Welcome, English cricket, to the real world

“Inglan is a bitch.” – Linton Kwesi Johnson

Telford Vice | Cape Town

Even in Bethnal Green, which is among the more unsubtle parts of London’s distinctly unsubtle East End, and even on the side of a parked delivery truck that had been scarred by all manner of graffiti, the words stuck out. “Fuck da Africans”. The hate wasn’t only in the message, but also in the messaging: short, fat, black stabs of paint formed the blockish letters. What visceral anger, what abhorrence, it must have taken to do this like that.

Less than a minute’s walk away at a line of street stalls hundreds of metres long, all of them staffed by Bengalis, you could buy anything from a hairpin to, probably, a helicopter. On your third visit to the Pakistani takeaway nearby, the man behind the counter pops your “three naan for £1” into a bag with a smile before you reach the counter. The Afghan butcher two doors down is only too happy to slice up any cut of meat you like any way you like. The English butcher further along the street offers, in season, whole pheasant; head, feet, feathers and all, staring at you with dull, defeated eyes.

Across the road at the local supermarket, the checkout staff are the most charming people in the world. One of them — matronly, wearing hijab — hands over your change with a warm, “Thanks babes.” Another, a wizened, dreadlocked Jamaican whose name tag reads “Cecily” never let’s you go without delivering a lecture on life: “Now then young man, stay away from the devil of drink …”

As you step outside, a gruff, unkempt old bloke apparently of eastern European origin is barking at a young, overtly English-looking white woman and pointing: “There! There! Your pocket!” She looks down and sees she is about to lose a pair of earphones.

Around the corner, Jamaal, a Tunisian barber, thinks in Arabic and French and tells lurid stories in the most exquisitely fractured English about the boxers, cab drivers and gangster associates who have sat in the same chair where you are now having your hair cut.

Not far from here is St John on Bethnal Green, an Anglican Church where, on Friday evenings, you can hear the Grand Union Orchestra wend their way through wondrous jam sessions. The house band comprises musicians from South Africa — trumpeter and percussionist Claude Deppa, who played with Miriam Makeba — Australia and England. Guest stars include Bangladeshi tabla master Yousuf Ali Khan, Chilean multi-instrumentalist Carlos Fuentes, Somalian oud virtuoso Mohammed Maalow Nuur, Zhu Xiao Meng, an expert on the gu zheng, or Chinese harp, and cellist and singer Kate Shortt, who tells the rich stories of the East End’s Jewish diaspora. And all that for the price of even the smallest cash donation.

You can contribute separately to the church coffers by buying a beer from the rector himself. The Reverend Prebendary Alan Green, on these occasions usually dressed in priestly collar and blue jeans, knows his India Pale Ale from his saison. There can be nothing so deliciously subversive as sitting in a pew holding a pint, with the vicar’s blessing.

Bethnal Green was home for 15 months in 2018 and ’19. London was, on the whole, dirty, cold, expensive and unfriendly. Bethnal Green was dirty, cold and expensive, but far from unfriendly. For a white South African, it was strange to live in a white majority country for the first time. But doing so in an area where the majority are black and brown made it feel something like normal. Not that being born and raised in the bosom of the privileges afforded by white supremacy anywhere, much less in Africa, can be confused, in any way, with normality. Life in Bethnal Green added a fascinating dimension to all that. 

“Fuck da Africans”? Here? Really? Yes. Here. Really. We knew this before Azeem Rafiq told us his cricket career had been stolen from him by racism. Rather, by racists lurking in his own dressing room. Because, without racists to fuel it, racism is a fire without flames and will soon die. This, too, we know. And have done for centuries. That Rafiq has himself been implicated for an anti-semitic exchange of text messages does not repudiate his story. This rings the alarm still louder: the disease infects those it afflicts in multiple senses. The victims of racism can also be perpetrators. 

So it was shocking and horrifying that the UK parliament’s Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee, to whom Rafiq spoke of his experiences last Tuesday, should have been shocked and horrified to hear there was racism in English cricket. It didn’t help that every member of the committee was achingly pale. Neither did it help that, not for the first time and, sadly, no doubt not the last, it fell to someone who is not white to lay bare to whites the depths of despair caused, intentionally, by a system created by and for whites — particularly white men of means — at the expense of everyone else.

