The “walk-out”, by Beyers Swanepoel. If the script were presented to a TV or film production company unfamiliar with the story, they would assume it was fiction. Why would a professional sportsman walk out of a cup final with the contest on a knife-edge to catch a flight to join a different team?
If the 27-year-old all-rounder is hoping the episode will “just go away”, he’s in for the sort of disappointment that lasts decades. It may be prudent for his agent to investigate ways in which his client might mitigate the reputational damage caused by his actions.
For those who missed it, Swanepoel completed his final over for the Lions and left the Wanderers heading for OR Tambo Airport for a plane to England, where he was due to play for Worcestershire in the County Championship. The Lions, unable to use a substitute fielder because Swanepoel’s absence was unauthorised by the umpires, lost by three wickets on the penultimate delivery.
It gets worse. Swanepoel informed none of his teammates, coaches or employers about his travel plans but did tell one of the opposition coaches, Albie Morkel. Who informed the match referee, partly to take advantage of the situation and partly out of disgust.
Both the Lions and Cricket South Africa announced enquiries into the matter, but the Lions quickly and sensibly chose not to waste their time and money and sacked Swanepoel. That they had the grace to call it a “mutually agreed contract termination” is a reflection on the character of CEO Jono Leaf-Wright.
With Swanepoel now unemployed in South Africa, it was doubly important that he start his county stint having already missed the first two rounds of championship matches. He had no need of a contract release from the Lions, having been sacked, but he did still, technically, require a no objection certificate (NOC) from CSA.
CSA’s statement yesterday said they had received “a formal demand for the immediate issuance of a no objection certificate (NOC)” from Swanepoel’s “legal representatives”. They also confirmed that the first such request was received only “on the evening of March 29 from Mr Swanepoel’s agent”. Presumably when the player was already in the departure lounge.
CSA has subsequently issued the required NOC, and Swanepoel is now free to play for his new employers. But CSA, presumably, will continue their investigation into whether the player brought the game “into disrepute”. There won’t be a shortage of expert witnesses happy to testify, should they need any.
In their own words: “CSA is … assessing conduct-related aspects of this matter in accordance with its disciplinary processes, which include consideration of the conduct of both the player and relevant accredited intermediaries.”
The concept of the NOC is on increasingly shaky ground. Employment lawyers outside of professional sport are bewildered by the idea that workers can be subjected to such stringent and often unreasonable restrictions on where they ply their trade.
Nationally contracted players are a different matter altogether, but NOCs are actually an ICC initiative that does not stand up in South African labour law when a player is uncontracted.
CSA wisely chose not to contest Tabraiz Shamsi’s high court application to waive the NOC requirement for him to play in two domestic T20 tournaments outside South Africa last year, and CEO Pholetsi Moseki made clear the same would apply to Swanepoel: “We remain mindful of athletes’ constitutional rights, including the right to choose a trade, occupation or profession freely, subject to lawful and reasonable regulation. At the same time, we are obliged to uphold our governance framework, contractual standards and codes of conduct in the interests and reputation of the game.”
“Restraint of trade” issues aren’t the problem for the highest-paid players, as they are for the likes of Swanepoel. Financially secure internationals such as Quinton de Kock and Anrich Nortjé have chosen not to have national or provincial contracts, both preferring to be free agents and fulfil their playing duties based on a handshake. (Actually, no-one is that naive — short-term contracts are drawn up for specific events and even individual matches.)
The greatest concern is whether Swanepoel’s actions indicate steeply declining respect for the domestic game. Despite the lack of crowds and sponsorship, I’m relieved to say I believe that is not the case. Yet.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.