Give our boys a fair crack
8 May 2008
South African teams always start four league points down in the Super 14.
Once again it is down to two rounds in the Super 14 and one league win that separates teams two and seven.
Once again those who devised the structure of the tournament are commending themselves because any tournament in which the play-offs only get determined in the last week has to be a good one. At least that’s the self indulgence you will hear.
But the Super 14 is not a fair tournament. It favours the New Zealand and Australian teams because of travel determined by geography and it also gives half the teams a more favourable draw each year, which in essence means it is not a fair tournament.
The Super 14, like the Super 12, is weighted against South African teams.
This is not a gripe but a fact and yet we wonder why we continue to fail more than succeed.
Let’s take the Lions as an example. They are fair game and All Blacks legend Sean Fitzpatrick gave them a bollocking for their shabby performance against the Hurricanes in Wellington last weekend.
What Fitzpatrick did not say was that the Lions had been on tour for five weeks, jetting between New Zealand and Australia.
At most, New Zealand teams play three games in South Africa. Australian teams get two. Occasionally a New Zealand team will get an Aussie team on the way over or one on the way back and when they do you never hear the end of how demanding the schedule is.
This brings us back to the South African teams, for whom a short tour is four weeks.
The South African players in time have improved and learned to enjoy Australia and New Zealand, but no matter how much you enjoy a place the difference between three and five matches is a fortnight away from home and in all probability eight league points lost on the road.
When you consider that four league points have historically separated teams four and eight, you get to appreciate the impact of the additional two weeks away from home.
Given the circumstances and the disadvantage of the draw (based on geographics) the fact that South Africa invariably has one team in the semi finals and on most occasions two in the top five is a credit to the boys.
The reality is South Africa does not have the depth for five teams and neither does New Zealand. Australia also does not have the depth for four teams. But outside of the depth issue, the best South African teams do bloody well.
I don’t think we give them enough credit and I have been as guilty as the next person. Our expectations are high and we demand success every weekend. But the reaction too often is over the top.
Because of this South African inferiority complex, which too many still have, it seems improper to object to the schedule because then South Africans are accused of being an extension of Pommy whingers.
The obvious solution is for South African teams to play in Europe, but that doesn’t ever seem likely. South Africa, by playing in the Super 12, have improved New Zealand and Australia’s development of players, to the detriment of their own.
If there is to be an expansion to the Super 14 then it has to ensure the teams all play the same amount of games overseas and spend equal time away from home.
Otherwise we will be wasting our time again and continue to be the whipping boys of New Zealand and to a lesser degree Australia.
The point is the Kiwis are not that good and we are not that bad. But when we continue to give them an eight point tournament head start we will never know how good we can be in this tournament or just how ordinary their teams can look.
280 Comments
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 » Show All
8 May 2008, 13:03 pm
snakessss
8 May 2008, 13:04 pm
no more dragons….
8 May 2008, 13:08 pm
About time this was addressed.
8 May 2008, 13:10 pm
cue tickler & wannabe
8 May 2008, 13:11 pm
The only solution I can think of is continental drift.
8 May 2008, 13:13 pm
the best South African teams do bloody well. Agree. Unfortunately there is no way to test the theory. The best would be to say, ok, you al travel to SA and play half your games here. But would Sanzar ever agree? No.
8 May 2008, 13:14 pm
at the end of the day, all the teams have at least 4 games awaay from home. Keo, what you asking for is impossible.
8 May 2008, 13:14 pm
All this and the fact that we have to contend with the sub standard refereeing too.
8 May 2008, 13:15 pm
Is it going to be worse foe SA teams in new super expanded longer Super competition?
I think so
8 May 2008, 13:16 pm
Yawn. Hana hana. Boring. Nothing will change the staus quo.
8 May 2008, 13:16 pm
well..we will never know how good or bad a kiwi or Aussie team would do if thay have to play 4 or 5 consecutives games in South africa………
8 May 2008, 13:17 pm
#4
I wouldn’t be surprised it Tackler is Wallabie.
8 May 2008, 13:17 pm
It’s the world’s natural tendency to feel antipathy towards all South African. Boo hoo.
8 May 2008, 13:17 pm
The only answer would be to split the tours, say if you are playing 5 games in Australasia, then you do 3 in the first part of the compitition and 2 near the end. But that just compounds the jetlag. I think we just need to deel with what life has dealt us. I believe the situation improves our ability to win oversees, because of the trials that we have to go through. “What doesn’t kill you makes you stronger” We are stronger for it.
Keo, drop this story once and for all. We have the tough deel, so If he get a home semi, it was a big effort! We just need to deel with it. Thats that! We are South Africans, not moffi ozzies or pommies, we can take it, and give it back 10 fold!
