The South African Rugby Union (Saru) on Monday appointed an official to investigate statements allegedly made by one of its players, Luke Watson.
In a statement, Saru said that following discussions with Judge Lex Mpati — the chairperson of the national judicial committee of Saru — a designated official had been appointed to investigate comments made by the Springbok and Western Province loose forward.
”Durban attorney Dekker Govender has been tasked with investigating the allegations and weighing the evidence to determine if they merit a breach of the Saru code of conduct.
”If a breach is identified, the player will face a disciplinary hearing,” said Saru.
The Afrikanerbond has also called for Watson’s withdrawal from the sport after allegedly referring to white Afrikaans men in rugby as ”Dutchmen”.
In a statement, the league’s managing director, Jan Bosman, said it was hoped that after the initial media reports on Sunday that Watson and his family would reconsider and even apologise to Afrikaners.
”It, however, seems as if they are not willing to do so,” said Bosman.
He said if conditions in the game were as unbearable as Watson felt and if indeed Watson did feel strongly about Afrikaners in the game and in the administration of it, then he should have withdrawn from South African rugby.
”This would have been the honourable thing to do.”
‘Opportunistic noise’
Meanwhile, the call to remove the Springbok emblem from South African rugby was a campaign to embarrass and catch rugby stakeholders and leaders off guard, United Democratic Movement (UDM) leader Bantu Holomisa said on Monday.
In a statement, Holomisa said the party noted the call by the chair of the portfolio committee of sport, Butana Komphela, and his ”cohorts” for the removal of the Springbok emblem from South African rugby.
”We should not be surprised by this publicity stunt because certain African National Congress [ANC] members want to ingratiate themselves with the new ANC leadership, and ensure that they are high on the list for next year’s election.”
He said in the process they were embarrassing the ANC, whose official position was for the retention of the emblem.
Komphela’s call was not a reflection of what the committee had discussed and was also not the formal position of the committee or the political parties who served on it.
”The Springboks must prepare for their upcoming tour and not concern themselves with this opportunistic noise by the honourable Mr Komphela.”
He said the UDM had full confidence in the current leadership of South African rugby. It was this leadership — under coach Pieter de Villiers — that had given the country a team where transformation and class were not mutually exclusive objectives.
Holomisa said instead of making a noise, Komphela and Sport Minister Makhenkesi Stofile should lobby for more funding from the minister of finance to enhance and expand development of players and facilities at grassroots level.
”In other words, actually focus on building something, as opposed to mouthing off and breaking down,” said Holomisa.
He said if the Springbok was a symbol of oppression, then the ANC should be asked why it was applying selective amnesia regarding apartheid-era symbols.
”How else can we explain the decision for the new democratic Parliament to use the apartheid-era’s parliamentary premises?
”Or for that matter the three ANC-appointed presidents of the country installing themselves in the Union Buildings — the ultimate symbol of apartheid’s power and oppression?” said Holomisa.
He said this demonstrated that South Africans should and could take ownership of symbols.
”The Springbok belongs to all of us — as was clearly demonstrated by the widespread support during and after last year’s Rugby World Cup victory.” — Sapa