Sanjay's Rugby World

Springbok coach Peter de Villiers has been described as full-time comedian and part-time coach. His influence must be contagious as we now have verbal garbage emanating from multiple sources in the Springbok camp!

Whilst we can always count on Peter de Villiers to keep us entertained with witty, humorous, controversial and nonsensical comments, it’s unusual to hear them from other members of the Springbok camp.

VICTOR MATFIELD

After the defeat to Scotland, Springbok captain Victor Matfield had this to say, “We have to really believe in the game-plan and what we are trying to do, that is the only way we can get it right.”

Matfield is one of the most intelligent rugby players ever. For him to say dribble like this indicates the confusion in the Bok camp. How can they not believe in their game plan, and worse still not know what they are trying to do? Dear oh dear oh dear!

ZANE KIRCHNER

After the Scotland loss, fullback Zane Kirchner said,
“The back three (England) like to run the ball back and their last option is to kick the ball, a bit like us now.”

Whilst I rate Kirchner and Aplon, I’ve hardly seen the Boks run the ball back, especially on this northern hemisphere tour.

Kirchner went on to say “We learned a lot from the Scotland game. Certainly in terms of the conditions. Most of the guys hadn’t experienced that really – they’ve played in rain of course but that was really bad and I think we need to adapt better.”

That’s been the story of the year. Lots of ‘learning experiences’ that the Boks haven’t learnt from! Well they may have learned, but they haven’t been performing any different.

And you can’t tell me the Beast, Bismarck and Jannie du Plessis, Bakkies Botha, Victor Matfield, Juan Smith, Pierre Spies and Jean de Villiers are inexperienced in northern hemisphere conditions.

OS DU RANDT

Even Springbok great Os du Randt has not been immune to devillism.

Beast Mtawarira picked up a slight medial ligament injury against Scotland and Was a doubtful starter at the beginning of the week. Du randt had this to say, “Beast’s injury will definitely impact on us if he is forced out because he has been very good for us since Gurthro Steenkamp was injured” said Bok Os du Randt.

“As a scrum we have been building towards this match, this was always going to be the biggest test of the tour for the scrum, and we have been working hard. So to lose Beast for the game will be a blow.”

Who are we kidding? The Beast has been a poor scrummager since the first Lions test last year. And the Boks don’t appear to have any plan, or are making any progress, let alone building for the final game of the tour!

Because of the injury to the Beast, Coenie Oosthuizen had been mentioned as a candidate to make his test debut.

However du Randt quickly dispelled that notion, “He is still young (21) and we know that props mature when they are 26 or 27. I would say that Coenie needs another four years or so to build up experience, to build up his technique and his mobility. So it would be wrong to throw him in at the deep end. But he has a lot of potential, and I would like to see him being faded in.”

Why in South Africa do we generally not consider props until they are older before playing test rugby? Other countries give young guys a chance. Look at James Slipper in the Wallabies.

If you are good enough, aren’t you old enough?

EXCUSES ARE FOR LOSERS

Last year Springbok captain John Smit said “excuses are for losers”.

Under Peter de Villiers I fear the leadership has become poisoned. Not just on the field but off it too.

I’ve never heard so many excuses, feeble comments or just downright embarrassing statements! It’s no wonder we are so pathetic on the field, when we are clearly confused and disorganised off it.

The Springboks loss to Scotland last week highlighted their lack of creativity and execution. But it’s not as if they lack the skill to produce tries.

The Springboks have shown that they have not adapted to the new law interpretations this year by one-dimensional attacking rugby that is not producing the desired results.

Almost every international side has adapted to the changes, and are keeping ball in hand, building up pressure, and by and large being rewarded with tries.

This short video of the Boks attacking play against Scotland highlights just how pathetic the Boks attacking effort was.

In this year’s Super 14, both the Bulls and Stormers showed they can embrace attacking rugby, and did it better than any of the other sides.

So South Africa has the players. This video shows the Boks attacking from set-pieces.

What is most noticeable is the long passes and greater width to the game, attacking at pace, beter handling skills and the desire to score tries. It helps when Fourie du Preez is directing traffic, but the Boks should be good enough without him too.

Given that many of the players are the same in both video clips, surely the difference has to be the coaching of the sides?

South Africa’s most capped player, Springbok captain Victor Matfield, has been shortlisted for the 2010 IRB player of the year award.

The Southern hemisphere dominates the main award, the IRB player of the year.

The shortlisted candidates are:

Richie McCaw (All Blacks)
Mills Muliaina (All Blacks)
Imanol Harinordoquy (France)
David Pocock (Australia)
Kurtley Beale (Australia)

All Black captain Richie McCaw is the only player to have won the award twice, and can become the first player to win the award for an unprecedented third time.

The 6 were chosen by an independent panel chaired by former Australian captain John Eales.

The full IRB Awards independent panel of judges were John Eales, Will Greenwood (Eng), Gavin Hastings (Sco), Raphal Ibanez (Fra), Francois Pienaar (SA), Agustn Pichot (Arg), Scott Quinnell (Wal), Tana Umaga (NZ) and Paul Wallace (Ire).

“The IRB Player of the Year Award is the greatest individual honour presented annually in our game” said IRB Chairman Bernard Lapasset, in a statement issued on Thursday.

“The six players nominated have all enjoyed an exceptional year of international Rugby and have been judged on their performances in the RBS Six Nations, Tri Nations, June and November Tests.”

With Eales known to dislike the Boks immensely, I doubt Matfield will win the award.

Matfield was a colosus during the Super 14 and has produced some sublime moments such as his chip and chase in Bloemfontein, and his try against Wales.

The achievements of Matfield will no doubt be diminished by the poor season of the Boks.

Hardinordoquy, Pocock and Beale have been good at times, but lack the class, consistency and match winning ability required to win the award.

For that reason, I believe McCaw will win his third IRB player of the year award. He is consistently one of the best players in the world, and makes match winning contributions, whether for the All Blacks or Canterbury/Crusaders.

