Jake White has a plan. Some of the previous incumbents of the Springbok coaching position have often claimed to have a plan, but White actually has one. If this were not the case the team to play New Zealand at Ellis Park on Saturday, announced on Tuesday, would deserve to attract a great deal more derision than it has.
If White were not demonstrably the first properly qualified national coach since Nick Mallett we would be entitled to ask questions, such as what on earth is Joe van Niekerk doing in the starting line-up?
Since limping off against Samoa in last year’s World Cup, Van Niekerk has completed just less than 100 minutes of game time spread over a month on the comeback trail. He will be playing number eight for the first time in two years and White has already conceded that he intends substituting Van Niekerk well before the end.
Of course, eighth man is Van Niekerk’s true position; he played it throughout a glittering schoolboy career and when he captained South Africa at under-21 level. It was Harry Viljoen who dreamed up the idea of playing Big Joe on the flank and that was largely to protect the fragile reputation of Bobby Skinstad.
The real issue is with the idea of starting a game with an impact player. The last time that happened was two years ago when André Pretorius fell over in training on a Friday, forcing Rudolf Straeuli to pick Brent Russell at flyhalf against Australia. Oddly enough, the venue was Ellis Park and Russell helped carve up the Wallabies with a compelling display.
Okay, so there are cheerful precedents and no one is suggesting that a fully fit Van Niekerk is not an automatic selection. It’s just a hell of a risk against the best team on the planet.
So, here’s another question: who is going to admit that sending Victor Matfield home from the Antipodes was the biggest failure of man management since Hennie le Roux was dropped in favour of Edrich Lubbe?
Matfield is back to partner Bakkies Botha at lock and suddenly the convenient myth that he was scarcely even bench-warming material for the Blue Bulls has been forgotten. Now his lineout skills are ‘world class†and if he would just care to hit a ruck or two he will be allowed to continue his career in the green and gold.
If it were not for the fact that Jake has a plan we would be wondering aloud how in God’s name Matfield’s inclusion has come at the expense of AJ Venter? Gerrie Britz, the man who, along with Albert van den Berg, kept Matfield’s seat warm during his absence, has moved into the back row instead of down to the bench.
Is this some clandestine attempt to convince us that Britz is also ‘world class†and therefore not someone to be easily cast aside just because room has to be found in the team for Matfield? Could it have anything to do with the South African Rugby Football Union’s (Sarfu) climb down at the arbitration hearing this week?
Okay, calm down. There are genuine rugby reasons for picking Britz on the flank despite the fact that he hasn’t played there for Free State for two years. Britz is a ‘top of the ground†player, a fine athlete whose greatest attribute — pace — is thrown into sharp relief on firm fields such as Ellis Park.
Venter, the man he replaces, was selected to play New Zealand in Christchurch on a similar ‘horses for courses†basis. It wasn’t White’s fault that Venter played so well that he could not be dropped for the Perth Test against Australia.
Britz also offers a further lineout option, bringing the total to five if you include the rest of the back row. Of course you might argue that the return of Matfield rather negates the need for an extra option; after all, there were also five alleged target men in Perth, but it didn’t stop the Wallabies from making an unsightly mess of the Springbok line-out, nonetheless.
So let’s just draw a line under the whole sorry business and hope that those responsible for removing the one factor that might have made victories out of defeats on this Tri-Nations tour are one day brought to book. Let’s just admit that Venter and Jacques Cronje are unlucky not to retain their starting berths and get on with the business of beating the All Blacks.
It is stretching the definition of understatement to say that it won’t be easy. Since the end of isolation the Boks have won three and lost two against New Zealand at Ellis Park. In 1996 the Boks won by 10 points, but it was something of a Pyrrhic victory given that the All Blacks had won the first three of a four-Test series.
In 2000, the last time the sides met in Johannesburg, the Boks won a game in which the defences of both sides failed to turn up by 46-40, but the other three matches have all been decided by three point margins, which tends to suggest that the team that kicks at goal better wins. That may go some way towards explaining Graham Henry’s decision to recall Andrew Mehrtens.
If truth be told, the All Blacks have a vulnerable look about them, while thanks to White’s intriguing selections the Springboks have a platoon of storm troopers on the bench. The last half hour could be a doozy and at the end of it we’ll know for certain whether Jake’s cunning plan was really that much better than a few of Baldric’s.