Parliament sports committee chairman Butana Komphela says Nelson Mandela allowed the South African rugby team to use the Springbok emblem for the 1995 World Cup as a matter of convenience rather than conviction.

Willie Basson, who chaired a National Sports Congress commission after the 1995 World Cup, said that Mandela had become involved in the Springbok issue only after SA had won the World Cup. It was then that he said the Springbok was a unifying symbol and asked the congress to allow it to be retained.

"It is a known fact that even Mandela himself allowed the team to use the Springbok emblem for the World Cup only as they had already made orders for the kit bearing the Springbok," Komphela said.

"He simply did not want to rock the boat before the big event; he even told the rugby captain at the time (Francois Pienaar) that they must not forget that the Springbok should go," Komphela said.

The South African Rugby Union (Saru) and the sports ministry have agreed that the team will adopt the symbol used by all the other national teams, the King Protea flower. The Springbok will remain on the jerseys, with the Protea over the heart and the lithe antelope on the right side, Saru announced on Monday.

Khompela a staunch opponent

The change has inspired intense debate, with Komphela leading the push for the Boks to make the switch.

"The issue of replacing the Springbok with a recognised national emblem was long overdue," Komphela said.

"The sign carries a long history of racial divisions," he added.

Saru says the Springbok was born in 1906 when a whites-only national rugby side toured Britain. During a trip to London zoo, the visitors, who lacked a nickname, spotted a herd of the antelope, common to east and southern Africa, and decided to name themselves Springboks.

In the Apartheid years, blacks were barred from wearing the jersey, and some South Africans say the Springbok is a painful reminder of the past.

Komphela says changing the Springbok emblem is long overdue, but not everyone agrees — and the debate does not divide clearly along racial lines.

Not everybody agrees

A sports convention in October passed a resolution to remove the emblem, sparking an outcry from supporters of the national rugby team, which is a source of deep pride, especially for Afrikaners.

Former Saru president Silas Nkanunu, believes changing the logo will not address the real issues affecting the sport's development and its promotion among blacks.

"The move smacks of political power play," Nkanunu said.

"Black clubs are in dire need of financial assistance, which is slowing the development of talent."

He said he did not understand how the emblem was racially divisive, saying some black players had adopted the Springbok even before South Africa's race-based rugby bodies unified into a national group in the early 1990s.

Despite the change, Saru spokesman Andy Colquhoun said he expected that few people would stop calling the team the Springboks.

"We believe rugby has united the country like no other sport. When we won the 1995 World Cup, people of all races came out to celebrate the victory of the Springboks," he said.

"The 2007 World Cup attracted even bigger support for the team, regardless of race."

The timing of the change to the new jersey was still under discussion, mainly for logistical reasons, Colquhoun said.

  • Have your say on Khompela and the Bok emblem below!

    365

    Print this page
    Send this article to a friend
    RSS
       Digg
    de.li.cious
    facebook