The winner will be announced on December 1, along with the coach of the year and team of the year winners.

Previous IRB player of the year winners:

2009: Richie McCaw (All Blacks)
2008: Shane Williams (Wales)
2007: Bryan Habana (Springboks)
2006: Richie McCaw (All Blacks)
2005: Dan Carter (All Blacks)
2004: Schalk Burger (Springboks)
2003: Jonny Wilkinson (England)
2002: Fabien Galthie (France)
2001: Keith Wood (Ireland)

The Springbok’s year will be defined by whether they can beat England at Twickenham on Saturday.

The Boks have not enjoyed a succesful year. There is a small opportunity to regain some pride against England in their last grand slam test. Whilst it won’t fix the deeper problems, as the last test of the year, it may just define how the season will be viewed.

A win in the last game of the year often takes the edge off the critics. Regardless of the result the coaching staff have much to face up to, but a win may just save their jobs!

A return of 3 from 4 may be enough to see them complete their contract at the World Cup next year, whereas a loss force SARU to give them the boot as the results have been substandard and unnacceptable all year.

THE BOKS ARE UNDERDOGS?

The Boks have tried to talk England up this week and appear to want the underdog status. For me it’s a sign that the Boks are lacking confidence and belief.

As World Champions, you should not fear anyside, you certainly shouldn’t fear losing or feel under pressure as you build towards defending your title. Clearly the heat is mountingon the Boks, and a whole heap of irrational thoughts are starting to surface.

Earlier this week Jean de Villiers said, “For the players it’s about regaining lost pride now. A lot of people are writing us off. The players will be the first to admit that it was disappointing. A win over England will go a long way to fixing it, but we will have to play well.”

It should not matter what others think, but what the players believe. The fact they are affected by others writing them off tells me this side has lost its edge.

ENGLAND HAVE THE RIGHT ATTITUDE

The Poms appear the mentally stronger of the two sides. English forward Tom Croft say’s they respect the Boks, but aren’t placing the World Champions on a pedestal.

“If you start thinking (the Boks) not quite the team they used to be, that’s where you will definitely slip up. You have to have respect for them off the pitch but as soon as you cross that whitewash, it’s you versus them and if you give them that respect on the pitch, they will get the upper hand” said Croft.

The English appear settled, quietly confident and reslishing the challenge of playing the Boks. They aren’t placing unnecessary demands or pressure on themselves, rather they just want to improve their game and come away with a win.

In my mind, they are in a good head space, in comparison with a disorganised Bok side. Worringly does this not appear to have shades of 2002 written all over it?

CONDITIONS

The weather forecast is not great with extreme cold and snow forecast for London.

It’s been the Boks highlighting the weather and how it may affect them. Once again they just need to focus on whatever conditions are presented to them and get on with it. It’s the same for both teams.

TEAM SELECTION

The Boks have made just 2 changes to the side that lost so dismally to Scotland. Pierre Spies for Ryan Kankowski is an expected change, and the pack is still a very formidable unit despite last week’s result.

The swop of Ruan Pienaar for Francois Hougaard is a puzzling one. Pienaar has more experience, but surely Div needs to see what he can do, and last weeks test where he was also suffering from the flu surely doesn’t warrant a demotion to the bench?

Where are the opportunities that Peter de Villiers talked about?

Meanwhile poor Patrick Lambie and Willem Alberts are likely to be thrust on again in the second half, without really having a chance to show what they can do, especially if the game is tight.

PREDICTION

The Boks are always stronger when they are the underdogs. They’ve not hit their straps all tour, whereas England are steadily getting better.

If the Poms can match the Boks upfront, I believe they may have more nous than we do in the backs. The boring Bok pattern is not a recipe for success, and if the Boks once again try not to lose, rather than striving to win, it’ll hurt them.

Even though the Boks smashed England at Twickenham in their last encounter, I think the Poms by 8.

Springboks:

1. Tendai Mtawarira
2. Bismark du Plessis
3. Jannie du Plessis
4. Bakkies Botha
5. Victor Matfield (c)
6. Deon Stegmann
7. Juan Smith
8. Pierre Spies
9. Ruan Pienaar
10. Morne Steyn
11. Lwazi Mvovo
12. Jean de Villiers
13. Francois Steyn
14. Gio Aplon
15. Zane Kirchner

16. Adriaan Strauss
17. CJ van der Linde
18. Flip van der Merwe
19. Willem Alberts
20. Francois Hougaard
21. Patrick Lambie
22. Adrian Jacobs

England:

1. Andrew Sheridan
2. Dylan Hartley
3. Dan Cole
4. Courtney Lawes
5. Tom Palmer
6. Tom Croft
7. Lewis Moody
8. Nick Easter (c)
9. Ben Youngs
10. Toby Flood
11. Mark Cueto
12. Shontayne Hape
13. Mike Tindall
14. Chris Ashton
15. Ben Foden

16. Steve Thompson
17. Matt Banahan
18. Danny Care
19. Hendre Fourie
20. David Wilson
21. Simon Shaw
22. Charlie Hodgson

PREVIOUS RESULTS

Overall the 2 countries have played 31 times. The Boks have won on 18 occasions, and England 12, with 1 draw which was in their first ever test.

Three is an interesting pattern of victories between the 2 countries, with 1 side tending to dominate for multiple matches. The Boks have won the past 6 encounters, and England won the 7 prior to that.

Can the Boks match the longest winning streak between the 2 sides?

AVERAGE POINTS

MILESTONES

Morne Steyn (311) will become the second highest points scorer in the history of test rugby for South Africa if he scores two points on Saturday, moving ahead of Naas Botha (312).

Morne Steyn is the second highest scorer in test match rugby in 2010 with 174 points. Steyn is 8 points behind Dan Carter (182).

Victor Matfield and Bakkies Botha hold the record for the number of international test appearances as a second row combination. This will be the 60th time they have played together for South Africa, having won 44 and lost 15.

