In Black and White
11 Nov 2007
Jake White, in his autobiography ‘In Black and White’ confirms that Luke Watson was never wanted by the Bok players.
Watson has never been initiated as a Bok player and White holds back nothing in detailing the circumstances that forced him to select Watson for one test against Samoa.
The Rapport Newspaper and Sunday Times newspaper brought exclusivity to the extracts of the book, due for release next week, and Rapport focused mostly on the Watson affair.
Both newspapers also detailed the prominent chapters in the book with White discussing political interference, transformation, player selection, the hell of 2006, the media’s role in South African rugby, the dislike for playing at Loftus among players outside of the Bulls, his relationship with John Smit and Victor Matfield, among others, and the political minefield that dogged his four year tenure.
He insists that Watson simply was never good enough and that the Watson family tried to broker a deal with him to include Luke as a Bok and be secured a future in South African rugby.
White writes his biggest regret is not beating the All Blacks in New Zealand and that would have been his greatest motivation to continue as Bok coach.
607 Comments
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 … 13 » Show All
11 Nov 2007, 09:26 am
White should be ashamed of himself, downright underhanded instigating manipulator.
11 Nov 2007, 09:27 am
THe dislike for playing at Loftus – apart from the Bulls players??? This shocks me, truly – LOL.
Now friggin hell, thats not news – its general farrkkiinnn knowledge…..
Blue bearded dragons…..(Dragon flies that is)
11 Nov 2007, 09:27 am
Poor excuse for a national coach and he’s still bleating from the sidelines.
11 Nov 2007, 09:29 am
Good riddance JAkey boy go cry on some lily white shoulders over yonder.
11 Nov 2007, 09:33 am
More Ruck & Skoppie
Skop – still feeling mean I see …
11 Nov 2007, 09:35 am
Can’t wait to read this biography. Have placed a pre-order through kalahari.net.
11 Nov 2007, 09:36 am
Good morning skop and the girls
11 Nov 2007, 09:37 am
Was wondering how long it would take people to turn against Jake. Shame on you!
11 Nov 2007, 09:40 am
Dislike for playing at Loftus by the non-Bulls PLAYERS???
I can understand why White may not appreciate Loftus, but why the players? If so, then stuff them. Probably bad memories from all the thrashings they got there at the hands of the Bulls.
Pretty sure that the majority of the NEW team will absolutely LOVE Loftus.
11 Nov 2007, 09:40 am
Too many revelations might cost Jake the England job.
The RFU have had their fill of book revelations after the Dallaglio and Catt debacle.
11 Nov 2007, 10:00 am
Just read the exctracts on the Sunday Times website.
That Stofile is a real arsehole, no doubt about it.
Here’s the thing. White had to endure a huge amount of ****. I sympathise with him regarding 70% of the stuff he’s talking about.
I remember I was his fiercest critic when week after week he kept insisting that Eddie Andrews, Solly T, Q Davids and Bolla were in the team on merit. It felt like he was lying to the fans who knew better. Now it turns out he didn’t have much choice.
I said I sympathised with 70% of his troubles. But there remains the other 30%, which was of his own making. His feud with the Bulls for example. Why alienate the guys who could have been powerful allies against the transformation clique driven by Stofile?
The enemies on the left were pretty much always going to be there, but the enemies on the right were of White’s own making.
Heyneke for example, will go into the coaching job with a powerful core support base and will have a much stronger position because of it.
Jake should have cultivated such support as well. But he chose not to.
11 Nov 2007, 10:08 am
NO TACITUS – The Bulls put forward HOW MANY votes of no confidence in Jake???
Sheez man, Jake had to take helluva lot of flack from the elements up north – end of.
However, Jake White was not always as innocent as some people seem to presume. That said, Jake was and is a FINE coach – end of.
11 Nov 2007, 10:18 am
The Bulls issues, if I recall correctly, were the result of their intolerance of Jake’s atrocious results in 2006. Those were justifiable reasons for no confidence votes.
The Stofile driven ****, however, was all about selecting quotas that didnt’ deserve to be there.
Remember when White was trying to convince all of us that Solly T was the quickest/most talented loose forward in SA when he chose him for the team?
I ask you this. If White was willing to oppose the Stofile clique on so many other things, why didn’t he take their quota requirements to the media as well, and simply state outright that Solly T was forced upon him, along with Eddie, Quinton etc?
He would have found a VERY sympathetic ear in the Rapport newspaper if he followed this strategy, and would no doubt have gotten the millions of Bulls fans on his side as well.
He could have played this better, but instead he came up with stories like: “Solly T is the next Schalk Burger.”
Come on. No wonder we felt he treated us with contempt.
11 Nov 2007, 10:18 am
#3 and 4
Skoppies, what are you saying dude? Why the hatred?
