Wales v South Africa, 26 November

First topic message reminder :

   
WALES v SOUTH AFRICA
26 November 2016
KO: 17:30 GMT
Principality Stadium, Cardiff

Live on BBC Two & S4C

Referee: Romain Poite (France)
Assistant Referees: Greg Garner (England), Tom Foley (England)
TMO: Graham Hughes (England)

A. Head to Head

31 Played 31
2 Won 28
1 Drawn 1
28 Lost 2
837 Points 459

B. Recent Form

17 October 2015
Twickenham Stadium, London, England
23–19 to South Africa

29 November 2014
Millennium Stadium, Cardiff
12–6 to Wales

21 June 2014
Mbombela Stadium, Nelspruit
31–30 to South Africa

14 June 2014
Growthpoint Kings Park, Durban
38–16 to South Africa

9 November 2013
Millennium Stadium, Cardiff
15–24 to South Africa

11 September 2011
Wellington Regional Stadium, Wellington
17–16 to South Africa

13 November 2010
Millennium Stadium, Cardiff
25–29 to South Africa

C. Teams

WALES 

Halfpenny; North, J Davies, S Williams, Liam Williams; Biggar, G Davies; Jenkins (capt), Owens, Francis, Charteris, Wyn Jones, Lydiate, Moriarty, Tipuric.

Replacements: Baldwin, Smith, Lee, Hill, Faletau, Lloyd Williams, S Davies, Roberts.

SOUTH AFRICA

Johan Goosen; Ruan Combrinck, Francois Venter, Rohan Janse van Rensburg, Jamba Ulengo; Elton Jantjies, Faf de Klerk; Tendai Mtawariri, Adriaan Strauss (capt), Lourens Adriaanse, Pieter-Steph du Toit, Lood de Jager, Nizaam Carr, Uzair Cassiem, Warren Whiteley.

Replacements: Malcolm Marx, teven Kitshoff, Trevor Nyakane, Franco Mostert, Jean-Luc du Preez, Piet van Zyl, Pat Lambie, Lionel Mapoe.

Well the days of white dominance are comnig to an end in SA.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Well the days of white dominance are comnig to an end in SA.

very nicely put 7.5. You can't debate or even discuss because in truth the facts are. You have no come back so you resort to petty remarks. Good for you.

feel welcome to come back on the height is not important statement anytime soon.

No 7&1/2 wrote:It's not ideal to use posiitive discrimination but given the state SA continues to be, I think it has to be done now rather than just ignore the attitudes around whites being naturally better. There are past threads dedicated to this though rather than the Welsh match thread.

Yep, I really hate that term and don't agree with it at all.

Personally I'm happy something is finally being done. Even a team of midgits will be better than what we've seen in the past.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Personally I'm happy something is finally being done. Even a team of midgits will be better than what we've seen in the past.

What did you see in the past? South Africa winning rugby games?

The changes in SA don't help SA rugby at all as it just encourages white South African rugby players to go abroad to Europe.

More stability, no prejudice (in theory), more money, a new life. It's a no brainer for many.

Player drain will continue to hurt SA. Plus I am sure their compatriots will encourage others to go to Europe.

The general racism fa.

No 7&1/2 wrote:The general racism fa.

Should all British sporting teams continue to pay penitence because of their past 400 years worth of racism and discrimination against billions of the globes inhabitants?

The players today were not responsible for apartheid and most probably would not even be able to remember the era, just like those in Britain today.. doesn't mean it didn't happen so why the difference? You think SA treated people worse than the British did during the empire?

Racism exists in SA, it is also heavily embedded in the UK and the west... and lets not in the context of things think everyone is whiter than white compared. You cannot defeat hate with more hate.

fa0019 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:The general racism fa.

Should all British sporting teams continue to pay penitence because of their past 400 years worth of racism and discrimination against billions of the globes inhabitants?

The players today were not responsible for apartheid and most probably would not even be able to remember the era, just like those in Britain today.. doesn't mean it didn't happen so why the difference? You think SA treated people worse than the British did during the empire?

Racism exists in SA, it is also heavily embedded in the UK and the west... and lets not in the context of things think everyone is whiter than white compared. You cannot defeat hate with more hate.

