Black Lives Matter: perspectives from South African cricket

Abstract

The killing of George Floyd sparked mass protests worldwide and forced all facets of society, including sport, to re-examine race, racism and inequality. Given South Africa’s post-apartheid transition from institutionalized racial segregation to a democracy in 1994, transformation has been prioritized. However, nearly 30 years post-apartheid South African sport is still struggling to transform. The Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement has given impetus to many prominent South African sportspersons to raise their voices. This paper, drawing on narrative inquiry aims to better understand the experiences of black cricketers in South Africa in the wake of BLM. Personal, radio and webinar interviews with leading players and administrators, media reports and social media forums were used to collect data. A thematic analysis was followed and four key themes emerged from the data were: critiques of a rainbow utopia; the timing of the critique; conundrums of quotas and breaking the system.

Keywords:

• Black Lives Matter
• South Africa
• sport
• transformation
• race

Introduction

The death of George Floyd and the global protests that followed placed the spotlight on racism in society. With sport being a microcosm of society, no sport organization or governing body has been immune or exempted from engaging in conversations regarding diversity and representation (Hylton 2020; Liew 2020). Liew (2020) further contends that ‘one of the great achievements of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement has been to expose how racism operates in its totality’; from economic domination to white boardrooms and administration. BLM has provided an opportunity for those ‘who have no interest in addressing racial inequalities’ to being confronted with its effects (Liew 2020). Furthermore, it has created a space for athletes’ voices to be heard. Liew underscores that for many, the vocalization of feelings have been brewing under the surface for a long time, and have previously been held in check for fear of retribution. Hylton (2020, 1) further contends that ‘race and its consequent tensions in sport resemble broader tensions wherever they reside’.

Within a South African context all facets of society, including sport, has been impacted greatly by the apartheid policies which legalized racial segregation from 1948 to 1994 (Swart 2018). The 1995 Rugby World Cup is regarded as a momentous occasion in South Africa’s sport history with Nelson Mandela donning a springbok jersey, the symbol of the apartheid state, at the finals which represented the transition to a new South Africa, ‘the Rainbow Nation’ (Van der Merwe 2007). Much was expected in relation to transforming sport in South Africa. While South Africa appointed its first black rugby captain, Siya Kolisi, in 2018 (CNN. 2018); after nearly three decades of democracy, transformation still remains a challenge (Swart and Martín-González in press). Only recently has Kolisi broken his silence and showed his support for the movement, indicating that he previously steered clear from the topic as he was ‘scared’ (ENCA 2020). Similarly, other prominent sport personalities have started speaking out. Thus, this paper attempts to utilize narrative inquiry to better understand the experiences of black athletes in South Africa, using cricket players as an illustrative case, in the wake of BLM. Furthermore, it can provide important information concerning the experiences of racism and transformation in South African sport from the perspectives of athletes which could be used to inform policy and management in the future.

Sport and transformation in South Africa

During the apartheid era, sport in South Africa was divided along racial lines as mentioned previously. Sport boycotts and protests were common occurrences throughout this period culminating in South Africa’s isolation from international sport (Swart 2018). Along with the international sport boycott, a non-racial sport movement, headed by the South African Council of Sport (SACOS) in the 1980s, supported the principle of ‘no normal sport in an abnormal society’ (Swart and Martín-González in press). Just prior to the demise of apartheid in the early 1990s, the National Sport Congress (NSC) emerged as more prominent than SACOS (Nauright 1997) and started negotiating as to the sport structures that would be required post-apartheid, with their white counterparts (Murray and Merrett 2004).

The inception of democracy in 1990 brought with it the promise of change to South Africa’s economy and society and sport played a symbolic role in creating a post-apartheid nation-state (Maralack 2011). The post-apartheid political project was based on the core beliefs of nation building, non-racialism, equity, transformation and development. The White Paper for Sport and Recreation, ‘Getting the Nation to Play’, (Maralack 2011; RSA 1997) was the first policy for sport in South Africa and was grounded in the Reconstruction and Development Program (RDP), the then ideological framework of the African National Congress (ANC), the new ruling party. This framework set the post-apartheid economic and social development agenda, seeking to reverse race-based uneven development and re-integrate South Africa into the global economy (Maralack 2011).

