Gayton McKenzie’s plea to SA Rugby president Mark Alexander to postpone Thursday’s vote on the proposed SA Rugby equity deal, with a big emphasis on the commercial rights of the Springboks, was not political interference but an act of sincerity based on finding a solution and not adding to the standoff between the sport’s national custodian and its affiliate 14 provincial members.
South African rugby has a history of ‘divide and rule’ when it comes to the national governing body and the 14 provincial unions.
Compromise, barters, trade-offs and every shenanigan one can think of has at some stage been in play in the 100-plus years of the game being administered. It is not a situation unique to South African rugby or exclusive to the history of South African rugby.
Pick a rugby nation and the narrative will be similar.
For a bit of context, SA Rugby’s leadership felt they had a strong enough proposal on an equity deal to take it to the vote and get the 75 percent majority required for approval.
Never has there been such calm on both sides, at least in their public response, in agreeing to such a postponement.
Earlier in the week it became clear they did not have this majority as seven of the 14 provinces, including the big four who all have private ownership, wrote to SA Rugby requesting a postponement of the vote meeting.
The seven expressed concerns and wanted clarification on certain aspects of the proposal. SA Rugby, through CEO Rian Oberholzer, rejected a postponement and Oberholzer, in correspondence to the seven provinces, which also included Griquas, Free State and Boland, explained the reasons for a refusal to postpone the special meeting.
McKenzie, who had been privy to SA Rugby’s sharing of information on the proposed equity deal, was contacted by the seven dissatisfied provincial unions and asked to provide calm to the situation.
McKenzie wrote an open letter to Alexander, explaining his position, the magnitude of the decision and also the apprehension of seven of the 14 affiliated provinces in making a decision when they were not satisfied all their questions had been answered.
He ‘urged’ Alexander to look for a solution based on putting everyone back at the table, without compromise, but out of respect for a situation that had the potential to damn South African rugby in the boardroom as much as it could potentially save the game financially.
McKenzie demanded nothing, made no government threats and made it clear he had no rights to interfere, given World Rugby’s position on political interference.
This was an intervention, with the only agenda being that South African rugby act with calm and with clarity in entertaining all 14 provincial voices before taking it to a vote.
Never has there been such calm on both sides, at least in their public response, in agreeing to such a postponement. SA Rugby’s leadership, by way of Alexander and Oberholzer, said yes to McKenzie’s intervention and request and the seven opposing provincial unions said yes to entertaining further discussion.
It was a ceasefire that showed the kind of on-field maturity and decision-making that has been the trademark of the Springboks back-to-back 2019 and 2023 World Cup title wins.
McKenzie has had an interesting week, with a lot of media focus on his office spend to various sporting events, on his own spend to the Olympics in Paris and on various other aspects of his first 100 days in office.
It all has seemed rather convenient that in the week of his 100 days so much rant and ridicule has been directed his way.
McKenzie has responded publicly to all questions, to the point where some have argued he has protested too much and others have told him to continue doing a great job and ignore the noise.
Whatever one’s view on McKenzie’s first 100 days in office, his act of getting every power broker within South Africa to put their weapons down and debate with clarity and conscience and conviction for the greater good of South African rugby when it comes an equity deal is his most significant act as a minister whose portfolio includes sport.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.