Polarity, rugby's most popular pastime

Jan de Koning takes a look at some of the public spats that have emerged in the past few weeks, not just in South Africa, but also in other parts of the world. He thinks polarity has become officialdom’s favourite pastime.

It was US author Robert Collier that once said, “One might as well try to ride two horses moving in different directions, as to try to maintain in equal force two opposing or contradictory sets of desires.”

There is no doubt that there has been a few comical brain explosions on both sides of the Indian Ocean in the last few weeks, as the hierarchy in both Australia and South Africa try to explain away the obvious boardroom splits that are threatening to tear the game apart in these countries.

Sometimes these statements want to make you cry.

Other times you can only read and giggle.

Take Australia, for example.

Wallaby coach John Connolly, writing in his weekly newspaper column, says: “We’re not in a crisis.”

He was, of course, speaking of the media suggestions that there was a crisis in the Australian camp.

“It’s time to set the record straight – there’s no crisis in Camp Wallaby,” he said in his column. “While we count down the days to France, unfortunately the focus in the media was again on off-field issues. It seems that whenever there’s a week with not much rugby played these issues raise their heads.”

This view, however, is countered by respected Australian rugby writer Greg Growden in the Sydney Morning Herald, who wrote: “This unity is an illusion.”

“The Wallabies and the ARU [Australian Rugby Union] are a viper’s nest of bickering egos,” he continued.

“The John Eales Medal night is traditionally the function where everything good in Australian rugby is celebrated. This year’s function in Brisbane was the complete opposite – it turned into an evening where a bag of snakes was suddenly ripped open, exposing the raw, viperish underbelly of Australian rugby.

“It brought out into the public arena festering divisions within the Australian coaching and playing ranks that have snowballed since day one of John Connolly’s reign as head coach. It revealed ego problems within the Wallabies organisation, and that key players have lost confidence in members of the coaching staff.”

While, such contradictory views are not unique to Australian rugby, it pales into insignificance when compared to the often mortifying verbal jousting within the South African Rugby Union (SARU) – where deputy President Mike Stofile regularly launches tirades on fellow Executive members.

At the weekend, SARU President Oregan Hoskins said South African Rugby had set a “target” of at least seven players of colour (non-white players) in the Springbok starting XV at the 2011 Rugby World Cup.

Hoskins, known for his more level-headed approach to dealing with rugby’s often bitter boardroom battles, admitted that transformation should not be a cosmetic process.

“There had to be substance to our way forward. There is no quick fix and we had to agree on a target for 2011,” he told weekend newspapers.

That sounds reasonable.

Not, however, if you listen to SARU’s most vocal politically-minded individual, Stofile.

According to the deputy President, the number seven is too small and 2011 is too far away. He wants more and he wants them now!

And, according to Stofile, the term “black” should not include coloured players.

Stofile, as has happened often before, questioned Hoskins’s comments.

“I don’t know where Oregan comes up with these figures, as it was not discussed,” he said.

The irony is that these two individuals sat next to each other at the head table at the SARU President’s Council meeting last week, where these issues were discussed.

Either one, or both, of them were asleep, or somebody is lying.

But clearly they did not receive the same set of minutes from that meeting, because “transformation” was on the agenda and numbers (call it what you like, ‘targets’ or ‘quotas’) were put on the table.

When you see statements like these, it is obvious why the public has lost respect for those who run the game!

Do you agree/disagree with Jan?
Email us your views!