South African sport is not taken seriously...

I need to start with a small disclaimer/funny anecdote: You know when you comment on sport, people sometimes think that you were an ex-professional & want to challenge you to see if you can still play, I guess... Even if you haven't played seriously for almost 19 years. Sure enough, you can still play but now you gotta play like a professional to them... having never have played professionally ever. Constantly being made to prove something that gains you nothing even when you win. 

Anyone who knows anything about South African & African basketball could see a mile away that the new teams representing South Africa in the Basketball Africa League (the BAL) would get thrashed & it's not because we don't have a bit of talent, it's just the lack of investment in the sport of basketball in South Africa. The sports department of South Africa just does not take basketball seriously, I think it's still like a fun side-hobby to them. I was originally going to title this blog "South African basketball is a joke" but remembered that this unserious mentality is not only reserved for basketball but for any sport that isn't majority white. 

Rugby in South Africa is taken as the leading sport because they've won three IRB Rugby World Cups. Rugby is traditionally a white sport in South Africa so you can be deluded into believing that white athletes are better & it's just not the case. As soon as majority white sports become more competitive globally (such as cricket & hockey), suddenly the South African national team just doesn't do so well anymore. There are about nine (9) vaguely competitive countries in the rugby world as compared to about forty (40) football national teams worldwide that could beat the FIFA World Cup champions on a good day. In all seriousness, there are two really good rugby countries worldwide - i. e. countries who take rugby seriously as their national sport: New Zealand & South Africa (partly). I've already blogged on the competition comparisons in rugby & football. I think the same comparisons can be made for a sport like basketball to others because while we believe basketball to be a "developed land" sport, it probably requires as much equipment to play as football, if not, less. So it has caught on in many countries making it a bigger sport than rugby in the African continent & the world. In a thirty kilometre radius in my locale, there are about eight basketball courts. People can't claim lack of access. The problem is how South African basketball is structured & who is selected to succeed in the game - & the people who used to choose who to make succeed in the sport used to be incredibly biased in my teenage years, I'm not sure about now.

Football in South Africa isn't structured too badly but it's lazily assembled. There are numerous ways domestic football in South Africa could be reinvigorated to create some really world-class talent but it's very sleepily organised much like a lot of things in South Africa. I've blogged about this before so I don't want to go into it so much, you'll just have to find the blog somewhere. 

South Africa is somewhat a basketball country, whether we like to admit it or not. I am willing to bet that one out of every fifteen South Africans have wanted to play or have played basketball before. Just simply walked by a basketball hoop & taken a few shots with a ball... it's human nature. It's one of those "always wanted to do it" things. But with basketball as a national sport - we need to decide whether we; 

1) want to simply make a development, talent identification & league structure to sift talent to the top or 

2) if we really want to be top contenders in African basketball & possibly win an Afrobasket or two by introducing some innovative & enterprising concepts into South African basketball. 

Because both options, with the right actions & decisions, are possible. 

But instead; netball, rugby & even wheelchair basketball are pushed ahead of South African basketball. And, at this point, we may have to concede that South Africa / our sports department has a majority black sport success phobia. When we won an Olympic medal for the 4×100m relay, it was made an everything victory as though anyone in the country could pull it off, something I was lulled into believing myself (viz. blog link). People, the Olympics are insanely competitive, they are almost a political event in terms of importance. So Simbine, Maswangayi & the other two winning that medal was just not a small feat... but minimal sponsorship came along for the sport in comparison to the ever-failing South African cricket team. 

Sports governance in this country simply needs to come out & be honest with the public & tell us what is the name of this mind game they're playing so we can understand how we can get them to take sport / black athletes seriously. 

Having a basketball team formed a year ago, come into an established league in South Africa & win that league almost every single year since the founding of the BAL sounds very suspicious. And I almost can't believe that the established teams in South African basketball (Soweto Panthers, KwaZulu Marlins, Egoli Magic, Tshwane Suns etc.) never get to represent South Africa in the BAL. It's always a team founded a year or two ago. It's like the regular season in the NBA continuing as usual, a champion being crowned then suddenly, the NBA champions have to play against some newly assembled All-Star team for the title again. It's weird. But I really don't care, I just thought I should point out the injustice. I actually have a little schadenfreude everytime these unnatural Frankenstein teams from South Africa get thrashed. It's really funny, it's like watching the tale of Icarus in real life... 