8 May 2008, 13:18 pm
#9 tassiebok: that’s going to be worse for every1.
8 May 2008, 13:18 pm
Snakes wanna bite me…no,no. That’s got to be the finest nick on this blog!
8 May 2008, 13:20 pm
I think that this post exaggerates the effect of long periods playing away from home.
I mean, I agree that this is not fair to the South African franchises, and it should be changed. How? Taking care with the expansion as the post suggests is a good way.
But please, let’s try not to fool anyone. In 12 years time, only last year the Super Rugby saw a South African champion while this year, 3 kiwi franchises compete against 1 aussie franchise and 2 south african franchises for the second, third and fourth place.
I don’t think that jetting two weeks longer has a 4 points impact.
8 May 2008, 13:20 pm
what if the aussies,kiwis and saffas play all their games against opposition teams one year at home, one year away. surely that would even out things a little.
8 May 2008, 13:22 pm
So what’s the excuse for the 3N win/lose scenario?
8 May 2008, 13:22 pm
I would also like to believe our travel schedule improves our chances of winning overseas, but why then have we not won in NZ since 98?
8 May 2008, 13:22 pm
I don’t like excuses, but fair is fair. A huge difference between a domestic and a international flight.
As for the Lions “who I love”, the stomers had to do the same thing, and they should of beaten the blues aswell.
See all at EP on the 17th of May.
8 May 2008, 13:23 pm
Not only that – Sharks are going to end 5th and fall out on points difference due to teams like the Cheetahs and Lions rolling over and playing dead when they play against NZ teams. Even at home. The Cheetahs managed to concede 150+ points to Canes, Saders and Blues…
8 May 2008, 13:23 pm
Whereas I agree with what Keo is saying, I would like to see a study done by somebody like Tim Noakes on just exactly what the disadvantages of a 5 week tour REALLY are.
In other words are they physiological or physchological or both.
Thereafter what could be done in a better way to minimize any disadvantages.
To my mind, it is one thing to say we are at a disadvantage, which I understand, yet it is important to get a full understanding of what that disadvantage really is.
Hopefully it is a lot more than just missing your mom’s koeksisters!!
8 May 2008, 13:23 pm
#17 Transvaal won the super 10.
8 May 2008, 13:24 pm
Keo, you are correct and most of us (and the Anzac guys) already know this. Unfortunately the lure of a share of $323 million from News Corp. is too strong an influence. Even if an SA team never won a match again, SARU would still get the much needed forex.
8 May 2008, 13:25 pm
I do hear the argument about the length of travelling, but I dont think you’re seeing the big picture….. That Stormers lost their 1st three games at home… is the reason they’re in trouble… not because of the length of travels…
The reality is its not like our teams get there and perform well for the 1st 3 weeks and then falter there after… from game one on tour they struggle!
Traditionally we struggle away from home….. whether the length of time spent away from home is one week or five weeks…. All you have to do is look at the statistics of the Springboks over the past ten years and look at their away record….. When was the last time we won in New Zealand…. and before last year, when was the last time that we had beaten a top 5 team away from home??
These are simply the facts Keo! Just the facts!
8 May 2008, 13:25 pm
Countering the argument one could say that SA sides get more practice playing in harder conditions and should therefore be at an advantage when test time comes. Alas, this too is not to be seen. Instead the boys should man-up and stop playing like lady bugs when on tour.
8 May 2008, 13:27 pm
BOO HOO
8 May 2008, 13:27 pm
Very good article… as i said elsewhere, the situation is merely compounded by the bottom 3 SA teams not winning their home games, thus making tours to SA easier
8 May 2008, 13:27 pm
#14 goodstuff:
That’s more like it Goody.
Someone tell me how many times the victorious 1937 Boks complained about having to play 2 games a week and having to travel by coastal ferries and trains for 2months non-stop.
8 May 2008, 13:29 pm
#22 King Shark: Sharks are my boys but this year they only got themselves to blame if they don’t make it! Last year they traveld well and AJ always remarks on how much the Shark team love to travel???? – but faith the boys will come through
Saders 57 points
Tahs 46 points
Canes 42 points
Sharks 41 points
Fingers crossed!!!
8 May 2008, 13:29 pm
#30 Cane,
How old are you?
8 May 2008, 13:29 pm
#26
The Springboks beat England at Twickenham and at the World Cup (twice) last year, although it would be difficult to argue that England are a top five team at the moment. Still, they did get to the final of the World Cup. Still, I agree with you – how many times have we beaten the All Blacks in NZ in the past decade? That says it all.
