Ken Borland

The Proteas don’t seem to be close to resolving who their Test captain should be, which certainly seems to be negatively impacting the performance of the struggling outfit, but I guess knowing who definitely shouldn’t be the skipper is a step in the right direction though.

Sadly for one of South African cricket’s favourite sons, Quinton de Kock has produced a pretty open-and-shut case for why he should not be captain as he has scored just 74 runs in six innings at an average of only 12.33 since taking the reins. A struggling batting line-up that had become used to De Kock bailing them out really cannot afford the flow of runs from his dashing blade to be stopped like that.

The 28-year-old wicketkeeper/batsman is just too valuable to not have playing well and whatever is hindering him from producing his usual world-class performances needs to be removed from his burden.

There is no shame in him standing down: He took on the job with some reluctance but out of a sense of duty as a senior player in a rebuilding side. For me, there are parallels with the great Hashim Amla, who relinquished the captaincy in January 2016 because he felt the team would be better served by him focusing on his batting.

In his press conferences, De Kock certainly does not seem to be enjoying the captaincy (although bubble life is probably also not making him happy) and personality-wise he is never going to be the sort of skipper who inspires through rousing speeches and being demonstrative out on the field. Sometimes his head doesn’t even seem to be in the game, such is his laidback demeanour.

So who are they going to appoint as the new Test captain? ‘When are the Proteas going to be playing Test cricket again?’ is probably the question that needs to be answered first though. As things stand, there are no confirmed Tests for the rest of the year.

But it seems obvious the new leader is going to come from one of three, maybe four, candidates – Aiden Markram, Temba Bavuma, Dean Elgar or Rassie van der Dussen.

Whoever gets the job, they are going to need to bring new energy, intensity and fight to the team. The kind of enthusiasm that the new-look T20 side showed at the Gaddafi Stadium in Lahore, even though they made mistakes and ended up losing to the home side by three runs.

The answer to the old question about whether leaders are born or made is pretty clear to me: sure, the leadership skills of someone can be improved by the right programs and mentors, but the innate ability to lead is either there or it is not. The best captains are those who truly enjoy and embrace the role, and the troops respond to the assuredness that is projected. The team will have direction.

Who is the captain-elect who has the loyalty of the whole team? Who is ready for the burden and will flourish under it, lifting the team’s performances at the same time?

Is it Markram, who has been groomed and anointed as the future skipper ever since he led the SA U19s to the World Cup title? The determination of the 26-year-old is clear as the runs have mercifully started flowing again after a tough couple of years.

Or is it Bavuma, the talisman of the team is so many ways and the face of the hopes of millions of cricket fans? The tenacity and energy he shows can only be inspirational.

What of Elgar, the senior statesman, the reliable one, the guy who constantly puts his body on the line on the field and is one of the biggest characters in the changeroom?

Or Van der Dussen, the relatively new face, still making his way in Test cricket but who exudes the sort of calm and composure that is also vital in the make-up of a leader?

We wait with bated breath for whoever the successor is going to be. They will carry our hopes as the Proteas try and re-establish themselves as a world power, it is going to be a very tough job with so many external challenges, and whoever gets the captaincy is going to need the support of the whole country.

But South Africa has a proud cricketing heritage that needs to be restored by this man, whoever it ends up being.

SA Rugby CEO Jurie Roux said recently that every union whether provincial or international is going to join up with private equity partners either sooner or later. Rugby has been one of the slowest sports to embrace professionalism though and I can hear many fans wailing that private equity is going to ruin the game.

“Private equity in rugby will have a massive influence, it will probably control rugby. And yes, SA Rugby is in discussions with private firms, but I don’t think there’s a union that’s not talking to someone. We all live in a post-Covid world that is now a much smaller pond and there is the opportunity now for investors to buy things at much cheaper prices. Private equity is here to stay, you’ll either join early or late, but join you will,” Roux said in an online press conference earlier this month.

There is perhaps going to be understandable anxiety that rugby is going to end up in the same sort of mess as the Premier Soccer League has with the controversial sale of the famous BidVest Wits club to a little-known National First Division club, Tshakhuma Tsha Madzivhandila, based in Limpopo. Thanks to BidVest cynically pulling the plug based purely on financial considerations, 99 years of history is down the drain, a club that has won nine top-flight trophies and produced players such as Gary Bailey, Peter Gordon, Richard Gough, Sam Magalefa, Thulani Hlatshwayo and Benson Mhlongo for all intents and purposes no longer exists.