The Springboks can equal the English record between the 2 countries of 7 consecutive matches if they win on Saturday.

This will be the 18th time the two teams have played each other in London, with the Boks winning eight, drawing one and losing eight.

South Africa have played 17 matches at Twickenham (includes a 27-21 loss to Australia in the Semi Finals of the 1999 Rugby World Cup). Of those 17 matches, South Africa have won 8 and lost 9.

England have won 11 out of 24 matches played since Matrin Johnson became team manager in July 2008, with two wins and seven defeats against Tri-Nations opposition.

South Africa have won 15 out of 19 matches played against northern hemisphere opposition under Peter de Villiers. The three defeats have been to the British and Irish Lions in 2009, France (2009), Ireland (2009) and Scotland (2010).
Willem Alberts scored the Springboks 100th try (against Scotland last weekend) in 38 matches played since de Villiers became coach in 2008.

George Clancy of Ireland will referee his third match involving South Africa. Previosuly he was in charge when the Boks won 26-0 win over Italy in June 2008, and in July 2010 when the Boks lost 30-13 to Australia in Brisbane, when two Springbok players were on the receiving end of yellow cards.

Former Springbok prop Dawie Theron has been appointed by SARU as the new coach of the South African U20 side for the next three years.

Theron was the successful candidate in a full recruitment process and replaces Eric Sauls

Theron is an experienced coach, who has also played at the highest level. He has been involved in roles as head coach, assistant-coach, consultant and tour manager with Griquas and the Cheetahs Super Rugby franchise.

Theron will have to stand down as coach of Griquas as he will be employed by SARU full time.

“I have really enjoyed my time with Griquas, but this is a rare opportunity for a coach to lead a national rugby side such as the SA Under-20s” said Theron.

THE CHALLENGE AHEAD

“I am sure there will be challenges but that is what makes rugby so special” said Theron.

“We have an unbelievable amount of talented youngsters playing the game in South Africa and I am looking forward to working with them”

“My first task will be to listen and speak to the various rugby structures at Saru and will then take my lead from them. I firmly believe that Saru has good structures in place and it is important that everyone is on the same page to ensure the success of our junior teams.”

SARU CEO Jurie Roux, stressed the importance the U20′s play in the development of our future Boks. “The SA under-20 coaching position is a vital appointment in terms of Saru’s strategic vision for developing talented young players.”

“We are pleased to have acquired a coach of his calibre and his record at Griquas is an indication of his ability to spot and nurture talent and to develop them into first class professional players.”

Theron has shown, especially at Griquas he has the ability to extract great things from his players. As a former player he can also provide great mentoring and experience to his charges who can make the step up to the senior side.

It is also pleasing that SARU are taking age group rugby seriously, as, no disrespect is intended, the coaches at age group level have been weak in recent times, and our age group sides have under-performed and failed to deliver on the world stage.

Theron’s first major challenge will be the 2011 IRB Junior World Championships in Italy. Is it about time South Africa seriously challenged for the title once more, and I’m sure under Theron, the Baby Boks will be challengers once again!

I commend SARU for making an intelligent and hopefully productive decision for once!

With professionalism and advances in sport science, players and coaches are continually striving for the ‘edge’ that will make the difference.

There are a wide variety of products, techniques and beliefs that permeate throughout the rugby world, and the latest positive drug tests from Springboks Chiliboy Ralepelle and Bjorn Basson highlight the question of ‘just what should rugby players be doing/using?’

On Tuesday last week, Professor Tim Noakes stated that there are very few supplements that offer any significant value. He even mentioned that in the recent past a medical committee had recommended to the South African Rugby Union (SARU) that supplements should not be used by players.

Supplements have been popular since professionalism, with players using them to bulk up, maximise energy levels and the ability to train longer and harder for greater gains.

A few years back creatine was all the rage. From what I understand it helps players train harder for short duration exercise, and maximise gains. Why is it not as prevalent now?

OTHER PRODUCTS

Other ‘scientific’ products have also been popular. Take the pain gone pen, which is a non-pharmaceutical method to instantly cure pain e.g on the field.

But perhaps one of the biggest ‘crazes’ were the fingerless gloves. Designed to make handling the ball easier, they have even been promoted with the tag ‘the wetter the better’.

Rugby gloves

There have been other developments such as enhancements to the players’ jersey’s. Prior to the 2007 Rugby World Cup, the Boks had different tops for the different positions, with the prop forwards, even having 1 long sleeve and 1 short sleeve (for binding in the scrums). And the All Blacks had the ‘sticky’ panel on the front of their shirt (which looked awful!)

Springbok 2007 RWC strip

COMMON SENSE

At the end of the day, you can’t beat the tried and trusted ice packs, hard training and common sense.

With professionalism and players able to concentrate exclusively on rugby, all sides and players train hard. Science may help give you that 1% difference but at the end of the day it’s the uncoachable factors that make the difference.

When I look at the best rugby players in the world, the Victor Matfield’s, Richie McCaw’s, Fourie du Preez’s etc, I see players that are not necessarily the biggest or fastest. I see the smartest, most determined players with the biggest hearts.

The awareness, the ability to read a game, the willingness to train hard and push oneself, and the desire to win. Most people will agree, defence/tackling is all about attitude. It doesn’t matter how big and strong you are or what supplements you have taken, when you are required to perform it’s the will to succeed that will make the most difference!

Former Springbok technical advisor Eddie Jones has highlighted poor planning and conviction as the reasons for the Boks poor form.

Jones was on the Springbok coaching staff with Jake White when the Boks won the Rugby World cup in 2007, and was involved with many of the current players.

Jones spoke to RugbyXV earlier this week and said current Springbok coach Peter de Villiers may have a worthwhile gameplan to defend the World Cup, but the players lack the conviction to follow it through on the field.

“This has been a continuation of the Tri-Nations for the Boks. Firstly, they can’t decide how they want to play. With the change of laws, most sides have committed to the way they want to play.”