Forging a post-apartheid South African identity through sport and competing in international competitions (Maralack 2011; Carlin 2008; Nauright 1997) became cornerstones of the emerging policy values. Growing support for victory in international sport competition fuelled arguments in favour of an elite sports development program. The cricket ‘Friendship Tour’ by South Africa to India in 1991 was the first international event announcing the arrival of a post-apartheid South Africa on the global sports stage. The irony is that the Friendship Tour was hastily arranged by the same architects of the rebel cricket tours in the 1980s, breaking the global sports moratorium against apartheid South Africa. Immediate participation in the 1992 Cricket World Cup, the 1992 Olympic Games and rugby and football tournaments were used to support the argument to what was possible in a post-apartheid South Africa and that investing in elite development would ‘get the nation to play’ (Maralack 2014). However, facing public criticism about declining performance in global sports events (2000 Olympic Games and 1998 Football World Cup), the Minister of Sport assigned a Ministerial Task Team (MTT) in 2000 to investigate ‘factors that negatively impacted on South Africa’s sport’ (Maralack 2011). At the MTT deliberations community organizations re-emphasized that sport transformation had to be placed within broader social, economic and redistribution transformation processes. At the same time as the MTT process, a coalition of sport organizations met at the ‘Colloquium on Racism in Sport’ held in Durban in September 2001 (Maralack 2011). Delegates argued that transformation must address the persistent prejudice of ‘racism, exclusion, marginalization and the failure to create an environment that would be conducive to creating equal opportunities for all’ (Colloquium on Racism in Sport 2001 cited by Maralack 2011, 104). It was suggested that failure to redistribute resources for sport, to social and economic under-developed and predominantly black communities perpetuated the persistent inequalities and continued lack of black sportspersons in South African national sports teams.

Responding to the MTT proposals, the state established the South African Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee (SASCOC) to ‘restore order to sport’ and reduce ‘fragmentation and procrastination in sport’ (Maralack 2011), consolidating administrative structures, decision-making arrangements and resources. First CEO of SASCOC, Moss Mashishi, announced at the inaugural address that to break with the failures of the past, the period between 2005 and 2015 needed to be viewed as ‘the decade of fundamental transformation’ because ‘transformation is the key word…and is one of the serious gaps that exist in the sports environment’ (Majola 2005, 9). However, a dispute between SASCOC and the Ministry of Sport stymied the ‘decade of fundamental transformation’ driven by the semi-autonomous SASCOC. Instead, a new process led by Government departments, sports governing bodies and community organizations developed another ‘integrated sports policy’, towards ‘seamless implementation of agreed plans’ (RSA 2012a). The state, through the National Sport and Recreation Plan (NSRP), required sport governing bodies, sports councils and other demand groups to introduce programs and targets for fourteen core strategies in accordance with the sports master plan. Although the development of sport was argued to be holistic, integrated and focused on the development of the entire sports development system, transformation remains the core value directing policy. ‘The essence of the sport transformation strategy is focused on changing demographic profiles on and off the field of play, ensuring equitable access and resource availability, skill and capability development on and off the field’ (RSA 2012b, 10). Thus, a broader approach was adopted in comparison to the period just after the end of apartheid when a quota system was introduced in sport to redress historical inequities; however resulting in some players being stigmatized as a result of this this system (Swart 2018).

It is evident that since this first White Paper on Sport its subsequent reiterations to date issues of racial representativeness in sports after apartheid has influenced policy debates. The NSRP (RSA 2012a) and Sport Transformation Charter (RSA 2012b), sub-titled ‘From Policy to Practice’, caps nearly 20 years of intense policy deliberations, initiated in 1994 and re-initiated in 1998, 2000, and again in 2005. Failure to reach consensus through these various policy reiterations led various Sports Ministers to lament that it is inconceivable that despite democratic intervention and significant investment, that contestation over sport policy, social transformation and sport development remains the most vexing and divisive issue for post-apartheid sport (Stofile 2005a, 2005b). Even more disturbing is that the first report on transformation was only published in 2012 (SRSA 2019) thereby highlighting the deep-seated contestation of transformation in South African sport (Swart and Martín-González in press). This status quo is still apparent today and was brought to the surface within the context of BLM in South Africa.

South African sport and BLM

The BLM movement was initiated in the wake of the acquittal of the shooter in the death of Trayvon Martin in 2013 (BLM n.d.). With the death of Michael Brown, who was unarmed, by a police office in Ferguson Missouri in 2014, the movement acquired widespread attention (Coombs and Cassilo 2017). These protests were confined mainly to the United States, however it was the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota in May 2020 that sparked nationwide and global protests. Le Poidevin (2020) underscores that the incident reminded them of their experiences of racism in their own backyards. The world of sport has not been immune to these protests.

