We got 10, but we could have done better in Rio

SASCOC’s qualification criteria, to some extent, bars them from assembling a more competent Team SA that can potentially win us more medals

Congratulations to all our medal winners at the recently concluded 2016 Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro, particularly our very own Wayde van Niekerk who has now put our provincial capital, Bloemfontein, on the world map.

Yes, the fastest 400m sprinter in the history of the Games resides and was mostly groomed in the City of Roses. The city has produced and/or groomed many world-class athletes in various sports and all of us Free Staters should take pride in that.

I would also like to congratulate Team SA as well as the South African Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee (SASCOC) on achieving the set target of 10 medals, which was set by the committee and the sports ministry.

This is the highest tally of medals Team SA has ever won at any previous Olympic event since readmission into the world of competitive sports. In Barcelona (1992) we got two medals, in Atlanta (1996) and Sydney (2000) we got five medals respectively. In Athens (2004) we improved a bit and got six medals while in Beijing (2008) we disappointedly dropped back to one medal through long jumper, Khotso Mokoena, who claimed silver that year.

Team SA hit their highest pinnacle once again in London (2012) with a tally of six medals and this time we have surged to 10 – a new benchmark and definitely a new target for Tokyo 2020.
The recent achievement is great, but I am certain our country could have done better had it not been for the somewhat illogical criteria which hampers our potential to achieve more at the quadrennial showpiece.

Apart from having to be an authentic South African citizen, we should really revise certain criteria which has seen many other competent athletes being excluded from our Olympic team.

For example, continental qualification i.e. qualifying superlatively based on an athlete or team’s height of competitiveness on the African continent standards was not considered.
Only if such superior achievement are achieved in the global fray will an athlete or team be considered.

This is with the exception of SAFA teams who, of course, only have the continental route as their only qualification option … and well, indeed Banyana and the national under-23 men’s team aptly qualified.

However, I feel if we want to win or chase more medals at Olympic Games, then teams such as Banyana Banyana or the under-23 should never be sent to the Olympics. This for the simple reason that their chances of winning there are so minimal and so close to impossible.

When do you – if you disagree – see Banyana defeating strong teams such as Brazil, Germany or the USA? Banyana are not even the best on the continent.

Whereas, the South African national hockey teams – both the men and ladies senior teams – are in reality the best on the continent. The men are ranked 11th in the world while the ladies are 14th. Given their standings, these two teams stand a better chance of pulling upsets at the Olympics – and at least return with bronze medals – in contrast to Banyana or the under-23’s who are ranked in the 40s.

Alternatively we could send more individual athletes instead of teams. An athlete who is ranked 10th in the world also has a better chance of pulling an upset against a number one or number two ranked athlete in individual contests.

This was proven by the elimination of Novak Djokovic and Serena Williams in the opening rounds of the men and women’s tennis singles.

We are wasting a lot of money by sending a whole squad of people who consistently return with no medals at every single Olympics event. Let us rethink our strategies and send those who are most deserving … that is if we want more medals.

We need to adopt a new approach ahead of Tokyo 2020, because I am sure South Africa has enough talent to amass 20 medals.