You are here:   ANC > The Silencing of South Africa's Greatest Cricket Side
 
This insult was more than many could bear. Graeme Pollock remonstrated with Majola about the hurt done to many who had simply been sportsmen doing their best for their country. In front of several old members Majola dismissed him with the words: "You guys had your day. Now get lost." This was made no easier to bear when Majola had South Africa's national schools' cricket week renamed after his own brother who, he claimed, might have played for his country but for his colour. Majola followed that up by going to Lord's to ask (in vain) that all previous Tests involving an all-white South African team be expunged from the records, an act which outraged many old Test players. Majola kept lobbying Lord's on this issue for two years but was finally told: "We can't pretend those Test matches didn't happen." 

"Part of the problem," says Ray White, "is that if after 1992 anyone said, ‘We ought to look after our old Test cricketers', others would, quite reasonably, say, ‘What about the black cricketers of that era who ought to have been in the team but weren't picked because of apartheid?' There was no way to settle that. How do you decide retrospectively who might have been picked decades before? It made everything rather insoluble, so it was just easier to draw a line and forget about the former era and its greats." 

Yet the oddity always was that cricketers usually got along as cricketers. "When I first came across Basil d'Oliveira I thought he might dislike me on principle," says Irvine, who was playing for Essex at the time. "I would even have understood that. But he was much too nice a man. Dolly and I became great pals."

It is certainly very striking that none of the greats of that era — not even the incomparable Barry Richards and Graeme Pollock — has ever been asked to coach or advise the current teams in any way — a bit like Australia ostracising Bradman. Similarly, the great fast bowler Allan Donald ("White Lightning") was long ignored as a bowling coach and got the South African job only after he had been offered that post by both England and New Zealand. This ostracism extends even into the media. Supersport, the main TV sports channel, got rid of Richards as a commentator after he was said to have spoken out of turn on the vexed subject of racial quotas in the team. Similarly, the SABC got rid of Irvine as a commentator, replacing him with someone with no experience of first-class cricket. "I have no doubt that political influence was brought to bear," says Irvine. Richards says much the same of his arbitrary banning from the airwaves. Instead, broadcasters now rely on Mike Haysman (ex-Australia) and Robin Jackman (ex-England), even though the latter played in the sanctions-busting "pirate" cricket tours of the apartheid era. Kepler Wessels is allowed his say, although he also played for Australia, because he was still captain of South Africa when the team re-entered world cricket in 1992. Clive Rice, perhaps the world's greatest all-rounder in the 1970s and 1980s, has effectively been banned from all South African media because he is a vocal opponent of affirmative action in cricket. This is a completely taboo subject on South African radio and TV commentary although everyone knows it has been a major factor in team selection. The result is sometimes comic, as when a visiting foreign commentator like Geoffrey Boycott brings the subject up on air, only to be met by a steely silence from his colleagues. Rice has, typically, made some withering comments about this political censorship of cricket commentary.

View Full Article
 
Share/Save
 
 
 
 
Andrew Dalrymple
October 2nd, 2012
9:10 AM
@Erica Would you prefer that there should there be a ratio or perhaps even a 'quote quota'? Or would the irony thereof be too much even for you? I think perhaps that you may have missed the point of the piece...

JonQuirk
September 12th, 2012
10:09 AM
One of my forebears was Arthur Kinnaird - Lord Kinnaird, known as the first Lord of Football. He not only organised and played in the first soccer international, Scotland v England, but also won 6 FA cup medals, a number only recently surpassed by Ashley Cole who now has seven. Of course when Arthur was plying his trade - in his spare time he also founded Ransome's Bank that became a core component of Barclays, it was only arguably Toffs who had the time and energy (and the necessary balanced diet) to both organise and partake in such frivolous pastimes as soccer. The poor being effectively side-lined and then lacking in opportunity. Yet were it not for the likes of Arthur, would soccer have ever properly got itself started, and would the likes of Ashley Cole ever have had a platform upon which to shine? It all starts somewhere; today's giants of any game stand on the shoulder's of giants who went before. I don't think anyone could argue that Arthur was not a giant, and being lucky enough to grow up close to the county ground in Southampton, and having thrilled to the sights of Barry Richards, Roy Marshall, Gordon Greenidge et al, I know they too were giants, who likewise should be revered the World over; is my mind playing tricks or did I really see Barry Richards score 300 in a single day for the DB Close X1 against a touring team at Scarborough? A voice of reason from the southern tip of the Dark continent

JonQuirk
September 12th, 2012
9:09 AM
It is not just cricket, but much of the other analysis of events in South Africa, and indeed the wider world, where reason, debate and progress itself is held back by didactic PC thinking. I wonder what generations to come will make of our clumsy interpretations of events, causality and blame? But then it has been the case for eons that it takes time for a rational, balanced view of history to be achieved. In the case of South Africa the question is will much of import be left standing by the time this voice of reason prevails? A voice of reason from the southern tip of the Dark continent

Nick Watt-Pringle
September 10th, 2012
1:09 PM
Very interesting article. One way of keeping records of players who played for SA, pre 1992. is to have their number then a forward slash and post Apartheid cricketers number on their shirt/cap etc. In 50 to 100 years from now no one will give a damm anyway. example (146/24) One cannot change history, only the future will benefit from what has happened in past. It is similar to some past atrocities in the world, you can never change it but one must have it recorded for futre generations to understand the past mistakes of this world. Enough of my soap box. I would like to check the stats on Headley and Sutcliffe.

Warren
September 7th, 2012
9:09 AM
A fine piece of journalism and an excellent article. One factual error, which doesn't undo the point being made but is disappointing as it's an error that could have easily been avoided. There are two other players who have Test batting averages over 60 and meet the innings criteria you have to use to have Pollock as eligible. George Headley from the West Indies and Herb Sutcliffe from England.

Erica Blair
September 1st, 2012
8:09 PM
Marvellous. An article about South Africa which doesn't quote a single black person. is this supposed to be deliberately ironic?

Post your comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.