Kaufman and Wolff (2010) contend that sport and the struggle for social and political justice are not mutually exclusive. Sport as a vehicle for social change and athletes engaged in activism are also not new phenomena; be it the international sport boycott of South Africa or the many prominent Black athletes such as Muhammad Ali, Arthur Ashe, Tommie Smith and John Carlos, who advocated for civil rights in the 1960s.

Shoals (2016) notes that Muhammad Ali’s death in 2016 led to a resurgence of activism by athletes in the US. Coombs and Cassilo (2017) highlight that some of the most vocal supporters of the BLM movement have been athletes, citing LeBron James as a case in point. Another athlete who used his platform to raise awareness and protest against racialized oppression and police brutality was San Francisco 49ers quarterback, Colin Kaepernick, who was ostracized for taking a knee during the US national anthem (Coombs et al. 2019; Boykoff and Carrington 2020). With the death of George Floyd, more prominent athletes worldwide voiced their support for the BLM movement such as Naomi Osaka and Coco Gauff (tennis), Lewis Hamilton (F1), and has also extended to international teams (Bundesliga teams, West Indies cricket team) and leagues (English Premier League) showing their support (BBC Sport 2020; Ghani 2020).

In South Africa, the BLM movement has sparked controversy amongst sport administrators and athletes. Lungisani Ngidi, a South African cricketer, faced backlash when he indicated the need to discuss BLM (Botton 2020). Many national cricketers and rugby players supported Ngidi, with the current Springbok captain, Siya Kolisi, leading the call by current sport stars for drastic changes to transform sports across the board (Botton 2020). Cricket South Africa (CSA) welcomed the statement of support made by 31 players and coaches for Ngidi’s BLM stance, and expressed that CSA is actively working on addressing the inequalities of the past (Dhyani 2020). In what has been described as one of the strongest statements from a sport federation in South Africa regarding the matter, South African Rugby CEO indicated that they would need to deal with uneasy conversations that have arisen from black players (Tshwaku 2020). This statement was made in the wake up of 49 (black) former rugby players and coaches who expressed their support for Ngidi and the BLM movement. Roux underscored, ‘The first thing we need to do is to let people tell their stories. But more importantly, we have to listen to those stories and hear what they are saying.’ (Tshwaku 2020). With many well-known South African athletes revealing their own personal battles with institutionalized racism, the current Minister of Sport Nathi Mthethwa committed government to resolving this challenge and said, ‘Discrimination has spread like a “cancer” through South African sport’. (Botton 2020). Kaufman and Wolff (2010) maintain that sport can and should be a vehicle for progressive social change. Hylton (2020, 3) further emphasizes that BLM politics is pertinent in that it ‘raises the spectre of insidious racialized processes at all levels of society that aggregate to disadvantage and alter individual and social-group opportunities and experiences’.

Methodology

Narrative inquiry is considered as a comparatively new qualitative methodology (Clandinin and Huber 2010). They add that it entails the study of experience understood narratively and structures new theoretical understandings of people’s experiences. Webster and Mertova (2007) indicate that narrative inquiry is an interpretive research method that can offer significant insight into lived experience through the telling or living of stories and information sharing. Haydon, Browne, and Van Der Riet (2018) add that narrative inquiry permits the exploration of the socio-cultural and physical environment that impacts individual experience. Furthermore, narrative inquiry investigates the narrative from a temporal, social and spatial perspective (Haydon et al. 2018), thereby creating a conceptual framework in which varying field texts (data) and analyses can be utilized (Clandinin and Huber 2010). Clandinin and Huber (2010) add that narrative inquiry is an iterative process starting with the telling of stories in field to data and then the final research texts.

By adopting a narrative approach, it allowed for the research participants’ (i.e. well-known Black South African sporting personalities) voices to be heard through a natural process of story-telling (Harper, Ward, and Silburn 2020). Consequently, this allowed for a deeper understanding of racism in South African sport to be investigated within the context of BLM to be achieved through a rich description of their experiences (Gordon et al. 2015). This narrative inquiry was undertaken in two phases. Phase 1 (data collection) entailed obtaining the narratives from several prominent black South African sport stars and administrators (past and present) concerning their personal experiences and knowledge of playing sport in South Africa. The researchers monitored radio and webinar interviews and undertook personal interviews with leading players and administrators. Media reports and social media forums of protagonists and antagonists in the unfolding debates between 14 July and 31 August 2020 were also used to collect data. Phase 2 (thematic analysis) involved the identification of key themes and trends that emerged from the data. The researchers analyzed the data in terms of key words, similarities and differences which were then further categorized and coded into themes. All ethical considerations were taken into account in order to commence the study and the necessary approvals provided.