11 Nov 2007, 10:19 am
I’m also distressed that a young player with talent and potential – Luke Watson, has been offered up as the sacrificial lamb by ALL roleplayers in SA Rugby. The politicians, the administrators, the national coach and others. They ALL used him to score points (or for financial gain…) and this is what upsets me, as a rugby lover.
Why ruin the future of a PLAYER to further your own cause…(whether you like the player or not should not be relevant here fellow bloggers)
This could, and probably will happen again…This, I find sad…
11 Nov 2007, 10:22 am
#13
Actually Tac I think you’ve forgotten the true detail of the Solly afair?
If I remember correctly Jake got in trouble for saying in the press when questioned about Solly something along the lines of:
“Well, you have to look at the political makeup of the team…..”
I remember clearly Jake getting in trouble for insinuating that Solly was their in part because of his colour.
11 Nov 2007, 10:29 am
#13 – OK – justifiable reasons… So why didn;t Heyneke get the boot after losing 11 Super 12 games on the trot??? Did the Bulls union chuck him – fire him – summon him back from Australasia???
Its called “being fair”.
11 Nov 2007, 10:32 am
13
‘why didn’t he take their quota requirements to the media as well, and simply state outright that Solly T was forced upon him, along with Eddie, Quinton etc?’
because that shows a lack of unity between coach and squad and risks alienating other black players. Plus, it leaves him open to accusations of racism.
11 Nov 2007, 10:32 am
#17
Its true Tac does seem to have a tendency to lean towards the Bulls in these instances…
11 Nov 2007, 10:34 am
#18
Big Hit, what is happening with the English coach situation? Is Ashton staying or going?
11 Nov 2007, 10:35 am
#19 – Tacitus is so far up the Bull’s backside – the next piece of prime steak you eat could be Tact’s *** cheek…..
11 Nov 2007, 10:36 am
Well, well surprise surprise Tacticus won’t find anything wrong with the Bulls oh no! The reason the other players didn’t like it there is because that crowd, even if you lose to the best in the World(AB’s) they will BOO you off the field. They Boo Percy and they Boo the English John Smit. Yep that sums it up for me…
11 Nov 2007, 10:38 am
Guys re-post #16
I’d just like to remind you all that Jake DID try and insinuate that Solly was their for political reasons and the press mauled him!
11 Nov 2007, 10:39 am
20
Still not decided.
Someone is going to come in however, whether it be a new team manager to assist Ashton or a new head coach to replace Ashton.
Jake may get the call but if he takes it too far with his book, then it could cost him the job as few were very impressed with Dallaglio’s revelations.
11 Nov 2007, 10:40 am
Ruck,
Was HM already in charge or an assistant in 2002 when the Bulls didn’t win a super match all year ?
11 Nov 2007, 10:41 am
Yetirat
Possible. But there were also statements along the lines of how excellent Solly was and Eddie benchpressing more than Os etc.etc. Bullsh*t arguments to try and justify the selection of under-par players.
With all said and done I feel for White. He was in a very difficult position. But when caught between a rock and a hard place, he chose to antagonize both sides, rather than ally with one of them.
The quota brigade was never a viable ally.
But the simple act of selecting Ettiene Botha instead of Wayne Julies for example, would have gone a long way in shoring up relations with the Bulls. Even if it was just for the weekday team.
Instead of identifying a potential ally, Jake saw the strength of the Bulls union as a threat, and did everything he could to try and get at them for some reason over the next few years.
From criticising them for supposedly playing injured Boks in the Super 14, to ridiculous statements that Heyneke was playing players out of position. This when Jake played Steyn in every backline position other than 9, played Habana at centre, De Villiers at wing etc.
Bottomline: Stofile is the prime evil here and was always going to be a problem. Bearing this in mind, Jake should not have looked for a war on two fronts.
11 Nov 2007, 10:42 am
Re: Non Bulls players not enjoying Loftus.
So its not only Katman and The Media that has something to say about Loftus ….
11 Nov 2007, 10:43 am
In fact the Bulls only won 4 super games in 4 years between 1999 and 2002 inclusive.
Never realised that !!
11 Nov 2007, 10:43 am
#24
Yes, well Dallaglio is just one giant ego!
I still think Jakie is irresistible with his World Cup winning record regardless of anything else. Also, the press here have certainly emphasized to people the political nonsense in SA rugby so I don’t think they’ll worry too much about the book.
Interestingly enough I watched Duncan Fletcher get practically attacked on Sky sports yesterday about his book and the whole Freddie thing.
11 Nov 2007, 10:45 am
Ruck
The Bulls DID fire Heyneke after his initial poor results, if I recall correctly. Isn’t that when they brought Rudy Joubert in? Heyneke obviously developed a lot as coach after that, and they brought him back after his great Currie Cup successes that followed.
11 Nov 2007, 10:45 am
Tacitus, why the hell should a national coach lick the Bulls union ***?? Because they’re the 3rd Force that governs SA Rugby??
