Chief among the Springboks’ tasks on their end-of-year tour must be to cast off the existential crisis that has settled over the team.

We’ve known some wild times – remember Harry Viljoen’s zany instructions not to kick the ball in his first Test? – and some dour times. Most Bok coaches have endured these.

The Boks under Allister Coetzee have set out their stall. They’re safe, certain and conventional. In keeping with Bok teams of old, and the whims of their coach, they favour their old strengths and won’t be doing anything extravagant.

Ranged against this is the zeitgeist of the modern game. The All Blacks play at a level all their own, setting standards even their forebears can’t compare to.

Closer to home, both the Lions and the Cheetahs have switched on to a bold, bright new world. The Sharks are trying, too, with varying levels of success. The point is that these teams have drawn a line in the sand. The old way had to go. The new way, with its premium on pace and space, is the only way for teams to prosper.

Those that don’t will wither on the vine. As the All Blacks demonstrate whenever they play, winning and entertaining aren’t mutually exclusive. To use the excuse that Test rugby isn’t Super Rugby is to surrender to the old dogma that no longer counts. If you want my R250 on a Saturday afternoon, I expect you to put on a grand show.

It’s thus little surprise that the Lions drew solid crowds during Super Rugby and the Cheetahs sold out their stadium for last week’s Currie Cup final.

To use a boxing analogy, most fans would prefer to see Mike Tyson in an explosive three-minute encounter than tame, tepid Floyd Mayweather jnr dance his way through 12 safe rounds.

Coetzee has made it plain that he’s wedded to a solid, proven game plan without the frills. But this doctrine will be tested this weekend when a South African team plays the Barbarians at Wembley.

The nature of such matches is that teams give it a rip. Rather like Sevens, where kicking and inhibition is frowned upon, Barbarians matches are expected to be free-wheeling affairs that pay homage to the club’s famous history. Two things dictate whether an invitation is offered: the player’s skills have to pass muster, and he must be well behaved.

Inherent in that ideology is an obligation to play attractive rugby.

We shall see.

The last time the Springboks played England at Twickenham, in 2014, it was a Pat Lambie dropped goal that separated the two sides. Interestingly, Adriaan Strauss was the hooker that day.

A week after the Baabaas match, he will wear the captain’s arm band against England. Given that Strauss is on his way out, it seems an opportunity was lost to blood his successor. Warren Whiteley should have been put in charge and told to get on with it. An impressive bloke with real gravitas, he will captain the Boks one day and when he does we’ll all wonder why it took so long.

It will be very much a case of two teams going in opposite directions at Twickenham. Eddie Jones has polished the old chariot into a gilded machine. England are formidable.

The Boks are coming off a horrible belting at home and travel with a squad of which 16 players have 10 caps or less. Many will still be hurting from the damage the All Blacks inflicted. Self-doubt could cripple them.

Italy and Wales then follow on successive weekends. These would have been gimmes in past years, but so would have matches against Japan, Ireland and Argentina.

The Boks will need to think faster, kick better and contest with more vigour if they are to have half a chance. Jones fancies them as being bullies and will encourage his team to niggle and gnarl. It’s a smart tactic.

I expect it will be a bruising tour that will be the making and unmaking of a number of players. Bok fans have had to recalibrate their expectations. Winning, for many of us, is no longer the only measure. Now, a mere ray of light will suffice. – © Sunday Tribune

 

 

 

Countless discussions have taken place in the past few weeks about the state of the Springboks.

One subject that has hardly come up is the continued selection of overseas-based players. There has been the usual wailing and gnashing of teeth about the player drain, said to number around 350 top class players in France, Japan and the UK, but there hasn’t been a useful conversation about the status quo.

Officially, the preference is for SA-based players, but if the Bok coach can make a case for a rugby emigré, he can select him.

We’ve seen much of this in recent years, including Bryan Habana, Duane Vermeulen, Johan Goosen, Willem Alberts and Francois Louw.

The exception is that the Bok captain must play his rugby in South Africa.

For a while, I thought this was a sensible option. The flood overseas has been massive and many players are good enough to represent the Springboks. But this is a lark that has had its day.

The Springboks should batten down the hatches and do as the All Blacks do by selecting home-based players only.

This would have the twin effect of making players think twice about heading off and also help the Springbok regain some of the aura lost in the professional age.

The other reality is that selecting offshore Springboks confirms a disconnect between them and the blokes who opt to stay at home. Six years ago Joe van Niekerk was selected out of France for a match against Wales. He was so off the pace he was never selected for the Boks again.

Two years ago Juan Smith was parachuted in from Toulon for a Test against Argentina in Salta. He, too, was last seen playing catch-up and never played for SA again.

Johan Goosen, who earned rave reviews at Racing 92, was pulled in for this year’s Rugby Championship where he was middling to average.

Proof, indeed, that not everything overseas is necessarily better.

There are exceptions like Louw and Habana, who do yeoman work for the Boks, but the fatigue of back-to-back seasons and the slog of travel have begun to show.