Results

The following themes emerged from the data: first, Rainbow utopia or breaking the code; second, why raise it now and not at the peak of their careers?; third; the conundrums of quotas and numbers game; fourth, ‘we are not here to break the system, it is already broken’.

Theme 1: ‘rainbow utopia or breaking the code’

Coming off the high of claiming both the T20 and one day international Player of the Year awards at the CSA 2019 awards on 4 July 2020, 24-year old Lungisani Ngidi told a virtual press conference on 6 July 2020: ‘As a nation, we have a past that is very difficult, with racial discrimination, so it’s definitely something we will be addressing as a team and if we are not, it’s something I will bring up’. Referring to the unfolding attention on the BLM movement, racism and exclusion globally, Ngidi pointed out that ‘it’s something that we need to take very seriously and like the rest of the world is doing, make the stand’.

He argued that standing in solidarity with the fight for racial equality that spread across football, rugby, basketball and other sports should be a focus for the Proteas (referring to the South African cricket team). By drawing attention to the continued challenge of racial exclusion and racism in South African sport, Lungi Ngidi made a rallying call for South African cricketers to get behind the ‘Black Lives Matter’ movement and he ‘did a great thing’ argued Monde Zondeki, another black national cricketer, ‘but I did not see the backlash coming’. In a newspaper article, Zaahid Nanabey pointed out that ‘Lungi Ngidi delivered the first ball in an unprecedented spell’, showing up the cracks in the edifice of the rainbow nation and its sports teams.

While Ngidi’s comments gained immediate traction among black cricketers and public, former cricketers raised their reservations and ridiculed Ngidi and the BLM movement, highlighting the cracks in South Africa’s cricket system. At the same time that the great West Indian fast bowler Michael Holding stated on Sky Sports Cricket interview on 8 July 2020 that ‘until we educate the entire human race, this thing will not stop’ (Sky Sports 2020), ex SA cricketers Boeta Dippenaar, Pat Symcox, Brian MacMillan and Rudi Steyn opposed Ngidi by indicating on Facebook ‘what nonsense is this. He must take his own stand if he wishes’ and ‘Black Lives Matter have become nothing more than a political movement’.

This unleashed a swift response initially by black ex-international players commending current fast bowler Lungi Ngidi, for raising his support for the BLM movement and demanding an anti-racism stance by the cricket authorities. Signatories included fast bowler Makhaya Ntini, who played in 101 Test matches, Vernon Philander, Herschelle Gibbs, Ashwell Prince, Paul Adams and JP Duminy, all in the top International Cricket Council (ICC) rankings of various cricket formats at some stage of their careers (Agence France Presse 2020). A total of 36 people, including five coaches, were named on the document. The players argued that despite three decades of cricket unity,

the views expressed from one side of the racial divide are still very much part of our lives… We see this an opportunity for CSA to be unequivocal about its position and to make sure the problem is confronted and we also invite our fellow white cricketers to join in this move to defend human dignity.

Ashwell Prince stated in a public presentation at the United Coalition of Sport and Community Based Organisations (UCSCBO) that ‘We are not surprised at their comments. Given South Africa's well-known past, black cricketers have borne the brunt of subtle and overt racist behaviour for many years, including from some colleagues’.

Prince, who played in 66 Tests, posted on Twitter that racial transformation had been met with resistance and ‘there had never been any unity’ in the decade he played for South Africa. Experiencing this differently, Monde Zondeki, national fast bowler pointed out on 13 August that ‘I was aware of the pain, but I did not understand the reasons’. He was in particular taken aback by the revelations made by Makhaya Ntini, the poster cricketer for cricket transformation. Ntini grew up as a cow herd in Mdingi, in rural South Africa to become the first South African to claim 10 wickets at Lords and reached an ICC ranking in the top 5 in 2009. On 3 March 2006, Ntini also achieved the best bowling figures by a South African in a One Day International (ODI), demolishing Australia with six wickets for 22 runs. A popular figure in South African sport, Ntini was voted their favourite sportsman in a poll conducted by the South African Press Association (ESPNCricInfo 2005). CSA’s CEO Gerald Majola, at the time, stated that

This independent research shows that we are well on our way to achieving our aim of making South African cricket a truly national sport. Makhaya’s popularity is a result of his hard work, winning ways and warm personality. He is a credit to cricket and to the nation.