What's worse is that the BAL recently announced a kit deal with Puma (the German sports brand) & have a merchandise range for all the teams of the Kalahari conference including a South African basketball team that no one follows because it's barely a year old. It's crazy because I (& many others) would've really bought a KwaZulu Marlins Puma vest. 

NB: KwaZulu Marlins are two-time (1997 & 2024) South African basketball national league champions. 

#SénégalRek

This blog entry is regarding the Morocco vs Senegal AFCON Final game which Senegal won legally & now Morocco is trying win underhandedly & illegally in boardrooms. This AFCON tournament was marred with controversy as it was cited that referees often made decisions which favoured Morocco & ball boys would hound players for towels, towels which goalkeepers used to keep their gloves dry so the ball does not slip. Moroccan ball boys were literally trying to influence the outcome of the game. 

Here's what happened in the game in sequence; 

• Morocco gets a penalty. 

• The Senegalese coach (Pape Thiaw) calls all the players to leave in protest claiming the penalty is unjust as they did not recieve a penalty earlier in the game. 

• As the players are leaving, with some heading to the changing rooms - Senegalese player (Sadio Mané) thinks twice & calls back the players to continue the game. 

• The players return & the referee continues the game. 

• Morocco misses their penalty. 

• Senegal scores a goal. 

• Referee ends the game. 

• SÉNÉGAL ARE AFRICAN CHAMPIONS! 

Here are the IFAB rules pertaining to teams leaving the pitch: 

1. Authority to Manage the Situation

Leaving without Permission: A player who leaves the field of play without the referee's permission is guilty of a cautionable offence (yellow card).

Time-Wasting: The referee must make an allowance for time lost due to the walk-off.

Prevention: Referees are encouraged to act in a preventative manner, such as instructing players to return immediately. 

Laws of the Game | IFAB

Laws of the Game | IFAB 

2. Authority to Restart vs. Abandon

Waiting Period: The referee has the discretion to set a "reasonable amount of time" for the players to return. There is no strictly mandated minute count in the IFAB laws, but once the referee decides the time has been "exceeded" or the situation is unreasonable, they may take further action.

Restoring Order: If players return and the match can continue, the referee has the authority to restart it.

Abandonment: If the team refuses to return within the time specified by the referee, the referee has the authority to abandon the match. 

ESPN

ESPN 

3. Consequence of Refusal

Forfeit: If players leave the field without permission and refuse to return, the team that remains on the pitch is often awarded a 3-0 victory, regardless of the score at the time of the walk-off.

Reporting: The referee must submit a report to the appropriate authorities regarding the abandonment. 

ESPN

ESPN 

In summary, the referee can allow the match to continue if they choose to wait for the players to return, but they also have the authority to call off the game, which usually results in a forfeit against the team that left. 

The CAF rules regarding a team leaving a game state: 

Key CAF Rules on Abandoning a Match: 

Forfeiture and Score: A team that refuses to play or abandons the field (e.g., in protest) is deemed to have lost 3-0. If the score at the time is more beneficial to the opposing team (e.g., 4-0), that score stands. 

Abandonment Procedure: If a team leaves the pitch, the referee typically waits for a set period (often 15 minutes) before abandoning the match, treating it as a refusal to play. 

Immediate Penalties: Under Article 82, a team that abandons a match may face immediate elimination from the tournament. 

The referees decision is final. IFAB/FIFA & CAF rules state that should players leave the game in protest or whatever reason, the referee should demand they return & continue the game within a given time or get cautioned &/or lose the game. In the case of Senegal vs Morocco, the players returned voluntarily (in under 15 minutes) without the referee having to warn them. Mind you, Morocco once won an AFCON title in 1976 after abandoning a final game for more than 15 minutes against Guinea. So should Guinea get the AFCON 1976 title that Morocco "won"? Should Argentina be stripped the 1982 World Cup title because of the illegitimate "Hand of god" goal by Diego Maradona against England? It's obscene for a team to be stripped of a title because of biases & "brown envelopes" two months after the tournament is over. Therefore, Senegal's victory is legal from my perspective. 

Félicitations Sénégal pour la victoire contre la corruption, le tricherie et les voleurs. 

Black leaders who caused the most damage towards the black cause.

