Sascoc's qualifying criteria for Rio will scupper SA's chances for 2022 Games

There is one problem with the SA Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee (Sascoc) wanting tough qualifying criteria for the 2016 Rio Games - Durban 2022.

Team SA’s best performance at a Commonwealth Games since readmission has been fifth place on the medals table, achieved in 1998, 2006 and 2010.

But presumably Sascoc, also responsible for delivering teams to the Commonwealth, will want to do better than that as the host nation of the 2022 edition in Durban (assuming the xenothugs don’t scupper the bid, which is to be decided in Auckland on September 2).

Decisions it takes now could affect what transpires in seven years time.

Sascoc, in the process of finalising the 2016 selection criteria with the country’s individual Olympic sports federations, wants to rule out Africa as a qualifying route.

The only exception would be football, because the continental route is the only qualifying option available to the Banyana and men’s under-23 teams.

Internationally, many codes offer continental qualifying tournaments as well as international tournaments.

But in rowing, for example, it would be ludicrous to allow SA’s rowers to qualify for the Olympics through Africa.

Instead, the rowers must qualify their boats for the Olympics by finishing in the top 11 at the world championships later this year.

In athletics and swimming minimum times and distances must be achieved. Generally, the African route is much easier than the international one.

Four years ago, two SA boxers qualified for London 2012 because they made the podium at the African Olympic qualifying tournament.

Without an African qualifying tournament this time around, SA’s boxers will have to make the podium at the world championships.

And that is surely an impossible outcome considering no SA boxer has won silverware at that stage.

Four years ago, the men’s and women’s hockey teams had to win international tournaments to bag that final 12th spot in London - the women succeeded in India and the men in Japan.

But this time hockey has changed its international qualifying system and introduced a far tougher system.

The men would already be out of contention for Rio, and the women would have to beat a few of the world’s best to book their seat to Rio - an unlikely scenario.

But both sides are capable of winning their African qualifying tournaments. Does one shrug ones shoulders and say tough luck for them?

Or does one think about the next seven years?  If you do, then hockey in particular presents a strong argument to be included for Rio.

Firstly, in both the men’s and women’s squads, almost two-thirds of the players will be 30 or younger in 2022.

The same players Sascoc will want to develop for 2022 are the same ones they will leave off the plane to Rio. Secondly, sending the teams to Rio would result in them getting critical international experience.

From 2010 until recently the women’s team received a big sponsorship that allowed them to increase the number of tests (they played 17 from 2008 until 2010, and then more than 150 in the four years after that).

They may have got trounced in their opening match of the 2012 Olympics, but at the 2014 Commonwealth Games they ended fourth, losing the playoff for bronze through a poor second-half performance.

There is no question that international experience is vital. So the question is: would preventing the teams from going to the Olympics risk hurting the teams’ chances in 2022?

I would think the answer is yes.

There appears to be a way Sascoc could allow African qualifiers without opening the floodgates for swarms of Eric the eels.

Why not introduce an exception clause for 2022?

In other words, if Durban wins the bid in September, then only sports featuring on that programme should be allowed to qualify for Rio through African tournaments.

How could that hurt?