S Africa calls for its players to stay

[Marius]

I disagree with Albi's post in the sense that I don't see the need to sacrifice meritocracy in national selection to achieve that objective. Guys like Rabada and Bavuma made it here because they studied in those private schools. And as you mentioned, that white people are just 8% of the population. The team will start reflecting the demographics if coloured kids are given opportunities similar to the ones that white kids have.

Rabada and Bavuma didn't need a leg-up in life - Rabada's dad is a brain surgeon and Bavuma's is a senior journalist.

Both are solidly middle class and if they hadn't made it as cricketers would probably have got decent jobs in whatever profession they chose.

 

[indiaholic]

I know.. I was just saying that those guys made it because they went to schools were cricket was pursued seriously.

 

[Daemon]

I still don't see why the solution is to have quotas rather than invest in cricket at the grass roots level. Make sure that talented kids get scholarships that allow them to study at the schools that seem to be the feeder system for SA.

I'm sure they're concurrently doing that. Quotas don't directly cost money.

 

[Adders]

All well and good, doesn't really change anything I said though.

Wasn't trying to.

But that said, did you edit this post below or did I just not read it properly earlier? Because I have a big problem with the bolded that I'm sure I would have addressed if I had picked up on it.

But you see the issue with that don't you? No one knows if it's going to work that way at all, and people who are skeptical have every reason to be.

Even if you could guarantee that it would achieve exactly what they hope it will it would still be contentious and be undebatably unfair & discriminatory. But you can't even guarantee that. In fact if I were a betting man I'd put a lot of money on guessing it will achieve nothing but create conflict.

No mate. Undebatably unfair and discriminatory was 50 years of apartheid........measures being taken to try and get the previously oppressed that make up 80% of the population back on an even keel with the rest of the country can never be considered as such. And I'll argue this to my last breath so therefore by definition it can't be undebatable.

It really astounds me that your sympathies and interest seem to be more with a handful of white cricketers that are getting stiffed (and I don't deny that they are) more so than the 40 odd million natives that are still living in poverty because of a regime that put them there.

I must have said this 50 times in these threads but so far no one that disagrees with me has answered this particular point.........There is more at stake here than the success of a cricket team, it is only a sport.

 

[TheJediBrah]

And as others have said, even if there were no quotas, the current national side would pretty much look how it does now.

That's not necessarily the main issue though is it? It's the quotas at the lower levels that is causing the most consternation from what I've heard

I keep going back and forth on the idea of quotas between "Well if it's what they need to make up for past racism so be it" and "it's the most brainless, idiotic thing they could possibly do" and right now I'm leaning more toward the latter. It just really doesn't make sense at all.

 

[indiaholic]

I'm sure they're concurrently doing that. Quotas don't directly cost money.

Hmm.. What are your feelings about SC/ST/OBC quotas in Indian cricket? It is a Brahmin/Upper Caste dominated sport here no?

 

[TheJediBrah]

Wasn't trying to.
No mate. Undebatably unfair and discriminatory was 50 years of apartheid........measures being taken to try and get the previously oppressed that make up 80% of the population back on an even keel with the rest of the country can never be considered as such. And I'll argue this to my last breath so therefore by definition it can't be undebatable.

It really astounds me that your sympathies and interest seem to be more with a handful of white cricketers that are getting stiffed (and I don't deny that they are) more so than the 40 odd million natives that are still living in poverty because of a regime that put them there.

I must have said this 50 times in these threads but so far no one that disagrees with me has answered this particular point.........There is more at stake here than the success of a cricket team, it is only a sport.

Two wrongs don't make a right. And, again, the the whole quotas will fix inequality* is entirely theoretical. If you genuinely think it will work and make everyone happy 50 years from now (very unlikely IMO) then good for you. (maybe will though, who knows)

*also thinking that just because a national side's make-up doesn't match up exactly with a country's demographics is inequality is pretty stupid. Not saying that anyone is doing that mind you.

I'm sure there are much better methods (and much, much more likely to actually work) to encourage black cricketers than quotas. Methods that don't involve blatant discrimination and unfair employment policies. Which is absolutely undebatable, regardless if the unfair employment practices are mandated by the government.

I respect your humanitarian view on the topic but I still don't get why you support quotas other than "it makes up for 50 years of racism etc etc" which I just don't get why you keep saying.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Then again, this is a government that probably shunts unthinkable amounts of money (in general) from the white community to the coloured community through tax, welfare etc.

What difference is a few white cricketers getting paid a bit less really going to make

 

[Heboric]

Then again, this is a government that probably shunts unthinkable amounts of money (in general) from the white community to the coloured community through tax, welfare etc.

What difference is a few white cricketers getting paid a bit less really going to make

Yep the tax base here is small, they are killing the middle class slowly but surely

 

[Daemon]

Hmm.. What are your feelings about SC/ST/OBC quotas in Indian cricket? It is a Brahmin/Upper Caste dominated sport here no?

I've got no idea about that, I don't really know what goes on in India tbh, it's hard to while living here.

I'm from a country that has implemented quotas everywhere from housing estates to a recent one for the presidency - measures that have seen a little bit of success. I'd be offering a very biased opinion on this topic.