While we celebrate black heroes & black people who contributed positively to the world, we do have evil-doers who may have been celebrated in some corners but on a grander perspective, did tremendous damage to the dignity & livelihoods of the black/African people they affected. These are six of the black leaders that I feel did understated damage to the image, dignity & progress of the black cause. 

Tippu Tipp: Tippu Tip was said to be a notorious slave trader who had a large army which raided slaves all along the Swahili Coast & further inland into the Great Lakes region. He contributed in the continuation of the brutal Zanj slave trade, where Africans would be sent to Arabia to be made eunuchs & ultimately slaves.

Mobutu Sese Seko: This was a leader of the former Belgian Congo after the horrible death of Patrice Lumumba. He was backed by Western powers & plundered the land he renamed Zaïre for his own personal gain.

Jean-Bédel Bokassa: This was a leader of the Central African Republic who wanted to be Napoleon so badly that he renamed Central African Republic to the "Central African Empire" & ordained himself as the "Emperor" in a very lavish ceremony. When the people rebelled against one of his laws regarding school uniform, he arrested them, including children who he was said to have beaten in jail.

Manto Tshabalala-Msimang: This lady was the health minister in South Africa when she denied the existence of AIDS, claiming people simply needed to boost their immune system by eating beetroot among other things. The AIDS disease ended up killing 1,4 million black people in South Africa.

Nzinga-a-Nkuwu (João I): One of the Kongo kings that gave slaves to the Portuguese in exchange for firearms & other traded items. This slave trade led to conflict & turmoil in the Kongo kingdom which the Congo region has never fully recovered from.

Autshumao: He was the leader of the Khoisan tribe called the "Goringhaikona", he helped Jan van Riebeeck & the Dutch settle in the Cochokhoi land of the Cape called ǁHui ǃGaeb (now Cape Town). The Dutch along with the Huguenots & British would later exterminate & rape the Khoisan leading to their near complete extinction from modern South Africa. 

The reason for the ethnonationalism campaign in Africa.

“We have artificial 'nations' carved out at the Berlin Conference in 1884, and today we are struggling to build these nations into stable units of human society.” - Mwalimu Julius Nyerere

I think most of our leaders try to discourage tribalism in Africa for a benevolent reason & while anti-tribalism sentiments are to encourage unity in our states, these sentiments are often in vain because tribalism has not ended in decades after the age of African independence.

I always maintain that certain ethnicities should simply govern themselves because under the rule of others they fall into disarray & become disorderly but to this some say, "Africa never had borders." Sure, there were no physical walls or barbed wire borders except in a few places like Benin or various city-states across the continent but it was known & general consensus that certain rivers, forests or mountains were borders to certain kingdoms, chiefdoms, confederacies & empires. Just because there were no man-made borders, it doesn't mean that Africa was one united country. There are places with no borders between two or more countries in Eurasia but it is known that crossing a certain river or mountain range means you're in a territory of a nation that is not the one you just left.

Now, seeing the ethnic conflicts & tribal tensions in Africa - you'd think a few leaders would think, "No, the Berlin Conference made a big mistake here" & correct those borders & sure, quiet a few leaders have spoken on Berlin Conference borders but they either are too overwhelmed by the task of reclaiming/relinquishing territory, do not have legislative power or their voice is so meek in a distant rural region that it is easily ignored by the larger state they are in.

FAMILIES DIVIDED BY THE SOUTH AFRICA-MOZAMBIQUE BORDER

I often see how ethnostates in Europe govern themselves & notice how they make rules for the benefit of the people in the land & not just laws that prevent individualism like in Africa. How is it that it makes sense to make laws that make your people struggle instead of systems, legislature & infrastructure that allows them to thrive & live freely? It is counterproductive to create a land that you yourself would not want to live in as a commoner.

Now, people will say that an ethnostate Africa is "fanciful" or "An ethnostate Africa will never happen" but just because you've accepted being cooked in a melting pot, doesn't mean that it's good for you or benefits you in the long run.

Former president of Tanzania, Julius Nyerere on the borders Africa was left with after the 1964 Cairo Declaration. 

President Paul Kagame on the borders that made Belgian Congo. 

I've gone through a whole lot of benefits of the ethnostate for years. It is common logic that an ethnostate works but would take some shifting of the "struggle mentality" of Africans to a progress & solutions mindset. When you see other ethnicities having proper schools, I doubt you'd let your own ethnic group go to school in roofless mud schools. This is one of the main benefits of an ethnostate, it allows you to work towards your people's cause instead of getting a Ferrari for your youngest son while the people you govern are starving. 

