Boks call up big guns
Percy Montgomery and Fourie du Preez will start against the All Blacks on Saturday.
They replace Ricky Januarie and Conrad Jantjes in the starting line-up, with the other changes coming at lock, where Andries Bekker starts in place of the injured Bakkies Botha, Schalk Burger in for Luke Watson at openside flank and Danie Rossouw and Frans Steyn coming onto the wood.
Montgomery will earn his 100th Test cap at Newlands in a back three that won the World Cup and one that started when they broke a 10-year losing streak at Dunedin earlier in the tournament.
“It’s a special moment for me, particularly because it’s at Newlands where I spent a big part of my career and against the All Blacks. You couldn’t have asked for a better script,” he told keo.co.za. Montgomery will share his special occasion with Juan Smith, who makes his 50th appearance for the Springboks.
Du Preez was somewhat of a surprise inclusion given how loyal coach Peter De Villiers has been to Ricky Januarie. However, there can be no question that Du Preez offers a more complete option, particularly from a tactical-kicking perspective.
De Villiers said it was a hard decision to drop Januarie but pointed towards fatigue as a decisive factor.
“We can’t live in the past. We have to move on,” De Villiers said in response to the question of whether Januarie’s performance against the All Blacks in Dunedin wasn’t enough to warrant a start.
“If you look at Ricky’s workload this year in the Super 14 and in the Test matches, you’ll realise that a lot has been asked of him. The legs were definitely starting to get a bit heavier and it was time to make the change.
“I’ve always promised players that I’ll be honest with them in all areas and while it was a hard call to make, I feel it was the right one given the type of game we want to play. It’s great to be in a position to say to two players who have done nothing wrong, ‘Look sorry but you’re not going to start’. It’s a blessing.”
Du Preez and Montgomery’s inclusion hints that their play may be characterised by territorial dominance gained through tactical kicking. De Villiers refused to confirm the game plan, saying: “I might as well invite the All Blacks to our training sessions if I told you that.
“Ricky and Conrad don’t have bad kicking games at all,” he asserted. “But Fourie is very good off the boot and Percy offers us a left-footed option which is valuable. We know how we want to play against New Zealand and those players offer us the strengths we need to play the game we want to.”
Asked whether their inclusion was partly designed to take some kicking pressure off Butch James, De Villiers said: “I aim to have 15 perfect players who are able to execute a wide range of skills. They will read the situation and play accordingly. But it’s always soothing to know you have two players who can do that job and that frees Butch to shift the ball.”
Captain Victor Matfield said he expected a physical contest. “We’ll give each other as good as we get. It won’t be a lot different to traditional Springbok/All Blacks Tests.”
In Dunedin the All Blacks dominated possession 58% to 42%, while they spent 66% of the game in South Africa’s territory. Despite this, the Springboks scored two tries to their one and crafted the better scoring opportunities. This also speaks volumes about the defensive work done by the visitors, who began to slip tackles late in the match (a total of 22 to New Zealand’s 6) but scrambled desperately in search of redemption. They made 205 tackles in total – massive by Test standards.
Asked if they expected to defend as much as that this weekend Matfield was non-committal.
“If you look at the stats from games over the last two years you’ll see that often the team that has less possession won the game. Maybe there’s a trend developing there,” he said.
“But decision making will be key. We put a premium on keeping possession but it’s important that we read the situation and make sharp decisions and execute accurately. Using the ball in the right manner is extremely important against the All Blacks.”
Springboks – 15 Percy Montgomery, 14 JP Pietersen, 13 Adi Jacobs, 12 Jean de Villiers, 11 Bryan Habana, 10 Butch James, 9 Fourie du Preez, 8 Pierre Spies, 7 Juan Smith, 6 Schalk Burger, 5 Victor Matfield (c), 4 Andries Bekker, 3 CJ van der Linde, 2 Bismarck du Plessis, 1 Beast Mtawarira.
