How is the flawed selection process in South Africa fixed?

The framework. The cricket-loving people in South Africa have suddenly become aware of the shortcomings in the game’s architecture that allow certain players to compete internationally. That’s not particularly new, though. The emphasis on the s-word is novel.

Rob Walter’s statement on Tuesday, “Building a winning Proteas team is my number one imperative,” made this more apparent. To do that, I have to select the team that I believe will have the best chance of winning each time I choose a side. Having said that, the system must step up so that our team’s demographics change in six, twelve, or even two years, and especially when we host the 2027 World Cup.”

Walter was giving an explanation for why he had only one black player and five brown players in his roster for the men’s T20 World Cup in the United States and the Caribbean in June. Or why the country’s estimated white population was 60% although it was just 7.3%?

Walter is familiar with the setup. During his seven seasons as coach of the Titans, from 2013–14 to 2015–16, seven players—seven black and brown—became international players. However, he may have added a caveat to his comment, saying that a victorious team is not always a white squad. The players that represented South Africa in their first three men’s World Cups (1992, 1996, and 1999) were all white, with the exception of one. And yet, in all of those competitions, they were unable to advance to the final. They haven’t done so yet.

Walter’s primary focus is on trying to win World Cups. Finding enough black and brown players who have sufficiently escaped the conditions that most South Africans of their race face to play international cricket is not his duty. It is the system’s responsibility to make that team fairly represent South Africa. That is not what it has ever done. Rihan Richards, the president of CSA and the head of the members council, which consists of the presidents of the 15 province unions and is the highest decision-making body within CSA, is currently in charge of that system. Was Richards of the opinion that Walter was right?

Richards stated to Cricket sport, “Things don’t change unless we take responsibility.” “I therefore get what Rob is saying—that we need to evolve as a group. Because he feels that’s how he wants to play, he has sided with specialists. The system has to be made to incorporate that mindset. Everyone should be aware of our expectations and work towards them. Rob is acting in his own moral judgement. Thus, we must have faith in him. Since we’ve granted him authority, we must hold him responsible.

Richards was originally elected to the majority non-independent CSA board in 2013. The sports ministry assisted in forcing Richards to resign from office in October 2020. Two months prior, with the resignation of Chris Nenzani, Richards had taken over as president. Had the board not been removed, the accumulation of governance issues would have forced the game into a chasm from which it would have been difficult to climb out. The majority of the reorganised board’s members are independent, and Lawson Naidoo, the chair, now holds a significant amount of power. Given Richards’ vocal support for change and his ability to effect change, why aren’t other black and brown athletes wearing South Africa shirts?

“Because the decision-making process takes too long,” Richards remarked. “We must simplify it and make sure that everyone is responsible for the tasks they are assigned. We go on if they don’t. When it should take two months, we take seven or eight months to complete a task. It shouldn’t take ten years if it requires dismantling and reconstructing the system. We just keep praying for a better outcome. We need to refocus our spending and make the difficult decisions. What is and is not working needs to be assessed.

“The system must be trusted by the players. Regardless of their ethnicity, faith, or skin tone, they all seek equal opportunities. They want to know that the system supports and values them. However, there are a lot of flaws. The SA20 players’ salary bill exceeds our professional budget. Budgets for cricket at certain schools exceed those of the [provincial] affiliates.”

This sounds like vague weasel language from someone who is contributing to the issue. Richards, however, sincerely hopes to leave the system in a better state than when he found it: “The moment something bad is said about you, you try to place the blame and pass the blame on someone else.” Whether it’s the board, the CSA president, or the provincial presidents, we are all accountable collectively, and we may all flee and hide. However, I am responsible for leading the delegation to answer to the legislative portfolio committee and the Eminent Persons Group (EPG) about why we fall short of our racial targets.

Other national teams are theoretically allowed to choose without having to meet the requirements of a racial scorecard, as their players are believed to have fairly equal chances of succeeding. Every starting XI that the South Africans select is supposed to have at least six players of colour, with at least two of them being black. Should the figures fail to stabilise over a year, CSA will have to defend their actions to the legislature. If the politicians—many of whom couldn’t distinguish a thigh pad from a googly—were not satisfied, they had the authority to compel the CSA to stop allowing their teams to call South Africa.

If you think that’s extreme, think about how people would respond if six white players and five South Asian players were on the winning team at a crowded Eden Gardens. They are neither England nor New Zealand. Their jerseys say “India” and they are dressed in a very pretty shade of blue. Would they be accepted all the way from Kaniyakumari to Indira Col?