Well said.

And I'm all for bringing out instances of racism to the fore.The difficulty in SA is it's so recent and no real signs of movement hence positive discrimination etc. Unfortunately rugby is still seen as teh white mans game etc. I've read on here football is for blacks etc. They just don't suit rugby etc. That sort of thing wouldn't sit well here but we're a bit further along and still have problems.

Certainly see it more post Brexit as well as it's becoming acceptabele to air distasetful views.

I came to see the latest comments on the game and I land into a discussion on racism and Brexit?

I'm glad I can't be blamed for this digression.

SecretFly wrote:

I came to see the latest comments on the game and I land into a discussion on racism and Brexit?

I'm glad I can't be blamed for this digression.

Yeah and with that BS there goes the thread.

If we can state the bleedin obvious - that per head of population certain pacific racial groups produce more international standard rugby players than any other. Why is it so wrong to say that White SA (with a Boer background) are also another group who produce a lot of big guys who are good at rugby?

lostinwales wrote:If we can state the bleedin obvious - that per head of population certain pacific racial groups produce more international standard rugby players than any other. Why is it so wrong to say that White SA (with a Boer background) are also another group who produce a lot of big guys who are good at rugby?

Coz they got more practice over the centuries? Am I close?

No 7&1/2 wrote:And I'm all for bringing out instances of racism to the fore.The difficulty in SA is it's so recent and no real signs of movement hence positive discrimination etc. Unfortunately rugby is still seen as teh white mans game etc. I've read on here football is for blacks etc. They just don't suit rugby etc. That sort of thing wouldn't sit well here but we're a bit further along and still have problems.

If you are uncomfortable with the notion that

a) test match rugby is a game that suits a bigger beast than a smaller one (generally speaking). England has only 5 players in their entire squad below 6ft and only 2 shorter than the average bloke on the street.. out of 35.
b) People in SA and specifically non whites (not inc. Indian South Africans) are much shorter than Europeans.

then maybe it doesn't sit well with you but it happens to be the truth.

So your idea is to say... well its better they field worse players and get worse results because a losing team who are "representative" of the nation" is better than one that may be skewed to certain groups as certain periods of time... but one that happens to win?

If so you have little idea on how to inspire people and kids into sport. People like winners. Kids in SA like Ronaldo, Gareth Bale, Lionel Messi... all 3 of them are of European origin. Is there a pattern emerging?

Could it be true... African children supporting european players over africans because you know... they're winners, the best etc?

Oh its because rugby is seen as a white persons game right? How many African teams have won a world cup? How many have got into even a SF of a world cup if not? Football is an African game right? Kids don't care. When I grew up I recall the fastest selling shirt in 1990 was of West Germany where I lived... enough to make our fathers blush right yet... yet again, kids like winners.  

I were you I would look into the 1996 African cup of nations which South Africa won. Just google it and look at the pictures of the lineups for instance. Football was a game in the past for white, cape coloured persons as it were for Africans. Bryan Habana (cape coloured) himself was named after Bryan Robson. Keegan Daniel (white) was named after the northeast's favourite son.

Messi being Argentinian yes.

I said earlier in a couple of decades SA will be class and brimming with non white players. There will be people hating it still.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Messi being Argentinian yes.

I said earlier in a couple of decades SA will be class and brimming with non white players. There will be people hating it still.

European origin meaning Spanish I assume. Will this get you hating on the Spanish colonialists now?

You can see into the future? lostinwales made a good point, but I guess nobody else brought it up through seeing it as being obvious. The current SA set-up is top down and it isn't going to work in my opinion.

Well something needs to be done. Racist setup for years and too many excuses to set it straight.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Messi being Argentinian yes.

I said earlier in a couple of decades SA will be class and brimming with non white players. There will be people hating it still.

Is Lionel Messi of Amerindian ancestry?

On his father's side, he is of Italian and Spanish heritage, the great-grandson of immigrants from Marche and Catalonia, and on his mother's side, he is of primarily Italian descent wiki

As I said... European origin persons (or if you like... white people).

