Writing in the Pretoria News, Peter Bills reveals how bad things in the Bok camp have got:

“Unless you believe that rabbits really can be plucked out of conjuror’s hats, then Springbok coach Peter de Villiers has a critical decision to make this Monday morning.

Humiliated by the Durban crowd after South Africa’s latest abject defeat, De Villiers faces probably the key moment of his entire career.

He either makes the decision to walk away from the Springbok job, accepting that playing with Jake White’s retreads is no way to embrace a new philosophy but that he isn’t brave enough to omit them, or he picks a team that just might be capable of producing the game he seeks.

For sure, the present one isn’t. Sources talk of a fractured Springbok camp, of some players who wish only for De Villiers to fail and resign; of others who cannot understand his policy of retaining World Cup winners who simply aren’t delivering any more and others who are plainly bewildered by the goings-on at the highest level of South African rugby.

There is much talk of the senior players virtually taking training off, and of key figures undermining the coach by preaching a completely different philosophy to the one he espouses.”

With thanks to the Pretoria News

Michael Aylwin of the Guardian suggests we should still be in fear:

“So that is how the All Blacks used to play. It has been too long. This was like seeing old friends again, or rather, enemies, nightmares, and swarms of black shirts ruthlessly engulfing anyone unfortunate enough to have the ball and be dressed in a different colour.

Sure enough, an angry All Black team is still a thing to fear, no matter how many players shy of a full complement, no matter how many calls for their heads to roll. Australia, so forceful and clinical the week before, were as cowed by the resurgence as anyone. After five wins on the bounce under their new coach, Robbie Deans, the migrant Kiwi, Australia were exposed here as a work in progress. Five wins is a good start by anyone’s standards, but this was the first away game they have played under Deans, and it has often been pondered why the geography of a patch of grass can so transform a team’s performance.

Many have questioned Australia’s set piece over the years, by which they mean the scrum, but here it was their line-out that imploded. After the helter-skelter craziness of last week’s encounter – praised and condemned in equal measure for the premium on pace and the lack of structure – here was a game much more traditional in its framework. Ten line-outs last week; this week there were 31.

New Zealand had attracted huge criticism, not least from themselves, for the lack of a kicking game, but they put that right with a vengeance here. Daniel Carter was landing the ball on a six pence, often 50 or 60 metres away, and he received ample support from his team-mates, particularly Jimmy Cowan, whose kicks from the base of ruck and maul were viciously difficult to deal with. The All Blacks backed it up with an excellent performance at the line-out. Their line-out has been almost as suspect as the Australia scrum for a while now, but here they attacked opposition ball with unfamiliar aggression. In the second half they won eight line-outs, six of which were on Australian throw-ins.

Four of the game’s five tries – all bar Ma’a Nonu’s last-gasp score in the corner for a crucial bonus point that lifts the All Blacks a point clear at the top of the table – stemmed from set pieces, which should keep the ELV sceptics quiet for the time being. The first two came within four minutes of each other just after the 20-minute mark and both were scored by the magnificently unlikely figure of Tony Woodcock. He was scrumming for all he was worth in the build-up to the first but managed to haul himself round to finish off the series of drives at the line that that scrum had precipitated. Then three minutes later he was charging through from a line-out ball tapped down to him by Ali Williams.”

To read the rest, click here

This extract is taken from a piece which appeared in the UK’s Independent some weeks ago:

“The comparison that Mallett makes between the northern hemisphere’s Six Nations Championship and the Tri-Nations competition in the south that forms the most fascinating of his views. Technically, he says, the Six Nations is the equal of the Tri-Nations. Fitness levels, structures, defensive patterns? none differ greatly. But there is one huge difference between the two, he insists.

“The intensity of New Zealand v South Africa is not yet matched by a Test match in the Six Nations. I don’t think they put their bodies on the line with the same ferocity as a South African defending his turf. The Afrikaaner is very physical; he loves tackling and is very brave. It’s the same among the players of island origin in the New Zealand sides. They get huge pleasure out of a big hit.

“So for me, it’s the absolute intensity that is the difference. The southern hemisphere teams hit harder in the contact situations, with or without the ball. In terms of muscularity, speed and size the northern hemisphere teams are up there. It’s just the mental side of it that is different. You don’t see a Schalk Burger type player here with absolutely no fear. Schalk is like a threshing machine. Players here will make the tackle but in the southern hemisphere it is almost an intense hatred of the opposition.

