SA bid and one argument

SA decided to make an argument of fielding non white players in their team.

Watching the two games playing FR vs NZ, it is once again turned out clearly.

How could this be a strong point for SA when other teams already have non white players and non white players who are better than those trained in SA?

SA tried to sell a point as exceptional when others made it common.

Over the past 25 years, SA have not trained one single decent non white player. When others have.

And SA, forced to hide that liability behind the quota policy stuff, have hoped to make a point by signaling SA had non white players...

Incredible stuff. WR is in full campaign to expand the rugby game, yet SA do not seem to get it that failure to expand the game internally is what is exceptional.

As a common place, SA should have many non white players and few of them world class.

SA have not even a decent one.

What kind of TV sets SAns watch their games on? Did they not notice that other teams have home grown non white players in their team?

 Cuntree of the blind.

 Indeed. SAns must be blind not to see what is happening elsewhere.

And it was a terrible idea to make the argument of non white players when the now hosting nation has already more non white players than SA. Decent players, that is.

 

 Looks like the vaccum of decent non white players trained in SA.

 No, the vacuum between your ears rather.

 Nah, the vaccum of decent non white players trained in SA. This one is vaccuum.
Writing is an evidence there might be not much but still something.

Good luck providing one single name of a decent non white player trained in SA.

 There is a long list of decent players and even a few exceptional players of colour. The problem is that the Q has taken away some competitive edge and was also wrongfully hung around very deserving players' necks. Race based sellections are wrong on so many levels, how the world isn't crying out against it completely baffles me.

Cheeky Watson and his ANC Comrades stole all the money that was meant for grassroots development. The Gupta's pawned this ages ago along with the trains.Why should a white person explicitly be responsible for developing non- white players? 
Zu.ma gives his regards from Nkandla. 

 Okay, say if you want to get into body shape and build types and argue why there are more black players in the french and england squad than there is in SA. 
Both these countries are first world countries which means that black players have a better environment to grow up in
Of the black players that are selected, they are normally 3rd generations. If you were to close your eyes and listen to them speak, you would not be able to tell the difference. 
France has a large West African population who are all much bigger in physique than our southern hemisphere Africans. It is also worth noting that a lot of Caribbean olympians are from West African decent and again all bigger. 
England too, has a large Nigerian and Caribbean black community. People from the Caribbean tend to be athletically superior as selected slave trading only sorted out the biggest and strongest along with horrendous conditions and trials they had to endure. Which meant that the strongest possible gene survived. 
Somebody like Maro Itoje is Nigerian where as courtney laws is Afro Caribbean. 
It is simply not because SA can't produce them, we just don't have enough black players of Size that can compete in rugby. 
Then take the Afrikaner who is from the dutch decent. The Dutch are the tallest nation in the world and men average over 1.80 cm. 
Take 350 years of trial and tribulation that the Afrikaners had to endure to fight for their freedom and independence. These are people that trekked into the desert with nothing other than there will and believe in their own ability. 
Don't forget about the Boer war where thousand of Afrikaners were killed and put into concentration camps. 
So the Afrikaners do have the physical attributes for rugby over the the local black player. 
Rugby has become a game of size. The same applies to the all blacks and Australia, both rely on Island nations for their physique. These players come from small island that are very far apart and have spent 1000 of years migrating between island through using their strength to paddle vast oceans. 
This is not about which race is superior as I pointed out that people from certain regions and background tend to be physical bigger. 
The only way South Africa will get the right black players is if a larger percentage of the community lived in 1st world conditions for at least 3 generations where good health care and died will improve the physical ability. 
In the victorian era, London use to be like Mumbai, really filthy and disease ridden. Partly due to poor diet and nutrition. This all changed once refrigeration was invented for ships This meant that poor people had access to cheaper meant. Disease dropped rapidly but the local population also started getting taller because of the protein rich diet. 

 It is impressive the tales people are ready to tell.

Most importantly, if indeed people in SA, the majority of them, are unfit to practise rugby then there should not have been rugby in the first place. This confirms that the introduction of rugby in SA was a mistake.

It took a few seconds to check that story about third generations. It is infirmed. Most of them are first generations. For example, the english player named for best player of the year is first generation born to nigerian parents.

Considering the ordeals non white people went through during the apartheid era, there is going to be humongous players in SA  etc

As people can not terminate their reliance on tales, the termination of rugby in SA will do that.

 Woosh!!!