And if there are players who are non white who are worthy of taking the shirt then I'm very happy for them. There are many players in SA who are non white and who deserve their shirt already. If there are more I'd be no less happy then I'd be if there were less.  Sport should transcend politics.

People in SA get race thrown down their neck every day. It stifles relationships, friendships, business agreements because people are always told

"white people are still in power" - false
"white people still dominate business" - false
"white people still own all the land" - false

as much as

"African people are only there because of leg ups" - false
"African people are token selections in springbok teams" - false

but don't think it doesn't impact relationships because it does. My wife's best friend is Indian yet some of the above are no no subject literally and when its brought up/mentioned its like someone has died.

try and forge togetherness is those conditions. You can give people extra help, you can give them education, scholarships but engineering in business and sport simply don't work. All the studies on business re-allocation have been proved to show it doesn't help and you don't have to be a rugby god to see that engineering in player selection is also impacting results. How do you think guys like Nizaam Carr now feels? He's in over his head and his colleagues all know it.... think he will feel confident to raise his voice?

Like I said plenty like that the white players are 'better'. Genetic superiors. Oh so near Godwins law I fear. Anyhow that's enough for me.

I'm not sure that's what FA was getting at. It's certainly not true, just look at the blokes from the pacific...

No 7&1/2 wrote:Well something needs to be done. Racist setup for years and too many excuses to set it straight.

What was racist about it though? Even during apartheid the Springboks had non-white players.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Well something needs to be done. Racist setup for years and too many excuses to set it straight.

you say that as a voice of authority on the subject or purely because you see no end results right?

You know coaches are doing so right? You know schools are anti anything white right? From my experience they do their utmost, they go beyond their station to help young and potentially talented non white individuals.

If people could say well look the boks setup was racist then surely an introduction of non whites into the fold would prove that wrong. But the reality is and there is no getting away from this.... the boks during this era were the most dominant side in world rugby and since the introduction of social engineering they have got progressively worse.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Like I said plenty like that the white players are 'better'. Genetic superiors. Oh so near Godwins law I fear. Anyhow that's enough for me.

Who said anything about white players being the best rugby players? If anything its not "europeans", its Polynesians who are the most physically equipped for the sport. Oh and btw, their is a significant amount of Polynesian DNA amongst Afrikaners..... my son came out with 5% polynesian DNA in his test all from his Afrikaner side... and its a feature in many Afrikaners too.

There'll be more non whites soon thank goodness.

No 7&1/2 wrote:There'll be more non whites soon thank goodness.

"thank goodness"! Nice little hole you're digging for yourself.

Yup, hopefully we see an end to the racism in SA. Another step along the way.

fa0019 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Well something needs to be done. Racist setup for years and too many excuses to set it straight.

you say that as a voice of authority on the subject or purely because you see no end results right?

You know coaches are doing so right? You know schools are anti anything white right? From my experience they do their utmost, they go beyond their station to help young and potentially talented non white individuals.

If people could say well look the boks setup was racist then surely an introduction of non whites into the fold would prove that wrong. But the reality is and there is no getting away from this.... the boks during this era were the most dominant side in world rugby and since the introduction of social engineering they have got progressively worse.

Come on, fa0019. Life is more than rugby. And Apartheid was one of the purest examples of Social Engineering. There are bound to be still rumbling ramifications and folk memories from that system. It isn't exactly ancient history.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Yup, hopefully we see an end to the racism in SA. Another step along the way.

killing racism with racism. Yeah I saw this happen once.. sorry no that was a dream.

Hate cannot defeat hate.

After WWI the "victors" created the treaty of Versailles. The draconian measures caused a more deadly world war only 20 years later.

After WWII they "victors" created the marshall plan which looked to rebuild Europe, winners and losers. Brought countries together, they are still together.

hate cannot defeat hate.

We'll have to see. I'm glad to see them doing this.

No 7&1/2 wrote:We'll have to see. I'm glad to see them doing this.

Presumably because it makes their team crap enough for Wales and England to beat them more regularly.

SecretFly wrote:

fa0019 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Well something needs to be done. Racist setup for years and too many excuses to set it straight.

you say that as a voice of authority on the subject or purely because you see no end results right?

