again
A Super 12 rugby victory has once more slipped away from SouthAfrica. Andy Capostagno looks at some of the reasons for the failure
Prepare the cold soup, it’s an all-New Zealand final. The Super 12 has again eluded a South African team, just when it seemed that the Stormers offered the best chance since the Sharks took on Auckland three years ago. If the sound of Newlands two weeks ago was that of crumbs of comfort being swept up, the sound after Saturday’s defeat by the Highlanders was one of recrimination, together with the sharpening of knives.
The ironies are many, but most will focus on the fact that the Highlanders beat the Stormers’ second team in Dunedin in March and their third team at Newlands on Saturday. On the latter occasion the second team was on the bench and in the stands, while the first team were counting the contents of their wallets in the change rooms. Against such a powerful side as the Highlanders the third team had no chance.
It is fruitless to criticise players for wanting to earn more money. The life of a rugby player is short; he needs to maximise his earning potential during that time. But Guy Kebble had it about right when he referred to the threatened player strike as: “The sort of nonsense we got up to when we were amateur. These guys are professionals who have signed contracts.”
Stormers coach Alan Solomons has already sought to move the blame away from his players, which is only natural since most will be playing under him for the duration of the Currie Cup. In time-honoured tradition Solomons has blamed the press, by whom “it was unfortunately blown up out of all proportion … and once we had lost, most people were quick to jump on it as the cause of our defeat”.
Which is a little like saying that Nero’s fiddling was a charming musical accompaniment to the fall of Rome, rather than an illustration of the root cause of its decline in the first place. And if the press are going to be blamed for blowing things out of proportion, who did the Stormers’ public relations department rope in to advertise the Men in Black campaign and Stormers Cola?
The only person who is likely to derive anything out of the whole sorry business is Nick Mallett. The Springbok coach has been able to call on his full quota of players for evaluation at the Sports Science Institute this week. As one of the champions of player power, he will also have gained a valuable insight into what can go wrong when that power is misused.
Part of the reason for the Springbok team’s disappointing tour of Britain last year was that settled sides tend to regard themselves as exclusive clubs. In such climates it becomes harder to drop a player than it does to pick a new one. The upside of clubbishness is revealed when players lay their bodies on the line for team-mates on the field. The downside is when they stick together at all costs to avoid change.
Whether he likes it or not, this year Mallett is going to have to invest in a new broom. So it is interesting to see where his preferences lie for the key positions, even if he has denied that this extended squad has anything to do with the World Cup.
The problem area of hooker contains just three names; Naka Drotske, Charl Marais and Tommie Webb. The last two are new to this level and benefit directly from playing in a successful Stormers side.
Marais is the kind of hard-scrumming hooker who could camouflage a perceived weakness on the tight-head side of the scrum. Webb is another beneficiary of the expansion of the Currie Cup. There would be joy in George and at the South African Rugby Football Union if both Webb and Braam van Straaten (another former Eagle) were to make Mallett’s starting line-up.
The other problem area, whether we like to admit it or not, is at fullback.
Percy Montgomery has done nothing in the past six months to suggest that he should be South Africa’s World Cup number 15. But so sure is Mallett of his ability that he has not asked one other fullback to this week’s gathering.
Gaffie du Toit, Pieter Rossouw, Stefan Terblanche and even Breyton Paulse can all play the position. The question is whether they should be allowed to when Andr Joubert is still the best in the country and, quite conceivably, on the face of the earth.
Joubert is rapidly achieving the status of bte noire. It seems Mallett will do anything rather than include him in his plans.
But if that is all that we have to worry about with the national coach, we should be counting our blessings.
At least Mallett will not be sending out his second team in the belief that he cannot beat a team full of New Zealanders. And at least he will not blame the media for daring to ask where his players are happier: in rucks and mauls or in bank queues.