“When they clear you out of a ruck in New Zealand or South Africa, they are doing it so hard to hurt you and saying in effect, ‘Don’t ever come here again’. Bakkies Botha’s cleaning out of England lock Ben Kay in the World Cup final was unbelievable. He hit him so hard in the ribs it was incredible he didn’t break four ribs. There is a lot more cerebral thought in northern hemisphere rugby.

“It is that kind of intensity I’m talking about. South Africa understood their skill levels weren’t as good as New Zealand’s in retaining possession. But their main weapon was to be as destructive as possible when the opposition had the ball. And I think that will always be the case. It stems from the differing cultures. There is more a sense of preservation among French, Italian and northern hemisphere teams.

“There seems to be a lack of thought going into contact in the southern hemisphere. They are just incredibly courageous.”

To read the full article, click here

Kiwi journalist Chris Rattue - who frequently likes to stick his neck out - has written a ridiculous attack on something he clearly has very little understanding of…

“Positive discrimination is alive and well in the Springboks camp and they will continue to pay a high price for it until new coach Peter de Villiers comes to his senses.

No, this isn’t a black and white issue. It’s the one in which the new Springboks boss continues to promote Butch James in the No 10 jersey, a move that can only be seen as an effort of giving every headbanger out there a belief that one day, they too might grace an international football field as their nation’s chief rugby playmaker.

Calling all disaffected props, loose forwards and hookers. You too can be a first five-eighths and win a world crown.

Most people wouldn’t give James a second thought as a world champion test pivot if they saw him plying his trade in a Super 14 fixture.

Matt Giteau, Dan Carter, Butch James … all together now “One of these things is not like the other, one of these things just doesn’t belong” to steal a line from the old children’s TV song.”

To read the rest, click here

This is an excerpt from a nice piece from Australia’s RugbyHeaven:

“It’S clearly that time of the year when rugby officials, who should know better, try to fight the winter chill by warming themselves up through talking hot air.

Over in New Zealand, Springboks coach Peter de Villiers has played the race card after former All Blacks prop Craig Dowd described him as a “puppet”. This prompted South Africa’s first black coach to moan that Dowd’s comment smacked of racism, which he says is rife in New Zealand and Australia.

But is calling someone a puppet racist? Hardly. Then again, de Villiers may have a point. It is obvious his white assistant coach Dick Muir is the puppet, and de Villiers the ventriloquist. Every time the cameras went to the South African coach’s box during the All Blacks Tests, Muir was screaming down the two-way line to the sideline staff, and de Villiers was doing nothing.

One time de Villiers seemed to be executing the great ventriloquist’s trick of having a drink of water while Muir kept screaming down the line.

But that’s nothing compared to the dribble coming out of the International Rugby Board propaganda politburo.

The Herald last week revealed that the IRB has made an audacious dash for cash by slugging countries an exorbitant $207 million tournament fee to host the 2015 World Cup, and a whopping $248m for 2019. It has got the organisation’s mice and fat cats running alleyways.

Once again, they are trying to defend the indefensible, which is that the IRB has become little more than a cash register.

Such a reaction is nothing new for their leading “communications” official, who was recently accused of widely disseminating an email that lampooned an Australian IRB delegate. And this is the same person who in 1995 showed how off the pace he was when he told the Herald a media release coming out the next day wasn’t worth worrying about.

Not worth worrying about?”

Click here to read the rest

It’s been a long time since SuperSport did anything with their rugby coverage to impress me…a long, long time!

But the inclusion of Bobby Skinstad onto the panel discussion prior to Saturday’s Test was a master-stroke. The former Bok skipper is eloquent and insightful - adding genuine value.

It’s time to put Naas to pasture and replace him for good!

By the way - this is just one mail that I’ve received on the topic recently:

“Watching “Boots and All” last night I think Naas Botha is definitely past his “sell by” date. He states the obvious most of the time and last night he kept on saying he did’nt see the games because he was away overseas so he couldn’t comment.

We need some younger blood with a sense of humour,some more creative anaysis and I am sure there are many waiting in the wings”
From Veldsman

Sportingo - James Mortimer (06/06/2008)

As the Southern Hemisphere international season commences, many - including some Kiwis - gloat about and mock the New Zealanders’ demise. How uninformed they are.