You know coaches are doing so right? You know schools are anti anything white right? From my experience they do their utmost, they go beyond their station to help young and potentially talented non white individuals.

If people could say well look the boks setup was racist then surely an introduction of non whites into the fold would prove that wrong. But the reality is and there is no getting away from this.... the boks during this era were the most dominant side in world rugby and since the introduction of social engineering they have got progressively worse.

Come on, fa0019.  Life is more than rugby.  And Apartheid was one of the purest examples of Social Engineering.  There are bound to be still rumbling ramifications and folk memories from that system.  It isn't exactly ancient history.  

As has been said they are replacing one form of social engineering with another.

No system is perfect, and its not like things cannot be improved. As far as I can see there are two key issues
1) That race or colour should not hinder the development of players.
2) That long term a more racially mixed middle class should develop which would mean that there are a more diverse pool of potential players who are not held back by the inequities of their background. Some diets help to make kids grow bigger, and those tend to cost. And Rugby is a game for all sizes but there are a lot of positions where size is crucial.

Where size is less important there are (and have been) some very prominent non white SA players. There is an issue with opportunity, but it is not the only issue.

SecretFly wrote:

fa0019 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Well something needs to be done. Racist setup for years and too many excuses to set it straight.

you say that as a voice of authority on the subject or purely because you see no end results right?

You know coaches are doing so right? You know schools are anti anything white right? From my experience they do their utmost, they go beyond their station to help young and potentially talented non white individuals.

If people could say well look the boks setup was racist then surely an introduction of non whites into the fold would prove that wrong. But the reality is and there is no getting away from this.... the boks during this era were the most dominant side in world rugby and since the introduction of social engineering they have got progressively worse.

Come on, fa0019.  Life is more than rugby.  And Apartheid was one of the purest examples of Social Engineering.  There are bound to be still rumbling ramifications and folk memories from that system.  It isn't exactly ancient history.  

No denial in that. The ramifications of Apartheid still linger, that is true. How much the continuation of such is a consequence of a) the Apartheid state and b) the last 22 years of African rule is the question. The longer it goes on the more you have to say its less to do with Apartheid and more how the sitting government have managed the country since its end.

How long ago did Apartheid end? 22 years ago. More than 50% of the country are <20. The life expectancy due to HIV is in the 40s (and no Apartheid didn't cause or intensify HIV in SA).

Yet that is still a side issue. Will any correction as such improve the springboks or improve the boks relating to the people?

Which will be followed more by fans and children alike? Kids hate losers, it doesn't matter, white, brown, yellow, black or whatever. People aren't born racist.

When SA won the 2007 world cup the country was very happy. They had open bus tour and kids in townships and suburbs flocked in their thousands. Are you telling me this side is more inspirational than the 2007 one to these kids?

Anyone who says Yes simply a) no idea about SA and b) no idea about the mentality of children.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Well the days of white dominance are comnig to an end in SA.

I dunno I quite expect England will win there in 2018.

lostinwales wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

fa0019 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Well something needs to be done. Racist setup for years and too many excuses to set it straight.

you say that as a voice of authority on the subject or purely because you see no end results right?

You know coaches are doing so right? You know schools are anti anything white right? From my experience they do their utmost, they go beyond their station to help young and potentially talented non white individuals.

If people could say well look the boks setup was racist then surely an introduction of non whites into the fold would prove that wrong. But the reality is and there is no getting away from this.... the boks during this era were the most dominant side in world rugby and since the introduction of social engineering they have got progressively worse.

Come on, fa0019.  Life is more than rugby.  And Apartheid was one of the purest examples of Social Engineering.  There are bound to be still rumbling ramifications and folk memories from that system.  It isn't exactly ancient history.  

As has been said they are replacing one form of social engineering with another.

It wasn't said that way in the post I replied to.  

Besides, yes, the people that felt they were oppressed by a social engineering system now think they have to social engineer their way out of the lingering resonances of that unequal system.  Is this model the best method?  Well some say yes and some say no.  But the point is that allowing time to correct the considered imbalances across society is not seen as a sufficiently expedient method of equalising the presumed distinction between colour.  