8 May 2008, 13:31 pm
#24 Ed_the_Lion: Hell Bro – that was a long time ago when EP was full and TVL was the richest union – don’t know if we will ever see those days again???
8 May 2008, 13:32 pm
#16 Ryan: thank you ryan.
8 May 2008, 13:32 pm
#30
Hate to say it but Cane’s right. The issues of travel/homesickness/jetlag serve merely to deflect our attention from the truth: SA teams are generally **** in Australia and New Zealand.
8 May 2008, 13:32 pm
#19 cane: Give us a minute. We’ll get back to you on this.
8 May 2008, 13:32 pm
Ja well same old thing.
How about splitting the comp into 2 groups, group teams so they have similar or slightly equal travelling schedules, alternate yearly so teams with difficult schedules have easy ones the next year and so on?
Have not really considered the math in this as I am in deperate need of a drink and my brain has switched off.
8 May 2008, 13:33 pm
#34 Gr8ter…We will see it again..That I promise to you..
8 May 2008, 13:34 pm
If what you are saying is true Keo then it makes the Bulls success last year a truly monumetal event. It means the Bulls are the best team that have ever played in Super rugby. This is what it means.
It makes this year even more disastrous though because it means we fell even further than we originally anticipated, and that is far boetie.
The Bulls deserve to be harshly ciriticized this year. Even with travelling if you win all your home games you have a solid platform to launch into the semis.
8 May 2008, 13:35 pm
#32 Ed_the_Lion:
Old enough to be able to name the bok backline in 1970…………but not the 37 backline of course………..I only mentioned them because among the real old timers they were considered to be the best Team to ever tour here.
8 May 2008, 13:35 pm
Keo,
The expansion may be a solution to get more countries involved and therefore be able to draw greater TV audiences. For that SANZAR could demand a much greater media deal. The expansion, however, is not a solution for us. We should focus our attention to Europe and aim to be part of the Heineken and European Cup. Besides the obvious time zones and less travel for our teams, Europe offers us a great deal more money. The cream of rugby players are being lured to play in Europe anyway, so our teams will still be playing against some of the best of Australian and NZ players.
Furthermore, a Springbok coach will have a greater opportunity to view our foreign based players. It’s a fact of life that more of our players are going after better money overseas, so this way talented players will not feel that they’re being overlooked when signing for a foreign club. We don’t need Australia and NZ; they need us. We can still be involved in the Tri-nations and simply arrange our season around the Heineken cup and the Tri-nations. In a way, this may suit Australia and NZ also, as they don’t like the travel aspect of the Super 14.
We have the opportunity now to break away from the Super 14. Why go for another 5 years of playing at a disadvantage from the start?
8 May 2008, 13:36 pm
Keo
The Boks travel the same as their teams in the 3 Nations and still struggle to win there.
If the team is good enough then the results will reflect so. Stormers this year case in point.
There are no surprises for our teams and they know long beforehand what the schedule is.
Get professional and get over it.
8 May 2008, 13:37 pm
#38 PissAnt: Isn’t it braai time yet?
8 May 2008, 13:37 pm
#40 BlueBlood: I’m with you on this one – last year the Sharks tour went well and the Stormers did well this year! But jet lag is a *****!
8 May 2008, 13:38 pm
#40 BlueBlood: Bollocks. The Kiwi teams were all at half strength last year.
8 May 2008, 13:39 pm
Keo, can you maybe do an article on the Lions and Cheetahs. Especially the Cheetahs. They were introduced to the S14 the same year as the Force but the Force left them behind for a while now. The Lions cannot seem to get above the 11th mark. WHAT is up, can we still blame the failed Cats marrige? Why cant the Lions Buy/attract good players and coaches, despite being based in the richest city in Africa? Why do the Cheetahs do SO well in the Currie cup and the V.Cup, but they cant save their life in the S14.
The fact that they keep on losing (year in and year out) effect the other SA contenders challange on the semis, its definately a national matter (rugby-wise)
8 May 2008, 13:39 pm
What if the Boks emigrate to Perth? Would this help?
8 May 2008, 13:39 pm
#41 Cane
Just joking with you.
I don’t think travelling should be any excuse. Jetlag wears of in a day or two.
The Lions just have the ability to loose against themselves. If you beleive in yourself nothing should stand in your way….
I still love the LIONS, and hopefully in the CC travelling to Loftus wont make them tired.
8 May 2008, 13:40 pm
#19 cane: Simple;
Harry Viljoen (shopping more than coaching when on tour)
Straeuli (no need to explain this one)
Carel DuP (made Bok coach when he never coached any team before that)
Markies (selects debutants against NZ and then blames them for the loss)
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 » Show All
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.