Let’s face it. It’s not great for business to be backing a bunch of losers. Forwards who save their best ball-handling for the opposition in the scrum. A back line whose worst knock-on effect is to depress the morale of the nation. A team that could only pass anything at the obligatory drug test. And a management that is so forward-looking, they make Fred Flintstone look like a new-age man.
We often hear that the arts are too controversial for sponsors to be associated with. But when last did you hear of actors biting off the ears of competing theatre companies, or of the leader of a dance troupe stamping on the legs of other dancers, or of painters being sin-binned for professional fouls?
So may I respectfully suggest that if it’s image you’re concerned with, rather than supporting unsavoury mauls, right wings and hookers, it would be much better to be associated with graceful dancers, innovative filmmakers and potential Nobel prize-winning writers.
It’s legitimate for business to expect bang for their buck, but unfortunately, in rugby they’ve taken this to mean that our buck gets banged every time they encounter a kiwi, a wallaby or a hen.
And what do these rugby blokes achieve in terms of real productivity? They attend a training session or two a week, watch videos of how the opposition beat them the last week, engage in a bit of anthem practice and then lie around on the beach trying to catch a tan in a superficial attempt to improve the demographics of the team.
Come big match day, they run around — mostly trying to catch the opposition — commit a few indiscretions to catch their breath in the sin bin, and 80 minutes later they’re telling us they’ll be better in four years’ time. If this isn’t sheltered employment, then I’m a solitaire-loving civil servant!
Dear sponsor, if you’re serious about job creation, then, it may surprise you, the annual remuneration of a single Springbok would support a company of 10 performing artists for a year. Multiply that by an underachieving squad of 30, and you could have at least 300 full-time employees who would perform not half-as-badly — and more creatively — on the world’s stages. And our much sought-after choreographers could come up with something more passionate and heart-warming than even the haka. For, you see, rugby players are from Mars, but artists are from, well, Earth. Our blood is red.
Except for the odd ballet company or orchestra, the cultural sector does not have major problems with transformation or with team selection that reflects the demographics of the country. Yes, we also have a minister that interferes unnecessarily, but he’s not as bad the sports guy. And, yes, there are some important structures that are poorly governed. But, the difference — and this is a major difference — is that artists get on and create anyway, and many go on to win significant awards for their work, despite bureaucratic and organisational obstacles they face.
So while rugby players and coaches blame the administrators for their poor results, just imagine how much more artists could achieve with your support, even when the official structures that are supposed to support them implode or don’t deliver.
When last did we have a ticker tape parade for our senior rugby teams? Get behind the arts, dear sponsor, and — if the last year is anything to go by — you’ll proudly be hauling out the open-deck buses (painted in your brand colours, of course) on a regular basis!