Did the committee think cricket was exempt from racism? Did they think the UK itself was free of this evil? Did they think it was all in the past, so why don’t we all just move on? All of the above? It’s possible, even probable. 

UK society is shot through with denial of the fact that it is built on racism. That Britain was central to the Atlantic slave trade is lost in the afterglow of praise for its decision to scrap slavery — which was only achieved on the back of an agreement to pay enslavers millions in compensation. When slavery died, colonialism lived on in rude health. But the British cling, despite all the truth that has been exposed of the murderous ugliness of their history, to notions of empire.

They have elected a racist buffoon, Boris Johnson, to lead them. He has cast himself as the modern version of a drunk, bankrupt, racist buffoon from another age, Winston Churchill. In the streets near the bad mother of all parliaments, neo-fascists have pledged to stop Churchill’s statue from being torn off its plinth by those who are fed up with him being lauded as a hero.

Maybe all this is to be expected from people who are so xenophobic they voted to leave the European Union, perhaps the most successful gathering of cultures in world history. Do they understand how Orwellian they sound when they bleat, “We must end freedom of movement!”? Do they not get the sick irony of being displeased about people turning up unannounced on their shores when the British themselves did exactly that for hundreds of years? And conquered as they went. And then asked people from those countries to come and help rebuild Britain after a war? Only to tell them, decades of hard work and taxes later, that their presence was “illegal”? As Jamaican poet Linton Kwezi Johnson has been saying since 1980, “Inglan is a bitch.”

So there was something offensively funny about many UK newspapers splashing Rafiq and his story across their front pages on Wednesday. Because the press is part of the problem. With the exceptions of The Guardian, The Observer and The Mirror, the major papers are right-wing platforms that either dog-whistle or blatantly tub-thump for the glorious days of empire and colonialism. They were powerful enablers of the Brexit vote and Johnson’s election, and they continue to prop up the dangerous and damaging fallacy that grotesquely flawed Britain is somehow “Great”.

At what? Certainly at exporting inequality. Another of their racist buffoons, unfortunately a clever, efficient specimen, Cecil John Rhodes, was a past master of land expropriation and voter suppression. No amount of his ill-gotten money given to educating the descendants of the millions he subjugated can serve as adequate atonement for his crimes.

It’s difficult to think of something African that Britain has touched that hasn’t turned into pain. In South Africa, as in many other places, when the empire was finally done with us, it up and left and we had to deal with the awfulness over which it had presided. Like the 1913 Land Act, which forced blacks off essentially unowned land they had lived on for hundreds of years and into the gold mines to earn the money they were told they needed to pay to continue living there.

The legislation was passed by South Africa’s white-dominated parliament, but it needed royal assent to become law. That meant King George V had to agree. George was the grandson of Victoria and the father of Edward VIII, who abdicated and left the throne to George VI — Elizabeth II’s father. Leaving aside the illegitimacy of the British queen’s authority, how do we take seriously the idea that she isn’t as irredeemably racist as her forebears? And that her loyal, loving subjects wouldn’t want it any other way?        

So forgive us out here in the colonies if we scoff at the disingenuous surprise that there is racism in English cricket. There is racism in every facet of UK society, which wouldn’t have prospered without it. Between them, the Dutch and British colonists brought racism to our region and enforced it as the highest authority — the only authority — of the land. It has infected, as it had to and continues to do, cricket and everything else in this country at every level.  

The game in South Africa has made a valiant attempt to confront those wrongs in the form of CSA’s Social Justice and Nation-Building project. Thirty-five days of often harrowing hearings involving accusers and accused alike will inform a report, which will include recommendations, that is to be submitted by the end of the month. That will be the start of fixing the future. But only the start.

Welcome, England, to the real world — which you have shaped in important and terrible ways. You gave us cricket, but at what cost? We’re still counting, and will be for years.

Here’s hoping it was one of your own who, on seeing the profanity on the side of that delivery truck in Bethnal Green, blotted out one word and replaced it: “Fuck da racists.”

Processing…
Success! You're on the list.

