a severe knock without crowds, it is not worth mass mortalities.

I would postulate that once spectators are allowed at sporting events again, they will return in their flocks because of how long they have been starved of live action. Perhaps club rugby, generally played in wide open areas, would be a good place to start safely bringing crowds back?

And club rugby will be returning shortly.

It is a level of the game that has been treated quite curtly by some professional coaches, but it was pleasing to hear Bulls coach Jake White, ever the traditionalist, say he will be keeping an eye on club rugby in the Pretoria region to see if there are any hidden gems who have the aptitude for franchise rugby.

He has shown his backing for club rugby by allocating each of his 45 contracted professional players to a club and, if they are not selected for the Bulls, they are expected to play for their clubs (although this won’t apply to the Springboks). White has made a rule that players will wear their club socks once a week at Bulls training and once a month they will come to Loftus Versfeld in their club kit, as well as actually go to their clubs periodically to help with training or social functions.

Resurrecting club rugby as a factory for the professional game would be a great gift for rugby in this country.

No real Proteas fan likes it when they lose and it gets even more frustrating when it seems like the obvious best available XI is not out on the field, but what’s even more infuriating is when people rage against the coach with all sorts of bizarre conspiracy theories about personal grudges and the like.

The latest thing that Mark Boucher has done to enrage the critics – most of whom seem to reside in the Cape – is to not choose Kyle Verreynne, Western Province’s exciting wicketkeeper/batsman, for the T20 starting XI against Pakistan.

The cricketing reason behind that decision – which is not just made by Boucher on his own but in consultation with three other selectors – is that South Africa have decided to follow the example set by the high-flying English team and play a much more aggressive brand of T20 cricket.

So of the batsmen in the squad for the Pakistan series, Verreynne has the lowest strike-rate in terms of his T20 career – 123.18 – which is why he was chosen as back-up wicketkeeper to captain Heinrich Klaasen. The only other batsman with a career strike-rate below what is now considered the benchmark of 130 is Aiden Markram on 126.76. Which is why he was not originally chosen, but only played because of injuries to Temba Bavuma and Rassie van der Dussen. And Markram has since been scoring at a rate of 180.64 in the series, looking a batsman transformed.

Hopefully these facts will act as a plunger to unblock the pipes of the current commentary around the team, the discourse being clogged up by execrable suggestions that Boucher is somehow anti Cape Cobras players and is deliberately favouring those from the Titans, the team he coached up until December 2019.

Verreynne has not been chosen because there are better options to bring the sort of long-handled hitting the Proteas require in the middle-order, it’s as simple as that. No, it has nothing to do with some grudge Boucher is alleged to have against Cobras coach Ashwell Prince, as one particularly obsequious Cape Town hack suggested this week.

It seems the fact that the Cobras last won a trophy in 2014/15 and have not beaten the Titans in any format since April 2019 has made some people ugly.

While I would personally give Verreynne a go in place of Pite van Biljon, given how well he batted in the last ODI, there is another change that needs to be made if the current Proteas XI is to meet its full potential.

The race targets in place for the national side were meant to help the development pipeline, but instead they seem to have tarred Andile Phehlukwayo with the disgraceful tag of being a quota player. He is way too good a cricketer for that to be acceptable, but when he bats seven and does not bowl, one can see why the whispers emerge.

Phehlukwayo is a talented all-rounder who began to find some form with the bat in the ODI series, while also being a stalwart of the white-ball attack. What is he doing in the team now though if he is not bowling? This is when selection starts to become a box-ticking, target-pleasing exercise.

And it’s not Boucher nor the selectors who should take the blame for this. Knowing the Cricket South Africa Members Council, they are way more likely to fire people over missed targets than actual results on the field of play, so one can’t blame the Proteas for sticking to those quotas even when it doesn’t make cricketing sense.

So when Advocate Dumisa Ntsebeza, the ombudsman of the new Social Justice and Nation-Building Commission, said last week that he would like to see CSA hold a transformation conference in July to discuss some of his findings, I immediately thought that would be a good time for the whole targets/quotas issue to be discussed.

And it is not the White former beneficiaries of Apartheid who should be involved in that conversation, but the Black players and coaches who have to deal with targets now that should plot the way forward.

*All stats from before the last T20 International on Friday evening.