“The best sides have found a balance in kicking and how they want to use the ball, and have the right mix. I don’t for one moment think the Boks believe in the way they’re playing. That’s affecting them.”

“They have got to get fit. They must decide on a strategy and build on that in the three months building up to the tournament next year. They must work out how they want to run and kick and when they want to attack.”

“They must also get their selections correct. What I learnt from Jake [White] is that a World Cup is won on experience and there are very few players who come in over the last 12 months. Every country pretty much knows which 30 they’ll pick. But they must pick correctly.”

“The Boks need to develop a belief in the way they want to play. They can still win it, I have no doubt of that.”

Jones has highlighted some fundamental basics for any side that wants to be successful. How the Boks can be unfit, and unsure of their game plan is beyond me. This year some of the lineups fielded by the Boks were the most experienced in our history.

It all highlights the lacks of leadership, direction and planning by the coaching staff. Can’t anyone else see the common denominator!

BOKS CAN BEAT ENGLAND, BUT THE PROBLEMS WILL REMAIN

The Boks are highly motivated to bounce back and beat England, but regardless of the result, Jones believes the Boks can’t stick their head in the sand and hide their problems.

“England are one of those sides who’ve worked out the way they want to play. Their selection and strategy is in synergy, and they’re better for it. It will be very tough for the Boks, but having worked with them, the one thing I know is how they enjoy playing England. It’s a Test they always really want to win” said Jones.

“There’ll be plenty of passion from South Africa and they still have a good chance of winning. But whatever happens on Saturday, the problems will still exist. You can produce one passionate performance at the end of a season, but it won’t hide the problems.”

BOKS CAN LEARN FROM THE ALL BLACKS

Jones highlights the need for players to play more intelligently. Whatever plays are executed, they need to be precise and purposeful.

“That’s also a reason why their attack (Boks) has been so one-dimensional.”

“New Zealand have shown the way the game can be played. At the start of the season they ran virtually everything, but through Dan Carter they’ve now added a new dimension to their game with their repertoire of different attacking kicks. Carter made more kicks than any 10 in the Tri-Nations, but it’s a case of when, how and why they kick, rather than kicking for the sake of it.”

KEEP IT SIMPLE

Jones has a knack for being concise and to the point. He speaks intelligently, and gives players, coaches and the public uncomplicated insight into the game.

Like many of the Boks critics, he has highlighted the coaching staff as probably the weakest link in the Bok setup.

If SA rugby were wise, they would have gotten Jones involved again as an advisor for the World Cup. Unfortuntely with the mob we are going to have to pray for a miracle if we are to rise again next year and defend our World Cup!

Mark Keohane on Monday wrote in the Business day newspaper that the Springboks 21-17 loss to Scotland can be positive if it leads to change.

Springbok coach Peter de Villiers

Keohane raises some valid points, which are not an emotional reaction from 1 defeat but the result of 15 months of frustration.

The key points which I agree with are:

• The Boks should never lose to Scotland. Ever.
• As I said after saturday’s result, if you lose to Scotland as coach, you deserve the sack.

• A loss to Scotland should bring about consequences.

• In 2002 there wasn’t, and look what happened. Does anybody want the same result as the 2003 Rugby World Cup to ever happen again?

• Jake White had to build South African rugby from one of it’s lowest periods, and most agreed we couldn’t let it happen again. The only way to stop history repeating, is to learn from it!

• What’s worst is that 2010 is 2002 repeating itself!

• SARU are unlikely to admit they are wrong.
  
• If Peter de Villiers truly believed in doing what is best for the Boks he would do the honourable thing and resign.

• Unfortunately de Villiers does not believe he is part of the problem.

• His stubbornness is bought out by his refusal to acknowledge problems and overcome them (he still can’t figure out how the Boks lost 5 of 6 Tri-Nations matches).

• The Boks biggest problem is the coaching staff.

• The (lucky) wins against Ireland and Wales only papered over the cracks, and since the Tri-Nations victory last year, the Boks have been in decline.

• Peter de Villiers this year has consistently stated his top players are fatigued and need rest, however instead of being used as a development tour to build depth and blood new players the grand slam has been about saving his own job.

• The chance to try new tactics and evolve the game plan has been sacrified for short term results, which have not been met, leaving the Boks having achieved nothing this year.

Edinburgh may have been a disaster, but it has not been nearly as bad as the entire season!

The Springbok side to take on England at Twickenham on Saturday:

The Boks have made just two changes from the side that lost to Scotland, with coach Peter de Villiers not wanting to make wholesale changes, indicating it will be more of the same from the Boks.

Pierre Spies returns at No. 8 for Ryan Kankowski, who drops out of the squad.

Ruan Pienaar and Francois Hougaard swop places in the starting lineup and bench.

THE SPRINGBOKS

1. Tendai Mtawarira
2. Bismark du Plessis
3. Jannie du Plessis
4. Bakkies Botha
5. Victor Matfield (c)
6. Deon Stegmann
7. Juan Smith
8. Pierre Spies
9. Ruan Pienaar
10. Morne Steyn
11. Lwazi Mvovo
12. Jean de Villiers
13. Francois Steyn
14. Gio Aplon
15. Zane Kirchner

16. Adriaan Strauss
17. CJ van der Linde
18. Flip van der Merwe
19. Willem Alberts
20. Francois Hougaard
21. Patrick Lambie
22. Adrian Jacobs

Springbok flyhalf Morne Steyn needs just 2 points to overtake Naas Botha and become South Africa’s all-time second highest points scorer.

Springbok points machine Morne Steyn

AVERAGES

Montgomery averaged 8.75 points per match (he was not the goal kicker for many of his matches however).
Botha averaged 11.14 points per match.
Steyn averages 12.95 points per match.

MORE RECORDS

Steyn has only required 2 seasons thus far to amass his points, and despite the poor season from the Boks, has still managed to score 174 this season (8th highest in a calendar year) so far which is not far behind the All Blacks Dan Carter with 182.

