/ 25 September 2003

Weighing up the Boks’ chances

South Africa has been playing test rugby for 112 years. As a pick up side moving around the provinces they lost their first six tests, but in 1903 – exactly 100 years ago – they won their first test series and, having discovered how to win, kept doing it on an impressively regular basis for the rest of the century.

The new millennium has not been kind to the men in green and gold, however, and let’s be blunt, there is no cause for optimism at the 2003 Rugby World Cup. After the false dawn of 2002, when under new coach Rudolf Straeuli the Boks played thrilling rugby (but still lost three out of four games) the 2003 season has been an unmitigated disaster.

The early season tests against Scotland and Argentina were all won, but it was skin-of-the-teeth stuff, reliant upon the unerring accuracy of Louis Koen’s boot. Never mind, said the coach, this is not my World Cup side; I’m keeping the big guns in cotton wool and having a look at some of the fringe players.

There was a moment towards the end of the first Tri-Nations match against Australia at Newlands when the country in general and the media in particular almost believed him. An injury in the second minute to fullback Jaco van der Westhuyzen allowed Brent Russell to play virtually the whole game, and the little maestro all but beat Australia on his own.

Reality came crashing in when the All Blacks posted 50 points at Loftus a week later. Russell had a nightmare and although he was not the only one, it was his name that was firmly scratched off Straeuli’s list. He crept into an extended squad, but was not selected to go to the World Cup and now occupies a place in the coach’s heart similar to the one that Gaffie du Toit and Dave von Hoesslin occupy in Nick Mallett’s.

Russell’s omission is a high profile example of Straeuli’s master plan, a plan often hinted at but never fully revealed. It’s a plan to strip the Springbok squad of all unnecessary extravagances, concentrating instead of the fundamentals without which no rugby team can function. It’s rather like taking a Ferrari and turning it into a tractor.

Off come the go-faster stripes (Russell, Andre Pretorius and Jaco van der Westhuyzen) and the twin overhead cams (Bolla Conradie, Pedrie Wannenberg and Lucas van Biljon) and on goes the diff-lock (Danie Rossouw, Bakkies Botha and Christo Bezuidenhout) and the limiter (Louis Koen, Stefan Terblanche, Thinus Delport and—well, most of the rest of the squad, actually).

Good sides have good combinations in key areas. Straeuli’s likely combination at 9, 10 and 12 will be Joost van der Westhuizen, Koen and de Wet Barry. Quite clearly, then, the coach does not believe that his side can win the World Cup by moving the ball quickly to the outside backs. So what does he believe? Presumably he believes that he has a tight five capable of dominating opponents and a flyhalf capable of punishing indiscretions. Beyond that he’s not too bothered.

And, to be fair, the tight five is not bad. Richard Bands scored a high profile try against New Zealand in Dunedin, but it was his solid scrumming at tight head through a misbegotten season that caught the eye and silenced a few doubters.

Ditto, Danie Coetzee, the Bulls hooker who has performed consistently well at the highest level this year and deserves more than to be cast aside once John Smit regains match fitness. At loose head both Bezuidenhout and Lawrence Sephaka have done little wrong, but oh, to have the option of Os du Randt.

Even in the absence of Geo Cronje and Quinton Davids the locks can look after themselves. Victor Matfield may not play the kind of Neanderthal game that most South Africans expect of the position, but he has the respect of his opponents and the ability to take the pressure off whomever his lock partner may happen to be from game to game.

So far so good, but the problem arises when this side plays a team that is better man for man in the tight five. That team is England, the Springboks’ opponents in their second pool match in Perth. The venue may be neutral and the English may be travelling to the far side of the globe for the fixture, but last year’s 53-3 demolition at Twickenham will not go away no matter how hard Corne Krige might wish it to.

This Springbok team cannot beat this English team, so it must concentrate on beating its other opponents in pool play. Uruguay and Georgia will each be competitive, simply because Eastern Europe and Southern America traditionally breed the kind of hard men who live to scrum. So it’ll be tough, but the Boks will win.

The key fixture, then, is Manu Samoa in Brisbane on November 1st, the same day as the Currie Cup final. In South Africa’s favour is the fact that it is their final fixture and they will know exactly what they have to do. Against them is a Samoan team that will have nothing to lose and everything to gain, even if everything here equates to a quarterfinal against New Zealand.

Samoa play exactly the kind of expansive, quick and aggressive game that should have the alarm bells ringing in the Bok camp. They will try and keep the ball alive for 80 minutes, avoiding scrums and lineouts and running the opposition off their feet. It shouldn’t work, but who’s to say how low Bok confidence will be by this stage of the tournament?

The irony is that if the Springboks do make it to the quarterfinals they could easily go all the way to the final. History shows that when it comes to the knock out stages the All Blacks have a glass jaw, while the Boks tend to hang on in there. So it’s not all doom and gloom, but Straeuli’s men have a conspicuously hard row to hoe.