Yet the revelations by Ntini 15 years later shows that the rainbow racial project paid scant attention to the lived experiences of black cricketers, denying the depth and multiple dimensions of racism.

On 17 July 2020, Makhaya Ntini revealed his loneliness and isolation in the South African cricket team, caused by his team mates, in spite of being a stellar performer on the international stage, playing a central role in the ascendency of South Africa to the top ICC Test and One Day rankings, being an outstanding player in the reign of Graeme Smith who had become one of the most successful cricket captains, and being the poster for cricket’s development and transformation programmes. In an interview with the South African national television station SABC's Morning Live (SABC 2020), Ntini openly relayed his disappointment at being ostracized by his white teammates. Ntini indicated that he was always alone and would run between the hotel and grounds to avoid the team bus. He said that,

We would get to the stadium at the same time, I would bowl to them, we would wear the same clothes and sing the same national anthem. I had to find a way to overcome those things. I had to find a way, and that way turned out to be the best weapon in my life.

I would go to the driver of the bus early in the morning, and I would give him my bag. I would say to him, ‘I will meet you at the ground?’ I would put on my running shoes and run to the cricket ground. On my way back, I would give the bus driver my dirty clothes and say, ‘I'll see you at the hotel’. I would run all the way back to the hotel.

Reflecting on this period, he indicated that ‘I was running away from that loneliness of driving back to the hotel. If I’m sitting at the back, the rest of them are at the front,’ he said. ‘I was forever lonely’.

In the expose of his team mates obliviousness to at best the racial exclusion and at worst the racial tensions and indifferences, he noted that

Being lonely is not having someone come knocking on your door and say let's go for dinner. That's loneliness on its own. You’ll watch friends calling each other, making plans right in front of you, and then you’ll be skipped. They will go along by themselves. They will have dinner, lunch and breakfast at the same time. If I was the first one in the breakfast room, the next guy will never come sit next to me.

He laments how CSA unceremoniously cut ties with him as a player without the series of retirement activities presented for other senior players: ‘All of them, I watched them playing in every single city in South Africa because they were retiring. I was never given that opportunity. Mine was shut down immediately. A month later I lost my contract’.

The stellar career of the first rural black (African) to ascend the heights of excellence at various cricket cathedrals of the cricket world could not belie the thin veneer of the rainbow utopia. The question resonating in South Africa at present is why did these players not speak out at the time?

Theme 2: why raise it now and not at the peak of their careers?

As the narratives have been relayed by numerous ex-players, the depth of complicity and deception emerges. Zondeki notes that when he was new to franchise cricket and harbouring dreams of playing for the national team, he idolised Ntini. Yet much whispering among players and coaches indicated that Ntini would return from ‘training camps in tears’. So why did they not speak up?

Ntini points out that

These are things we thought we’d go to the grave with them. Even though they were painful, but at the same time you can’t go running around telling people what is happening to you because they will say you’re a sore loser who didn’t appreciate what was given to him.

He indicates that ‘This couldn’t have come at a better time. I think this is the right moment, the right time. We’re still young. We are able to sit down with our own kids, and we are able to reach them’.

Others such as Ethy Mbhalati (@ethy81) were more blunt arguing on 14 July 2020 that ‘black cricketers have suffered enough from day one, and I am not surprised why some stupid persons attacking me why (I) am starting to talk now’. Contradicting the commonly held belief that sports are one of the most meritocratic, colour blind institutions (Brown 2006; Carrington 2010), Mbhalati states

we were threatened by the unions/franchise, if we talk we going to lose our jobs/contracts and by then we were depending on them financially. We can’t talk because we will be victimised, we can’t talk cause they will take away the bread that we feed our families with.

The paralysis expressed by black players at their peak to speak out against racist and exclusionary actions is mirrored in systemic paralysis dealing with cases when they did arise. Numerous instances of complaints were raised informally and one is highlighted here as a formalized complaint and raised with the appropriate authorities.

