It doesn’t take a scientist to see the All Blacks have a winning formula, from administrators to players. Pity the South Africans can’t copy it
RUGBY:Steve Morris
THE past few weeks have not been a hugely successful period for South African rugby, either from the playing perspective or viewing the storms of discontent sweeping through the realms of what is often mistakenly titled rugby management and administration.
Certainly, the fission-building within can only detract substantially from what Gary Teichmann and his somewhat patchwork Springbok side attempt at Ellis Park on Saturday when they open the Tri-nations series against the awesome All Blacks.
It is interesting in this respect to go back to the administration and planning New Zealand has employed, following the crushing disappointment of losing the World Cup to the Amabokoboko at the same venue just two seasons ago. They have structured their entire thrust towards giving their coaches and players both the freedom from red tape and the breadth of material to work with that has ensured them domination of the game William Webb-Ellis first devised.
Then contrast this with the psychology and on-the-ground approach of the South Africans which has been narrowed by internal politics, outdated provincialism, petty jealousies and the type of grasping charge for the bag of loot that seems endemic in our fledgling society. In all, one of those classic cases of “we know best” gone horribly awry.
Where the New Zealanders quickly settled on a winning formula for the Super 12 by first identifying the top teams and then the best 120 players in the country as a pool for all the nominated teams to draw from, South Africa has pushed through a formula of forced marriages of provinces who are both competing for the same slice of sponsorship cake and are traditional bitter rivals.
The motion pushed through by the South African Rugby Football Union (Sarfu) which has engendered these marriages of inconvenience – belatedly one must add after trying to get the Currie Cup units to go it alone against near-Test strength sides in Super 12 – has forced huge cracks in what was an impenetrable system of glasshouse non-glasnost in our game.
Natal, Free State and Northern Transvaal have raised the possibility of an almost unprecedented revolt among the ruling class, a happening almost as significant as the bourgeoisie attacking the Winter Palace in many ways.
The unions, facing the fact that the Sarfu dispensation all but wipes them off the map, have determined to fight back and called an extraordinary general meeting of the provinces in an attempt to have the ruling reversed and a semblance of the sanity and logic, which is the New Zealand system, imposed in its place. More power to their collective arm.
It takes no more than a glance at the success the New Zealanders have achieved in the Super 12 and the knock-on effect this has had on the All Blacks to see which formula works best.
Our national side faces its own problems in the furore which has greeted the knowledge that Louis Luyt Junior – heir apparent to his father’s kingdom – is to receive a massive slice of the action as a commission on the $5-million that sportswear giants Nike are reportedly willing to offer for the Springbok team.
While it is a fact that sponsorships of this magnitude are not easy to come by, it is hard to imagine that the younger Luyt could have even entered this level of negotiation without the powerful shadow of his father looming large behind him.
This may not be the case – indeed one hopes this is so – but the fact remains that appearances are often far more damaging than the hidden realities. So it is that the Nike commission smells very strongly of the worst kind of nepotism, no matter how clean the deal may be.
But this is only one of the problems that face a team taking on the acknowledged best in the world for a bruising 80 minutes at Ellis Park … a venue incidentally that has raised the ire of the All Blacks, in that this Test was due to have been played at Loftus Versfeld in Pretoria.
Riddled by injury and beset by public resentment against some controversial selections, they can only go into this Test with little confidence in the tactical abilities of their new coach Carel du Plessis, after being out-thought and out- manoeuvred in the series against the Lions, which left the Springboks on the wrong end of a 2-1 beating in a rubber where they could arguably have won all three.
Du Plessis has opted for Marius Hurter in the pivotal tighthead role ahead of Adrian Garvey or Dawie Theron, in the face of a history of Hurter’s inability to master the power, technique and vast experience of All Black Craig Dowd. It is an interesting gamble at best. Especially when you consider how highly Garvey was regarded by opponents when he wore the green and gold, and that Theron did little wrong in his last Test or in the bruising Griquas-Natal Currie Cup encounter last weekend either.
The coach has rightly retained the services of Jannie de Beer at flyhalf. The Free Stater kicked a vital 13 points in helping win the third Test against the British Lions. This was a facet that was patently missing in the second Test, where the Springboks out-scored the tourists three tries to none as a sad procession of Henry Honiball, Andre Joubert and Percy Montgomery left a staggering 18 possible points in the breeze.
But having plumped for De Beer, surely it must have crossed the coach’s mind that the obvious thing to do in this case would be to play Honiball outside him at inside centre, where the Underberg farmer’s thrust, defensive skills and experience could be utilised to steady the hand of a rookie flyhalf who had two kicks charged down in his debut Test against the Lions.
All Black coach John Hart has the luxury of being able to retain a side unbeaten in their last three outings – against the Argentine Pumas and Australia – and leave a player of the calibre of Andrew Mehrtens languishing on the bench and keep faith in Carlos Spencer at flyhalf.
In the moderate claims of both Honiball – on current form at least – and De Beer for the pivot’s role, Du Plessis certainly does not enjoy this luxury. But then lateral thinking has never been a great part of our game since Kitch Christie and Francois Pienaar left the fold.
Teichmann has an unenviable task leading his side out against Sean Fitzpatrick’s men this Saturday. There is the turmoil that the administrative iconoclasm has engendered at the top end, and the uncertainty that the coach and a spate of injuries have forced at the other.
And, sadly, even the die-hard Springbok supporters will not easily part with a bet on the South Africans coming out on top at Ellis Park. As much as they want it, it looks very much like a bridge too far for the Springboks this time.