The simple act of selecting Ettiene Botha to appease the Bulls union, is the same thing as selecting Luke Watson/whoever else to appease the politicians….
Please just read what you’re typing…..you can’t have it both ways – (whilst that might be distressing, its the way of the world…)
11 Nov 2007, 10:49 am
28
I know. The Northern Bulls were a known to be weak even in the NH.
It became the ‘in’ fashion in rugby circles for everyone to wear SH Super 12 shirts, the Bulls shirt was the only one no one would be seen in because they were synonymous with being a weak team even to people who didn’t know that much about Super 12 rugby.
You see tend to see people wearing them now, however, given their resurgence. The only Super 12 shirt I ever purchased was a Sharks shirt.
11 Nov 2007, 10:50 am
Bagel
The booing came from all the WP fans living in Pretoria.
Get your facts straight.
Newlands is not Boolands for no reason.
11 Nov 2007, 10:50 am
Ruck
White didn’t HAVE to “lick the Bulls arse” as you put it. But it sure would have made his life a whole lot easier if he had a less antagonistic relationship with them. Instead, it all ended in tears and a book in which he laments his terrible time as Bok coach. His choice.
Remember the Bok team that had virtually a WP line up?
Paulse
Joubert
Barry
Bolla
Big Joe
Schalk
Quinton Davidz
Eddie Andrews
I probably missed a few. Rather interesting that of all those players, only Schalk and De Villiers were left in the team that achieved success at the world cup. So Jake DID have a change at heart at some point. Thankfully.
11 Nov 2007, 10:51 am
Good choice BH !!
11 Nov 2007, 10:52 am
BIGGLES you brigand…..I am going to post you a Stormers strip…(Sharks at least a good few steps above a Bulls jesrsey though…)
11 Nov 2007, 10:53 am
Why would a Capetonian choose to live in Tshwane ??
11 Nov 2007, 10:54 am
OutWide
Money?
11 Nov 2007, 10:55 am
#34 – Yip, that team with all those Province boys WON THE TRI-NATIONS…….
11 Nov 2007, 10:55 am
Don’t worry. As a Bull I confess that I prefer the so called Laager mentality. Heyneke always stressed to the Bulls that it was them against the rest of the country. And that kid of mindset brought them their 5 Currie Cup finals, 2 S14 semi finals and the only South African S14 title in the history of the competition.
In fact, I believe all he had to do in some games was stick up a Mark Keohane article on the dressing room wall, and the Bulls had all the motivation they needed to run out and wipe the floor with their southern opposition.
That’s just the way we like it. Keep it coming please.
11 Nov 2007, 10:56 am
Possibly, but it would need to be extremely well paid to compensate.
11 Nov 2007, 10:56 am
Marius Joubert: HAT TRICK HAT TRICK HAT TRICK….
11 Nov 2007, 10:56 am
“BIGGLES you brigand…..I am going to post you a Stormers strip”
More like a flap with that ladyboy team.
11 Nov 2007, 10:58 am
OutWide
Man must eat do your evironment pretty much becomes redundant.
11 Nov 2007, 10:58 am
29
To be honest, I don’t mind book revelations as it lets people see the reality from different perspectives.
Dallaglio’s effort however, was particularly stinging and the timing was all wrong, i.e. just after the World Cup when there was a feelgood factor. This from an aging, underperforming, peripheral squad figure who was pinpointed before the tournament (by Will Carling) as a potentially divisive influence was particularly hard to stomach for many. He also revealed details about secret meetings and ‘outed’ other players.
On the Jake issue, I think there is a distinct possibility that he may end up without an international job and could wait for a high-paying a club job.
11 Nov 2007, 10:58 am
Springbok players had no right to dislike Luke. He is a very unique individual who stands for what is right and is no “gat kruiper”. He is a good player.
11 Nov 2007, 10:58 am
#43 – Home erotic Jondood? I have not read a single post of yours in which you don’t mention, “WP Lady boys……”
Why the fixation/obsession with our players?? Is it physical, mental or both??
11 Nov 2007, 11:01 am
SHEEZ, I’ve often wondered how a gynae must feel sorrounded by ……. all day. With Tact and Jondood doing their Laurel and Hardy act, I now KNOW what a gynae must feel sorrounded by ……..
11 Nov 2007, 11:04 am
#46
He is pretty good at the breakdown and no smaller than George Smith or Phil Waugh. I think the new rules with hands in the ruck will suit him as he has a low centre of gravity and is strong on his feet. Maybe it will be better for his game if he is released from the captaincy.
11 Nov 2007, 11:06 am
Jake, Jake, Jake…..
Are not some things better left unsaid.
And who are the players that didn’t want Luke. I’m sure for example his WP Team-mates were happy to have him in the Squad.
Oh well, it will sell books I suppose.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 … 13 » Show All
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.