In 2015, Khaya Zondo was selected in the touring squad to India. Ashwell Prince and Thami Tsolekile highlighted in interviews that the mysterious omission of Zondi from a selected Proteas national team to face India in a deciding 5th ODI in Mumbai was a seminal moment in South African cricket (UCSCBO 2020). Prince indicated ‘I know that he was selected as I was a selector and yet he did not play the next day’. Players in the squad became concerned at the inequity resulting in some cricketers standing up to question race-based injustices in team selections. A concerned group in the touring party referred to as ‘Black Cricketers in Unity’, formalized their concerns in a letter that questioned the omission of Zondo that reduced him to the only non-playing travelling member of that 2015 tour to India. Ashwell Prince’s arguments that players were picked to satiate the transformation target ‘points to an unsightly trend of black cricketers being used as “water carriers” and not getting game time (News 24 2020)’. Reports stimulated by the Ngidi moment suggest that skipper AB de Villiers had vehemently blocked Khaya Zondo’s inclusion in the squad for the fifth and final ODI at Mumbai (CricTracker 2020). De Villiers had even threatened to walk out of the national side if Zondo was selected, and recently reported (CricTracker 2020). The news outlet quotes former CSA President Norman Arendse’s report into the incident, confirming that Zondo’s name was on the team sheet ahead of the fifth ODI. However, he was removed from the playing XI hours before the match, contrary to the CSA selection policy. Sibusiso Mjikeliso, a journalist, asked in August 2020, why the report by advocate Norman Arendse’s investigation into the saga has not been acted upon (Mjikeliso 2020). This report also came against the backdrop of a year when spinner Aaron Phangiso did not play a single game in the 2015 Cricket World Cup, again the only squad member not to do so. As a mark of protest, once the tour concluded, the group ‘Black Players in Unity’ continued speaking about the implications of the controversy involving Zondo, however, no consensus was reached.

Questions about quotas remained close to the surface throughout South Africa’s sport transition. Asked why he did not speak up sooner, Zondeki noted ‘We can’t talk cause we are quota players. There’s always that side of the story’, a debate we turn to next.

Theme 3: the conundrums of quotas and the numbers game

As humiliating and mentally scarring the Khaya Zondo and ‘Black Players in Unity’ experiences were, the non-selection of Geoffrey Toyana as national cricket coach in 2017 highlights the complexity of race, racial quotas and the substantive meaning of merit selections in sport. The application of racial quotas in South Africa to ensure equality in sport have been notable since the first post-transition Cricket Friendship tour to India in 1991 and has been contentious for its usefulness and divisiveness over the past 30 years.

South Africa was readmitted to international cricket in 1991 after the moratorium imposed by the ICC due to apartheid was lifted. The South African national team made a short tour of India in 1991, referred to as the Friendship Tour. Even though South Africa had not held its first democratic election, did not have a post-apartheid national flag or anthem, it played as the first non-racial South African on the Friendship Tour to India and the 1992 Cricket World Cup in Australia and New Zealand. The decade saw a number of tours of South Africa by major international teams as well as the continued playing of domestic competitions. Only two black players were included on the 1991 tour, Faiek Davids and Hoosain Manack. It has been assumed since 1991 that Davids and Manack were not given game time even though they were selected for the squad. In a public interview, Davids dispelled that myth, arguing that he was never in the playing squad but was included as an additional member with Hansie Cronje, Derek Crookes and Hoosain Manack. He points out that ‘two weeks before unification was announced, I was contacted by Ali Bacher to be included as an additional player and not part of the playing squad. Although we trained with the squad there was never an intention for us to play’. It is significant that Cronje and Crookes, who were classified white were integrated into the national team at later stages but that Davids and Manack, the two black players would not have that honour. Reflecting on being selected once again as an additional member for the 1992 World Cup Squad, he questions: ‘I don’t know what happened in the unity talks… but it is clear that players were sacrificed in the name of unity. All these years have gone by and we could never share our stories until now’.

Toyana who was an emerging cricketer from Soweto, a black township in Johannesburg, in the 1990s, points out that ‘you felt that you were on trial every single time you walked on the field, one failure away from being on the bench. No one can perform freely under those circumstances. No one’. He highlights that in the 1990s

When we were coming through, transformation was something new. And back then there only had to be one black African in the playing 11. There would usually be two of us in the squad, so you would have a situation where the black players, bowler or batter, were vying for the same spot,

referring to his days playing in the old Supersport Series.

I still don’t know how you choose a team along those lines, because it seemed as if the plan was to get the quota out of the way and then worry about the actual team. As that one guy, you felt so isolated, and you wondered what the rest of the team thought about you even being there. You had to be very mentally tough.

It is suggested that Ashwell Prince (News18.com 2020)

found a place in the national team for the first time thanks to the then prevalent quota system in South Africa. With pointed elbows and a crouched stature, it has always seemed that Prince faced every delivery with a vigorous sense of servitude.