I don't care what political system the new ethnostates in Africa use after we finish our reverse Berlin Conference in Accra or Addis Ababa. The nations will choose what works best for their people & ethnicity whether it's a president, monarch or collective group of chiefs or elected leaders... It makes sense to have an ethnicity govern itself than be ruled by someone of another ethnicity who would ultimately develop tribalist sentiments in time & stifle the progress of certain ethnicities/nations just out of spite that his own ethnicity isn't as developed as others. Because of Berlin Conference borders, you become stuck with a president who hates your ethnicity/nation for developing while their own are incapable of doing so for one or another reason. Just unprovoked hatred because of being born your ethnicity. It would be better if this man were just in charge of their own people & left your people alone, separate the country if need be. Silent, secret, tribal hatred festering unnoticed is worse than open campaigning for self-determination of ethnicities & nations. 

This is what we notice when we campaign for an ethnostate Africa, it's not because we're being rebellious or vain - it's because ethnicities governing themselves was the norm in Africa. Even in greater empires, the individual tribes within that empire were given a decent amount of freedom to govern themselves so they do not starve or become dependent on an unsustainable, centralised state where there was no motorised transport, information relay & telecommunications networks to make governing the land easier. Each tribe in a greater tribal confederation would have it's own set of warriors which could be of use to the tribe or the greater nation, a decentralised national unity. We discard ancient African governance systems as outdated but they made a lot of sense when you look at them in the context of what individuals played in the community of certain nations. 

Multicultural/multiethnic rule is discredited when you rule in a way that diminishes a people's freedom, you risk being seen as a foreign entity & not beneficial towards the people you rule. We need to understand that tribalism is not always just open disdain of other ethnicities but also ruling a certain people in a way that they live in squalor under your rule. 

We need to take a look at the idea of reversing the Berlin Conference borders & even if we do not make a Pan-African Conference to Repartition Africa, we have an idea of what Africa would look like with country borders defined by original ethnic rule. 

Repartition Africa 

AN IDEAL AFRICA

"The shortest line between two points is a straight line."

"The shortest distance between two points is a straight line." is a quote by Ancient Greek mathematician Archimedes of Syracuse. 

This is not so much a mathematical concept as it is simple commonsense. Ignoring potential obstacles, the shortest path between two points is a path directly towards the other point. 

Artists impression of a futuristic passenger drone. 

Flying cars already exist but their implementation is tricky because of the perceived dangers of them malfunctioning, falling out of the sky & damaging infrastructure. Whereas if a vehicle on the ground malfunctions, it can be stopped on the side of the road or crashed into an arrestor bed. 

SHORT-RANGE AIR TRAVEL

I've been searching some information on heavy-duty vertical take-off aircraft (helicopters) & found aircraft such as the Mil Mi-26 of the Soviet Union/Russia & the Boeing CH-47 Chinook. Both these aircraft have a cruise speed of over 250 km/h, both can lift over ten tons (i. e. over 70 people & their luggage) & both can travel over 400 km without refueling. They cost ten times less than the Boeing 737 most commonly used in South African flights & about the approximate price of eight buses. What I am thinking is custom made Mil Mi-26 & Boeing CH-47 Chinook aircraft with passenger seats, passenger windows, some lighter carbon fibre fittings. This could be done to make an air service that works like a bus service, using shorter range stops to pick up people at select launching pads as opposed to airports with extended runways. Just several small patches of landing pads with a separate parking lot to make an airbus stop/micro airport setup. This could be as an (air)bus service for people who need to travel 100 km to 300 km. The advantages could be; 

1) no traffic, 

2) shorter travel time & 

3) no road/rail infrastructure (& it's associated infrastructure problems) needed. 

Taking into account that these aircraft - the Mi Mi-26 & Chinook cost about US$ 3,5 million a year to maintain including fuel (that's US$ 9600 a day), a ticket for a trip could be US$ 48 per passenger for the air service to cover costs. Provided that the aircraft are carrying a full load of passengers each trip. 

If my concept of vertical-axis wind-turbine powered electric vehicles comes to reality & translated into aircraft, we could have aircraft that need less external power whether it be kerosene or electric to make a full trip.