How a logo can unify a team yet divide a nation
As we welcome a return to sport in a few days, the sporting calendar to look forward to is simply mouthwatering. Olympics, Euros, Lions tour, Tyson vs Anthony... 24 months of sport will be condensed into 6 months starting very soon! The least frequent of fixtures will be the Lions tour to South Africa to face the Springboks, a once in a 12 year phenomenon.
The last Lions tour to South Africa in 2009, I was working at Canterbury of New Zealand and involved in the launch of the Springbok kit. In December 2008 the ANC ruling party made it public the Springbok logo was to be removed or moved and replaced with the national flower - Protea. The 102-year old Springbok emblem was move to the right-hand side - I panicked as we were almost ready to start production!
Myself and a few colleagues were put on a flight to South Africa to meet the key stakeholders. Following the meetings, the governing body gave its green light, the jersey went to the top of the political structure to get an approval, the South African President and out of respect we were told a presentation was to be made to Nelson Mandela.
"The decision was taken to accommodate the application of the national sports emblem - the King Protea - and to bring SA Rugby in line with other South African sports federations," the South African Rugby Union said in a statement.
"The timing of the change has not been decided", it added.
A bloody nightmare from our side with strict production deadlines!
Why is the Springbok Logo so controversial?
For over 90 years from the first time the team played in 1891, the South African national rugby team chose only white players. Apartheid was a part of life and politics in South Africa. There was even segregation among black players, who were divided into Black African and Coloured (mixed race) leagues with no international participation.
The Springbok logo has featured on the green and gold rugby shirts of South Africa since being adopted during a tour of Britain in 1906-07. It is said that the team's first captain, Paul Roos, chose the springbok on an impromptu basis to prevent the British press from inventing their own name!
For more than 100 years it has been a powerful symbol in South Africa, first dividing and then uniting a population once driven by racial division.
How has the Springbok logo divided a nation?
The first coloured national team used the Springbok as its emblem in 1939 and the first black national team used it in 1950. It is a symbol of the aparthied era that some believe should be removed to unify the nation. Others believe the Spingbok is part of the history of the nation and should not be removed.
Why the single logo for all sports?
Each sport has been brought to South Africa and taken on by the different ethnicities. Rugby and cricket was historically deemed a "white sport", football is deemed a "black" sport. Each sport has its own internal battle regarding the ethnicity of players and coaches. Each sport has a chequered past and the respective logo is linked to that history. By creating a South African logo for ALL sports, the concept was to wipe the slate clean from the horrid past.
How did Mandela use the Springboks to unify a national?
In 1994, the ANC wanted it replaced by the protea flower only for President Nelson Mandela to step in and give special permission for it to be used in the 1995 Rugby World Cup in South Africa. Despite being excluded from organised international competition for nearly 20 years because of apartheid, the Springboks won the tournament. When he made the presentation of the William Webb Ellis Trophy to Francois Pienaar, the team captain, Mr Mandela wore a Springbok shirt and cap – a hugely symbolic gesture on what was once the hallowed Afrikaans turf of Ellis Park, Johannesburg.
The change has inspired intense debate, with critics describing the Springbok as a symbol of the Afrikaner community which ruled the country under apartheid.
In the days of apartheid, rugby became the country's pre-eminent sport and black players were not allowed to wear the Springbok jersey.
What next?
The debate still continues within South Africa. I personally hope the Springbok logo remains as a reminder of the history of the team.
--
1 年History is the one thing that can never be rewritten, we as a nation should embrace and flourish in our young yet rich diverse history by standing by it. Our cricket team is known as the 'proteas' rugby team as the 'springboks' and even soccer we are known as 'Bafana Bafana' yes the rugby emblem differs but let's also take into consideration that national rugby games are still owned by a single broadcaster and not televised live on SABC that is a issue which should be addressed before the change of emblem. In my opinion...
Sporting Touch | Teamwear - Workwear - Print & Embroidery
3 年Mark Bradbury
Founder & Clinical Director Uniskin / Reverse ageing and extend health span using genetics, aesthetics and balancing hormones/Researcher / Best Selling Author/ Finalist Business Book Awards/ Global Public Speaker/KPI2021
3 年Dips Patel you did it ?????? Well written and enjoyable piece of history. I am so proud of that green and gold since I was a little girl. Rugby and the Boks is in our blood. I could not have been more proud in 1995 when Francois Pienaar and our Madiba lifted that cup and more recently Kholisi and the Bok’s. My blood runs green and always will. Don’t mess with the logo it’s come to represent us all especially in rugby.
Founder: Slip Safety Services | Author: Prevent Slip Accidents with Slipology ?? | Host: Safety And Risk Success Podcast ?? | Host: Safety Roundtable ??
3 年Really enjoy these insights into kits and their hidden meanings ??
Entrepreneur - Investor - Mentor - Co-Founder FantasticServices.com - Author of Amazon bestseller Fantastic Business - keynote speaker & NED
3 年It’s an identity it’s a uniform it can mean everything