In tests he continued to score runs against various countries on home and away surfaces and became one of South Africa’s dependable heads. Two of those centuries, one against West Indies in 2008 and the second while facing England the succeeding year helped South Africa to stave off and inflict resounding innings defeats in their progress to restoring their lost formidability in international cricket (Agence France Presse 2020). Deployed as an opener at times, a 150 against Australia in 2009 helped South Africa win the third Test and avoid a series whitewash. Yet Prince is still portrayed in the media and social media (Prince 2020 @ashyp_5, 16 August 2020) as a quota player and undeserving of his place in the South African team. This in spite of his first class and test averages (44.43 and 41.64, respectively) being better that Hansie Cronje, Jonty Rhodes and Boeta Dippenaar, trailing AB de Villiers at the time. His 11 test tons also surpassed all except de Villiers.

As Makhay Ntini can attest, it is that early sense of ‘othering’ that seeps into every aspect of the sport. Toyana argues that change has been as slow and painful as it has because the default has been to think of ‘black cricketers in the system as token development players. Know your place. Don’t overstate your case. Remember your race’. This is also so for the head coach position.

One of the more astounding outcomes in the aftermath of Ngidi’s support for BLM is the admission by the outgoing CSA president, Chris Nenzani acknowledging on a radio talk show hosted by Robert Marawa on 6 August 2020 that Toyana should have coached the South African cricket team and that the appointment of the former West Indian fast bowler Ottis Gibson as national coach instead of Toyana was ‘a missed opportunity’. Lungani Zama argues that Toyana’s long fight against prejudice (New Frame 17 August 2020) was unsurprising as he has endured much more than oversight, while continuing to produce Proteas, both black and white, and winning trophies at a phenomenal rate.

Toyana was appointed as the first Black African to be head coach of a franchise, the Gauteng Lions in 2012. He started at a time when the Lions had experienced a trophy drought of five years. He succeeded immediately in breaking the trophy drought as the Lions won the domestic Twenty20 competition, went on to be joint holders of the one-day cup and finished second in the first-class standings. Under Toyana’s tutelage the Lions went on to win four trophies in four seasons. Prior to Ottis Gibson’s appointment as Proteas coach in August 2017, Toyana had been widely tipped to be the next national coach, having previously worked with the SA U19 and SA Emerging Players teams. He worked with and had intimate knowledge of numerous national players who performed exceptionally on the international stage such as Kagiso Rabada, Quinton de Kock, Chris Morris and Dane Vilas.

Reflecting on his shock omission on a SportsLive interview on 14 August 2020, Toyana indicated that Nenzani’s

statements left me cold and disgusted. Why is he saying it now? I still don’t understand as I ticked all the boxes with respect to trophies, selection of players, both black and white to the national teams and transformation. I am level 4 coach, the highest qualification in world cricket. They had an opportunity. The SA Under 19 s also went to the finals of the Champions League! I ticked all the boxes.

I was never provided with an official explanation but I was told that the reason that I did not get it was that Toyana was going to follow a black agenda. I stand accused of having a black agenda but I nurtured numerous white players including selecting Wiaan Mulder (a white player), when he was still at school.

It is a strange position to accuse a successful coach of having a ‘black agenda’ while his teams showed incredible success at both national and international levels and when the CSA has an approved Transformation Plan that purports to promote cricket in African townships. It would appear that on 6 August 2020, by upgrading the ‘could have’ to ‘should have’, CSA president Chris Nenzani laid bare the failure of systematic and principled transformation.

Theme 4: ‘we are not here to break the system, it is already broken’

In the floating detritus of cricket’s transformation journey lies the message from the group of 40 black former players and coaches, identifying themselves as ‘Concerned former SA cricketers and coaches’, to CSA. Originally formulated in support of Proteas fast bowler Lungi Ngidi and the BLM, the group has broadened its objectives seeking to continue to engage CSA and contribute to anti-racism, non-racialism, equality, accountability and excellence from all leaders and institutions in South African cricket. This is in spite of the group expressing their dissatisfaction with comments made by CSA Director of Cricket Graeme Smith, in particular the language used such as ‘disgruntled’, ‘witch-hunt’ and ‘agendas’ as ‘it subconsciously attributes negative connotations to their stand and statements’ and painted them in a disparaging light.

