[imagesource:here]

We learnt a couple of things from SuperSport releasing the finding of the independent review into the Ashwin Willemse walk-off saga.

The one you’re hearing most about is that Nick Mallett and Naas Botha have been cleared of racism, and SuperSport have pinned the unravelling of the post-match coverage on some technical issues.

And, of course, we learnt that this is still a massively polarising topic.

We did write about those technical issues a few weeks back, but let’s start with SuperSport’s official release from yesterday:

There are two factors which provide a reasonable explanation for the incident:

The first is the (mistaken) technical assumption that there was enough time for all the analyst to express their pre-match analysis or commentary of the Lions/Brumbies rugby match. However, the switch to the live broadcast happened sooner than anticipated. Consequently, there was no time for Ashwin to express his views. The panel then agreed, off-air, that Ashwin would be given the first opportunity to speak after the game.

The second is that it is reasonable to assume that Ashwin may have regarded the common stance adopted by Nick and Naas as patronising when they insisted that he should thereafter speak first.

They have to assume on Ashwin’s behalf, because he opted out of taking part in the independent review.

You can read the rest of that SuperSport release here, and if you want to watch the half-hour press briefing, you can do so here.

Another thing we learnt, and one that sheds a new light on the matter, is that Nick and Ashwin have had beef for a while now.

Sport24 with those details:

Nestled on page 22, almost halfway through probe convener Vincent Maleka’s 50-page report of his keenly-awaited review – publicly revealed on Monday – are aspects of former Springbok head coach Mallett’s three-hour testimony to him…

Maleka writes in the report, issued to media: “Although I did not interview Mr Willemse I was informed by both Messrs Mallett and (co-pundit and Bok flyhalf legend Naas) Botha that Mr Willemse was no pushover, and would strongly defend his views whenever he differed with theirs.

“(Mallett) references emails which he addressed to management at SuperSport, wherein he requested that he should not be rotated together with Mr Willemse for live studio broadcast.”

Excerpts from an October 2016 email from Mallett, to executive producer Scott Seward, are included, reading: “I really enjoy working with Bobs (Gcobani Bobo) and Xola (Ntshinga), Scott.

“They are a real pleasure … Xola asks very good questions and Bobs knows enough about rugby to produce interesting clips for discussion.

“Unlike with the complex Ashwin, there are no agendas.

“It would be great if Ashwin could be moved … where we don’t have to work together.

“I think he talks garbage, we irritate the hell out of each other and the working environment is just unpleasant and tense.

“I am very happy to work with Breyton (Paulse), Shimmy (Hanyani Shimange) or Bobs instead as, unlike with Ashwin, I respect their hard work and rugby opinions.”

Well damn, that sounds like bad blood.

There’s another email, too:

Maleka also refers to September 2017 correspondence from Mallett to (another manager) Malcolm Russell, “wherein he indicated how well he worked with other colleagues such as ‘X’ (Ntshinga), Jean de Villiers and Breyton Paulse.”

The advocate concludes: “There is no doubt that Mr Mallett felt uncomfortable working with Mr Willemse, and expressed his preference to work with other colleagues.”

Given that these two clearly weren’t fond of working together, or at the very least Mallett had requested otherwise, why did SuperSport continue to use them to form the in-studio panel?

The review did state that both showed professionalism in their subsequent dealings with each other, but SuperSport are probably wishing they had taken heed of those emails at this point.

There’s an interesting article over on Times Select, which sheds further light on the matter. Here are a few nuggets:

Before the halftime analysis, Mallett stepped out to buy a cup of coffee and bumped into Willemse who was having a smoke.

“Mallett asked Willemse whether he would care for a cup of coffee or a cool drink. He declined the offer, but graciously. This off-the-air incident reflects a sensible relationship between colleagues, at least at that stage of the proceedings”…

Maleka dismissed a claim made on social media that Willemse had been outside the studio for most of the second half and therefore was unable to give an adequate analysis, saying Botha and Mallett had told him he was there for most of it, popping out only for a cigarette.

He also defended Mallett’s tendency to correct the poor usage of English by fellow analysts, saying he did this to Botha as well, and that it was a habit learned from his headmaster father.

Times LIVE contacted Ashwin after SuperSport released their findings:

When contacted by TimesLIVE on Tuesday afternoon‚ Willemse declined to comment.

“I can’t speak now and I do not have any comment at this point‚” Willemse said.

I’m not sure who Ashwin’s legal counsel is, but perhaps the time to talk publicly has arrived.

SuperSport aren’t closing the door on his return, according to SuperSport CEO Gideon Khobane:

“I still see a place for Ashwin at SuperSport and I would very much like to engage further with him to understand his viewpoint.

“It’s important for us to not close the door on Ashwin because we still believe he has a lot of value to add.”

Ashwin isn’t the only one remaining mum. Remember when Minister of Sport and Recreation, Tokozile Xasa, ran her mouth about how Nick and Naas should be fired? You might remember this statement:

“This behaviour of entitlement by some white South Africans who continue to think that their whiteness represent better must come to an end, if it was not for a barbaric nonsensical apartheid system that privileged them we could not have implemented quota system to normalise an otherwise abnormal system.”

When reached for comment yesterday, Xasa’s spokesperson said: “The minister can’t comment on a report she has not yet read through.”

SuperSport will now refer the report to the Human Rights Commission “for final resolution”.  If you’re the kind of person who likes to dig around, the 51-page full independent review can be read here.

One thing is for sure – we won’t be seeing a repeat of this incredibly awkward three-way boogie from back in 2014.

The cringe begins 25 seconds in:

I did see that, SuperSport, and I can never unsee it.

So that’s basically where we stand now, good people. The name-calling will continue on social media, and until Ashwin speaks we are left with an independent review that leaves many questions unanswered.

[sources:supersport&sport24&timeslive&sport24&timesselect]