The long and winding road from province to franchise to province

“Would you think cricket is in a really good position now? Or was it better before? Whatever they’ve done in the franchise era, it’s been a giant failure.” – Wendell Bossenger 

Telford Vice | Cape Town

OTHER than a flat, straight road that stretches across the belly of South Africa for 165 kilometres, nothing separates Kimberley from Bloemfontein. The earthy people, the welcoming atmosphere, the dusty air in these two places is the same. That, at least, is the outsider’s view. Locals couldn’t disagree more.

Kimberley’s heart is a hole that was dug, using only picks and shovels, 240 metres deep by 50,000 miners. They found 2,720 kilogrammes of diamonds from 1871 to 1914. Naval Hill towers incongruously — we are deep inland — over Bloemfontein. It is so named because it was where British naval guns were stationed during the Anglo-Boer War at the turn of the 19th century.

Arch-colonist Cecil John Rhodes would stop at the Halfway House in Kimberley on his ride between diamond mines and slake his thirst while still mounted on his horse. At the Mystic Boer in Bloemfontein, tops were popped off beer bottles by an expertly handled large knife, everyone smoked, including non-smokers, the pool tables were occupied by people who discovered this was the only place in the world where they were any good at the game — but only at 4am — and from backlit photographs on the walls long-dead Boer guerrillas peered down on the scene with baleful disapproval.

“The Half” has been there since 1872. It still is, old and improved without glorified land thieves and their horses. “Mystic”, established in 1997, became a Covid casualty last year. The people of Kimberley wouldn’t say so out loud, but they will see that difference as proof of their city’s superiority over Bloemfontein, which has long rolled its eyes at its smalltown neighbour 165 kilometres down the highway.

It seems all of this went over CSA’s heads when it decided, in 2003, that the cricket unions  of Griqualand West and Orange Free State — the areas centred on Kimberley and Bloemfontein – would join forces to form a franchise based in Bloem. Griquas were grumpy enough to resort to legal action, which they lost. That was the most dramatic of the birthing challenges that marked South Africa’s move from 11 provincial teams to six franchises in the summer 2004-05.

But it’s not as if the team originally called the Eagles — now the Knights — were the only imperfect partnership. East London and Gqeberha, the new name for Port Elizabeth, are 285 kilometres apart along the east coast. But, in cricket culture terms, Border and Eastern Province are from different worlds. So the Warriors have never quite clicked across provincial lines. Neither have the Cobras — a gnu of Western Province, Boland and South Western Districts — the Titans, where Northerns and Easterns are supposed to get along just fine, nor the Lions, a cobbling of Gauteng and North West.

In each of those instances economically stronger provinces swallowed smaller siblings, who had to grin and bear the truth that the other guys didn’t think they belonged in their shared, passionless dressingroom; that they were there because the suits said they had to be. To the public, fake teams with made-up names that had no history to lean on were about as attractive as being stuck in traffic. Crowds at provincial matches started thinning once South Africa returned to international competition in 1991, but at franchise games they became thinner than cattle in a drought, which led CSA to throw open the gates at first-class games. All that did was confirm what was widely suspected: not only could you not convince people to pay to watch this kind of cricket, you couldn’t give it away for free. Even the cricketing gods have given up on the stuff — the first-class final between the Dolphins and the Titans at Kingsmead, the last franchise match that will be played, has seen only 10 overs bowled in two days because of the weather.  

Provincial cricket has continued to exist and has even retained first-class status, but it is scoffed at as a sad relic of an outmoded past. Not for much longer. From next season the franchises will be gone and the provinces will again offer South Africa’s highest level of the domestic game. Why? Because more players need more opportunities in more teams, say the suits. A bidding process has decided which eight teams will be in the top division and which of the other seven will fight for the single promotion spot when that part of the system is activated in 2023-24. Partly, this has always been about money. The creation of the franchises drove the provinces into the amateur ranks, which shrank the coterie of professional players. When the franchises go out of business there will be 75 fewer player contracts on offer.

The cricketing logic that drove 11 provinces into six franchises was that it would mean only the best players emerged, that there would be no room for mediocrity. And that would make South Africa stronger in the international arena. The decision was taken in the wake of Australia winning five of their six Tests against South Africa in home-and-away series in 2001-02. All of Australia’s international players are drawn from six state sides. If it works for the Aussies it will work for us, was the thinking. Did it?

