Comparing SA football to rugby and cricket is a pointless exercise

Durban - Some anti-transformation individuals will often mock Bafana Bafana and say they would have been achieving better results had they been similar to the Springboks and Proteas.

These individuals will also often argue that there is not fair representation of minorities in South African football, yet nine times out of 10 can’t even name the minority players in SA football, or who have played and continue to play for Bafana.

This leads to doubt over whether they actually supported Bafana when they were a relatively okay team by world standards in the late 1990s and early 2000s.

Yes, SA football is not where it should be and it gets embarrassing at times. There are flaws with the system and can do with a lot of improvement.

We should be competing among the best nations in Africa and at least qualifying for the World Cup. Sadly, due to deep structural issues, these issues look like they will take several years to resolve realistically.

But it is naive to compare football to cricket and rugby due to the extreme differences and unique nuances in each sport.

Football is called the “global game” for a reason and it is the most popular sport in the world. There are 211 national association members of Fifa and it’s safe to say that at least 100 nations, if not more, take the game very seriously.

The Proteas and Boks have certainly achieved a lot over the years and their achievements must be lauded, and rightfully so. However, the popularity of these two codes is mainly confined to the Commonwealth nations.

While there are several nations that technically play international cricket and rugby, the reality is that the Proteas and Boks are only realistically competing with about 10 nations on a serious basis.

By looking at the