Rugby is more than a game, it's a circle of like minded people networking.  It's a social grouping in its own right - everywhere.  It's a club, a fraternity.  People who have played in turn keep connections going through other channels in life - ex players who get involved in business can and do keep those connections going that can then lead to business/employment advantages for people from that specific 'rugby' fraternity.  So getting into the rugby mix is more than about playing a game - it's about being allowed into the club, being allowed get advantages from the after-rugby life practices.  Rugby is a mutual care and regard community and I suppose black SA says: 'we want in'.

lostinwales wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

fa0019 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Well something needs to be done. Racist setup for years and too many excuses to set it straight.

you say that as a voice of authority on the subject or purely because you see no end results right?

You know coaches are doing so right? You know schools are anti anything white right? From my experience they do their utmost, they go beyond their station to help young and potentially talented non white individuals.

If people could say well look the boks setup was racist then surely an introduction of non whites into the fold would prove that wrong. But the reality is and there is no getting away from this.... the boks during this era were the most dominant side in world rugby and since the introduction of social engineering they have got progressively worse.

Come on, fa0019.  Life is more than rugby.  And Apartheid was one of the purest examples of Social Engineering.  There are bound to be still rumbling ramifications and folk memories from that system.  It isn't exactly ancient history.  

As has been said they are replacing one form of social engineering with another.

No system is perfect, and its not like things cannot be improved. As far as I can see there are two key issues
1) That race or colour should not hinder the development of players.
2) That long term a more racially mixed middle class should develop which would mean that there are a more diverse pool of potential players who are not held back by the inequities of their background. Some diets help to make kids grow bigger, and those tend to cost. And Rugby is a game for all sizes but there are a lot of positions where size is crucial.

Where size is less important there are (and have been) some very prominent non white SA players. There is an issue with opportunity, but it is not the only issue.

https://businesstech.co.za/news/business/134749/black-vs-white-middle-class-in-south-africa/

People naturally assume white persons still dominate SA. The latest figures suggest the Black middle class is now twice the size of the white middle class and that excludes Cape coloureds and Asians. When combining white vs. non white middle class adults we see 2.62 million vs 8.37 million (or 3.2 times the size).

Not saying what you suggested isn't the way forward but its a presumption many in Europe hold (in error, innocent as it is).

SecretFly wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

fa0019 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Well something needs to be done. Racist setup for years and too many excuses to set it straight.

you say that as a voice of authority on the subject or purely because you see no end results right?

You know coaches are doing so right? You know schools are anti anything white right? From my experience they do their utmost, they go beyond their station to help young and potentially talented non white individuals.

If people could say well look the boks setup was racist then surely an introduction of non whites into the fold would prove that wrong. But the reality is and there is no getting away from this.... the boks during this era were the most dominant side in world rugby and since the introduction of social engineering they have got progressively worse.

Come on, fa0019.  Life is more than rugby.  And Apartheid was one of the purest examples of Social Engineering.  There are bound to be still rumbling ramifications and folk memories from that system.  It isn't exactly ancient history.  

As has been said they are replacing one form of social engineering with another.

It wasn't said that way in the post I replied to.  

Besides, yes, the people that felt they were oppressed by a social engineering system now think they have to social engineer their way out of the lingering resonances of that unequal system.  Is this model the best method?  Well some say yes and some say no.  But the point is that allowing time to correct the considered imbalances across society is not seen as a sufficiently expedient method of equalising the presumed distinction between colour.  

Rugby is more than a game, it's a circle of like minded people networking.  It's a social grouping in its own right - everywhere.  It's a club, a fraternity.  People who have played in turn keep connections going through other channels in life - ex players who get involved in business can and do keep those connections going that can then lead to business/employment advantages for people from that specific 'rugby' fraternity.  So getting into the rugby mix is more than about playing a game - it's about being allowed into the club, being allowed get advantages from the after-rugby life practices.  Rugby is a mutual care and regard community and I suppose black SA says: 'we want in'.

Fly

just for a second ask yourself if the non white community will feel happier with this side which lost 8 matches and registered losses to every side they faced this year vs. that of the 2007 RWC winning side which featured only 2 non whites in their starting XV.

