There is something deeply telling about children who refuse quietly.
Recently, students from Roedean School travelled to King David High School for a tennis fixture.
What awaited them, by their account, unsettled them. Security officials carrying military-grade weapons were stationed outside the gates.
Inside, the campus was adorned with Israeli flags and posters of hostages held by Hamas.
Whatever the intention behind the display, the visiting students reportedly experienced it as intimidating and politically charged.
They did not protest publicly. They did not turn to social media. They did not invite cameras.
Instead, they returned to their school, reported their discomfort, and requested that the February fixture be forfeited.
It was not spectacle. It was conscience. That distinction matters.
Too often, young people are dismissed as dramatic or impulsive when they raise concerns. But in this case, the students acted with restraint.
Their refusal was quiet, internal and respectful. They did not vilify another school or challenge its right to express solidarity.
They simply communicated that the environment did not feel aligned with the spirit of school sport. And that is where leadership becomes critical.
Schools are not political theatres. They are custodians of children.
Their first obligation is not to manage reputational fallout or appease external constituencies. It is to safeguard the psychological and physical well-being of their learners.
School sport should be a sanctuary — a space for discipline, teamwork and healthy competition.
It should not require teenagers to navigate the symbolism of an active international conflict.
When young players arrive to compete and encounter visible militarised security and overt political imagery connected to a devastating global crisis, it is not unreasonable that some might feel overwhelmed.
Perception shapes experience. And experience shapes memory.
This is not a debate about which side of a geopolitical conflict one supports. It is a question of duty of care.
When students raise discomfort calmly and respectfully, institutions are faced with a choice: defend their learners’ wellbeing, or retreat in the face of external pressure.
It is deeply disappointing that Roedean appeared to concede ground rather than firmly defend its students’ position.
If external pressure influenced the ultimate handling of the matter, it sets a troubling precedent — that organised outrage can override institutional judgement.
That is not the example educational leadership should model.
Institutions earn credibility not by avoiding controversy, but by navigating it with steadiness.
In a country like South Africa — with our own history of militarised spaces and political intimidation — sensitivity to symbolism is not weakness. It is wisdom.
This does not mean schools cannot express solidarity with causes they believe in. It does mean that context matters.
Educational environments require particular care, especially when children from diverse backgrounds are involved.
The Roedean students did something quietly brave. They withdrew from a space that felt uncomfortable without attacking anyone.
They did not seek public validation. They sought protection from their own institution.
What lesson do we teach young people when their measured moral instinct is met with retreat?
Do we teach them that conscience must bend to louder voices? That institutional relationships outweigh student well-being? That it is safer to comply than to stand firm?
Or do we teach them that their sense of safety matters — even when it complicates matters?
The fixture will recede, as all school matches do, into the quiet archives of memory. The scoreboard will dim, and the final tally will lose its urgency.
But what will endure is the lesson these girls carry: that when they set down their tennis rackets and quietly said no, the adults meant to be their baseline did not stand firmly beside them.
We ask much of our children — excellence, discipline, empathy and resilience.
Yet when moral conviction is served with courage, an institution must be ready to return it with unwavering support.
Because strength is not always found in the swing; sometimes it is found in the refusal to enter a court where one’s conscience is unsettled.
History does not always remember who won the tennis match. It rarely forgets who faced match point with the greatest courage.
- Asanda Magaqa is an award-winning journalist, communications consultant and media entrepreneur.
- Follow The Herald WhatsApp channel today and stay connected to the stories shaping our world.
The Herald
