RUGBY: Jon Swift
THERE has to be a realignment when this inaugural round of rugby’s new Super 12 competition is over. The programme — even for sides from the southern hemisphere’s top three countries — is just too tough.
Certainly, the inconsistencies — some old, some newly raised — need to be evaluated before any thought is given to extending the Super 12 to the Super 16 as has been mooted.
Natal’s startling second-half collapse against Otago is a case in point. Four extremely hard away games in just 13 days is asking a bit much even from a side who carry the mantle of Currie Cup champions.
It was inconceivable that Natal could have let a 32-13 lead slip to finally be beaten 32-33 in the dying minutes of the game. But somehow they contrived to do exactly that. The question that remains, then, is why?
It is pointless at this stage of the game to harp on the draft system that has been put in place Down Under, giving the Australian and New Zealand teams a free choice of players from the provinces who are not in competition, but this is a major factor for the more structured South African sides.
One can only wonder how the brains trust which runs rugby in this country managed to miss that particular loophole. Yet somehow they did, leading to distinct weaknesses in key areas when injuries occur.
The second factor which led to Natal’s collapse — and with it the loss of three priceless points — is the schedule which has been set for touring teams. There are no easy matches anywhere. There are some positively daunting ones away from home.
True, the cash involved in flying squads backwards and forwards milittates against a true home-and-away series as the Super 12 is currently structured. There is no real alternative but for each side to make a swing in either South Africa or Australia. Or for some of the stronger sides to have home ground advantage in many cases.
But then there was a very viable alternative before the competition started; break it up into two pools of six sides and then play home-and-away. It would cut one match from the present 11-game pool schedule and give every team in the competition a fairer shake.
It would still mean a tour. Again, the expense involved would demand this. But there would certainly be more of a feeling of “If we miss them at Carisbrook or Lancaster Park, we can always get them back home.”
Certainly, having the cushion of a home match against even the toughest sides would help to draw some of the growing on-field animus out of the series.
Which leads to another point and one which continues to raise its head whenever sides from one country come up against teams from another: interpretation of what have always been a complex set of rules. The International Rugby Board, that set of gentlemen so well known for quick and decisive action, have been debating this aspect for any number of years.
The way New Zealand and to a lesser degree Australian referees view the question of off- side in ruck and maul situations varies markedly from the way South African whistlers interpret things.
The amended law which restricts following players from joining anywhere but from behind the last line of feet has done much to speed up play in this respect. But the New Zealanders are age-old adepts at getting a man in the way. It is as much a hallmark of their game as pure forward power. We watch with interest how the likes of Ian Rogers will see this aspect.
All of which leads back to the Natal defeat as they suddendly ran out of steam against Otago and let first substitute Matthew Cooper in for a try and then watched as an uncharacteristic lazy hoof from flyhalf Henry Honiball led to the charge down which gave Otago skipper John Leslie the crucial second seven-pointer.
Cooper’s two penalties in the last three minutes came from glaring mistakes from a despondent Natal side who had truly played magnificently for nearly an hour and then right out of sorts for the final 20 minutes.
There is no doubting that Natal ran out of both steam and commitment. But all the three factors mentioned earlier had a say in the shock result.
They were overtired, undermanned among the substitutes — for don’t forget that one of the two decisive penalties came from Neil Minaar’s first touch of the ball — and, in the analysis, blown to death in the final quarter.