WE are at the business end of the 2006 Currie Cup. I like to take a few moments to reflect back on the season, identifying some good, bad and ugly aspects of the season.
The good…
It has been encouraging to see the attacking prowess of most of the sides in this years competition. Too often fans have had to sit through game after game of dour, stereotyped crash and bash rugby. This season has shown a remarkable turnaround. This was exemplified by Hottie Louws’ try for the bulls against province this last weekend. The interpassing between forwards and backs was excellent. The sharks, province, cheetahs, lions and even the griquas have shown the willingness to keep the ball alive instead of seeking contact, thereby slowing down the game. What a welcome relief.
Another good has been the emergence of one or two really good players who have performed consistently and should come into the reckoning come World Cup time. Hilton Lobberts confirmed his arrival on the big stage with an audacious pickup and score against Province. Bevan Fortuin has not put a foot wrong all season, and would not let the Boks down. Bradley Barritt has shown consistent form for the Sharks, as have Waylon Murray, Keegan Daniel and Francois Steyn. For Province, Robbie Diack has been immense, the Lions are fortunate to have the services of a player like Jaco Pretorius, and the Cheetahs have given Kabamba Floors the opportunity to confirm what many people already knew – that he is a player of genuine class.
It has also been encouraging to see the quality of rugby being played when one considers that many of the leading Springboks were not involved in the competition. This has given the opportunity to the above-mentioned players to show their worth on the big stage.
The bad…
In the same breath, the number of points being scored in some of the games in the knockout section has been a worry. But I for one would prefer to see points being scored, than a battle of two kickers. The inclusion of sides like the Pumas and the Valke continues to amaze me. Now don’t scream at me saying that the only way they will improve is by being exposed to this level of competition. I would concur that they are being badly exposed. The Griquas claimed the notable scalp of the Sharks, and ran the bulls, province and the lions close at various stages during the competition. How much good can you be doing for a rugby players career when week in and week out he is on the receiving end of a 40 point plus hiding, and at the end of the season to be told not to come back next season as his union is under financial pressure?
The ugly…
Ollie le Roux’s mullet. I battle to keep my beer down every time I see the Cheetahs play!
On a more serious note…
I have been disappointed by the level of refereeing in the competition this year, in particular the performance of the TMO. The now famous, “I cannot see the ball being grounded. I have no reason not to award the try. You may award the try.”, comes straight to mind. Too many “home team decisions” have been made. The role and definition of the TMO is a simple one. If the men in the TMO box are making errors with the benefit of slow motion replays and endless angles, what are the chances that they are going to get it right on the pitch in the heat of battle. I believe this is something that needs to be addressed, I don’t have the solution.
Perhaps you do? Or do you have any additions to the Good, Bad and Ugly of the 2006 Currie Cup? Let us know.
Tukkers out.
Comments(15)