One of my favorite books from the past couple of years is Playing
the Enemy
by John Carlin. It’s a straightforward and stirring
account of how a fledgling national leader skillfully used sports to
help heal a country and quite possibly prevent a bloodbath that could
have turned into genocide.

During his nearly three decades in captivity in apartheid South
Africa, Nelson Mandela spent his time wisely. He taught himself to
speak Afrikaans, the Dutch-like language used by the ruling white
class. And he studied the game of rugby, which, to white South
Africans, was the American equivalent of football, basketball and
baseball put together. (Blacks in South Africa, along with some of the
poorer whites, played and followed soccer.)

When the white government finally called on Mandela for help out of
the impending doom, he made them feel at ease by speaking their
language, and he charmed and amazed them with his knowledge of
rugby.

The casual American sports fan will remember that South Africa was
banned from the Olympics, but that was small potatoes in comparison to
their having been banned from international rugby competition. It
started when the South African national team, the Springboks, toured
New Zealand and played a series of matches against the legendary New
Zealand All Blacks. Civil unrest reached a boiling point in New Zealand
and then exploded over when plans were announced for the All Blacks to
play in South Africa. Anti-apartheid sentiment was so high in New
Zealand (and among many of the All Blacks players) that the tour was
canceled, and a de facto international rugby boycott of South Africa
went into effect.

The rugby boycott, along with the Olympic ban and an ever-increasing
tide of countries, universities and corporate entities refusing to do
business with South African companies, helped nudge South Africa toward
the 20th century, albeit in the last decade of the century.

When Mandela finally was released from prison and became the
country’s leader, he used his international reputation and negotiating
skills to give white South Africans something they probably never
thought possible and certainly didn’t deserve—re-admittance to
the international rugby community and, incredibly, the chance to host
the 1995 World Cup of rugby.

Against all odds, the South African team reached the final game of
that World Cup (against the heavily favored All Blacks), and when
Nelson Mandela walked onto the field wearing a Springbok jersey and
shook the hand of François Pienaar, the captain of the South
African national team, the stadium erupted into a roar that echoes even
today.

“I remember that moment like it was yesterday,” says Dave Sitton,
best-known in these parts as the TV voice of UA basketball and
football. What he’s less-well-known for (although it’s infinitely more
impressive) is that he has been the coach of the University of Arizona
club rugby team for 32 years. Sitton’s current team is ranked ninth in
the country. He is also the TV announcer for USA Rugby, which has
recently signed a long-term deal with ESPN in advance of the sport
joining the Olympic Games in 2016.

“About 100 of us gathered outside Bob Dobbs at 5:45 in the morning
to watch that game. (Rugby enthusiast and Bob Dobbs manager) Mike Beth
arranged for it to be shown at Bob Dobbs, but they couldn’t open up
until 6 a.m. due to liquor laws.”

Rugby fans drinking?! Probably only in America.

“When Mandela walked out onto that field in the Springbok jersey, it
was electric. I’m sure millions of people all over the world felt
exactly the same way.

“You have to remember that to South African blacks, the Springbok
had been the equivalent of a swastika. Furthermore, a lot of people
think that Mandela’s becoming president of South Africa laid all the
problems to rest among the black majority. But there were warring
tribal factions and all kinds of political groups, not to mention a
large number of blacks who simply wanted revenge against the whites,”
Sitton explains.

“What Mandela did was courageous and inspiring—it was one of
the great moments in modern history. I have no doubt that it saved
countless thousands of lives.”

Carlin’s book has now been turned into the movie Invictus,
which opens tomorrow (Dec. 11). It’s directed by Clint Eastwood, and
the buzz is that it immediately jumps to the head of the Best Picture
Oscar line. The part of Nelson Mandela is being played by Morgan
Freeman, who reportedly was the first and only choice of Mandela
himself. Matt Damon, who has obviously hit the weight room, plays the
part of François Pienaar.

I thought so much of the book that I gave copies of it to friends.
Amphi High football coach Vern Friedli, a voracious reader, loved it
and passed it on to his son. Guy van Zijll, a rugby enthusiast who, by
odd coincidence, is conversant in Afrikaans, found it quite moving. I’m
taking my basketball team to see the movie this weekend.

I realize that there are those who see sports as this giant waste of
time, money, effort and passion. To those people, we can say that there
was at least one time that sports—with one game, two men and one
handshake—worked a miracle.

3 replies on “Danehy”

  1. “Invictis” sounds like a good movie. Great to read some info on Rugby Coach Dave Sitton, as he rarely receives ‘ink’ in that volunteer capacity. I played briefly for him until I tore my knee’s ACL (after a long rehab, I knew hard plastic knee braces are verboten in the sport, and I didn’t want to go through that again). Although brief, and some two decades ago, Coach Sittons’ words resound with me today.
    Interesting that Danehy has yet to mention another true inspirational sports movie (that even topped the number one spot against that vampire movie), “The Blind Side.” HHhhhhhmmmm…wonder why?

  2. All movies ‘based on a true story’ have a ‘dramatic interpretation’ of the events. Since the movie “Invictus” has the much larger story of a national team of a country that is undergoing huge tumult, as well as being an older story, it is bound to have a much larger inaccuracies than that of “The Blind Side.” My guess is that Tom Denehy, being a self described liberal and supporter of public schools at the detriment of charter schools, has other issues with the film.

    Michael Oher (the young man who is the center of story), states that the one ‘dramatic interpretation’ is that he already knew a bit about football (unlike the film showing that he knew little of the game). I have heard what rankles liberals about it is that the film is that it has an overt Christian message as well as showing the massive failure of three major government institutions. These gov’t failure are that of the; state welfare – gov’t housing is a hell hole (Mr. Oher states he is still the only one he knows of that “has made it out of that place”), child protective services are completely overwhelmed and/or inept, inner city schools are completely dysfunctional. Add to that the racial/wealth difference (wealthy White family helping a poor African-American kid), and you have a stew that few ‘progressives’ would enjoy.

Comments are closed.