Loading ...Two recent newspaper headlines “Grant turns down R10 million” and “Springbok captain John Smit released for club duty”, provide plenty food for thought. They once again raise questions about the expediency or necessity of allowing foreign-based rugby players to be eligible for Springbok selection.
It could give a perception , probably false, that the honour of representing one’s country in sport doesn’t carry the same weight as in years gone by. Who would have thought, 10 or even five years ago, of turning down a Springbok cap to run out in club colours?
One report was about Peter Grant of Western Province turning down a lucrative offer from a Japanese club, a noble sacrifice he is prepared to make because he wants to play for Western Province and so earn the right to be awarded the Springbok jersey.
The second report, on the other hand, is about Smit and Percy Montgomery not being available for the Test against Italy this Saturday because they will be playing in a club-competition final in France.
Quite a contrast!
I appreciate that Italy is not one of the strongest rugby nations but does that lessen the honour of playing for the Springboks and even captaining the team? Isn’t this potentially setting a dangerous precedent that will make it acceptable for other Springboks who also have foreign club obligations to choose their clubs over the national side, even when the Boks are up against stronger opponents?
Initially there was a ban on the selection of foreign-based players for the Springboks. This was introduced in the late 1990s to combat the perceived poaching of South African players by rich clubs in Europe and Britain. In 2004, the rule was relaxed slightly to allow a maximum of three foreign-based players to be eligible for Springbok selection.
But in May this year, “to give new coach Peter de Villiers the best tools to do the job to the best of his ability”, the ban was scrapped altogether and he is now permitted to select as many foreign-based players as he wishes.
SARU president Oregan Hoskins explained then: “We do not expect the floodgates to open and it is our expectation that only a small number of overseas-based players will be called up.” De Villiers promptly selected Smit, Butch James, Victor Matfield and Montgomery for his training group, and they were included in the 22-man squads for the two recent Tests against Wales.
This complete abolition of the ban came less than a year after the rugby authorities reiterated the original ban and scrapped the concession for three foreign-based players being eligible for selection for the Springbok team. To be eligible for selection, the players had to play at home.
Hoskins said then: “We want to reward the guys who play at home, to encourage our best players to stay here. Guys who go overseas to make some good, quick money won’t be helping our rugby structures in any way. If we allow them to keep leaving, we’ll also be robbing the South African public of seeing the best players in action.”
So what has happened in less than a year to cause such a complete turnaround?
A dangerous message is now being sent out to the wealth of rugby talent in South Africa — players who, up to now, have shown loyalty and remained in South Africa to play for the domestic teams, particularly in competitions in the earlier part of the season such as the Super 14 and Vodacom Cup. The Currie Cup is not so badly affected because it falls mainly outside the season of the northern nations.
What if there are not more Peter Grants who will be able to withstand tempting offers and, with no ban on them being eligible for the Springboks, start the biggest exodus of rugby players that we have ever seen? What will happen to our domestic rugby? It is reported that there are already between 100 and 200 South African players based or living overseas.
What about those players who will feel that they have no chance of playing for the Springboks, no matter how well they play in the domestic competitions, because of the eligibility of foreign-based players who do not have to prove themselves locally? They will also believe they have to leave to play in other countries in order to qualify for a national team, albeit not the Springboks. There are already many (too many?) South Africans who wear other nations’ jerseys.
South African rugby can only be the loser!
I think you misunderstood.
Both Percy and Smit have ended their foreign contracts and are returning to play their rugby in South Africa. Percy for WP and Smit for the Sharks.
Victor has also returned for the Bulls and Butch has ended his contract with Bath.
It is blatantly clear that Peter De Villiers told these guys that in order to play for the Bokke they would have to play their rugby in SA. These players just had to see out their current foreign contracts.
The semi-final’s this weekend was a compromise reached between the clubs and SA Rugby wherein Smit and Percy would be released from their remaining club commitments for the two tests against Wales however, should either club qualify for the semi-finals, it was agreed that the players would be available for such. Both clubs qualified.
Don’t worry, this was just an interim arrangement and is more the exception than the rule.
(Report abuse)