“Would you think cricket is in a really good position now? Or was it better before? That will answer everything. If I look at franchise cricket now and the players who are around, and where we are ranked in the world, and how good we really are compared to when the provincial system stopped, it’s not much of a comparison. Whatever they’ve done in the franchise era, with all their performance chains and systems, it’s been a giant failure.” 

That’s Wendell Bossenger, whose name you might not know if you aren’t familiar with the snakes ’n ladders of South African domestic cricket. Bossenger’s senior career lasted from October 1996 to February 2011. He was a silkily skilled wicketkeeper, a versatile batter and a capable captain; an allround model professional and an asset to any team. But his team were Griquas. With vacancies for ’keeper-batters limited to one per team, and with the number of top teams reduced from 11 to six from 2004-05, leaving Griquas out in the cold, Bossenger was denied his shot at leaving a legacy that could easily have included an international career. Instead he kept labouring in relative obscurity, surfacing in two first-class games for the Eagles in 2006-07. He was part of CSA coaching structures, has worked with the Titans on a part-time basis, and is now based in George as a sales representative for a sporting goods company. “I’ve been a house husband for three years — Covid got me out of retirement,” he said.

After the 2003-04 season, when the provinces were shoved aside, South Africa were second in the Test and ODI rankings. They are now sixth in Tests and T20Is and fifth in the ODI standings. But what of South Africa’s rise to No. 1 in the Test rankings in August 2012, a place they held until January 2016 but for an interruption of three months by Australia?

“You can’t say players like [Graeme] Smith, [Jacques] Kallis and [Mark] Boucher came from the franchises,” Bossenger said. “That’s the old system. They managed to make [franchise cricket] look good, and once they faded away we were left with six teams where no-one’s really playing good cricket anymore.”

All of the players who featured in the 2-0 series win in England in August 2012, which put South Africa on top of the Test rankings, made their first-class debuts before the franchise era. The closest to the cusp were AB de Villiers, Vernon Philander, Morné Morkel and Dale Steyn, who all came up in 2003-04 — the last summer the provinces represented the big time. For those of Bossenger’s view, that was also the last summer South African cricket was of a high enough quality to allow players to step up into the international arena confident that they could handle what was coming their way. 

“Shouldn’t we look to 11 teams to create as much depth as we possibly can in every position in every province? Yes, we would have a couple of really strong provinces. But, in general, we would have a lot of feeder provinces playing against each other. I played for Griquas, and my statistics were better than a lot of the guys who played in major provinces. So when I played against a big union I wasn’t out of my depth. Now I don’t think we have even enough guys to put a proper Test team together. It is disappointing watching now, having been part of an era where the standard was really good, which was built on an era before that when we had really strong teams. And we just said to them, ‘Half of you guys are not allowed to play [top level] cricket anymore. Go away and do something else.’”

Following the Australian template had “led us down a very bad path. We’re a completely different nation and mix of cultures. We need to get back to who we really are as a nation; our own DNA and identity. That’s really important. We don’t want to just hope we’re good. We want to know it.” Putting the provinces first again was “definitely the right way to go. Hopefully we can get the right framework for this thing to work again. I do believe there are still very clever people out there who can make it work, and we have a lot of good cricketers of all races and some good coaches who are really passionate about the game and work hard. You need to rebuild the system with that.”

Neil McKenzie, who began his first-class career for what would now be called Gauteng’s B team in January 1995 and ended it in the colours of the Lions in March 2015, concurs with some of Bossenger’s sentiments: “The provincial sides were highly competitive. South Africa’s international players were playing week in and week out. In terms of strength, our cricket was at its toughest then. The bowlers really came at you. When I first played Natal had Malcolm Marshall, Shaun Pollock, Lance Klusener, Ross Veenstra … At EP it was Brett Schultz and Eldine Baptiste. Northerns had Fanie de Villiers and Tertius Bosch, and they were considered a more beatable side; more a one-day team. You had to know your story playing against those attacks.”

Even so, McKenzie says the franchise era has given South Africa “good, proper cricket”. But he feels it was undermined by the subsequent exponential increase in the players’ commitments: “The IPL and the other T20 leagues weren’t around [before the franchises] and there wasn’t as much international cricket. You weren’t losing the big names. And the more world class players you’ve got in the system, they help more than any of the coaches. A guy batting with Hashim Amla, Graeme Smith or Jacques Kallis is going to learn more from one innings than he would from 10 net sessions.”