They had open top parades in 2007, in townships, in white and non white areas. Whereever the boks went they were mobbed. Fans loved a winning side, white, black alike.
Do you think they will be more inspired by this team?

fa0019 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

fa0019 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Well something needs to be done. Racist setup for years and too many excuses to set it straight.

you say that as a voice of authority on the subject or purely because you see no end results right?

You know coaches are doing so right? You know schools are anti anything white right? From my experience they do their utmost, they go beyond their station to help young and potentially talented non white individuals.

If people could say well look the boks setup was racist then surely an introduction of non whites into the fold would prove that wrong. But the reality is and there is no getting away from this.... the boks during this era were the most dominant side in world rugby and since the introduction of social engineering they have got progressively worse.

Come on, fa0019.  Life is more than rugby.  And Apartheid was one of the purest examples of Social Engineering.  There are bound to be still rumbling ramifications and folk memories from that system.  It isn't exactly ancient history.  

As has been said they are replacing one form of social engineering with another.

It wasn't said that way in the post I replied to.  

Besides, yes, the people that felt they were oppressed by a social engineering system now think they have to social engineer their way out of the lingering resonances of that unequal system.  Is this model the best method?  Well some say yes and some say no.  But the point is that allowing time to correct the considered imbalances across society is not seen as a sufficiently expedient method of equalising the presumed distinction between colour.  

Rugby is more than a game, it's a circle of like minded people networking.  It's a social grouping in its own right - everywhere.  It's a club, a fraternity.  People who have played in turn keep connections going through other channels in life - ex players who get involved in business can and do keep those connections going that can then lead to business/employment advantages for people from that specific 'rugby' fraternity.  So getting into the rugby mix is more than about playing a game - it's about being allowed into the club, being allowed get advantages from the after-rugby life practices.  Rugby is a mutual care and regard community and I suppose black SA says: 'we want in'.

Fly

just for a second ask yourself if the non white community will feel happier with this side which lost 8 matches and registered losses to every side they faced this year vs. that of the 2007 RWC winning side which featured only 2 non whites in their starting XV.

They had open top parades in 2007, in townships, in white and non white areas. Whereever the boks went they were mobbed. Fans loved a winning side, white, black alike.
Do you think they will be more inspired by this team?

I expect they were just excited to see Matt Damon, doesn't mean they were crying out for a return to being denied basic freedoms and access to opportunity.

I'm not trying to justify the policy. I'm trying to understand the motivation that is leading to it. You can always disagree with any opposing motivations but first you have to admit that they exist.

You call it 'hate' v 'hate'. The people who feel differently about the motivations behind the policy would reject that notion that 'hate' is the key - and might simply say, 'we want to share in this thing that brings so much pride to the nation'

Gooseberry wrote:

fa0019 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

fa0019 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Well something needs to be done. Racist setup for years and too many excuses to set it straight.

you say that as a voice of authority on the subject or purely because you see no end results right?

You know coaches are doing so right? You know schools are anti anything white right? From my experience they do their utmost, they go beyond their station to help young and potentially talented non white individuals.

If people could say well look the boks setup was racist then surely an introduction of non whites into the fold would prove that wrong. But the reality is and there is no getting away from this.... the boks during this era were the most dominant side in world rugby and since the introduction of social engineering they have got progressively worse.

Come on, fa0019.  Life is more than rugby.  And Apartheid was one of the purest examples of Social Engineering.  There are bound to be still rumbling ramifications and folk memories from that system.  It isn't exactly ancient history.  

As has been said they are replacing one form of social engineering with another.

It wasn't said that way in the post I replied to.  

Besides, yes, the people that felt they were oppressed by a social engineering system now think they have to social engineer their way out of the lingering resonances of that unequal system.  Is this model the best method?  Well some say yes and some say no.  But the point is that allowing time to correct the considered imbalances across society is not seen as a sufficiently expedient method of equalising the presumed distinction between colour.  