Steyn even set a new record earlier this year with 41 consecutive successful goal kicks in tests!
The run ended on 6 November 2010 against Ireland and beat the previous record of 36, held by Chris Paterson of Scotland.

Sport24 last week reported that some big names in South African rugby are getting involved in the Varsity Cup.

These include:

Heyneke Meyer (Tukkies) – current Blue Bulls director of rugby

Pote Human (Tukkies) – former Blue Bulls coach

Herkie Kruger (University of Johannesburg backline and kicking coach) – Recent Lions flyhalf

David de Villiers (Shimlas assistant coach) – Recent Cheetahs lock

Dougie Heymans (former Free State prop) also returns as scrumming coach and team manager of Shimlas.

Meyer and Human have been seen at Tukkies practices, helping to prepare the side for next year’s compeition.

It’s a measure of the success and importantance the Varsity Cup now occupies in the South African rugby calendar that such personalities are involved, and it’s great for the development and mentoring of young South African rugby players.

Is Meyer getting back to a hands on coaching role again as a prelude to bigger things?

With the Springbok coaching job set to become available in 2012, and possibly even earlier, Meyer may be signalling his intentions early, and providing further ammunition to an already impressive rugby cv.

Regardless of whether he is actually after the Springbok job, I am sure both Tukkies and South African rugby will benefit immensely as a result of Meyer’s involvement.

In the latest IRB World Rankings the Springboks have slipped back to third place whilst allowing Scotland move into the top 6.

The Springboks had briefly regained second spot last week, courtesy of Australia losing to England rather than proving their pedigree.

With a loss to Scotland, the Springboks move back to third, and a further loss this weekend to England leaves them dangerously placed to fall down the ladder.

The Boks, are losing further ground over the All Blacks who by beating Ireland have opened a larger lead at the top.

Scotland move into the top 6, not sure if that is the first time they’ve enjoyed such a high ranking, back if they can display their passion and determination as they did against the Boks on a consistent basis, they can remain there.

The Scots pushed Ireland and Argentina each down a spot.

IRB WORLD RANKINGS

Full IRB World Ranking list

Now the fans can connect with the South African rugby players via My Players.

My players website

With the increasing use of social media allowing greater interaction than ever before, My Players will help manage this connection.


It will feature:

• The latest rugby news
• Exclusive content from the team and players such as interviews
• Behind the scenes action
• Competitions with the chance to win player memorabilia

The site currently up and running, but only officially launchs in 2011.

It is compeletely free, so register now!

After going down 21-17 to Scotland at Murrayfield on Saturday, the reaction in the Springbok camp was one of extreme disappointment.

Springbok coach Peter de Villiers

SPRINGBOK COACH PETER DE VILLIERS

Springbok coach Peter de Villiers felt the Boks could not get their game gaming.

“Obviously we’re very disappointed. The things that worked for us in the past two games – the first phases and holding onto the ball – didn’t work for us tonight” said de Villiers.

“The conditions weren’t very good and Scotland made use of the conditions better than us, so well done to them. All credit to Scotland, but we only had ourselves to blame.”

The Boks conceded 16 penalties to the Scots 10, and whilst not blaming the ref, de Villiers did take a customary dig at ref Stuart Dickinson.

“Before we accuse anybody we have to go and sit and look at the video and see what happened and then make some hard calls.”

“The momentum at the beginning was with us but then we were nailed for a few things on our ball; they got into the lead and put us under pressure and they used the conditions better than we did.”

“Some of the refereeing decisions were puzzling, however we did not respond the way we should have done.”

“We now have to pick ourselves up physically and mentally for the challenge of playing England next weekend.”

The Boks were outplayed for the second week in a row and deserved to lose. Peter de Villiers should rather just look to take responsibility than seek blame elsewhere, and he also needs to admit his substitutions were foolish.

“If we look at the Morne Steyn incident in isolation then it might have been a mistake, but if you look at the bigger picture towards next year’s World Cup then you have to say that the players need to get experience of playing in these conditions.”

If he wants to give players experience, putting Lambie on for the final quarter is not the way to do it. He should have started the game, or at least be given the whole game. Coming on with the side trailing, in tough conditions is throwing him a hospital pass.

SPRINGBOK CAPTAIN VICTOR MATFIELD

Bok captain Victor Matfield was unable to hide the pressure the players feel to play more expansively. I certainly didn’t think the Boks played expansively, and they weren’t able to mix it up nearly as much as Scotland did.

“We’d been under pressure; everyone wants us to be more expansive. “There has been a lot of talk about us needing to be more expansive in our approach and maybe we paid too much attention to that” said Matfield.

“These weren’t the right conditions to play expansively, and we made too many mistakes in our own half.”

“In conditions like that you need to have an accurate kicking game and an accurate chasing line and put them under pressure instead of putting yourself under pressure. That’s something we’ll have to have a look at.”

“Maybe the Scottish put us more under pressure and when you’re under pressure you’ll make mistakes. In this weather you can’t play a lot of rugby it was all about the team making the least mistakes and putting the other team under pressure and they did it to us – they got the lead and they kept us in our half.”

Whilst the Boks will no doubt be feeling the pressure, looking forward after this defeat, Matfield said the next game against England will be just the same as any other match.

“We start again on Monday; new energy, new focus after mourning tonight’s (defeat). It’ll be exactly the same as any other week.”

THE SCOTS GOT IT RIGHT

To win in sport, desire often triumphs over anything else. Stand in Scottish skipper Rory Lawson summed it up ever so eloquently when he said, “This was all about guts and togetherness. I am so, so proud.”

The Boks would do well to learn the lesson, but as we’ve seen under de Villiers reign, it’ll probably pass them by.

The autumn internationals have shown that the new law interpretations have changed the way rugby is being played, and the Boks have failed to adapt.

The Boks need to embrace running rugby

In an effort to create greater attacking rugby, and more tries, the laws were re-interpreted. The 2010 IRB Tri-Nations report, showed that the ball is in play longer, there are more tries (especially compared to penalties), and the rules favour the attacking side.

