Standing to account: Why Quinton de Kock shouldn’t be allowed to ‘keep it to himself’

Jon Hunter-Parsonage is a PhD student at the University of Bristol.

On Thursday, at the start of play, every player involved in the Test took some action in support of the need for racial justice in the world. 

Every player, barring De Kock. 

Over the past 18 months, South African cricket has in many senses been flailing in the dark. From administrative disasters and missteps to a men’s team that is struggling to match up to past triumphs, to policies on social justice that have vacillated between a wholehearted embrace of calls for racial and social justice and policies that have forbidden players from showing the support that they would like.

For the first Test against the West Indies, in Saint Lucia, the Protea men’s players were allowed to make the gesture that they felt comfortable with in relation to the calls for racial and social justice. The players insist that despite the different actions, the team is not divided. 

But has De Kock’s lack of action indicated the extent of his support (or lack thereof) for the claims that so many are making in support of calls for racial and social justice? We do not actually know, since De Kock – faced with an option to support racial and social justice, and an opportunity to explain his stance – chose to do neither; not taking action and not explaining, saying only “I will keep it to myself. It’s my personal opinion”. 

De Kock did speak at length about his convictions, including rhino conservation. So, what is clear is that De Kock’s objection is not to combining sport and politics, but to the kind of politics in question. 

Freedom of opinion

There is much to be said for the idea that the players can take the action that they want to. They do, after all, enjoy the constitutional right to freedom of belief and opinion like the rest of us. 

In one sense, people should not be compelled to do something they are uncomfortable with. In another, perhaps as white people we should feel uncomfortable enough to act in face of the calls for racial justice implicating the patterns of privilege that shape today’s world, that benefit white people and white men in particular. And acknowledging, admitting and addressing this discomfort is important. Ignoring it is arguably part of what produces or allows systems racism to continue. 

But whatever stage they are at, people should take responsibility for their stances, for the actions they choose to take in the face of racial and social injustice in South Africa and the world. This requires, at the very least, openly engaging on these issues, especially when you are a leader and role model for so many others.

Over the past few years calls for racial and social justice have been present in a number of areas of society, including sport. 

Prominent figures from across the sporting world have bravely raised issues of social justice, including South Africa’s Lungi Ngidi, Siya Kolisi and Makhaya Ntini, as well as Marcus Rashford, Naomi Osaka, Lewis Hamilton, NBA players and WNBA teams and players (among many others in South Africa and internationally).

Makazole Mapimpi, for example, risked censure from the Springboks when he decided he could not stay silent about gender violence in South Africa, and commemorated Uyinene Mrwetyana in a match against Japan – something memorably recited by Mapimpi and Rassie Erasmus in the documentary Chasing the Sun. These people – overwhelmingly black – have been outspoken proponents of the need for the world in which we live to be just, for the patterns of injustice to be broken, and for the dismantling of racism wherever it is found – in the sporting world and elsewhere. 

In response, they have been subject to ridicule and abuse, from government leaders down to social media trolls. Teams and players have been booed. All of this indicates something foul at work in our world. Booing calls for racial justice? 

Why? 

Does it make people uncomfortable?

Much about this needs to change. And one of these things is that it should not be the people who are arguing for greater justice in the world, many of whom already bear a significant and inequitable burden, who need to justify their actions (although they continue to do so, a testament to them). It is the people who decide to take no action who need to justify their actions. It is people who, when given a choice, choose not to act.

It is people like De Kock. 

While De Kock, in his refusal to speak, has spoken volumes, he should be held accountable for more by the game. He should be held accountable by the leaders of the game in South Africa, by Proteas fans and by cricket writers.

Will be held to account by the Proteas team leadership? The identity of some of these leaders, and their own history, is important. 

Accountability and leadership

Amid the ongoing administrative disaster that constitutes Cricket South Africa, two high-profile people who hold significant power and influence, certainly in relation to the men’s team, are Graeme Smith and Mark Boucher. These men have expressed their rhetorical support for calls for racial and social justice. Indeed, Smith has knelt in support of greater racial and social justice in the world. And their actions in relation to De Kock need to reflect their commitment. 

Though we are not merely the sum of our pasts, the role that these men played in the experiences of Ntini and so many other players of colour, in their feeling of alienation and exclusion from the Proteas team, is pertinent. These two men need to show their commitment to the justice that they have expressed support for. They need to be accountable, and to hold the players accountable. 

Breaking down barriers that have ruined lives, that continue to ruin lives, is not some game. But the games we play can play a role in these battles, sports stars included. If we believe in accountability (and, goodness knows, many people in South Africa who do not support calls for racial and social justice love to talk about accountability, emphasising what they appear to think is a lack of accountability that only appeared in post-1994 South Africa – an outrageous position, on so many levels), we should hold all of our public figures to account for their actions, particularly sports stars, for what they do on the field. 

Interestingly, around the world, some sports stars and teams have not chosen to kneel, and have provided clear reasons – including that they view kneeling as an empty gesture, and are committed to structural reform. The Scottish football team was one of these, opting to “stand against racism”. This week, they reaffirmed their commitment to racial and social justice, with their captain, Andy Robertson, saying they will “kneel against ignorance and in solidarity”. The need for accountability and transparency was answered by the Scottish team. 

Sport in South Africa has played a significant role in perpetuating the privilege and priority given to white people in the country. Many argue it still does. Seeing the influential cricketers of today take steps to address ongoing racial injustice, symbolically and, hopefully, through other, off-field actions, is an important step. De Kock, and other players who chose not to take steps, should at the very least bear the same onus as the sports stars who have knelt and stood up for social justice, in South Africa and elsewhere. De Kock, and those like him, including many of South Africa’s rugby players, must be accountable for their actions. DM/MC