The IPL has coincided with South Africa’s summer only three times in its 13 editions, and even then only partially. But there are plenty of other T20 leagues that could get in the way of the national cause. South Africa played 427 matches from their return from isolation in November 1991 to the end of major provincial cricket. In the equivalent time after the advent of the franchises they played 474. In less than the past 13 years they’ve played 482. So the bigger the star the less they will be in action in domestic cricket, whatever its shape.

That’s nothing new. Kagiso Rabada played 26 matches last year: nine for South Africa and the other 17 for the Delhi Capitals. That he has appeared seven times for the Lions in 2021 has as much to do with the pandemic — a visit by Australia was called off — as CSA planning. McKenzie’s memory of the South Africa spearhead’s most recent match, against the Titans at the Wanderers last week, was vivid: “You had Rabada running in against [Aiden] Markram and [Dean] Elgar. That’s what you want.”

It is. But you can’t always get what you want. Kimberley has a hole. Bloemfontein has a hill. There’s no changing that, come old fashioned hotels, dodgy bars, provinces or franchises.

First published by Cricbuzz.

Processing…
Success! You're on the list.

Krom Hendricks’ story holds lessons for all, now and in the future

A half-breed like Hendricks in South Africa’s Test team? Unthinkable. No matter how good he was as a player, he was born not good enough.

TELFORD VICE | Cape Town

THREE white men are at a Cape Town bookshop talking about a work two of them have written about a black cricketer. Three of the questions from the audience come from women. Two of the questioners are black. Discuss.

Not that there is a lot of discussion in South African cricket. What there is a lot of is shouting — from whites at blacks who question why they do not have a bigger presence in the game in all avenues and at all levels, from blacks at whites who highlight failings by those who are black, and from brown people who lament that once they weren’t white enough to be considered equals and now they aren’t black enough. All too often, the shouting is a kneejerk defence against the indefensible.    

Chris Nenzani, Cricket South Africa’s president until their annual meeting on September 5, when he is due to vacate that office, is a lightning rod for much of that anger. Respected for most of a tenure that started in February 2013, he will leave the game stained by the past 18 months, which have seen galloping financial losses, compound fractures of governance, dwindling sponsorship and mounting public and stakeholder disapproval.

Thus, and perhaps unfairly, Nenzani, who is black, will go down as CSA’s worst ever leader. But say a word against him and, regardless of the unimpeachable facts of the matter, if you are white or brown you will likely be met by irrational, abusive screeching in his defence. The reasons why go beyond what one person, black, brown or white, competent, mediocre or inept, could ever achieve.

“What did you expect? I don’t know why we’re so surprised. When you put your foot on a man’s neck and hold him down for 300 years, and then you let him up, what’s he going to do? He’s going to knock your block off.” There’s a chilling jolt of currency in those words in the wake of the public killing of George Floyd by police in Minneapolis on May 25, and the nuclear reaction that has spread far beyond that street of unnecessary death. But they were said by Lyndon B. Johnson in the angry aftermath of the assassination of Martin Luther King in April 1968.

Forty years later enough of the United States’ white majority voted for Barack Obama to make him their country’s first black president. Four years after that, they kept him in the job. But then, in retaliation for eight years of what looked like progress, they elected Donald Trump, a shameless juggernaut of retrogression and division who represents the seething rejection of racial and gender justice. For Americans of every stripe, it’s back to the past.

Similarly, not nearly enough about the reality of black South Africans’ lives have changed since they won their freedom 26 years ago. Instead, whites remain on top of almost any pile worth measuring, including cricket.

Thirty-six men have captained South Africa’s official Test team since March 1889. Thirty-four have been white. Of the 29 debuts handed out across the formats since the start of 2019, only four have gone to black Africans, who comprise more than 80% of the population and form the majority of cricket’s player base and following. These figures are crude but rude with the truth that the game, despite significant efforts to darken it, remains unbearably white.

Among the major sports only football puts national teams on the field that demographically represent the nation more or less accurately. Much has been made of the racial rainbow that was the South Africa rugby side that won the 2019 World Cup, but only five of the XV who started the final against England were black African. Then there’s the shibboleth that in South Africa blacks play football and whites play rugby and cricket. It is a lie invariably peddled maliciously.

