Cricket SA never took a principled stance on Teeger situation, and it backfired

Cricket SA never took a principled stance on Teeger situation, and it backfired

Insiders confirmed to Daily Maverick that David Teeger was removed as South Africa under-19 captain for the age group Cricket World Cup, starting in Potchefstroom on 15 January, due to political pressure — not because of the alleged “security concerns”.

Last week, CSA stripped Teeger of the South African captaincy over apparent threats of protests at games. It relates to his comments in support of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) troops in the ongoing war in Gaza.

After receiving the Rising Star Award on 22 October at the Absa Jewish Achiever Awards at the Sandton Convention Centre, Teeger, the 2023 head boy of King Edward VII School (KES), said the following:

“Yes, I’ve been [given] this award, and yes, I’m now the rising star, but the true rising stars are the young soldiers in Israel. And I’d like to dedicate it to the state of Israel and every single soldier fighting so that we can live and thrive in the diaspora.”

Three days before the start of the tournament, CSA issued a statement on 12 January: “We have also been advised that they [protests] are likely to focus on the position of the SA under-19 captain, David Teeger, and that there is a risk that they could result in conflict or even violence, including between rival groups of protestors.”

That’s the beauty of living in a democracy — people have the right to object lawfully. These expected “protests” should be easily controlled with even a modicum of planning by law enforcement.

Using this “threat” as an excuse to strip Teeger as captain is a convenient cover-all by CSA. Attempts for explanations as to what these concerns are were ignored. Board chairperson Lawson Naidoo told Daily Maverick, in a text message, he had no further comment.

What makes this decision more illogical is that Teeger will remain in the team as a player. How is the security threat mitigated if he is still participating as a member of the team?

Credible threats?

Surely his mere presence in such a grave security situation won’t make supposed threats of violence disappear?

The reality is that there appears to be very little danger to Teeger or anyone else. Yes, there might be a few small protests, as there were at Newlands before the second Test between the Proteas and India over the situation, but nothing more.

Daily Maverick asked a prominent security company with vast experience in personal and event security, including at the highest governmental level, for input. Their expert opinion was that the threat to Teeger or anyone else at the under-19 Cricket World Cup was close to zero.

They were also confused by the fact that Teeger, apparently the focus of this security crisis, remains in the team, or how stripping him of the captaincy reduces the supposed threats.

He’s still there, still set to play, and still part of the South African team.

Daily Maverick understands that CSA’s appointed security company did not recommend Teeger’s removal as captain or ejection from the team. Yet the South African Police Service claimed there is a threat.

Sports Minister Zizi Kodwa also met with Teeger privately last week, just days before he was stripped of the captaincy. That interaction has not been explained.

CSA passed the buck 

The reality is that CSA failed to take the lead in this situation.

Teeger’s comments in support of the IDF were flagged by the Palestine Solidarity Alliance (PSA) last November, which lodged an official complaint with the South African Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee, as well as CSA and Gauteng Lions Cricket.

The PSA wanted Teeger to be suspended from representing the national team following his “provocative, biased and inflammatory” comments.

If CSA believed Teeger’s comments went against its principles as an organisation, it could have taken internal action against him, stripped him of the captaincy and possibly removed him from the team. It would’ve drawn criticism. Now, far worse, CSA has elicited anger from all sides.

If CSA believed in the Constitution’s right to free speech, it could have backed Teeger on that principle. But it didn’t do that either. Its members simply displayed no principles on this emotive issue and instead tried to navigate some sort of middle ground underpinned by appeasement rather than principle.

CSA didn’t hold an internal disciplinary hearing. CSA didn’t make a decision about a player representing their team. Instead, it passed the buck and appointed respected advocate Wim Trengove to investigate the matter.

Teeger cleared 

Trengove’s well-reasoned determination must have gone down like a fumbled catch at CSA head office because he cleared Teeger of any wrongdoing.

In a 44-page adjudicator’s determination, Trengove found Teeger had not breached any codes of conduct or acted unconstitutionally.

“The Constitutional Court has made the point that the right to freedom of expression does not protect hate speech, but emphasised that the expression of unpopular or even offensive beliefs does not constitute hate speech,” Trengove wrote.

Now, all of a sudden, it’s a security issue, according to CSA. And because it falls under the coverall of “security”, CSA can evade any questions about the matter.

You may or may not think Teeger should be axed over his comments. But the reality is that the people who could have made that decision — CSA – have tried everything to avoid making it.

Its members are trying to appease supporters of Palestine, anti-war supporters and also the Jewish community. All they have succeeded in doing is angering people on all sides due to their own paralysis and lack of leadership.

Teeger’s comments were certainly offensive to people sympathetic to the plight of Palestine and Gaza; that is not in question. But it didn’t make them unlawful and it didn’t breach the CSA’s code of conduct, as they were made outside of the sporting arena.

CSA could still have taken a stand and removed Teeger because Teeger is selected by them. They have the right to select a team and a captain. But CSA couldn’t even do that. They wanted Trengove to pull the trigger, and he didn’t because he followed the law and the Constitution.

So, CSA waited until the 11th hour and hid behind alleged security concerns as a way to strip Teeger of the captaincy. And even then, they didn’t have the nerve to drop him from the squad completely.

A firm decision on Teeger’s position, either way, would have met with criticism from somewhere. That’s the nature of hard decisions. But it wouldn’t have devolved into a morass of buck-passing and fudging. DM