South Africa is sharply split according to socioeconomic status. It is the world’s most unequal society, according to the World Bank. In general, white people who were wealthy during apartheid—which ended in 1994—continue to be wealthy. The black middle class is expanding, yet the black impoverished of apartheid still live in poverty. Even if racism is no longer legal, its principles nevertheless govern far too many aspects of South Africa’s daily life. or doesn’t.

Attempts to create a better, more equitable society are thwarted by pervasive government corruption, widespread hostility to change among White people, and the propensity of the wealthy, both new and old, White and Black, to distance themselves from the numerous difficulties facing their nation. Among all that, cricket is a piece of flotsam and jetsam.

The majority of white areas have the superior facilities. Black and brown players are essentially compelled to put up with the relative absurdity of what were once exclusively white elite schools in order to succeed in the game. Rich families can support a younger family member’s desire to play professional cricket. In an economy where the unemployment rate increased to 32.1% in the final quarter of 2023—that is, the unreliable government statistic—poorer families depend on them to secure a legitimate job.

In South Africa, there are more Black and Brown people who play and watch cricket than White people, but at higher levels of the game, this isn’t accurately reflected on the pitch. According to Cricbuzz, the CSA board was given a comprehensive plan on Friday with the intention of expediting the development of black batters, the least visible kind of elite cricket players in the nation. An estimated USD 5.4 million was invested on transformation by CSA in the most recent fiscal year. Coaches dedicate countless hours to finding black and brown candidates. They deserve better and won’t want to hear this, but ultimately, a lot of their efforts are ineffective.

Since it became legal to choose men’s Test players from any race upon re-admission in 1991, there have been 131 such selections; of these, 93 have been white and have occupied 2,361 of the 3,212 spots in the XIs. It is 73.50% and 70.99%. Using this unrefined metric, there have been about ten times as many white players in South Africa’s Test teams, occupying over ten times as many playing spots.

Reading the account of Dean Elgar’s Test career ending doesn’t give you that sense. It makes sense that he was furious when Temba Bavuma abruptly took over as South Africa’s captain in February of last year. Following the Indian home series, Elgar announced his retirement in January. Elgar’s harsh account of what happened has surfaced in multiple pieces, the most recent of which was released on Sunday. The first was published in March and lacks supporting proof. Even when he is cited as saying something that could have negative legal ramifications, such “Shukri Conrad is the reason my Test career was cut short.” Cricbuzz contacted Conrad for comment, just for the record. He still hasn’t replied.

The release of the piece has sparked outrage, which some South Africans may interpret as racism. When a brown coach bench a white captain and insert a black player in his stead, what are we to expect? Naturally, conceited, frail, systemic whiteness will be terribly sad. This will be viewed by some as just another instance of South Africa’s descent into identity politics.

According to the newspaper that featured the Elgar comment, Graeme Smith was let go from his position as director of cricket for the CSA. Well, he resigned, really. That’s undoubtedly an honest mistake, but it feeds the racist narrative that black and brown people are incompetent and are attempting to divert attention by deliberately eradicating white greatness.

Rugby wins, which mutes such cruelty. The Springboks hold the record for most World Cup victories—four. Like cricket at the time, they had one non-white player, the brown Chester Williams, when they won the first time around, in 1995. When they won in 2007, that amounted to seven players out of a 32-man roster, including injury replacements. In 2019 it was 12 of 31, and in 2023 it was 14 of 35. The brain behind both of those recent achievements stated this week that keeping the race-obsessed at away involved more than just balancing players.

In Potchefstroom, on Friday, Rassie Erasmus accepted an honorary doctorate from North West University. “We struggle with the word transformation because a lot of us love to connect that to [moving] black people in and white people out,” Erasmus remarked. “But change entails transformation in other nations. You make adjustments to your methods of operation, public relations, defence of your nation, management team diversity, team selection, and work ethic. That’s metamorphosis, that’s change. We brought the word to its true sense.

As a player, coach, assistant coach, and technical analyst, I experienced every stage of the process, and I saw many errors that I most likely committed myself. I saw what was going on while I was in Ireland [coaching Munster in 2016 and 2017], and I said to myself, ‘We can correct this if we stop doing it by embarrassing a group of people or individuals.’ That served as the main tenet. You feel really safe and free to be yourself with the Springbok team. It’s not a place to hide, though.”

Walter may be weary of hiding, but he may not be too weary to admit it. The cricket system in South Africa has a lot of the former, but not so much of the latter.