 

[Marius]

No mate. Undebatably unfair and discriminatory was 50 years of apartheid........measures being taken to try and get the previously oppressed that make up 80% of the population back on an even keel with the rest of the country can never be considered as such. And I'll argue this to my last breath so therefore by definition it can't be undebatable.

It really astounds me that your sympathies and interest seem to be more with a handful of white cricketers that are getting stiffed (and I don't deny that they are) more so than the 40 odd million natives that are still living in poverty because of a regime that put them there.

I must have said this 50 times in these threads but so far no one that disagrees with me has answered this particular point.........There is more at stake here than the success of a cricket team, it is only a sport.

Poverty rates are coming down, and '40 odd million natives' aren't all living in poverty anymore.

One of the successes of the ANC government has actually been in reducing the number of people living in poverty in South Africa.

 

[91Jmay]

Two wrongs don't make a right, is an interesting way to compare 50 years of apartheid vs some quotas in sport.

 

[Marius]

Two wrongs don't make a right, is an interesting way to compare 50 years of apartheid vs some quotas in sport.

How exactly does a rule saying X numbers of players have to be of X race in the national XI lead to a reduction in poverty, or fix schools in townships, or lead to an increase in black incomes?

 

[Adders]

I respect your humanitarian view on the topic but I still don't get why you support quotas other than "it makes up for 50 years of racism etc etc" which I just don't get why you keep saying.

Yeah no, that's not what I've been saying at all.

To clarify my position on this I am not even pro quotas as I don't know for sure if they will work and I don't know if there are better ways. But I am certainly not against them because something needs to be done and that is why I have argued so strongly against people on here that categorically say they are wrong.

So I don't necessarily support quotas......I'm just not against them. And in all these threads I see heaps of people that see them as a prejudice or even a racist policy. That is what get's to me and that's what I'm arguing against.

And I don't think it is about retribution either, it's not about punishing the whites for past wrongs.......****, this current generation had nothing to do with it. I just can't see any way of readdressing the balance without there being some sacrifices made by the privileged whites.

And in cricket terms, honestly how bad is the sacrifice? So the likes of Kyle Abbot have to give up international cricket and go ply their trade in in Eng domestic.......yeah it's not ideal for him or South African cricket. But **** me he still has a decent paying job and will eat tomorrow.

 

[TheJediBrah]

So I don't necessarily support quotas......I'm just not against them. And in all these threads I see heaps of people that see them as a prejudice or even a racist policy. That is what get's to me and that's what I'm arguing against.

That's the thing though, regardless of whether you think it's the right thing to do to make up for/counteract years of disadvantage, quotas are racial discrimination. By their very definition. That's just a fact.

And I don't think it is about retribution either, it's not about punishing the whites for past wrongs.......****, this current generation had nothing to do with it. I just can't see any way of readdressing the balance without there being some sacrifices made by the privileged whites.

And in cricket terms, honestly how bad is the sacrifice? So the likes of Kyle Abbot have to give up international cricket and go ply their trade in in Eng domestic.......yeah it's not ideal for him or South African cricket. But **** me he still has a decent paying job and will eat tomorrow.

You think International cricket quotas are the only form of recompense going on in South Africa to try and fix inequality? Of course not, they're nothing compared to everything else the government is doing.

IMO quotas are unethical, pointless, and almost certainly ineffective. What it comes down to, to me, is you're instituting unequivocally what amounts to unfair workplace practices for no discernible gain.

btw if I was a white middle-class South African right now I'd be on the next plane to anywhere before you could blink

 

[TheJediBrah]

Two wrongs don't make a right, is an interesting way to compare 50 years of apartheid vs some quotas in sport.

Can't even think of where to start here . . .

such a bad post

 

[Marius]

On the issue of quotas, quotas are also now required at club level (or at least at the national champs).

At the national champs (where each union sends the team that won their premier league, my club has represented Easterns a few times) it is now a requirement that each team fields two POCs, one of whom must be African. If you don't, you get given a R10 000 fine and don't get any points from that particular game.

What happens is that, instead of developing local talent (which is difficult for a community based club with limited resources) POCs from other clubs are approached and guaranteed they'll play in club champs, and often given a small stipend.

Now, how does this help develop black players etc? How does this grow the game at grassroots?

 

[TheJediBrah]

On the issue of quotas, quotas are also now required at club level (or at least at the national champs).

At the national champs (where each union sends the team that won their premier league, my club has represented Easterns a few times) it is now a requirement that each team fields two POCs, one of whom must be African. If you don't, you get given a R10 000 fine and don't get any points from that particular game.

What happens is that, instead of developing local talent (which is difficult for a community based club with limited resources) POCs from other clubs are approached and guaranteed they'll play in club champs, and often given a small stipend.

Now, how does this help develop black players etc? How does this grow the game at grassroots?

That's not so bad. Someone posted something here earlier about representative sides needing 8 or 9 POC per team or something ridiculous.

It's still not great, but it could be worse I guess

 

[Marius]

That's not so bad. Someone posted something here earlier about representative sides needing 8 or 9 POC per team or something ridiculous.

It's still not great, but it could be worse I guess

It's club cricket, there should be no quotas whatsoever.

 

[TheJediBrah]

It's club cricket, there should be no quotas whatsoever.

True, it's really hard to see any justification for it