Members of the Springbok World Cup squad became almost instant millionaires, but what about new players called into the team?
RUGBY: Jon Swift
IT IS the concentrated nature of sport as a mirror of life which tends to highlight the human existence. Big is not always best. The quickest do not always win.
And so it is with the collision of two issues which have dominated thought in South African rugby over the past few weeks: the ongoing problems of a refusal to openly acknowledge professionalism in the game; and the selection of the Springbok team to play Wales.
The squad for the one-off Test at Ellis Park on September 2 finally introduces Gary Teichmann to the international arena after 10 games in the green and gold for this country, none of them in a Test.
The rangy Natal captain’s selection is one of three changes from the World Cup-winning side, with Mark Andrews — who did duty at the back of the scrum in the semi-final and final — moving back to his most effective position in the second row, and James Dalton reclaiming the hooking berth from Chris Rossouw after his unceremonious dismissal from the competition in the Brawl of Boet Erasmus against Canada.
But Teichmann’s selection — and indeed that of Vlok Cilliers on the substitute’s bench — brings into focus one of the problems of contracting players on elitist terms as is the case with the World Cup Boks and the South African Rugby Football Union (Sarfu).
It was a contract, for those who did sign, which had the effect of turning the players into instant millionaires. This is not the case with Teichmann, despite the fact that that there will be a number of players with no active part in the Test who still hold those contracts.
“Teichmann will be looked after and he will have no cause to complain financially,” is the way Sarfu chief executive Edward Griffiths put it.
It is part of the whole uncertainty which has gripped world rugby and will doubtless cause more than a few storms and upheavals at the currnet International Rugby Board meeting on the subject.
For although Teichmann — and again, one would imagine Cilliers — do not qualify for the immediate largesse offered the World Cup Springboks, they are not ruled out of that level of earning completely.
“If Teichmann, and this holds good for other new Springboks, shows against Wales and later against England, that he will become a fixture in the Springbok side, Sarfu will talk about a contract for him next year,” is the explanation from Griffiths.
It all sounds great in theory and has the welcome effect of opening the door to the national side for the form players who do not hold contracts. But the cynic could easily point to two vital flaws in the set-up as it stands on its present shaky foundations.
The first flaw is an escalation of the bad feeling which still exists between the bulk of this country’s provincial players, a lack of communication and recompense which led to the formation of the Players
The second flaw is potentially far more serious. Sarfu has already had to deal with the impasse between the national team and the administrators of the game in this country. As such they have felt both the weight of player power — rightfully so — and the backlash of public feeling against attempts to use a heavy hand against this country’s rugby heroes.
It is unlikely that the whole contracted portion of the Springbok squad will retire, be injured or lose form dramatically all at once, but arguably this could just
It would mean a completely new-look national squad. And an almost inevitable return to the united front from this revamped squad to gain the kind of collective contractual package which was eventually handed to Francois Pienaar and the current crop of
If that didn’t happen, we would have the almost farcical situation of a large number of non- international players reaping bigger rewards from the game than those wearing the green and gold, and costing the game — at all levels — money it shouldn’t have to
Gavin Johnson, who has lost his reserve spot for the Test against the Welsh to Cilliers, must be watching the state of affairs with both interest and trepidation.
18