All 4 home nations, Ireland, Wales, Scotland and England have shown so far this autumn, they have adapted their game plans and are favouring holding onto possession and trying to run the ball more (The All Blacks and Wallabies generally do this regardless of the rules).

They’ve outplayed the Boks, looking more decisive on attack, having more options, and creating more space and opportunities.

It’s stretched the Boks, who despite having one of the most feared packs in world rugby with great set-pieces, have generally come off second best in the possession stakes this year.

It’s not because the set-pieces are so poor, and the Boks struggle to win any ball, it’s because they Boks only ever kick it away, and fail to take it through phase play.

That was find in 2009, you could kick for field position, and wait for penalties to come with strong defence and getting your hands on the opposition ball.

In 2010, it’s a struggle to turnover the ball as the laws favour the side on attack, and sides can build phases and test the defence multiple times, sapping the energy out of the opposition. At least that’s what all the sides are doing to the Boks, and it’s working.

THE BOK BLUEPRINT

The Boks conversely have gone back to 10 man rugby. Whenever the Boks fall under pressure, it seems they revert to tight, unimaginative, ‘percentage’ rugby.

Look at Nick Mallet, Harry Viljoen, Rudolph Straeuli and even Jake White. When the going get’s tough, it’s back to big, strong forwards, and crash and bash rugby.

Unfortunately it doesn’t work. The opposition know what’s coming, and if they can defend like trojans, they can negate the Boks. By ‘playing’ rugby, and running the ball, building phases, they can keep it away from the Bok forwards for long enough periods to ensure their defence has time to get organised, and is not subject to long periods of pressure.

To be a successful sportsmen requires having multiple strings to one’s bow. A cricket batsmen must be able to play all around the wicket and have a shot for every delivery. It doesn’t mean they have to play every shot in the book, but when you only play the one shot, the opposition can make plans to counter it.

Rugby is not dissimilar, the Boks are failing to utilise 15 men, and pacy, skilful players out wide who can vary the Bok attack, and create confusion and unpredictability to the opposition defence to allow it to be penetrated more easily.

The Bulls and Stormers showed in the Super 14, South Africa has the players to not only play the expansive game, but lead the way. Unfortunately for the Boks, we may have the wrong coaches with Peter de Villiers, Gary Gold and Dick Muir.

Until we get someone strong enough, intelligent enough and determined enough, we may find ourselves left behind like we did at the 2003 World Cup.

The Springboks have failed to learn from the lessons handed out in the Tri-Nations, and the Bok coaching staff must take responsibility for the poor showing on the grand slam tour.

Bok coaches de Villiers and Gold

The Scots took the game to the Boks, and triumphed because they played as a unit, in an intelligent manner.

POORLY COACHED

In my view the Springboks were beaten for numerous reasons:

1. LACK OF DESIRE

The Scots played with their hearts today. They had fire in their bellies and they simply wanted the game more than the Boks. No one took the game by te scruff of the neck for the Boks, whereas the Scots had 22 players all vying for Bok blood, and determined to do whatever it took to get there.

2. POOR COACHING

The Springboks simply have not produced any constructive, attacking rugby on this tour. They scored the only try, through luck more than anything else. Unless you are prepared to attack, points will not flow very easily.

The Scots however were prepared to chance their arm. They risked plenty to gain even more. They threw the ball around, kicked and chased, tried drop goals. They used the kitchen sink, and it worked.

The Scots showed the Boks that you can’t be one-dimensional, whatever the conditions may be. There must be a full utilisation of the 15 players, and the way the Scots used their centres to run at pace to create space and gaps was in stark comparison to how Jean de Villiers and Francois Steyn bash the ball up.

3. POOR BASICS

Too many dropped balls, careless penalties and poor body positioning at crucial times killed the momentum if ever there was any. It’s the little things that make a big difference. Ultimately the coaches have to take responsibility as these are good players.

4. POOR SUBSTITUTIONS

Once again the coaching staff are to blame here. They’ve learnt very little since the first Lions test in 2009. The subs were pre-meditated and did not make any impact as players we needed on the field departed.

Conditions were tailor made for Bakkies Botha, he should have stayed. Deon Stegmann was playing well and a menace for the Scots at the breakdown, whilst Morne Steyn is your banker with experience and the goal kicking required in a tight game.

Willem Alberts should have replaced Juan Smith who was not having one of his better games. The coaches need to read the situation, and adapt, and replacing like for like would have been better than taking off Stegmann who was doing a good job.

Entrusting Lambie in a pressure cooker environment in conditions ill-suited for his game simply defied logic.

5. SHODDY SET-PIECES

The scrums were a disaster, with both props being pinged as they could not handle the pressure.

The normally reliable lineout lost at least 3 balls, and Victor Matfield is clearly not at his best in this facet of the game despite maintaining his form around the rest of the paddock.

GOODBYE GRAND SLAM

The elusive Grand Slam which the Boks have not won in 59 years keeps evading us. Meanwhile the All Blacks are likely to record yet another one.

What do the Boks do for Twickeham? Rest senior players or regain pride? The way the selectors have gone about the tour, I fear it’s been a wasted opportunity.

The World Champion Springboks suffered a shock 21-17 defeat to Scotland at Murrayfield due to a poor collective team effort.

Springboks 17

Tries: Willem Alberts
Penalties: Morne Steyn (3)

Scotland 21

Penalties: Dan Parks (6)
Drop Goals: Dan Parks

Springbok player ratings:

1. Beast Mtawarira – 3

Missed a couple of vital tackles in each half, that almost cost the Boks tries. Dominated once again by Euan Murray in the scrums. Simply not producing any set-piece dominance for the Boks.

2. Bismarck du Plessis – 3

Always gives 110% but today lacked accuracy and execution when it mattered. Gave away a penalty at the breakdown, got one steal where he played the ball on the ground that went unnoticed, and missed 3 crucial lineout throws that left his jumpers under pressure as he wasn’t accurate enough.

