Andy Capostagno Rugby World Cup
Having matched Australia tackle for tackle in a brutally physical semi-final the Springboks now know that they could have won the World Cup. For the Wallabies did nothing in their final triumph against France to suggest that they had hidden reserves of stamina or freshly opened mines of ideas.
The only thing that actually separated South Africa and Australia at Twickenham was the eventual player of the tournament, Tim Horan. The 29-year-old Queensland centre was the only back at this World Cup who was consistently able to break through the defensive screens erected by the serious contenders. It is not frivolous to suggest that had he played for either New Zealand or South Africa they, and not Australia, would be world champions today.
Which puts into perspective exactly what was wrong with the Springboks. In Joost van der Westhuizen they had the best scrum-half in the competition, in Jannie de Beer a perfectly dependable fly-half, and in Robbie Fleck an outside centre who could with some justification claim to have been the best in his position on view, Daniel Herbert not excepted.
What was missing was an inside centre within hailing distance of Horan. The Wallaby champion set new standards in giving a tackle, taking a tackle, recovering from a tackle and, most crucially of all, avoiding a tackle. Not for him the head-down drive into the first line of defence to set the ball up for the next phase. Instead he returned the game to its basics and ran round defenders before making the ball available, almost always from a standing position.
All seemed to be well when England were met and beaten with something approaching panache in Paris. The English panicked at the sheer ferocity of Springbok tackling and were in no position to counter De Beer’s day in a million when everything he kicked turned into points. But the tries should have made us suspicious – Van der Westhuizen’s from a skewed Paul Grayson clearance, and Rossouw’s from an outrageous bounce when the match was won anyway.
Instead of addressing the problem of how to use backs who had, 18 months ago, been the envy of the world, Mallett decided that Australia could be beaten the same way as England. In the event Wallaby tackles were every bit as powerful as Springbok ones and De Beer had no cosy cocoon to stand in and contemplate yet another drop goal.
The only time South Africa looked remotely threatening was from broken play, when Van der Westhuizen and Fleck got to within 5m of the line only to discover that the support had hung back in the expectation of having to make another big hit. The contrast when Horan broke the line could not have been greater. David Wilson, George Gregan, Herbert and frequently Matthew Burke and Joe Roff were always on his shoulder.
That none of Horan’s raids led to tries speaks volumes for the sheer will of the Springbok defence, but it does not excuse the coach from the starkest accusation of all – a lack of ambition.
A dear friend of mine likes to remind youngsters that the idea of the game of rugby is to carry the ball over the opponent’s try-line. Everything else is peripheral. South African rugby needs to learn that lesson all over again.