When the Springboks walked off the Stade de France this time last year, reality had been borne in upon them. After a week of training in Johannesburg notable only for the injury to the then (and still) unknown Danie Rossouw, the Springboks had checked into their ”lucky” hotel, the Concorde Lafayette, in Paris.
They then spent a week training at the Boulogne Bilancourt ground and, after a relatively balmy few days of weather, it grew so cold that the locals were predicting snow for the first Test of the tour. Coach Harry Viljoen said that both the weather and the seven new caps in the French team were largely irrelevant. He had a game plan and he intended to use it.
The result, we were assured, was also largely irrelevant since Viljoen had only just begun his ”process” and, anyway, the success or failure of the tour would only be judged according to the result against England two weeks hence.
But if the result was irrelevant why were the Springboks walking off the field on Saturday night staring at their boots? Why did the coach and his talismanic captain, Bob Skinstad, appear to be avoiding each other’s gaze at the post-match press conference?
Because, despite the coach’s subsequent efforts to rewrite history by telling his team they had created a plethora of opportunities, a dynamic young French team had stuffed them. The 20-10 result may have appeared close, but the players knew differently. The wheels on Viljoen’s wagon, always wobbly at best, had come off.
Viljoen’s constant refrain was that the domestic game in South Africa was no longer capable of producing Test-class players. By contrast the northern hemisphere appeared to be the real seat of power in the world game and that was why France could pick a bunch of callow youths to go out and beat the Springboks.
So is Rudolf Straeuli, Viljoen’s successor, fooling himself? Does he really believe that a bunch of twentysomethings still wet behind the ears can beat the Six-Nations Grand Slam champions? In Marseilles, where France have never lost? You better believe it.
The same domestic competitions that Viljoen derided have produced the finest Springbok squad for seven years. There are, as ever, question marks around the tight five, but everywhere else there is strength in depth and, wonder of wonders, skill and flair. Under the revisionist regime of Viljoen skill and flair might just as well have been a bottom-of-the-bill vaudeville act. Under the back-to-basics Straeuli they’re a West End sensation.
In Paris in 1997 Nick Mallett’s Springboks were so good in beating France 52-10 that the locals cheered them off the field, recognising a class act when they saw one. Straeuli’s team might well lose on Saturday, but they will do so playing the kind of rugby the French appreciate.
If they do lose it will be because the French pack has played to its potential. It is as fearsome a unit as they have ever put on the field with a front row in particular that is the envy of the world and a back row that is a perfect blend of pace, power and guile.
But if rugby matches were decided on paper France would scarcely ever lose and, while they had a six-month long purple patch following last year’s victory over the Boks, this is a new season and a new French team. Coach Bernard Laporte has already bemoaned the fact that his players were forced to compete in domestic ties last week and that he has had precious little time to work with them.
In addition, the withdrawal of Tony Marsh has made a big difference. The New Zealand-born centre made his Test debut against Viljoen’s side, but a groin strain has forced him out. Marsh was widely regarded as the cement that held the backline defence together and that could never be said of his replacement, the mercurial Thomas Castaignede.
But if Castaignede’s inclusion weakens the defence, the attack is of a different class. The defensive frailties evident in South Africa’s Tri-Nations campaign will be tested to the full. This is a good French side from one to 15 and there are some fine players on the bench as well, but against this Springbok side they may be a little underdone.
The Boks may have lost three of their past four Tests, but before the tour starts it should be recorded that Straeuli has done a remarkable job. He has found playmakers where Viljoen insisted none exist and he has given pride back to the men who wear the green and gold.
When Straeuli went as a player to Britain in 1994, his coach, Kitch Christie, was in the process of building a team for the 1995 World Cup. One of the questions that Christie asked himself was whether Hennie le Roux was a flyhalf or an inside centre. Eight years down the line Straeuli has a similar conundrum concerning Butch James.
He also needs to know whether Joe van Niekerk is his best eighthman and where precisely to play Werner Greeff and Brent Russell. Will 35-year-old Willie Meyer make it to another World Cup? After a workout against mighty Jean-Jacques Crenca Straeuli should have his answer.
This is a tour filled with possibilities because, unlike his predecessor, Straeuli is a rugby man, not a Utopian idealist. His opposite number, Laporte, falls into the same category and, whatever the result, we may sit back after Saturday’s match and ponder the possibility that we have seen a classic between two sides who might easily meet in the 2003 World Cup final.