Mark Smit
4 December 2008
Johannesburg — THE tempestuous tale of rugby and the leaping Springbok started in 1992 when the National Sports Congress (NSC) held a meeting of all sporting codes.
At that meeting all codes agreed that the King Protea would be adopted as the national sporting symbol of the new SA. This was even before the democratic elections of 1994. Rugby was present at that meeting and also signed up to adopt the Protea as its symbol.
Then SA, now out of isolation, was awarded the 1995 Rugby World Cup. In its haste, and excitement, the rugby authority set the merchandising machine in motion, completely forgetting, it said, that it was supposed to use the Protea as the official emblem, and not the leaping Springbok.
After profuse apologies from the rugby authorities, the NSC decided to make an exception for rugby, because recalling all the agreements and merchandise already produced would cost millions. They did this in good faith, believing that rugby had genuinely forgotten about the 1992 agreement.
So the 1995 World Cup went ahead, with the host team wearing the leaping Springbok as its official emblem -- always on the understanding that when the World Cup was over rugby would join every other code and adopt the King Protea.
In a placatory gesture, then rugby chief Dr Louis Luyt undertook to ensure that rugby would revert to the Protea after the World Cup. But then the Boks threw a spanner in the works by winning the World Cup by beating the All Blacks against all expectations.
The achievement set off a wave of national celebration with people of all races, delirious with excitement, celebrating the win with street parties.
Seeing the euphoria and the unifying strength of the achievement, the then president, Nelson Mandela, summoned the NSC leaders and asked them to allow rugby to continue using the Springbok emblem.
He argued that it had proved to be such an important unifying factor, and such an important player in the building of a new nation, that scrapping it at that stage might do more harm than good.
When it became known that Mandela was in favour of retaining the Springbok for rugby, the African National Congress Youth League and the ANC Women's League came out in favour of retaining it.
The NSC, having already decided that the Protea should be the national sporting emblem, set up a special commission to look at all aspects of the president's request.
That commission was chaired by Centurion-based academic Dr Willie Basson. Others who sat on that commission were Stix Morewa, Rob Wise, Gideon Sam, Krish Mackerduj, and Sam Ramsamy.
After lengthy discussion they decided, in deference to the wishes of the president, to allow rugby to carry on wearing the Springbok.
This decision was taken against the background of some anger on the part of other codes who had reluctantly agreed to stop wearing the Springbok themselves.
It was later, according to Basson, that rugby, in a gesture of reconciliation, decided off its own bat to put the Protea emblem on the jersey with the Springbok which, said Basson, was accepted as a decent gesture at the time.
"But then the nonsense started, with arguments about the commercial value of the brand and all sorts of other arguments being put forward to keep the Springbok," said Basson.
"But the fact is that, in 1992, along with all the other sporting codes, rugby agreed to adopt the King Protea as its emblem."
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2008 Business Day. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
