CRICKET Second Test- Australia v South Africa

[1910]

Right so because discrimination was okay in 1945 it's fine to continue with it now...

Interesting view of progress.

You think just organically they're going to just play a sport they have been banned from no help or undoing of wrongs?

Ntini said he encountered it all the time; it's still there.

 

[The True King]

You think just organically they're going to just play a sport they have been banned from no help or undoing of wrongs?

I think you can do that at a grass roots level.

Discrimination in professional sports shouldn't be justified by pointing at things that were done 80 years ago.

 

[1910]

I think you can do that at a grass roots level.

Discrimination in professional sports shouldn't be justified by pointing at things that were done 80 years ago.

If you don't talk about the past you can't understand why they need to fix it. They aren't trying to get black people to play the sport because they have this inclusive awesome happy past.

Just ignoring it won't help.

 

[Fitzy]

Why is it odd that the country that stopped black people playing for 50 years now has to try and get 80% of the country playing the sport again?

It's across all three formats and across the season- it's not six per game.

Who are the white players averaging 60 in Test cricket kept at home? There are none- when SA lose it's Ntini's fault he lived with that for 100 Tests.

Well that wasn’t explained properly then was it, hence why I found it quite strange. Regardless, the national team should be who deserves it not some sorry apology for what happened well in the past and certainly not for some target market bullshit. You can never get rid of that quota now without putting intense scrutiny in the organisation. If SA cricket don’t have the integrity or values to select players who deserve it without taking into account race than they have far bigger issues than black/coloured participation. Back in 2016 they had Hashim Amla, Kagiso Rabada, Temba Bavuma, Keshav Maharaj, JP Duminy and Vernon Philander to have that many players of colour and feel the need to publicly introduce a quota shows they care more about there bottom line in the grass roots than there current crop of cricketers. The quota immediately allows the public to question the legitimacy of every single one of there selections the second they don’t live up to performance. An over correction of the highest order to satisfy the whole woke agenda that leaves no winners except the S.A. crickets bottom line in the long term. Really poor attempt to make a sport more popular with a demographic when discrimination is being introduced to obtain justice for what happened 80 years ago in none of these players lifetimes. Absolutely 0 need to introduce that quota in 2016 when you already had 6 coloured players in there test team alone. Same outcome occurs without the public quota.

 

[1910]

Well that wasn’t explained properly then was it, hence why I found it quite strange. Regardless, the national team should be who deserves it not some sorry apology for what happened well in the past and certainly not for some target market bullshit. You can never get rid of that quota now without putting intense scrutiny in the organisation. If SA cricket don’t have the integrity or values to select players who deserve it without taking into account race than they have far bigger issues than black/coloured participation. Back in 2016 they had Hashim Amla, Kagiso Rabada, Temba Bavuma, Keshav Maharaj, JP Duminy and Vernon Philander to have that many players of colour and feel the need to publicly introduce a quota shows they care more about there bottom line in the grass roots than there current crop of cricketers. The quota immediately allows the public to question the legitimacy of every single one of there selections the second they don’t live up to performance. An over correction of the highest order to satisfy the whole woke agenda that leaves no winners except the S.A. crickets bottom line in the long term. Really poor attempt to make a sport more popular with a demographic when discrimination is being introduced to obtain justice for what happened 80 years ago in none of these players lifetimes. Absolutely 0 need to introduce that quota in 2016 when you already had 6 coloured players in there test team alone. Same outcome occurs without the public quota.

They came back in 2016 because the government felt numbers were falling, they spoke about it before that and wanted it but rugby aiming for 50% and cricket 4/11 wasn't working. So, they enforced it.

Cricket, Rugby, Netball and athletics were all subject to the same rules.

It's designed to force you to identify talented young players and nurture the talent. You can't just put your efforts into white kids because you need your team to have black players.

 

[The True King]

If you don't talk about the past you can't understand why they need to fix it. They aren't trying to get black people to play the sport because they have this inclusive awesome happy past.

Just ignoring it won't help.

Constantly bringing up the past isn't some sort of antidote to fixing things either. In my experience most arguments that continually bring those sorts of things up are just seeking to be more divisive, especially when its to make comparisons or justifications.

I am no expert on RSA cricket, for all I know they might be the best options available. I just think this sort of policy lends itself to scrutiny when you go from being very competitive to a laughing stock. If anything this failed tour is just going to put a spotlight back home on a bunch of blokes who weren't fit for the job to begin with - the cycle then begins again when they go back to the selection table and a restricted with who they can pick.

 

[BooKhaki]

Why is it odd that the country that stopped black people playing for 50 years now has to try and get 80% of the country playing the sport again?

It's across all three formats and across the season- it's not six per game.

Who are the white players averaging 60 in Test cricket kept at home? There are none- when SA lose it's Ntini's fault he lived with that for 100 Tests.

Racism now doesn't fix racism in the past. And yes, not picking someone because they aren't the right race is 100% racism.

 

[1910]

Racism now doesn't fix racism in the past. And yes, not picking someone because they aren't the right race is 100% racism.

It was only the 90's it "went away" to think you change government and click your fingers and 60 million people are no longer racist is pretty fanciful. Those same people are still there running cricket, netball and athletics- they didn't just die in 1994.

Do you really doubt that they would still have people in charge that don't want a player picked for his skin?

If you don't have rules in place if you just trust those guys to do the right thing now- do you really think anything will change?

 

[Fernando]

Do you really doubt that they would still have people in charge that don't want a player picked for his skin?

I don't think anyone doubts that because that's their official policy

 

[The True King]

It was only the 90's it "went away" to think you change government and click your fingers and 60 million people are no longer racist is pretty fanciful. Those same people are still there running cricket, netball and athletics- they didn't just die in 1994.

Do you really doubt that they would still have people in charge that don't want a player picked for his skin?

If you don't have rules in place if you just trust those guys to do the right thing now- do you really think anything will change?

Given about only 8% of the 60mil population are white, you would like to hope it's not that fanciful.

You say the same people are in charge... have you had a look at the Cricket South Africa board?
I absolutely agree they shouldn't be trusting those in power to do the right thing now - their last 4 CEO's have been dismissed for misconduct and/or corruption and that's within the last 10 years. They have also had the ICC threaten to suspend them due to government interference with the sport.

 

[BooKhaki]

It was only the 90's it "went away" to think you change government and click your fingers and 60 million people are no longer racist is pretty fanciful. Those same people are still there running cricket, netball and athletics- they didn't just die in 1994.

Do you really doubt that they would still have people in charge that don't want a player picked for his skin?

If you don't have rules in place if you just trust those guys to do the right thing now- do you really think anything will change?

I'd argue a quota system gives people ammunition to be racist.

If you have racist rules in place, it promotes racism and gives ammunition to racist people to have a sook about someone based purely off their skin, comments like "he's only there cuz he's black" sound ridiculous if there isn't a quota system in place. But right now try and argue for Zondo being in the side. He is 100% a diversity hire, and it's shameful.

I've heard the quota was part of the reason ABD retired earlier than he should have.