(CNN) -- It is a Sunday night in Bridgetown, Barbados.
Here on this Caribbean island, and on the others that make up what's known as the West Indies, life revolves around one thing -- cricket.
On this night, locals gather at historic Kensington Oval, which hosted the 2007 World Cup final. There are no national teams on display this time, but there is a local trophy up for grabs.
It's enough to draw a large crowd of boisterous fans. In the concourse, a familiar face makes his way through the crowd
He is Franklyn Stephenson, and he is the best to have never played for the West Indies, all because of one decision he and his teammates made 30 years ago.
It left each of them -- forever -- branded a rebel.
In 1983, the West Indies cricket team was on top of the world. Team captain Clive Lloyd, from Guyana, had led them to back-to-back World Cup victories in 1975 and '79.
Overflowing with talent, the islands of the West Indies could have fielded at least two teams of world-class players. But with all the hype and success, money did not follow. Playing international and club cricket was not enough to earn a living.
At the same time, a world away, South Africa was deep in the heart of apartheid. Its government's policies had split life into different classifications for whites and so-called non-whites.
Such oppression against the non-white population intensified into violence, landing young protesters like Nelson Mandela in jail. Thousands more were arrested or killed.
As the world tried to pressure South Africa's leadership, sanctions were applied, and sport was no exception.
In 1970, the International Cricket Council banned South Africa from international competition, leaving the country's cricket-mad fans deprived of the sport they loved, and their cricketers of the careers they dreamed of.
"You're always optimistic," said former South African cricketer Clive Rice. "The stupidity that existed would change and South Africa would change much quicker, and we'd be back playing international sport. But it hung on and hung on."
Always remember seeing a Botham interview when he was asked why he didnt tour South Africa. He replied that he would never have been able to look Viv richards and Joel Garner in the eye again. Sometimes, you just cannot take the money..
I firmly believe the rebel tours helped the International Comunity refocus on the abnormal plague that was apartheid.
You will recall in 1964, for the 18th Olympiad in Tokyo, South africa were banned for not renouncing apartheid and can you believe in our lifetime, only in 1990....only in 1990, did apartheid fall. Many of us will have children older than the fall of apartheid.
When I speak to my children about diversity, I always emphasise about how others are viewed.
The West indian tours would have been seen poorly as did the Sri Lankans and my own English team. I think they all went for the money but I believe this drastic moved helped to reignite the debate and change. The tours started with England in 82 and ended with said in 1990 when apartheid fell.
I know, for fact, young whites were asking questions especially when they started to admiring players like Stephenson who told a story of a young white boy offering him a bottle of coke (or I think it was Stephenson).
Many were lost to these tours including one of my favourites Richard Austin.
The question is, had Botham not been so financially secured would he have gone?
In the case he decided not to go, as he did, it should have been about the condemnation of a regime that promotes supremacy, injustice, hate, anathema divides and everything that is bad about the human race.
We let South Africa get away with it far too easily and we have invaded for less in the past. I feel ashamed the International community just let this happen. 1990?ย