Currently there is a big political discussion in South Africa about the Springbok as an emblem. What is your view?

l was not aware of this debate before now ( l live in the UK, & am English), so thanks for raising the question.

From an outsider is point of view, l can see how emblems associated with the apartheid era could inflame passions, but this is simply the wrong target, for many reasons.

Firstly, the SA rugby team has been known as the Springboks since 1906, long before apartheid reared its ugly head, so to link the two is wildly inaccurate.

Secondly (and connected with the first point), the Springbok name & emblem has a rich history (not quite as rich as that of the All Blacks, but not far off) that is for the most part untainted by apartheid, & scrapping the emblem (and presumably therefore the name as well) would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Thirdly, the springbok as an animal is inextricably linked to South Africa in people is minds, & has the brilliant quality of being above politics & man is grand or petty failings - l actually think that (if u ignore the history, which, as the first point above shows, the people calling for the emblem is abolition r clearly doing themselves) it would be hard to come up with a MORE neutral emblem than an animal that so clearly characterises the country.

Fourthly, sport should be above politics, & the minute nations start using sport as a political football (pardon the pun), that is when they start looking very much like Eastern Bloc countries before the fall of the USSR - very sinister in a supposedly civilised nation.

Finally (and perhaps most importantly), l believe that, far from the springbok being an emblem of white oppression, the opposite is true: in these days of soaring non-white participation in the sport of rugby union, at all levels of the game (a picture that can only continue to improve), has not the springbok actually become an emblem of post-apartheid reconciliation, of rising above the past, & of hope for a more assimilated future?

As a South African, l reckon replacing the Springbok will cause more friction amongst different races in the country for the sake of fixing a problem that does not exist. How on earth can a Springbok as an emblem be deemed racist? What will happen next? Will the animal itself be renamed? The ANC(ruling party) itself is divided on the subject(look in their own polls) so l think its just changing something for the sake of change. The opposition parties r very much opposed to the change. It is very unfortunate the comes up every time, especially because the Springboks have had a huge part in national unification, especially by the winning of the 2 World Cups. EVERYONE was celebrating, Mandela wore the Springbok jersey & call the Springboks the Springboks. So to summarize, l think it should not be replaced, because it is going to cause much more damage trying to ''fix'' this problem that does not exist.
PEACE

PS somewhere else on , the replacement was justified because of a supposed link between the Springbok rugby emblem & the Springbok Club(Neo-Imperialist Body) This is totally inaccurate & untrue.

im english so im really an outsider on this issue but the rest of the world knows the team as the springboks & will always be called this even with a logo change. do the players want a change or are they happy with the emblem & what would it be changed to as the springbok is fast, sure footed & agile