Interestingly, the world numbers one and two – New Zealand and England – have a steadfast rule: they do not select players from beyond their borders, no matter how accomplished. So when Dan Carter shifted off, that was it, cheerio. In England’s case, Steffon Armitage’s continued excellence in France is all but ignored.

New Zealand’s stance is unequivocal. “To wear the All Black jersey you have to play your rugby in New Zealand,” says CEO Steve Tew.

It’s a policy that defines their retention strategy.

Other teams, like the Wallabies, have a compromise of sorts. Overseas-based players must have won 60 caps or had a contract with the ARU for at least seven years to be eligible for selection, as was the case with Matt Giteau who was pulled in for the World Cup last year.

South Africa is duty-bound to nurture Super Rugby and keep it robust. Rewarding players who earn their cash overseas is anathema to this ideal.

I get the view that we now live in a global village and the state of the SA economy makes it appealing to earn foreign currency, but the very foundation of the Springboks is imperilled by the player drain.

The Springbok needs to win back its shine to the extent that young players think twice before accepting an overseas contract. The players who stick around and earn their crust in Currie Cup or Super Rugby must be rewarded for their loyalty, too. Why should those who choose to go elsewhere, effectively abandoning local rugby, benefit from the best of both worlds?

The New Zealand currency isn’t strong either, but it’s instructive to see how the world’s best player at the time, Richie McCaw, chose to stay local. So do Kieran Read and Ben Smith. And Dane Coles and Brodie Retallick.

It’s yet another lesson SA rugby can borrow from its Kiwi friends.

The very heart of SA rugby is under attack. Those who push off have every right to do so, but SA rugby must look after its own.

The gun-for-hire policy has run its course. It’s time to shut it down. – © Sunday Tribune

 

 

 

 

Stop squawking, Allister Coetzee is going nowhere.

It’s not his style and, besides, he’s the symptom of a creaking, outdated system that isn’t geared towards Springbok excellence. We all know this.

The enduring strength of South Africa’s players has disguised many of the problems; sporadic success in Super Rugby or a once-in-a-blue-moon win over the All Blacks has allowed us to fool ourselves.

The scaffolding around which SA rugby hangs itself is too unwieldy to dismantle overnight, or even over a few years. Things move slowly when committees are involved, so railing against the structures may make us feel better, but is a waste of time.

Many of the issues are deep-seated, like skills. Twenty years ago Nick Mallett was almost run out of town for suggesting that SA skills levels weren’t up to scratch. Yet he was right. With few exceptions, the schoolboy style is to bash and crash, to win at all costs. Little wonder gifted ball players like Bob Skinstad, Warren Whiteley or Cheslin Kolbe are such exceptions. No elite-level coach should have to work on skills, but they all do.

The Springboks are no longer the fittest or the biggest of teams – New Zealand and England are – so those attributes count for little when they aren’t matched by skills, which has been the case in recent years.

England coach Eddie Jones said last week that it was foolish to mimic the New Zealand style, a pattern suited to their physical and mental characteristics. We all swoon at the All Blacks, but any thought of emulating them at their game is indeed self-limiting.

SA coaches should rather plunder their philosophy which places a premium on fitness and the shrewd use of space. The All Blacks’ conditioning and skill sets allow them to adapt their game, and their pace, which has led to extraordinary dominance in recent years.

Their style is grounded in creating space and exploiting it. This requires skill and fitness, which they have in abundance. They can change on the hoof, too, adapting their tactics to suit the challenge. They did so in Durban last weekend, absorbing great heat in the first 20 minutes and then creating pressure through their formidable defence.

The fire went out of the Boks around the 70-minute mark and the All Blacks cranked up the pace to amplify their superiority. Out on their feet, the Boks were destroyed.

New Zealand were able to mangle SA because each player possesses consummate skills. Dane Coles, redefining the art of a hooker’s play, is a case in point. He can run, offload, dummy and jink like the best midfielder.

Brodie Retallick may look like a piano mover, but he’s a dab hand at playing it too, in a rugby sense.

The coaching indaba in Cape Town this week ought to go to the heart of this reality. The objective – “to ensure rugby excellence and continuous improvement to remain a top rugby-playing nation” – is jarring, but that’s the cold truth. The recent Bok performance trajectory reads like our sad currency: desperate and getting worse.

Succession planning also needs attention. With few exceptions, the passing of the Springbok coaching torch is a ham-fisted affair seldom unaffected by controversy or high drama. Any good created by his predecessor instantly evaporates and the new man must start from scratch.

The replacement of All Black coaches is seamless and embodies the functioning of the team itself. When Steve Hansen replaced Graham Henry, he was satisfied with the squad because he had helped create it. When Ian Foster takes over, as he surely will, he will have the same pleasant transition.

Not so with Coetzee. He inherited a squad largely not of his choosing (many of them contracted Springboks) and had to get on with it.

As the Boks lick their wounds, the aim for next month’s European tour must surely be damage limitation. The ship is too big to turn around in a few weeks, but the signs of looming change must be writ large. The coaching staff needs bolstering, a fit and hungry squad must be selected and there must be a nailing down of the shape and style the Boks should embrace.

Failure to do so will be catastrophic. – © Sunday Tribune