Survey shows players oppose all-white tour

Press, 20 August 1976, Page 1

Survey shows players oppose all-white tour

By the sports editor

Three out of four rugby players in Christchurch approve of the present tour of South Africa by the All Blacks, but almost as many players would not approve of a tour of New Zealand by a Springbok side selected from whites only.

These conclusions emerge from a survey of players by “The Press” this week — a survey conducted in an effort to establish whether the New Zealand Rugby Union’s past and present policies on exchanges of visits with South Africa are on all fours with opinion among active players of rugby. The players were asked two questions: (1) Do you approve of the present tour of South Africa by the All Blacks? (2) Should New Zealand invite South Africa to send to New Zealand a team chosen on the same basis as previous Springbok teams? The answers to the questions were: DeDidn’t dined Yes No know answer 1. 175 44 4 7 2. 52 1(1 7 7 Expressed as percentages, 76.1 pe cent of those surveyed answered “Yes” to the first question and " 3 per cent “No” to the second.

The survey was conducted by telephone. Each of the 20 rugby clubs with teams in the open grades of the Canterbury Rugby Union’s competitions was invited to supply lists of players in these grades. The Teachers’ College club, which has only one team, could not oblige — its members had dispersed on their term holidays. No list was received from the Lyttelton club. The New Brighton club would not take part in the survey. Although it was explained that the survey was confidential, with no reference to individuals or clubs in the results, the president of the New Brighton club (Mr G. T. Nolan) said that newspapers were not behind the game. “You fellows cannot be trusted these days,” he said.

He said there was “no guarantee that the lists would not be sent to H.A.R.T. and C.A.R.E.”

For the survey, every fifth name on each list was marked. Because some players had moved, or were awav when the survey was made (on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday), the survey fell short by 20 per cent, but the responses obtained represented 10.45 per cent of adult rugby players in Christchurch, and 17.05 per

cent of those on the submitted lists.

The results of the survey were conveyed yesterday to Mr J. L. Sullivan, chairman of the New Zealand Rugby Union’s council. He was asked if the union would now issue an invitation to South Africa to send a team to New Zealand in 1981 and, if so, would it suggest any change in selection policy? “It is not the practice of the rugby unions to issue invitations covering scheduled tours until, say, 12 months before the tour takes place,” said Mr Sullivan. “The 1981 scheduled tour is a long time away. In the meantime, we are watching the changes which are taking place. In those circumstances, the N.Z.R.U. council of the day will consider the invitation.”

Mr Sullivan was also asked to comment on a news item yesterday in which South Africa’s Minister of Sport (Dr Piet Koornhof) said his Government had approved a request for a mixed-race invitation team to tour France next year. The item also said that the choice of the team would be left to the all-white South African Rugby Board.

“I am not involved in that issue,” Mr Sullivan said.

Many New Zealanders, however, may well feel that they are involved, and w ill take a keen interest in the basis of selection of the South African players for the tour of France. There is no mistaking the sustained interest of New Zealanders in international rugby, but the Christchurch survey gives a strong indication that attitudes to the South African rugby organisation are hardening.

This process had no doubt been hastened by recent events in South Africa, by television programmes on sport there, and by the black African nations’ ban on the Olympic Games.

The New Zealand Rugby Union is not in an easy position. But regarding the next projected Springbok visit, it has time on its side, as Mr Sullivan pointed out. It may be that New Zealand’s present embarrassment will be removed by a course of events in South Africa; but if it is not, the opinions of players — as expressed in the survey — may make it impossible for other than a merit-chosen side to visit New Zealand.

The New Zealand Rugby Union is surely conscious of the need to keep in touch with the views of the players of the game.