Rugby is more than a game, it's a circle of like minded people networking.  It's a social grouping in its own right - everywhere.  It's a club, a fraternity.  People who have played in turn keep connections going through other channels in life - ex players who get involved in business can and do keep those connections going that can then lead to business/employment advantages for people from that specific 'rugby' fraternity.  So getting into the rugby mix is more than about playing a game - it's about being allowed into the club, being allowed get advantages from the after-rugby life practices.  Rugby is a mutual care and regard community and I suppose black SA says: 'we want in'.

Fly

just for a second ask yourself if the non white community will feel happier with this side which lost 8 matches and registered losses to every side they faced this year vs. that of the 2007 RWC winning side which featured only 2 non whites in their starting XV.

They had open top parades in 2007, in townships, in white and non white areas. Whereever the boks went they were mobbed. Fans loved a winning side, white, black alike.
Do you think they will be more inspired by this team?

I expect they were just excited to see Matt Damon, doesn't mean they were crying out for a return to being denied basic freedoms and access to opportunity.

Wrong world cup dude.

And in any case.. what does that have to do with rugby?

There has been 22 years since the end of Apartheid (well technically 24 if you include the 2 years where it was torn down and the white community prepared for a handover of power).  

Where does accountability start and accountability end? White people are not in power, they do not control legislation, business nor any other industry... how are they at fault for poor people being kept poor? Maybe the government should tax rich people more, well they don't. Maybe they should use the Native American model..i.e. get rid of them... literally? Yet again and again the answer is this... its all outside of the hands of white people and in the hands of Africans.

Yet... life has got no better for the poor in SA and many studies suggest that life is worse then it was (bar things like having the freedom to vote, potential access to higher education etc) but again none of that has anything to do with rugby and how teams inspire future generations.



Whites still own most of the arable land though.. you know the industry which accounts for about 30,000 people (SA pop 55 million). Ah case closed right!

SecretFly wrote:I'm not trying to justify the policy.  I'm trying to understand the motivation that is leading to it.  You can always disagree with any opposing motivations but first you have to admit that they exist.

You call it 'hate' v 'hate'.  The people who feel differently about the motivations behind the policy would reject that notion that 'hate' is the key - and might simply say, 'we want to share in this thing that brings so much pride to the nation'

Well you can call it racism v racism if you like.

I support the development of rugby in African schools, suburbs etc. I support scholarships and busaries which already are probably the best in global rugby in getting the best players (of whatever colour) into the best schools. I support assistance to help all players with potential to physically develop as players as well as mentally via further education too.

Yet that is where it must stop.

Sure having coaches be more less biased helps... if bias is indeed there but social engineering sides doesn't work.

You say the boks were engineered... and yes no doubt there were non whites who were excluded unfairly yet it doesn't take away the fact they were the most successful team in rugby history during such. Doesn't take away the fact since they have bee introduced the boks have dropped down the pecking order.

It hurts many ways.

Firstly, guys who make the grade through merit will forever have a question mark over their heads. People even here believe Tendai Mtawarira is such (untrue). However he too has not been kept on his toes, never been pushed because he can't be dropped. Guys will never feel part of the group no matter what.

Secondly it makes more deserving guys miss out, resentment amongst those who make it to those who they see as don't deserve it and also the loss of guys who aren't willing to play with such rules.

uncle_nigel wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:We'll have to see. I'm glad to see them doing this.

Presumably because it makes their team crap enough for Wales and England to beat them more regularly.

No, more to do with a few comments from SA fans and the like which I just find a offensive.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

uncle_nigel wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:We'll have to see. I'm glad to see them doing this.

Presumably because it makes their team crap enough for Wales and England to beat them more regularly.

No, more to do with a few comments from SA fans and the like which I just find a offensive.

May I ask what you have found offensive? I'm sure we have all heard many things from many people on the subject before.. but today? If so may you expand?