Subs: 16 Adriaan Strauss, 17 Brian Mujati, 18 Danie Rossouw, 19 Luke Watson, 20 Ricky Januarie, 21 Frans Steyn, 22 Conrad Jantjes
By Ryan Vrede, in Cape Town
August 12th, 2008 at 11:24 pm
#699 BokiNZ:
In my world only informed opinion really matters, otherwise too much drivel fills the space and wastes certainly my time.
But you have been quiet for a while of late. Is it the impending battle that brings you out.?
August 12th, 2008 at 11:27 pm
#700 BokiNZ: Yup, Olympics just not doing it for me, although almost got excited when we Brits managed a gold in cycling and one in the pool.
What is the juice of choice this season?
August 12th, 2008 at 11:27 pm
#698 carol meredith:
Not a very pretty picture you paint here of the male community. Are we so predictable to your gender?
Or maybe you are referring only to male beach vollyball?
August 12th, 2008 at 11:33 pm
#703 ET: Even George Bush noticed the atributes of the Beach Volley Ball Babes. (Did you see the picture, yeukk).
Can anyone tell me when the Male Beach Volley Ball is playing. (Only joking, would rather have the Springbok changing room shot on Saturday, love the group hug)
August 12th, 2008 at 11:34 pm
#665 ET: ET I think you are missing tightheads point that at the time that Luke et al was doing good stuff, they were not being pressurised any longer by the Pumas, who were to tired to get up for it any more. We have seen what happened in the S14 with teams that were not physically prepared for the ELV’s (the Bulls) and who thought they could just slow it down and play to stucture. by the second half of the game, the boks were getting so much time and space, they could do what they wanted. Don’t expect that against the AB’s.
The Pumas were ill prepared for this game – they lost to
Italy and Scotland previously, were playing a team in the middle of their season, their own players had just come off holiday, and they had no idea of the effect of the ELV’s. They were out on their feet.
As an aside, thinking “big picture” about ELV’s: The thing is with the ELV’s the structure remains if required, but they allow an attacking team to speed the game up/slow it down at will. If a team wants to dictate speed of the game, they must first get posssession. A team can only slow the game down by retaining possession, and can only retain possession by not kicking it away, which means they have to retain the ball AND slow the game down. This means the ball stays in play longer. The question for a team wanting to slow teh game down is this – is what is more tiring: Attacking constantly playing energy efficient rugby, or defending while playing the game at the attacking side’s speed selection. Either way, the ball stays in play.
PS If Luke is in this week, expect a running game from the Boks. Pop passes, free running, etc.
There is no other reason for him to be there. He is wasted on 10 man rugby.
August 12th, 2008 at 11:35 pm
#702 carol meredith:
Surely the swimming has to be extremely exciting, as always. And I thoroughly enthused about the stunning Adlington victory and Jackson 3rd against there USA favoured opponent. In fact I was rooting for both of them in their semis already and was disappointed when they did not win there. Also Coventry(Zim.) was very good and was just unlucky in the final.
August 12th, 2008 at 11:41 pm
#704 carol meredith:
Got sick of seeing him too often especially at this sporting event. And he could not even do a decent job for that young lady, in terms of her documented request. The backside is anatomically the backside and not the back.
August 12th, 2008 at 11:44 pm
#706 ET: You are far better informed than I am. I used to love the Eventing but a bronze or two was not good enough really.
If Paula Radcliff manages to stay in one piece I will be following her progress. What do you think I should look out for in the next few days?
August 12th, 2008 at 11:51 pm
#705 SjamBok:
At no stage did I make a big thing about the opposition but you still have to put the points on the board and if you do it with crowd-pleasing rugby it is so much better. And the good stuff started in the 1st hallf already. And he was attemppting to point a finger at only Watson and not all the forwards for what I called a lethargic 1st half.
TH was actually trying to be too smart and when that is too categorical you simply make yourself(TH) look ridiculous. Also there is a bit of history here with him and others who disagree with his technical preachings.
I am sure you found the game entertaining. This Sat. no one expects the same to occur.