‘… let’s get this hollow commercial concept of World Cups out of the way. The only real tournament was played in 1987 – which the All Blacks won with a path of domination that was astounding’Canterbury have completed the 2008 Rebel Sport Super 14 with their seventh title in the 13 years that the tournament has been operating. This means quite simply that the world’s dominant provincial team has won over 50 per cent of the toughest domestic international series - a tournament that ranks alongside the Heineken Cup.

If you add the three titles that the Auckland Blues have claimed, this makes for fearsome reading for Australian and South African supporters. Only three times has another country claimed the title. The current world champions, South Africa, for all of their bleating, have won only one title despite empty claims that they have the toughest domestic competition. As well as this, New Zealand has five times provided the losing finalist to the competition’s Grand Final. Fifteen finals appearances to seven by Australia, while the Africans have only appeared in three finals!

But, of course, many point to the fact that countries’ overall domination is reflected in their international performance – and in this arena the All Blacks quite simply have no peer.

First, let’s get this hollow commercial concept of World Cups out of the way. The only real tournament was played in 1987 – which the All Blacks won with a path of domination that was astounding not only for the fact that they were unchallenged, but that they had recently had a massive number of their players banned over the “Cavalier” controversy.

In 1991, the All Blacks did the rugby world a favour by appointing two conflicting coaches and fielding a side on the decline. The Wallabies, eventual champions, nearly lost to Samoa in pool stages and only defeated Ireland by one point. The Australians at this point had evolved into a top team courtesy of being groomed by New Zealand by numerous Bledisloe thrashings.

In 1995, the All Blacks were the dominant team in the cup – hosted by South Africa, whose re-entry into top rugby was due to the New Zealanders’ consistent attempts to play African teams despite their worldwide sporting ban. The Springboks then repaid this favour by poisoning the entire All Blacks team, but despite this could only defeat the legendary team in extra time.

The following three tournaments New Zealand paid the price with poor selection policies, inconsistent game plans and over-hyped expectation. The victories by Australia, England and South Africa in the cups were by name only. John Eales, Martin Johnson and John Smit have all admitted publicly that their teams were given huge favours by having the All Blacks knocked out by once-in-a-lifetime performances by other teams.

South Africa and Australia owe their standing on the world rugby stage to the constant competition with the New Zealanders. The South Africans claim dominance in the amateur days of international rugby, but the controversy over apartheid, biased referees and constant cheating assured South Africa were a false world power. Despite this, New Zealand continued to send teams, despite fears of even being banned from Olympic events and they openly defied the Gleneagles agreement – the only country to do so. Ironically, the All Blacks continued to nurture the South African rugby beast.

Australia gained much from being the Tasman neighbour of New Zealand. Up until 1997 the Wallabies had only won seven Bledisloe Cups and the All Blacks held it for 27 straight years in the mid 1900s – however, the Australians grew from regular competition with the greatest of rugby nations.

But, of course, like any great argument, we need proof to back up these audacious claims. In over 100 years of rugby the All Blacks have only lost 96 times. Every other country in the world has lost at least twice that many games. South Africa have lost more, despite being banned from international competition for many years. New Zealand are the only team in world rugby not to have a half-century of points posted against them and their largest losing margin is 21 points – half of any other team.

To read the rest, click here

2008_06_21 RBHS U19A Rugby vrs Bishops 8-20

I’ve never had the pleasure of meeting Rob Andrew but he certainly knows how to rub people up the wrong way:

“In no particular order, Andrew expressed his disquiet that the Welsh referee Nigel Owens had been sighted in the same hotel as the All Blacks prior to last weekend’s Test in Auckland, slammed the local media for inaccurate reporting, rubbished claims by Graham Henry that England had been cheating in the scrums and suggested that Richie McCaw should wear a white jersey to reflect the amount of time he spends in offside positions. In a couple of respects he may well have a point but his timing was hardly immaculate.

Had England actually won the first Test by a 17-point margin rather than been hammered 37-20 there might have been more high moral ground to seek. New Zealanders would have been too busy conducting an inquest to care about Andrew’s opinions, justified or otherwise. Instead, the former England fly-half has risked making the same error as Sir Clive Woodward on the 2005 Lions tour, failing to appreciate that winding up the locals does not win many international games in the southern hemisphere. All Blacks, like Australians, have no huge preference about whom they beat but, above all, they hate losing to England. To sledge them publicly is to galvanise them still further. If the English management were really clever they would smile broadly at every attempted slight and invite Henry around for tea and crumpets, rather than enter into the same old yah-boo-sucks routine.”

With thanks to the Guardian