3. Jannie du Plessis – 3

Made some decent tackles, but possibly set the tone for the match with an early knock on without any real pressure on him. Was not binding correctly at scrum time, and lucky not to be penalised more.

4. Bakkies Botha – 7

Worked hard around the field and probably relished the tight physical battle. Was good at the breakdown, plays intelligently to either slow ball down or try and effect a steal if it’s on. Should not have been subbed in conditions that suit his game.

5. Victor Matfield (c) – 7

Kept calm when his side were looking for leadership. Once again failed to dominate his forte, the lineouts but good around the field and made plenty of tackles. Showed his intelligence early from a Stegmann steal to set up Aplon out wide, but opportunities few and far between.

6. Deon Stegmann – 8

Competed brilliantly at the breakdown. Made a steal early, carried the ball strongly and even took a ball at the front of the lineout. Does so much hard work that goes unnoticed, and carried the ball well at the back of the maul. Subbed way too early as he was one of the Boks best.

7. Juan Smith – 5

Not one of his better games. Got penalised, albeit a tough call at a crucial breakdown in the second half, and failed to make his normal telling runs and tackles effectively. Left Kankowski out to dry when he regathered Hougaard’s chip, Smith stayed wide when he needed to stay on his shoulder and secure possession.

8. Ryan Kankowski – 6

Got involved often for the first 60 minutes, but just fails to really break the gain line. Not a wet weather player. Needed to work harder in defence.

9. Francois Hougaard – 6

Not a stand out performance from the nuggety scrumhalf who may have still been carrying the effects of the flu. Did his job well though, and kicked accurately including one well weighted chip for Kankowski in the first half. An ill Hougaard still a better option than Pienaar however!

10. Morne Steyn – 6

Goal kicking was good, missing the one long range attempt. Had little front foot ball to work with and should never have been subbed.

11. Lwazi Mvovo – 3

Not much better than Habana. Got caught out positionally for much of the game, perhaps being too tentative to meet the ball, especially in the air. Made one nice run in the 45th minute and showed the strength of his leg drive, but got caught late in the game being too upright that gave the ball back to the Scots.

12. Jean de Villiers – 5

Takes the ball to the line. Generally makes his tackles, and does that week after week, bringing no variation to the Bok backline.

13. Francois Steyn – 4

Spilt a ball early and didn’t do much more after that. Physical in the tackle, but lacks the pace of an outside centre, clearly highlighted by his counterpart Max Evans.

14. Gio Aplon – 6

Limited chances. Had a good run early went Matfield sent the ball wide, and made a mess with Kirchner on one high bomb.

15. Zane Kirchner – 6

Missed one take in the first half, and made one knock on, but looked one of the few Bok backs likely to make something happen. Varied his play well and took one good high ball when Mvovo was hesitant. Just needs to iron out the odd little error.

16. Adrian Strauss -

Not on long enough to make an impact.

17. CJ van der Linde –

Not on long enough to make an impact.

18. Flip van der Merwe – 4

Missed one fairly easy lineout take that was not thrown right on the money. Didn’t bring much else to the game when replacing the Bok enforcer, Bakkies Botha.

19. Willem Alberts – 7

Reacted well to take his try, but did not make the desired impact. The Boks lost speed to the breakdown in replacing Alberts with Stegmann who is a different kind of player.

20. Ruan Pienaar – 5

Made no impact.

21. Patrick Lambie – 5

Brought on in difficult circumstances. Unable to make any difference, but can blame his tight five. Missed a conversion you need to nail at this level.

22. Adrian Jacobs -

Not used.

Coach: Peter de Villiers – 1

Useless. Can’t see any semblance of coaching in this side, as the game plan is outdated and predictable. Subs are pre-determined, and coaches need to think on their feet depending on the circumstances. Deserves to be sacked as any Bok coach who loses at Murrayfield should.

Man of the Match – Deon Stegmann

Worked hard, and a strong all round game. Got stuck into the dirty work which some of his teammates needed to follow. Made a good steal, carried the ball well, and generally always on the shoulder of his ball carriers.

The Springboks were absolutely awful as a spirited and determined Scottish side halted the Boks grand slam aspirations with a 21-17 victory at Murrayfield.

Springboks 17

Tries: Willem Alberts
Penalties: Morne Steyn (3)

Scotland 21

Penalties: Dan Parks (6)
Drop Goals: Dan Parks


As undoubtedly the easiest of the home nations to beat, the Springboks hit the bottom of the barrel as they went down 21-17 to Scotland at Murrayfield.

It was a day nothing went right for the Boks, but full credit to Scotland for bouncing back hard after a thrashing the week prior by the All Blacks.

It was the Scots first win in 8 attempts over the Boks, and in my mind this defeat for he Boks is even more depressing than the 2002, 21-6 loss. At least at that stage Bok rugby was at a low, this time we are World Champions with some of the most experienced players ever, playing a side thrashed a week earlier.

A BETTER START FOR THE BOKS

The Boks started better than they have for much of the season.

Initially competitive at the breakdown, the Boks even shifted the ball wide to aplon off a Deon Stegmann turnover. After 3 kickable penalties, the Boks had a 6-0 lead and that’s when the Scots turned up the heat.

THE TURNAROUND

They held the ball for prolonged periods, frustrating the Boks and earning penalties which converted into points.

The Boks were making silly errors, but the Scots showed that fortune favours the brave, a lesson the Boks have not learn all season.

The Scots mixed their play up well, kicking and chasing, using their forwards to bash the ball up, going wider every now and then, and using good interplay between forwards and backs.

Once the Scots got into the lead, the game changed. The Boks simply struggle to play catch up rugby. In wet conditions, the pressure must have felt ten-fold, and they simply could not get anything going.

By contrast it took 42 minutes for the Boks to move the ball through 2 sets of hands in the backline, and it was the first time I can recall that happening since the Ireland match. And then Aplon kicked it downfield.

The Boks don’t deserve to win until they start playing to win, rather than these negative tactics which are designed not to lose.