August 13th, 2008 at 12:01 am
#708 carol meredith:
Keep watching the swimmimg as it is always exciting and the new American wonder Michael Phelps is attempting to win 8 golds and already has 3 and possibly 5 as I see tape delayed finals sometimes.
The deliberate emphasis on USA and China in the gymnastics has made it boring for me but maybe you like gymnastics. Also when the athletic events starts you are ensured lots of exciting events.
August 13th, 2008 at 12:06 am
#710 ET: Did I hear that Phelps arms are nearly 7 feet long?
I’ll skip the gymnastics and concentrate more on track and field.
I’m off. Cheers.
August 13th, 2008 at 12:06 am
#709 ET: You made a point about reversion to “dinosaur type rugby” 9by using Rossouw et al). Now, I am not a fan of Rossouw as well, make no mistake, because his lack of skills cancels his ability to be used when skills are required. And his lack of technique frankly cancels out the advantage of his size.
I believe that a team shouls have the skills to up the ante when it matters, and the power to play that kind of game when it is required. You can never be the best at all types of play all the time. Perhaps you need to be teh best at conservative, defensicve rugby at the beginning of the game to allow a team like Oz to wear themselves out, and then be able to work it wide towards the end, when they are out of gas. Itis not a cut pattern that is required, but a recognition of when to use what style, where the oppositions weak points are, and how to make the current situation work for you.
This attitude is explained in the “Book of Five Rings” by Miyamoto – the greatest swordsman that ever lived, who remained undefeated until his death at a ripe old age. He says he does not prefer this style or that style, or this sword or that sword. He thinks that they all have a part to play at a point where they can be used to be most effective. And whatever you have, you use in a way that can be most effective. eg If you have a short sword, force the enemy into close quarters where they can’t use their long sword, or where its less effective. So you dont use Luke for 10 man rugby.
We have the athletes (big and fast) to play either type of game, and any mixture of these. What we need is the recognition of when one type of game will be more effective. eg against Oz, we should have reverted to conservative, field position rugby based on set pieces when our running game plan was being out played by the Aussies. It is stupid to do the same thing time and again and expect a different result. Unless the mere changing of time has caused a different situation.
Gavin Rich’s latest column is quite good (although I also think he doesn’t quite get what I have explained above).
August 13th, 2008 at 12:32 am
#494 Saffa_Guy: PdV’s Boks By 5: You’re right, I was sh-t stirring. Adi has done much better than most people (myself included) thought he might, but that’s not my point here. What I was doing, somewhat tongue in cheek, was to draw out the apologists and appeasers and to see whether sufficient tolerance exists in our new shiny democracy to permit an unpopular viewpoint to be heard.
The fact is that of course I hope the Bokke slaughter the ABs and that Adi (and everyone else) does well.
But mostly I want to make the point that what counts for me is excellence, not skin colour. I believe, and I’ve posted it many times before, that Beast is the best prospect we’ve had since Os, and that Habana is the best wing I’ve ever seen. The others mostly hold their own, but are capable of feats of brilliance at any given time.
Finally, to be brutally honest, I wouldn’t bat an eyelid if the entire team was black or coloured and without a single white player, provided and only provided that they were the best we have. I hope that this is unambiguously clear.
I am a South African and I have always supported South Africa. I want us to win. I want all the black and brown and white kids to have an equal opportunity, even if it means raising taxes to achieve the result. In education, in sport, in their nutrition. That’s it.
August 13th, 2008 at 12:35 am
#712 SjamBok:
We as S.Africans have an obsessioin with size/brawn etc. and I see you mention ‘big and fast’ but not skill. How many great rugby players are big and fast and skilful? A very small percentage and I cannot readily think of any/many other than say Eales and he was not really big but very skilful for his size Remember, it is textbook knowledge that the physiological male is a 70 kg individual so anyone who is 100kg. or more, is really abnormal wrt. mass. How often in your life have you heard the term ‘big and clumsy’ but small and fast or small and bouncy(a low centre of gravity). You simply do not get big, fast and skilful often even and espcially in S.A. with its not so good nutrition regimen.
