A key cause of the 1981 Springbok Tour protests was the cancellation of the 1973 Tour. During Springbok tours of Britain and Australia in 1970 and 1971, there were strong and somewhat violent protests, culminating in a sense of unrest both in South Africa and their host countries. South Africa’s sporting contacts with other countries had almost entirely ceased, as it was encouraged to show disapproval of South Africa’s apartheid regime through having nothing to do with the country, sporting or otherwise. When New Zealand’s turn arrived in 1973, a highly politicised campaign of opposition began. In the lead-up to the 1972 elections, Labour leader Norman Kirk made a promise to not interfere with the tour. However, the beginning of his leadership was fraught with many major decisions based around sporting contacts with South Africa, and he began to attempt to get the NZRFU to withdraw its invitation to the Springboks, as well as trying to negotiate with anti-tour groups. This was going back on his election promises, and invited wide criticism from around New Zealand, especially from staunchly conservative rugby supporters. Kirk viewed the tour as not much more than a possibility for civil unrest, (as shown by the burning of the rugby grandstand at Papakura in April 1973), and saw no alternative to postponing the tour. He also realized that black African nations were likely to boycott the 1974 Commonwealth Games in Christchurch if the tour went ahead, and saw that this would be severely bad publicity for New Zealand. Kirk wrote to the NZRFU saying that the government saw “no alternative, pending selection on a genuine merit basis, to a postponement of the tour.” Firstly, the cancellation of the 1973 tour caused further protest among the anti-tour protestors. They saw that the government had interfered in sport once, to make what was in their eyes a decision that supported the abolishment of racism in South Africa, and this was a victory for groups like HART (Halt All Racist Tours). They were encouraged by this, and when the tour was not cancelled in 1981, they campaigned furiously to bring about the same victory experienced in the 1970s. Having successfully cancelled the 1973 tour, it served only as an incentive for anti-tour protestors to object heavily to the 1981 tour. Also, critics of the decision were incensed because they believed that not only had Kirk broken his election promise of not mixing sport and politics, he had also bowed to threats from ‘rent-a-mob’ activists. This meant that there was also a lot of anger at the previous tour being cancelled by the pro-tour supporters, which served to intensify the calls for another tour, and renew determination to keep the tour going. This meant more opposition to the protestors was put in place in 1981, from the establishment of the red and blue squads to violence from the general public toward protestors. The cancellation of the 1973 tour by the National Government was a cause of the 1981 tour protests, because it both inspired and angered New Zealand citizens, and also showed that the government held the power to cancel the tour.