Apartheid was consigned to history in April 1994, but anyone who argues that the country isn’t still in structural and systemic racism’s dismal grip lives in a universe parallel, and at least as warped, to that occupied by Chris Nenzani’s noisier supporters.

On June 4 the minister of sport, Nathi Mthethwa, met with the Eminent Persons Group (EPG) and, a release said, “was concerned about the lack of implementation of the EPG team recommendations; and went as far as proposing an enforcement mechanism using legislative instruments to ensure that all the transformation objectives are realised”. The EPG reported that “more than 50% of the audited federations have achieved their transformation targets”, but also that “black Africans and women are underrepresented in every sphere of South African sport”.

The same could be said about all aspects of modern South African life. Apartheid was consigned to history by Nelson Mandela’s election as president in April 1994, but anyone who argues that the country isn’t still in structural and systemic racism’s dismal grip lives in a universe parallel, and at least as warped, to that occupied by Nenzani’s noisier supporters.

How much of all that might Krom Hendricks have helped change, for the better, had he been given the opportunity he earned rightfully? Considering the forces ranged against him, maybe no more than minimally. But it is a thought worth exploring nonetheless.

Hendricks was a rock star fast bowler from the Cape who was in his pomp in the 1890s. Tall, broad and moustachioed, he ripped through batting orders like a demon — the English team that toured South Africa from December 1891 to March 1892 compared him favourably to Fred Spofforth himself — and he should have roared into the Test team. Doubtless he would have if not for the accident of his birth.

Hendricks’ father was white. His mother was black. Such mixing and matching in the gene pool was not unheard of in Cape Town, a port city, after all, where the world’s disparate peoples met on more equal terms than in less liberal places. But the products of such unions were not welcome in the polite white society that held their superiority in all circles — including on the cricket oval — to be at once self-evident and inviolate.

A half-breed like Hendricks in South Africa’s Test team? Unthinkable. No matter how good he was as a player, he was born not good enough. Nothing could change that. As one of the members of South Africa’s inaugural Test XI, Augustus Bernard Tancred — his best friends, all of them white, no doubt, called him “AB” — wrote in the Standard and Diggers News of February 14, 1894 of the possibility of Hendricks being picked to tour England later that year: “To take him as an equal would from a South African point of view be impolitic, not to say intolerable, and I would not have him on those terms if he were a better bowler than [former England ace George] Lohmann.”

Tancred’s vile words live and breath again on page 62 of Too Black to Wear Whites, a study of Hendricks’ life and career and the context in which he lived. Two of the white men at that Cape Town bookshop were the authors, Jonty Winch and Richard Parry. The third, André Odendaal, wrote the foreword. All are historians, and cricket people with a gift for marrying research with passion to tell stories that enrich our understanding of the past and so the present.

Hendricks deserves his due, not least because he has never had it before. He would have been, in his day, prominent in any reckoning of who the best and quickest fast bowler in the world might be. But, in 848 pages of Maurice Luckin’s supposedly authoritative history of South African cricket, published in 1915, Hendricks appears in prose only once, as “the Cape coloured boy, Hendriks [sic]”, and features in a solitary scorecard.

He was a victim of his time and his circumstances, with powerful figures like arch-imperialist Cecil John Rhodes personally involved in stymieing his progress. This disgrace reached the level of preventing Hendricks from earning a living by playing professionally for clubs. But he was not about to go quietly, writing bristling letters to newspapers and even enjoying the support of some of those the white elite considered “gentlemen”.

Hendricks himself was not above apparent prejudice, firing off a missive to the Cape Times in January 1894 in which he “must disclaim any connection with the Malay community. My father was born of Dutch parents in Cape Town, and my mother hails from St Helena — then why am I termed a Malay?” Why was he anxious not to be counted among the Malays? Perhaps because they were Muslim. Or because they were brought to the Cape as slaves. Or he was pulling the race card to try and be regarded as white, and so be permitted to earn money from playing cricket.

Winch and Parry have done the game a great service by delving deeply into their subject to knot the loose ends of Hendricks’ previously barely told story, and in the process weave a vibrant vision of the South Africa of the time. While much has changed, it is depressing how much has not.   