The ideal team should be able to play the 9-man, 10-man, 12-man or 15-man rugby game anytime the need demands but how often do you see that. I personally can only think about the 1974 Br. Lions and maybe that 95-96 NZ that can play to any such broad plan/s.
The ideal team would have every member complementing the other 14 all the time and how often have we or will we see that. I don’t know that answer.
All of this is just some food for thought.
August 13th, 2008 at 1:50 am
#502 WP Till I Die: and raised til she finished high school boet…her fam still lives there too
August 13th, 2008 at 1:58 am
she first went to the olympics b4 having even stepped foot out of zimbabwe, when she was a high school student in 2000, and made the semi finals for one event. Lets give little brother zim credit where it’s due, my girlfriend (shes zimbo) tells me they breed talented swimmers there much like rugga players but they never make the step up to professionalism most of the time due to lack of resources.Only went to USA for varsity scholarship which she is still on So how can we as a nation with this much talent and def more resources than zim not muster up 1 medal???
August 13th, 2008 at 4:32 am
#714 ET: bobby Skinstad had everything. Spies could too if he had a bit of game time.
The AB’s team of the last few years (the one that has won 42 of 47 their games before the RWC) played like this. They effortlessly changed their plan of attack to explot the weak points at that time and for those circumstances. I am sure Richie had a hand in this. The only team to beat them in this tuime was us, and only because we had the most bloody minded rugby players on the planet, with defence as a religion.
The point that I am trying to make is that it is not body type that counts (although it helps to be bigger), but the mentality of the players. A smaller team (within limits) can use team work and gang tackling to make up for lack of size. But only if they are mentally right. But a stupid team can only play one game. And a team of specialist body sizes without the right mentality can’t change from their plan A. The right team to select is one that has the physiology to go toe to toe in the tough stuff, but the ability to change to plan B if the first one is not working. Even better, to be able to siultaneously recognise without being told that the plan must change.
August 13th, 2008 at 6:49 am
#717 SjamBok:
How could I forget my favourite, Skinstad, who I actually mentioned in post #665? But I am sure you will accept that Bob was far more about brain than brawn and exceptionally skilful. The most skilful forward I have ever been exposed to.
Agree with you also on the importance of the mentality component. For me most sport is about 45% ability, 45% psychology/mental and the rest is the remaining 10%.
August 13th, 2008 at 6:54 am
#717 SjamBok:
#718 ET:
Agree overall with that perception of yours in that post and it requires brainwork.
August 13th, 2008 at 7:32 am
#694 Keo:
You surprise me.
I have not responded to the claims of ET because he has done nothing but make claims that are false, attempt to put words into my mouth and assume he knows my position.
I can take on this arguement and rip his claims to shreds, but do not want to engage in a rugby conversation with him, as it is futile.
I have always regarded your rugby opinion to be well informed, but now have my doubts.
August 13th, 2008 at 9:06 am
#720 tight head:
I just saw the skirmish between you and ET and Keo’s assessment.
I agree with Keo that you came off second best. Although you know your subject, you are mostly too categorical in your approach and do not seem to realise that issues are not always either white or black but that there are grey areas as well.
To attack Keo’s rugby opinion as well because he has “voted” against you is not going to do your case any good.
August 13th, 2008 at 9:27 am
#721 Robzim:
I challenge you to go back to my post 671.
Then read his post 672, where he started the personal attack.
Then I challenge you to dispute the facts of my post 676 from a rugby point of view.
I did not bring up the subject of Watson, he did.
I responded and clearly stated that our players (plural) could not be judged on that second half.
Then see his personal attacks on me in his posts 686 and 691 where he mentions issues like white rights, Adi, quotas, and size.
I have mentioned none of the above issues which he convienently subscribes to me.
Then he has the cheek to ask me to stick to the facts and not to make sweeping statements.