Springbok Player Ratings

With 2 wins from 2 games on the grand slam tour, the Springboks appear satisfied they’ve turned their fortunes around. But have the problems from the 2010 Tri-Nations been corrected?

Being away from home is no excuse in the professional era, and if the Boks need a reality check, they can always use the All Blacks impressive results as a yardstick.

The Springbok management have sent out mixed messages regarding the tour and it’s context based on next year’s Rugby World Cup. When we were getting our ass kicked in the Tri-Nations we were told the performances had to be viewed with the World Cup in mind.

Given our losing streak, we were told the end of year our was all about regaining Bok pride and winning.

Just this week however, Springbok coach Peter de Villiers said, “There is a World Cup next year. You would have to be stupid if you think that 15 players or 22 players can win a World Cup for you.”

“You have to have a squad of 30, so I’m just using the opportunity that this tour gives me and I will play all the players on this tour. This one for us is an opportunity, with some things in the future in mind, to see how on a par our players are.”

Thus I would like to see us having learnt from the Tri-Nations drubbings, and strengthening our weaknesses to successfully defend the World Cup.

THE PROBLEMS FOR THE SPRINGBOKS

The detailed analyis of the 2010 Tri-nations as researched by the IRB, highlighted that the Boks approach in 2009 of winning matches ‘withouth the ball’ are less likely under the new law interpretations.

You are unlikely to win with less possession than your oppoenent, can’t rely solely on opposition mistakes and have to value the ball and construct tries to win matches.

In regards to the Boks, the report showed:

• The Boks conceded over twice as many tries in 2010 as in 2009.
• The Boks conceded 22 tries (Aus 21, and NZ 9), yet scored only 13 (Aus 17, and NZ 22).
• Whilst the Boks were often deprived of possession, they were also more ineffectual with ball in hand, scoring a try for every 7.9 mins of possession, compared with Australia (6.5 mins) and New Zealand (5.9 mins).
• On defence the Boks conceded a try every 4.9 mins of possession, compared with Australia (5.2 mins) and New Zealand (12.2 mins)
• Whilst both Australia and New Zealand were fairly consistent in terms of scoring and defending tries in each half, the Boks conceded almost twice as many tries in the first half (14) compared with the second (8).
• The Boks were the only side to attempt a drop goal (4, none of which were successful).
• The Springboks had a 38% success rate on the opposition lineout in 2009 (24 steals), yet only 15% in 2010 (9), which was slightly lower than the other 2 sides.
• The Springboks scored only 44% of their points from tries, well below Australia (52%) and New Zealand (60%). Although it was higher than 2009 (32%). Conversely the Boks scored the highest percentage of points from penalties (56%).
• The Springboks were the only side to have their forwards (8) score more tries than backs (5). (NZ = 14/8, Aus = 13/4). Interestingly in the last 5 years South Africa’s forwards have only scored 5 out of 46 tries (11%).

WHAT’S CHANGED?

The current grand slam tour has not seen much change. The Bok forwards were impressive for the opening 60 minutes against Ireland, which set up the win.

However we really did not do much with the ball, relying on a Juan Smith intercept to build a lead. It was some constructive play from Zane Kirchner that created space for Gio Aplon to score and establish a good lead.

However Ireland showed how to break a defence down, and like the Tri-Nations, exposed us down the left (Habana’s flank) to score 2 tries. Had they started with O’Gara, or had O’Gara nailed the sideline conversin, who know’s what could have happened?

Against Wales, they outscored us 3 tries to 2. They valued the ball, and scored 3 tries to their backs. They were adept at utilising their whole side, creatig space, and finishing well. Had Shane Williams not been injured, they would’ve had a finisher to take advantage in the last 10 minutes when they were hot on attack.

Is it a concern that like the Tri-Nations we:

• Started poorly. And conceeded early tries, more in the first half than second.
• Had 2 forwards score our tries, when in the last 5 years of the Tri-Nations it has mostly been backs.
• Scored more of our points from penalties than tries

THE BOKS ARE NOT FOOLING ANYONE

I believe the Boks are papering over the cracks. Under Peter de Villiers we are not moving forward, and the shortcomings in our game are not being addressed.

It is a problem with coaching, as the players are some of the best in the world. Springbok captain Victor Matfield earlier this week said, “Boks not caught out in Tri-Nations. It was just accuracy that let them down.”

“There are things we want to achieve on this tour, we are not happy with the way we have been playing even though we have been winning, and we want to focus on the goals we have set ourselves.”

I sincerely hope those goals include the playing pattern and deficiences exposed in the Tri-Nations, otherwise we will struggle to successfully defend the World Cup!

The Springboks have called on 3 new members to their squad ahead of their final 2 tour matches on the grand slam tour, to bring their group back to their original complement of 30.

The players that have departed are Chiliboy Ralepelle (drug allegation), Bjorn Basson (Ankle injury/drug allegation) and Bryan Habana (fractured hand).

They have been replaced by Bandise Maku, Charl MacLeod and Odwa Ndungane respectively.

Both Maku and Ndungane have previous experience with the Boks, with Ndungane playing several tests. For MacLeod however, this is his first call up to the Boks.

The players will be available for the final 2 tour matches, the test against England at Twickenham, and the last match against the Barbarians.

Whilst Peter de Villiers has opted for players with previous experience, I don’t believe Maku and Ndungane can feel their selections are justified on current form. However with a lack of contenders really sticking their hand up, there is not a lot else to call up with injuries to players such as Tiaan Liebenberg, Gary Botha and Jongi Nokwe.

At scrumhalf, I am a big admirer of Dewaldt Duvenage, however he appears to not be in the selectors minds. Sarel Pretorius and another player they’ve considered in the past Jano Vermaak have been leap-frogged by Charl MacLeod on the back of his Currie Cup performance.

I don’t expect the three to play much of a part in the Bok 22, and maybe it was a missed opportunity to give a player like Gerhard van den Heever a chance!