Is Safa Cape Town President, Bennett Bailey, having a meltdown?
I mean, the numero uno of football in the Cape Metropole and Vice President of Safa National went on a rant which could indicate that his back is against the wall.
Bailey is a busy bee and exhausting all avenues to ensure that he holds onto power and relevance – albeit potentially just until September 12, the date of the Safa National elections.
From wanting to insinuate that seasoned journalist are guilty of calling “fake news” and calling certain said individuals “moegoes” and “mamparas” during his speech at the Coke Cup launch (1:24:05/2:03:06) one can once again draw stark similarities between Bailey and the US President, Donald Trump, for their ability to vehemently deflect and simultaneously push and enforce their own narrative.
And of course, to pacify and also glorify those so-called “Facebook ninjas” and “keyboard warriors” who always sing to his tune and appease his narcissistic nature.
At a recent Safa CT meeting it came to light that the region did not collectively endorse Sandile Zungu as their candidate for the Safa presidency, but rather a push from Bailey himself in this instance – and this was quite evident from the Safa CT live video at the Coke Cup launch where Bailey can be seen wearing a Safa CT cap with “Zungu for President” written on the front.
Now, apart from Bailey’s egotistical nature and power trip which is on display for all to see everywhere in the football landscape, there’s also his position at the South African Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee (SASCOC) – and concerning his appearance between the Portfolio Committee’s Arts and Culture, one has to ask the question: “Did Safa CT and Bailey follow allow internal protocols and processes before drafting a letter to its said President, Barry Hendricks (SASCOC), who confirmed to the Portfolio Committee that correspondence was received?
Now, does it not seem like Bailey is abusing his position as Vice President of Safa National?
What is also very interesting about Zungu and Bailey, we must also remember that Bailey also serves on the legal committee of SASCOC, and it can only be assumed that he has a close relationship with Hendricks.
But then came Bailey’s Facebook post.
Writing publicly on Thursday, Bailey launched a scathing attack on what he described as the manipulation of football structures elsewhere in SAFA.
He wrote of “backroom maneuvers”, administrators being suspended, people being denied due processes, opposition being removed from congresses and disciplinary processes allegedly being used to neutralise those standing in the way of particular political outcomes.
At one point, Bailey alleged that a football administrator had been suspended on “cooked up charges”. Elsewhere, he criticised what he described as a suspension imposed “without any due process”.
Strong words!
And perhaps entirely legitimate questions.
But they invite an unavoidable examination of Bailey’s own backyard.
Because while Bailey now publicly questions the use of suspensions and disciplinary processes elsewhere in SAFA, there is the unresolved history of Wayne Weitz.
Weitz was not some peripheral figure. He was the Treasurer of Safa CT, the very organisation over which Bailey presides.
He was suspended by the Cape’s Mother body and subjected to disciplinary proceedings.
The outcome?
Weitz was found not guilty by the Safa CT’s own disciplinary committee and Bailey’s region was instructed to immediately reinstate Weitz as well as to publicly apologize to Weitz – neither was forthcoming!
Then there is the second chapter.
During the same broad period in which questions were being raised about the Palestine funds associated with the Football for Humanity initiative at Safa CT, Weitz was also employed at the Western Cape Sports Academy (WECSA).
Bailey had been appointed Chairperson of the WECSA Board through the Western Cape Provincial Sport Confederation.
Weitz was placed on unpaid suspension at WECSA and subsequently dismissed.
He challenged his dismissal at the CCMA.
No Bones with Jones is not suggesting, without evidence, that Weitz’s difficulties at WECSA were caused by the controversy surrounding the Palestine funds. Timing alone cannot establish motive or causation.
But when the Treasurer of Safa CT is facing disciplinary action within its very own structures and is ultimately found not guilty by its disciplinary committee and simultaneously finds himself facing suspension and dismissal in another organisation chaired by the President of SAFA Cape Town, questions are inevitable.
And Bailey’s recent Facebook post today makes those questions even harder to avoid.
If suspending administrators without proper justification is objectionable elsewhere, surely the same standard must apply in Cape Town.
If disciplinary machinery should not be weaponised to eliminate opposition elsewhere, surely administrators in Cape Town are entitled to precisely the same protection.
If “backroom maneuvers” deserve exposure elsewhere, transparency cannot suddenly become optional when uncomfortable questions are asked closer to home.
That is the difficulty with demanding accountability.
The standard you set for your opponents eventually becomes the standard against which your own conduct will be measured.
And Bailey occupies enough positions for that scrutiny to matter.
He is President of Safa CT and Vice-President of SAFA nationally. He also serves on the Executive Committee of the Western Cape Provincial Sport Confederation, is one of two Vice-Chairpersons of the Cape Town Sport Council, sits on the SASCOC Legal Committee and serves as Chairman of Professional Darts. He was also appointed Chairperson of the WECSA Board.
There is nothing inherently improper about holding those positions.
But power accumulated across multiple sporting structures carries something with it: accountability across all of them.
Which brings us back to Bailey’s own words.
He asks whether what is unfolding elsewhere in SAFA is “checkmate or karma”.
Perhaps there is another question worth asking.
What happens when the standards you demand of everybody else are finally applied to you?
Because “fake news”, “moegoes” and “mamparas” will only take the conversation so far.
Eventually, the documents speak.
And in Bailey’s case, so do his own words.
PHOTO SUPPLIED