No you guys have not stuck to the facts and are all guilty of stereotyping me.
Your friend ET has twisted my posts to suit his pre conceived idea of me as a white man living in the past to suit his arguement, and I am sorry to say that you and Keo have fallen for it.
August 13th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
#474 katman: If the best you can do when you read something you don’t like is to want to shut me up, then I say to you go get loved.
Typical dom donder ignorant, verkrampte South African attitude……”if you don’t agree with me then you must be wrong”…….”ag kak man”.
Thick, arrogant, small minded South African.
August 13th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
#720 tight head:
The more you talk the more you ridicule yourself and no one does a hatchet job on you better than yourself. Case in point, look at your response to the Keo comment, as I jokingly predicted you go over the top. I do not even think Keo was being serious and was just having some fun more than anything else, but then again your warped reaction.It is purely that ego, believe me there is no rugby deity anywhere on this planet.
August 13th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
#724 ET:
Go home.
August 13th, 2008 at 2:01 pm
#721 Robzim:
That is exactly the point I made today, mostly, and also more than 3 weeks ago when I put Watson’s 20 mins. at Carisbrook into total perspective. His response that day, a few posts later, was sublimely categorical and even when I civilly challenged him to admit it was totally false wrt to that post that day.
Yesterday we had a similar situation. My post #665 is purely on the merits or lack thereof, in my estimation, in certain positions which agin I think devalues the Boks effort this Saturday. His response in post# 671 is a snide, sarcastic effort as if the rugby deity has spoken.
It is time for him to realise ther are many grey areas in all of life.
On a more pleasant note what is your take on this starting XV?
August 13th, 2008 at 2:11 pm
#722 tight head:
Post #672 is a powder puff, harmless, civil response with no lies or words put inany mouth as you so claim. My this shows you have to be extremely sensitve as all that is being done is a smart turning of the tables here. You are merely being administered your own medicine, but with civility and with smartness and you cannot respond to it and less even handle it.
Talk on please do.
August 13th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
#726 ET:
Read my post 722 carefully.
I challenge you, or any of your friends here to dispute what I have said.
You are guilty of the very thing you accuse me of.
Stereotyping and accusing me of taking up positions on issues that I have never discussed.
I have shown far more civilty to you in this affair, than you to me.
Go back and read the personal assumptions you have made about me.
All based on thin air and not backed up by fact as you like to point out.
Your posts are full of personal and emotional accusation and assumption.
Nothing concrete to debate about rugby.
I stand by my post 676 which is a rugby post and not an attack on any player.
The rugby facts in that post cannot be denied.
Perhaps that is why you reverted to personal attack.
Yes, that is right you fired the first shot, and don’t seem to like it when I fire back.
I will defend your right to be heard, even though I do not value your opinion.
I have nothing to discuss with you about rugby, as you are the one who starts the personal attack every time.
I simply respond.
Something that I shall no longer bother to do.
August 13th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
#725 tight head:
Egg, just egg and I really like egg (especially omelette) but not RAW and not on tha FACE. And that is what this eventually all is: EGG on YOUR FACE.
Stick to the tighthead technicalities, it is, as said previously, sometimes informative.
August 13th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
#728 tight head:
Your own words everytime you posts especially during buddy-time hangs you time after time.
I challenged you 3 weeks ago and again yesterday to be honest and to admit your being catergorical wrt to some rugby things and you dish out the same medicine that you cannot handle( your post 671), snide and seemingly sarcastic remarks. The ball is in your court now as you need to challenge the facts or admit being incorrect when it suits you, if you do not wish to come across as being ridiculous.
But if you wish just speak on and on and on.
DONE
August 13th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
#728 tight head:
” I have nothing…….as you are the one who starts the personal attack everytime. I simply respond.”
YOUR words, BOLD but totally DISHONEST when judged against my post #665 and your responding post #671(snide, insulting).
Talk on, just DO SO. But my case is CLOSED with YOUR DISHONEST WORDS.