Never mind Western Province leaving Newlands, can you imagine the outrage if it was announced that the Bulls were moving to Polokwane and would henceforth be known as the Buffaloes?

But let me allay your fears by pointing out that rugby has mechanisms in place to prevent such stupid things from happening.

Before going to market, a union will split its assets between a commercial/professional arm, which will largely deal with corporate matters like sponsorships, advertising, marketing and broadcast deals, and an amateur arm which will hold assets like the stadium (whether they own it or have a rental deal) and ‘intellectual property’ like the team name.

Stakeholders can then buy shares in the commercial/professional arm. A private company can buy 25% of those shares and the union gets the cash, while the equity partner takes dividends while also hopefully driving up the commercial value of those properties.

Even though SA Rugby’s constitution now allows for private companies to own up to 74% of a union’s professional arm, as long as the ‘amateur’ administrators have done their paperwork correctly then properties like the team name or where they play should be totally protected even if the union is now a minority shareholder.

The Bulls have been amongst the first unions to really make private equity work for them, with Patrice Motsepe’s African Rainbow Capital Investments and Johann Rupert’s Remgro each owning 37% of the Blue Bulls Company. First prize to them because the influx of cash has allowed the Bulls to hire big-name coaches in John Mitchell and now Jake White, who is totally revamping the team with a host of quality additions to the player roster.

Perhaps the first thing for a union to ensure is that there is synergy between themselves and their private equity partners, so that they can work together to run a successful team.

Unfortunately there have been two unions in the news lately for getting it all wrong – the Eastern Province Rugby Football Union and the Western Province Rugby Football Union. Both those beleaguered unions seem to be suffering from a bunch of rank amateurs trying to run multimillion rand businesses.

After years of wrangling seemed to be coming to an end with the signing of heads of agreement to sell Newlands to Investec, WPRFU president Zelt Marais has unilaterally decided not to sign off on the rest of the deal, despite already taking an advance of more than R50 million from Investec. Interestingly, the WPRFU also owe Remgro R58 million for a loan. These are powerful enemies to have and one fears that the once proud union could be heading the same way as Eastern Province.

The embattled Port Elizabeth franchise just seems to lurch from one crisis to the next and fresh problems are now springing up between the company that holds the majority shareholding in the Southern Kings and the EPRFU.

Roux was not specifically talking about the Southern Kings or Western Province, but his message certainly applies to them when he said political interference tends to surface when administrators try to run their franchises as an amateur entity.

But to borrow from Saturday Citizen deputy editor Brendan Seery’s excellent Column, for every couple of Onions that have to be dished out to unions, there will be more Orchids given out to those who make private equity work.

Simply put, rugby is unable to survive this post-Covid world without them so, like the Wallabies and scrums, every union just has to find a way of making these partnerships work.

Even though the Sharks have had the schedule from hell, they will go into the June international break still very much in the playoff mix following their 53-0 romp over the Southern Kings in Durban at the weekend, much to the delight of coach Gary Gold.

The Sharks are second in Africa Conference 2, just two points behind the Lions, and third in the Group, three points ahead of the Stormers, although they have played one more game than the three other top local sides and have a bye this coming weekend.

“I’m very satisfied and particularly pleased tonight that we got the bonus point and kept the opposition to zero. We knew the last six weeks would be tough, playing on three different continents in three weeks, but I’m really happy with the attitude of the players and how they’ve dealt with all the travel. It has been tough and it’s taken its toll, but to be as competitive as we have been, especially against the New Zealand sides, is very pleasing.

“The guys have shown a lot of character and now they have a bit of downtime. We can fix the guys that are broken and hopefully get some big names back. It’s good that we can try and keep our noses ahead rather than play catch-up,” Gold said.

The Sharks played some tremendous rugby in the first half against the Kings, getting the ball wide and scoring six tries, including three in a dazzling five-minute spell midway through the half. But they went off the boil in the second half and Gold said one of the things that still concern him is the team’s tendency to waste chances.

“We had a very specific plan at the start, you never want to get into an arm-wrestle against a side as courageous as the Kings, and we controlled things nicely in the first half and took our chances. Not so much in the second half, maybe there were too many changes, but it was a bit disappointing. The Kings are a never-say-die side, especially in the contact situations, and we lost a lot of ball.

“We didn’t take our chances as clinically and the lineout didn’t function as well. We need to step up, we are not the finished product, there are simple options not being taken. We tend to over-complicate things, if we take the simple options we will score more tries,” Gold said.