As discussions unfolded the group emphasized that ‘the continuation of the systematic discord that runs through CSA and its affiliates’ has been highlighted by the fact that relevant coaches, ex-players, current players and other role players were not consulted prior to signing off of the Transformation Policy. Robin Peterson argued that

We have so much to unpack and unfortunately it’s not always going to be comfortable conversations. We understand that the road ahead is not going to be an easy one. But like we always said in the Proteas dressing room, there is nothing that grows in a comfort zone and we all need to get out of our comfort zones.

The players currently argue that ‘we are not here to break the system; it is already broken’. The question that needs addressing is how cricket can be improved for all players and stakeholders?

Discussion and conclusion: next steps – what now?

The four themes presented above highlights that by not engaging with and understanding the lived experiences of black cricketers, the transformation process cannot engage with the personal, the depth, multiple dimensions and the structural embodiment of racism in South Africa’s transition from apartheid. First, Ngidi’s publicly stated support for the BLM movement and the plea that its objectives be translated into necessary change in South Africa has paved the way for many uncomfortable truths to be brought to the fore in cricket. These conversations may be more awkward for some more than others and acknowledging privilege and prejudice may not be easy. The set of tasks that the concerned cricket group established is primarily focused on reversing the deep-seated ‘othering’ that continues to seep into every aspect of the sport.

Second, the genesis of the transformation project in cricket commenced with the Friendship tour to India and the systematic isolation of Faiek Davids and Hoosain Manack as additional members to the core playing team, speaks to distrust of the capacity and skills of blacks that still resides within decision makers. They were never intended to play but served an instrumental purpose for the optics of national unity. The narrative has come full circle from Faiek Davids, when he said that he does not know what was discussed in the boardrooms when political and sport unity was negotiated, but he is clear that the outcome is that sports people were sacrificed on the altar of national unity. The treatment of the highly qualified and successful South African coach, Geoffrey Toyana, who had nurtured many of the current national players, and overlooked for Otis Gibson, an ex-West Indian cricketer turned coach, underscores the complexity of race and inequality. The distrust of locally produced, competent, successful and articulate black leadership is endemic to South African sports, 30 years after the commencement of transition. This has occurred in spite of leaders in the boardrooms being black, pointing to deeply entrenched and systemic racism and entitlement.

Third, the imposition of sport quotas in an attempt to reverse the deeply entrenched racial, cultural, social and economic inequalities is a narrow strategy to overcome the real lived experiences of marginalized black sportspersons as it addresses a sliver of an instrumental, numerical and technicist approach. The quota system in South African cricket has been reduced to a box-ticking exercise serving narrow political optics, paying scant attention to the need to expand and democratize the game through greater representation at all levels. Based on the evidence above, black players at numerous levels of the game are reduced to numerical quotas and true development may not be happening at a pace and effectiveness that would help the sport in South Africa. The evidence suggests that transformation, its ideals and quotas as its vehicle have become more divisive than enabling equality.

Fourth, accountability and integrity by leadership has become critical at this juncture. When they released their statements, the 40 person ‘Concerned former SA cricketers and coaches’, highlighted their deep concern that CSA may not be willing or able to commit to social justice and change. In his statement Ashwell Prince indicated that

we were alerted that the transformation policy had been signed off by the board without any consultation with relevant coaches, ex-players, current players and other role players. The time has come for meaningful change and to stop this unproductive agenda that is deeply rooted with key decision makers within the organisation.

In the wake of this cricketing furore in South Africa, CSA appointed previous Truth and Reconciliation Commissioner Advocate Dumisa Ntsebeza, on the 29 August, as the CSA Transformation Ombudsman and to head the Office of the Transformation Ombudsman of Cricket South Africa’s Social Justice and Nation Building (SJN) project (Simbembe 2020). Whilst these are laudable objectives, the success or failure of the second transition, stimulated by BLM, Lungisile Ngidi and others will require accountability and integrity by leadership in the boardroom, in administration, in politics, on the playing field and by various levels of the public.

As Geoffrey Toyana, the ‘should have’ coach of the South African cricket team points out:

Sport is a big thing in South Africa, and no one has all the answers to solve all the problems at once. But we are all involved because we love it, and we know how much of an impact it has when things go well.

The BLM movement has served as a catalyst for the voices of black cricketers to be heard and has created a platform for institutionalized racism and transformation in South African cricket to be addressed. It remains to be seen how successful the SJN will be in tackling the ills of the past, and whether similar processes will come to the fore in other sports in South Africa.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the South African cricket players and administrators for providing information and participating in interviews.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Funding

Open Access funding provided by the Qatar National Library.