Hendricks was indeed too black to wear whites at a high level in his country in the 1890s, and he would have been for the next hundred years. More than 130 years have passed since his outrageous talent for taking wickets became impossible to ignore. South Africans are now parsing the difference between who is merely black — indigenous and mixed race brown people and those of Asian heritage — and who is black African, and on that basis making important decisions about the lives of individuals as they attempt to redress the viciously legislated social engineering of the past.

Mostly, care is taken to ensure this happens with due regard for all involved: there is no question that Kagiso Rabada, a black African, is South Africa’s best fast bowler in a generation. But it is equally true that black Africans are, rightfully considering the grotesquely skewed reality that went before, afforded more life and career opportunities than other race groups. Whether they are able to take them in a society where too much of the past infects the present in ways far bigger than cricket — the World Inequality Database reports that 1% of South Africans earn 20% of the country’s income, while 90% take home only 35% — is a different conversation.

Rabada, for instance, is the son of middle-class parents. But they rose from the desperately difficult beginnings universal to black lives of that time to become a doctor and a lawyer. Would their son be where he is had their hard work not paid for a place at a prestigious school that had produced seven international cricketers?   

Rabada’s route to fulfilling his potential would not have been open to Hendricks, no matter how much talent he had or how hard his parents toiled to see it fulfilled. Even now he might consider the door half-closed rather than half-open. Then, he was not white enough. Now, he may not be black enough.

First published by Cricbuzz.

Processing…
Success! You're on the list.

And so to Twickenham. And back. And quite some trip it was

IMG_1875

LAND OF HOPE AND GLORY – Twickenham, where all sorts go to watch rugby. And much more … (Photograph: Telford Vice) 

There were promises of “Hog Roast” and “Borough’s Best Burger”, and a place that advertised, simply, powerfully and oddly aptly, “BRAAI”. Only £7 for a boerewors roll. That’s around R140.

Times Select

TELFORD VICE in London

TAKE the Central line two stops from Bethnal Green to Bank, then the Waterloo and City line one stop to Waterloo, then, from platform 17, the overground to Twickenham. Five stops.

All the while channel your inner V. S. Naipaul going to Lord’s in 1963 to watch Frank Worrell, the finest of all cricketers because he was so much more than a cricketer, lead West Indies against England.

Naipaul, owner of a Booker Prize, the Trinity Cross — the highest honour achievable in his native Trinidad and Tobago — and a British knighthood, died in August as one of the most celebrated writers on the migrant experience.

And there he was on a London bus 55 years ago, en route to the cricket with his ears wide open.

“If Collie [beloved West Indies allrounder Collie Smith] did not dead … He used to jump out and hit [England fast bowler Brian] Statham for six and thing, you know,” Naipaul reported faithfully, along with many other overhearings of his fellow travellers’ views.

Conrad Hunte, whose patience at the crease made Kepler Wessels look like Jonty Rhodes, was part of that West Indies team. Hunte came into my life when he was a working with the then United Cricket Board’s development programme and I was a young reporter. I knew him for just a few days, but he left an indelible impression as a person so decent you felt improved simply by being in the same room as him. He was, I was not surprised to learn, a member of Moral Re-Armament.

It was Hunte who sparked what became my obsession with Worrell. His eyes blazed and his voice danced when he spoke of his skipper. If Worrell could light a fire in someone as inspirational as Hunte, I thought, what kind of man must he have been? I was not disappointed in the answers I found, which lift me up to this day.   

As upright and solid as Hunte was as a human being and an opening batsman, he wasn’t always a favourite with the crowd, some of whom — Naipaul wrote — felt he was “taking this Moral Re-Armament a little too seriously. He do not want to hit the ball because the leather comes from an animal.”

That followed Hunte batting for more than two hours for his 44 in the Lord’s Test, which was drawn with West Indies needing just one wicket and England only six runs.

Naipaul, who watched the whole match and had plenty to think about on the mid-match rest day, wrote: “Day after day I have left Lord’s emotionally drained. What other game could have stretched hope and anxiety over six days?”

I would be at Twickenham for only a few hours to report on the Springboks’ match against England, and I do not fancy myself as any kind of Naipaul. But, if I’ve learnt anything writing about sport it’s that, as Naipaul illustrated so vividly, the story isn’t only on the field.

