There was a time, not so long ago, when the announcement of four new caps in the Springbok team would have been sensational news. Not any more. Since the 1999 World Cup semifinal, South Africa’s selection policy has matched the downward spiral of its results. It has reached the stage where team selection is actually deemed less important by both media and players than cell phone bans and nameless shirts.
The idea that a player is the custodian rather than owner of the shirt is a laudable nod to history that would carry more weight were it not for the general anonymity that Springbok players carry with them onto the field these days.
As for former Wallaby captain John Eales jumping into the fray by criticising the draconian ban on cell- phone communication and cohabitation with wives and girlfriends, remember that he is Australian and retired. As HP Lovecraft pointed out, the past is a foreign country — they do things differently there.
The conspiracy theorists might suggest that taking the public eye off the ball is what this is all about.
There has been some comment about the difference between this particular Springbok incarnation and the one that took the field against Scotland in Edinburgh last November, but it has not been strident enough.
For the record, the only survivor from match 22 that went down 21-6 against the Scots is Pedrie Wannenburg. One match! Out of 22! In seven months! Heavens to Betsy.
This might be the time to remind ourselves that Rudolf Straeuli and Corne Krige spent most of that benighted tour telling the media that they had a callow team, decimated by injuries. It would be different in Perth at the World Cup, they said.
Did they really mean this different? There’s no point in getting carried away, of course. Take the team in context and it has a logical look to it. Eight Bulls, the best performing Super 12 franchise, four Sharks, two Cats and a Stormer.
Those who believed that a Cape cabal controlled South African rugby in the years following the 1995 World Cup would be full of praise for Straeuli’s selection. Perhaps they would even ignore the fact that he was born and bred in Pretoria, played for the Bulls and the Lions and coached the Sharks for a year.
Now there’s a reversion to the good old days. Never mind cell-phones and girlfriends, let’s dust off the hoary old spectre of provincialism. It won’t do, of course. Straeuli may be guilty of many things (throwing caps around like confetti, for instance), but he is almost evangelically pure in his selection procedures.
And inevitably all will be forgiven if this team win — not just on Saturday, but on a consistent basis.
The weather in Durban suggests a heavy-going game on Saturday, which should suit both sides.
Scotland, because they live in damp conditions for 11 months of the year, and South Africa because they resemble a bulldozer rather more than a Ferrari. The Springboks have elusive runners in Stefan Terblanche, Ricardo Laubscher and Ashwin Willemse, but the only sprinter on the park is Andre Snyman.
The back row also lacks a genuine flyer, although it is not impossible that in the trio of Wanneburg, Wikus van Heerden and Hendrick Gerber, Straeuli may have blundered upon his World Cup unit.
Jaun Smith, who is a flyer, lurks on the bench to galvanise them when required. The recall of Selborne Boome to the bench also smacks of ”impact player syndrome”. But while the statistics suggest that ”Boomer” is the most reliable lineout jumper of them all, he has never had that indefinable ”presence” which players in his position need.
There is a perhaps apocryphal story concerning Mark Andrews’s fall from grace with Nick Mallett. Andrews had the temerity to ask why he had been dropped and what he had to do to get back into the side.
”Play more like Selborne Boome,” was the coach’s reply. ”But I played like Selborne Boome when I was 21,”, said Andrews. Andrews, incidentally, is back in Durban following a solid season with Newcastle in the English Premiership. There are many, not all of them Natalians, who would love to see his name, rather than Bakkies Botha, alongside that of Victor Matfield for Saturday’s test. Botha has been thrown a lifeline after a disastrous end of season tour last year, and he will have to play out of his socks to keep Geo Cronje’s name out of the mix.
Scottish props have traditionally given South African teams more trouble than any others down the years, from ”Mighty Mouse” McLauchlan with the 1974 British
Lions, to Tom Smith with the same team 23 years later. Richard Bands, on Test debut, will have to deal with the infuriating little man this time.
The absence of a hooker on the bench is due to the fact that Bands can play the position if Danie Coetzee (one of the one-Test veterans) fails to last the game.
There is enviable backup on the bench in the form of Cobus Visagie and Robbie Kempson, and for once in a very long while the Springbok front row has a mean look to it.
It can be assumed that this pack will win a lot more ball than its predecessor in Edinburgh last year, but there is some question as to what it will do with it subsequently.
It can be assumed that there will be more back row moves than recent line-ups have been accustomed to, with Joost van der Westhuizen adding his not inconsiderable
support.
The big question that only game time will supply the answer to is how big Straeuli’s investment in Louis Koen will turn out to be. Koen’s tactical kicking has never been as impressive as his place kicking, and the selection of Trevor Halstead outside him suggests that Straeuli’s preferred method of crossing the gain line is through the big Shark rather than the little Bull.
One thing we do know is that win or lose, there cannot be 15 new names for next Saturday’s Ellis Park test. But if there were, the absence of names on the shirts would save SA Rugby a lot of money. Now there’s a thought.