Well there was you for a start, know you're a Scottish not SA but basically talking about genetic superiority, everything was fine with the big old white boys (paraphrasing); it doesn't sit well with me in 2016. As mentioned talknig to Springbok fans who won't follow the team anymore purely on the basis it's now a black team. Past comments from prominant members of this forum saying life in general under aprtheid was better for everyone. Just makes me realise why this is being pushed through.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Well there was you for a start, know you're a Scottish not SA but basically talking about genetic superiority, everything was fine with the big old white boys (paraphrasing); it doesn't sit well with me in 2016. As mentioned talknig to Springbok fans who won't follow the team anymore purely on the basis it's now a black team. Past comments from prominant members of this forum saying life in general under aprtheid was better for everyone. Just makes me realise why this is being pushed through.

Who said genetically superior?

I said South African Africans are much much shorter than Europeans. And its true whether you like it or are comfortable with it or not. If you have a problem with this then I think you're going to have a problem with much in life. It happens to be a fact and I gave you many links to support it... including those owned by African companies.

Differing heights doesn't mean genetically superior... but it may mean some people are better suited for some sports in question. Gymnastics tends to favour shorter persons as does weightlifting. Basketball favours taller people, rugby too as I showed you that in Englands test team there were only 5 people shorter than 6ft out of 35, 2 shorter than the national average. The link is undeniable no matter how you put it.
I myself would have been a better rugby player if I was taller. I was decent and achieve more than most but in the end physical stature stood in my way as it does for many. I was not supremely talented ala Neil Back, David Pocock etc that physical stature became obsolete but you could say that about many of the very best players today too?

Height is not just about genetics. Its nature and nuture combined. SA has a big HIV problem, it has a big poverty problem. Growth is stunted, people are too sick to learn to play, keep on playing etc. Yet even after all that is factored in... Africans are still shorter... and significantly so. It does matter.

There is no doubt there are many white South Africans who don't support black players. I've heard what you mentioned yes and they shouldn't be defended. But what you're asking for is revenge for crimes past. It doesn't help African south africans or South Africans so why bother? To knock Afrikaners off their perch? Would that make you feel better?

fa0019 wrote:

Who said genetically superior?

I did. I am genetically superior. There I said it. That's a weight off my shoulders. I'm out and proud!

fa0019 wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

fa0019 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Well something needs to be done. Racist setup for years and too many excuses to set it straight.

you say that as a voice of authority on the subject or purely because you see no end results right?

You know coaches are doing so right? You know schools are anti anything white right? From my experience they do their utmost, they go beyond their station to help young and potentially talented non white individuals.

If people could say well look the boks setup was racist then surely an introduction of non whites into the fold would prove that wrong. But the reality is and there is no getting away from this.... the boks during this era were the most dominant side in world rugby and since the introduction of social engineering they have got progressively worse.

Come on, fa0019.  Life is more than rugby.  And Apartheid was one of the purest examples of Social Engineering.  There are bound to be still rumbling ramifications and folk memories from that system.  It isn't exactly ancient history.  

As has been said they are replacing one form of social engineering with another.

No system is perfect, and its not like things cannot be improved. As far as I can see there are two key issues
1) That race or colour should not hinder the development of players.
2) That long term a more racially mixed middle class should develop which would mean that there are a more diverse pool of potential players who are not held back by the inequities of their background. Some diets help to make kids grow bigger, and those tend to cost. And Rugby is a game for all sizes but there are a lot of positions where size is crucial.

Where size is less important there are (and have been) some very prominent non white SA players. There is an issue with opportunity, but it is not the only issue.

https://businesstech.co.za/news/business/134749/black-vs-white-middle-class-in-south-africa/

People naturally assume white persons still dominate SA. The latest figures suggest the Black middle class is now twice the size of the white middle class and that excludes Cape coloureds and Asians. When combining white vs. non white middle class adults we see 2.62 million vs 8.37 million (or 3.2 times the size).

Not saying what you suggested isn't the way forward but its a presumption many in Europe hold (in error, innocent as it is).

Look I am no expert and am to a degree guilty of 'European thinking' - but I would expect the knock on effects (that might benefit rugby) to lag behind the growth of a non white middle class - maybe by a generation or two.

SecretFly wrote:

fa0019 wrote:

Who said genetically superior?

I did.  I am genetically superior.  There I said it.  That's a weight off my shoulders.  I'm out and proud!

I know I mean look at guys like Conor McGregor and um... CJ Stander!

That C O'J Stander now. COJ