The three tube stations were their usual, bustling Saturday afternoon selves, strewn with the hither and thither of people on a myriad different missions. But once I was aboard the overground I felt part of a common purpose.

The dress code was caps and beanies (the odd hat), rucksacks, scarves, warm jackets, jeans, and shoes sensible and sturdy enough for grandstand clambering and that you knew could get slopped with beer.   

“Bollocks to Brexit” a large commercially produced sign read as we eased out of Waterloo, soon followed by “Brexit is bonkers”.

The fella sat next to me, a bearded, bobbed redhead of a 30-something blessed with a spaniel’s face, didn’t notice. He was too busy, between bites of a supermarket sandwich, reading his phone as well as last night’s Evening Standard. 

Across the way two luminously pasty, shaven-headed Yorkshiremen — they sounded, to me, like Jonny Bairstow — prattled away about work.

“Twickenham,” read the next noteworthy sign, and soon the hundreds on our train joined the phalanx oozing out of the station to become part of the 80 369 who would be in their seat come kick-off.

A roadside preacher armed with a loudhailer — “Confess your sins!” — and a scribbled bit of cardboard — “Jesus is Lord!” — had about as much impact on the passing parade as the Brexit signs had had on the sandwiching spaniel.

More attractive were promises of “Hog Roast” and “Borough’s Best Burger”, and a place that advertised, simply, powerfully and oddly aptly, “BRAAI”. Only £7 for a boerewors roll. That’s around R140.

The grey mass of the stadium loomed — Twickenham looks elegant from the inside, but from the outside it’s an ugly block of concrete — along with a bloke from the Democratic Alliance. At least, he was wearing a DA T-shirt.

He had enough gel in his hair to keep the flags above the stands as stiff as Cecil John Rhodes’ upper lip. He also had Rhodes’ colonial smugness. Call it what it is: the plastic surgery of privilege.

A woman whose blackness shone out of the paleness all around, and wearing a South Africa flag around her shoulders, was about to pass him when he pounced, proffering pamphlets: “Ma’am! Do you live in the UK?” Happily, she had a mean sidestep and left him in her wake, his eyes as stuck as his hair.

And so into the outer shell of Twickenham itself, a confusing tangle of lifts that don’t go all the way to the top floor, staircases hidden behind doors, and concourses that seem to lead to nothing except more lifts and staircases.

“Excuse me,” I asked I don’t know how many stewards, “how do I get to the pressbox, please?”

All of them looked at me as if I had wanted to know the way to El Dorado. More than once, they answered my question with one of their own, accompanied with a look that said they had no clue such a place existed: “Pressbox?” 

The game came and went in its usual flash — if you’ve reported on a rugby match, chances are you’ve also gone home and turned on the television to find out what the hell happened out there — and it was time to make the return journey.

I had been warned by more seasoned Twickenham reporters that getting back could be an ordeal of trains congested with the most awful kind of English ponces who stink, if you’re lucky, of beer and, if you’re not so lucky, vomit.

“It’s better when England lose,” one of my colleagues said. Of course, England won — with not a little help from the bungling, bumbling Boks themselves. And a referee who deserves to be forced to listen to the man from the DA for at least 80 minutes. 

The trains were indeed filled with sloshed spectators. But no-one stank of anything. And the natives, no doubt softened by their team’s undeserved victory, were friendly.

In fact the most interesting occupants of the carriage I was in were two women in Springbok gear. One held dearly a half-litre bottle of cider. The other did the same, and also clutched a beer.

They stood in the aisle, swaying slightly, no doubt because of the movement of the train, and engaging in uninhibited conversation.

“He asked me to get him, like, £20 worth of weed,” one said. “But he’s a ‘lej’ boss — he takes such good care of me.”

She didn’t have quite such favourable things to say about someone else: “That chick! Don’t call me out on my shit and then you dunno how to catch the fuckin’ tube!”

Her companion looked increasingly uncomfortable as the journey wore on, and as Waterloo hove out of the night and into brutally bright view she revealed why: “Right now, I don’t care; I would piss in a bucket.”

Times are different to when people dressed up to go to the cricket, where giants of the age in every sense — like Worrell and Hunte — would perform for our entertainment.

But I had to wonder what Naipaul might have made of what I saw and heard on Saturday. And about what he did see and hear and didn’t write about in 1963.