Overseas threat to SA greatly exaggerated

Stuart Abbott, the promising Western Province centre, is the latest South African player destined to move to a British club. The South African under-23 centre looks set to join English Premiership side Wasps after the Currie Cup.

Should he go, he will be one of three WP players - Braam van Straaten and Charl Marais being the others - flying out after the Currie Cup is completed to continue their careers in the UK.

However, there is a lot that is different about Abbott's impending departure to that of Van Straaten and Marais. Whereas the latter pair are at an august stage of their careers and have already represented South Africa, Abbott is a young player who still has his rugby future ahead of him.

Unlike his current WP teammates, and for that matter Cobus Visagie and Joost van der Westhuizen, who have walked out of deals with British clubs, his decision does not necessarily entail throwing away his chance of playing test rugby. Abbott holds a British passport and could conceivably now qualify to play for England.

But what makes the Abbott case particularly interesting is a clause which his agent is allegedly having written into his agreement with Wasps which stipulates that the deal will be off if Abbott is selected for the Springbok end-of-season tour to Europe and the United States.

That would appear to be an unambiguous endorsement for the SA Rugby and SANZAR policy of barring overseas based players from being eligible to represent their country.

In that sense the Abbott case is not dissimilar from that of Van der Westhuizen and Visagie - the prospect of earning all those pounds becomes less alluring if it means you either have to end an international career or give up on any chance of one even starting.

Strike one then to Rian Oberholzer and his argument that by banning overseas based players from playing for their countries, the three SANZAR nations are safe-guarding their interests and preventing a flood of players to the northern hemisphere.

But perhaps a closer examination of the situation is necessary before Oberholzer's argument is just glibly accepted.

Listening to Joost speak on the radio the other night it became clear would love to play for Newport if he could continue his international career at the same time. I cannot escape the feeling that the South African rugby bosses are being unfair and even morally wrong in forcing him to make a choice between his beloved Springbok jersey and the pay-day that he perhaps deserves after his years of loyalty.

As Van Straaten said this week, the argument that northern hemisphere rugby is weak no longer holds true. We all know what Joost is capable of and surely for him it should just be a matter of proving that he is still fit and relatively sharp before being selected into the Springbok squad.

Those things can be confirmed by sending a video tape of his overseas performances to the Springbok coach and selectors. The same can be said for both Van Straaten and Marais, and for that matter Visagie. The important point is that they have all played in South Africa long enough to show what their capabilities are.

As Van Straaten says, they are South African citizens and at the end of the day it is the same game.

It is significant that of the five players under discussion here, four of them are experienced Springboks and the other is a young player with a British passport. For it takes me back to a conversation I had last year with former WP coach Alan Zondagh, who is now involved with Sale.

It was Zondagh's contention that a flood of players out of South Africa was most unlikely given the severe restrictions on the number of overseas players that a British club could employ. According to Zondagh, clubs were not prepared to look at overseas players unless they had impeccable credentials and had played international rugby.

So promising young South Africans were not going to be snapped up until they had proved themselves. To do that they had to play Currie Cup level at the very least, but preferrably Super 12. The only exceptions were those like Abbott who held British passports.

With only so many positions at English clubs open to overseas players, the flood threat spoken of by Oberholzer may have been greatly exaggerated. The real threat comes at the level that Van der Westhuizen, Van Straaten and company now find themselves.

But Van Straaten has a good point when he argues that this threat could be lessened considerably if South Africa could find a way to make the players feel more secure. Being dropped is part and parcel of professional sport, but Van Straaten alleges that Australia and New Zealand have seen the light by offering players two and three year contracts.

I am not for one moment suggesting all Springboks or all the top players should have long-term contracts. What I am saying is that the potential threat posed by the British currency can be obviated to some extent if SA Rugby (Pty) Ltd could pinpoint those players they consider indispensible to the domestic game and then contract them accordingly.

Those, like Van Straaten, who are not considered that important to the survival of the Currie Cup and the strength of South Africa's Super 12 challenge should be allowed to go in the knowledge that they can still be selected for their country if needed.

The domestic competitions will still have enough young players coming through to provide depth. Apart from the fact that overseas clubs only prey on players who are already long established, any young player yet to make it into the Springbok side would surely find it logical that his best chance of attracting the attention of the national selectors is to remain under their noses - in other words at home.

It might even give the national coach more options. Instead of being limited to watching just Van Straaten were he to remain with WP, Viljoen can now watch Van Straaten play for Tykes and at the same time monitor the progress of De Wet Barry at WP.

Swelling the selection net from the current figure of about 120 home based players to 120 home based players and another 30 or 40 overseas based players (realistically that is the maximum quality players overseas clubs can accomodate) can only strengthen the Springbok resource base, not diminish it.

Now is there someone out there who wants to argue that Van der Westhuizen will be a worse player if he plays for Newport than if he spends another year at the Bulls?