Has time run out for Allister Coetzee?

ADP, I reckon there would be a fair chance of rugby returning to a whites-only (OK, only 80 or 90% white) enclave. Is that apartheid? Maybe, maybe not. But would you expect the national government to give a rat's about it, give it any money. Cut it any slack whatsoever? Maybe, maybe not. But for the umpteenth time, do not expect there to be no political interference in sport. There is plenty in Australia, even if it's not quite so in-your-face. And the question remains: how do you get the SA government to change its policy? "Please sir, scrap your policy because we really really want a white coach and 13 white players in the Springboks." Likely?

Peter - how does asking for no political interference in sport equate to bringing back apartheid? Or do you actually think that would be the result?

Peter, It was not my intention to imply that you are disqualified from commenting merely because you are not South African. Of course you will hold opinions, and those opinions may be well-informed (or not). So, apologies if I miscommunicated that. The word "rant" was not meant in derogatory fashion, but rather in the sense of meaning "exaggerated" and "unconvincing". More to the point: in spite of your original comment containing elements of truth, it was always going to be controversial, because of the phrasing and imprecise rendition of your argument. Many on this forum might have gained by hearing your argument, had it been formulated in a less adversarial manner.

So, thank you for all the comments. Sorry it's taken a while to get back. No, I'm not South African. Well spotted! As an aside, I've never been accused of being improperly proper or was that properly improper before. If that disqualifies me from commenting, then I expect never to hear from Carlos again except on the Pumas, Jaguares and the occasional Argentinian club player. I do have experience of being a member of a racial minority with the political power. The change away from that is very unsettling and can throw one's contribution to society into question. Thanks to those who described my last post as a rant. Perhaps it is true that all currently-living white South Africans were always bitterly opposed to apartheid. Perhaps I should have just asked how far people wish to re-wind the clock. What to do? Good question. The fact is that South Africa has an elected government, which has established a policy around increasing the numbers of black SA rugby players. If you want change to the current arrangements, that is your starting point. That is what I meant by "live with it". How do you convince the government to drop any requirement for a black coach or a specified number of black players at any level? If that is all they want, probably you can't. If you can show that SA society, and therefore the government, would be better off with more successful teams, you may have a show. Is there a plan currently in place, with timeframes? I couldn't find anything terribly useful on the SARU website. I have not yet dug around in the provincial websites. I assume such plans would include attracting non-white kids to play rugby at school and club level, which means having grounds, training facilities, expensive personal equipment. Football AKA soccer does have the advantage here. All you need is a ball, a stone-strewn mostly-flat space and a bunch of barefoot kids. Is there a clear rugby path for the more talented kids? How do you make it attractive to them if they think that rugby is played at expensive schools? (You see a lot of this mindset in Roar commentators who bag Australian rugby for the sme reason.) Etcetera etcetera. Is it possible that SA is simply going through a terrible couple of years and that people are not used to this? Is it just the sort of situation we are used to with Australia? Argentina have not maintained the level which saw them chop Ireland to shreds. Ireland have come back from that. Merely swings and roundabouts? I have seen it suggested that over 300 white SA rugby players have left the country because they think their path to Springbok stardom is blocked by black players who are not as good as they are. Is this serious? The black players in the Boks and the provincial teams are no better than the 21st-ranked in the country? Is it possible, and absolutely understandable, that they leave because SA has a crap economy and currency, and it's simply financially more sensible to leave? (Quite apart from those who can't admit that they are not good enough.) Thank you for the equations and the discussions around what I do or do not think about apartheid, the ANC and in particular the notion that I might like an easier problem to solve. That one was great snark! To summarise: comments on what I might or might not think may be more useful than wishing that SA Rugby suddenly reverse its requirements on quotas for teams. I have taken them on board. SARU changing its mind isn't going to happen.

Mushrooms works for me :-) At least a dassie knows when to duck for cover, which is one more skill than AC's Boks!

Don't bother etienne, there are none as biased as those only looking at one side of a coin. Completely oblivious that it has two sides.

"But we cannot say that all 8M are racists longing for a return of apartheid." I fully agree with your Harry. But that was not Peter's assertion either; he used a metaphorical proxy to address a minority/plurality. "Opposing ANC is not indicia of apartheid nostalgia." I absolutely agree that it is not per se indicative. Obviously. Although there is a subset that matches. "That is Peter’s unconscious or conscious point." I do not think that is the case (my interpretation in light of his metaphorical use). I think you are reading much more into his comment than what was intended. The following point also needs to be made: I do not know Peter at all, but from the examples he use, and the improper and inaccurate proper noun usage, I am reasonably certain that he is not South African. This is relevant, since his knowledge of our situation is then neither intuitive nor experientially reliable, and therefore somewhat abstracted. Which supports my view of his "stream of consciousness" being idiomatic and metaphorical, rather than being concrete and with precise intention. Basically it is a rant, that is fuzzy within its semantic context, but partly accurate in its intention.

WiN, How is it that you see racism in BBs comment there? Please explain. Rushing to falsely (or frivolously) tag people with the racism label actually does the cause of eradicating racism tremendous harm in the long term.

Please Biltongbek - no racism on this thread. This is a serious issue with a man's career at stake not to mention the majority of black South Africans who can't relate to their very white national rugby team. Give it time

8M is not the total of B-Y. But we cannot say that all 8M are racists longing for a return of apartheid. Opposing ANC is not indicia of apartheid nostalgia. That is Peter's unconscious or conscious point. And I resent it.

Don't know why Ackerman was not chosen in the first place - oh hang on - yes I do

Sure, but that is NOT the number that "opposed apartheid" (before it was abolished by statute). The terminology is important, since it implies a point in time. Your axiomatic representation above does not reflect two comparative points in time (it now occurs to me, after your latest comment). Perhaps you missed that part of Peter's argument, or maybe you thought it irrelevant. But it is relevant; in the context of this discussion, it is the central point.

Geez Harry, are you talking algebra or studying thoroughbred breeding?? *S*

You are confusing Peter and he will DEMAAAND an easier puzzle to solve...

Aaah, shame man, take that chip off your shoulder. You might notice that you're the only racist on this thread

yes, I think so

8,033,630 voted for DA this year.

Etienne, I think we can safely say that of the tens of millions of those who opposed apartheid, millions of those also support the DA.

I think for this group, the dassie.

"And millions fit that: opposed apartheid; dissent from ANC." Harry, if you intend the two clauses to be conjunctive, I think you have your figures wrong by at least an order of magnitude. Also, I read Peter's "broad-brushing" differently; the folksy terminology he uses, indicates (to me) a metaphorical proxy for a reality that sits somewhere between a very small minority and a plurality. The exact size can only be established empirically. At the Calvinia Hotel, the white barman refuses to serve black customers. They are expected to know their place, regardless of their odour. Exempli gratia.