Boks under achieve in 2008
27 Nov 2008
The Springboks are a better team than the current All Blacks – and Saturday’s Test against the Poms at Twickenham will prove it.
One thing New Zealanders love to do is talk up their All Blacks. It is something those in the northern hemisphere also take great delight in – that is talking up the men in black.
It could be that it makes defeat against them seem honourable and bearable. It could also be that New Zealand, as a nation, has never done anything to offend anyone, whereas white South Africans will always live with the baggage of apartheid.
The rugby world, post 1994, has come to accept and tolerate us, but – with the possible exception of the French – they don’t like us.
It is why the Springboks will simply have to settle for winning World Cups while the All Blacks continue to win over fans and the northern hemisphere rugby media every November.
New Zealand once again have the mantle of best team in the world in a non-World Cup year. This New Zealand team will be even better in 2009 and in 2010 they will be unbeatable. In 2011 they will implode and the cycle will continue and we’ll be told by New Zealanders that the World Cup has killed international rugby and that the yellow cup really means nothing because a team has to be judged over a four-year period and not a three week play-off period.
Which brings me back to the weekend’s Test matches. I must confess to cheating this weekend, as I never watched the Springboks or All Blacks matches live. I viewed both games knowing the result and without the additional pressure of having to file on the final whistle – hence the lateness of the column.
What it confirmed to me, and it is something I have been saying for a couple of years, is that the Springboks possess the better individual talent, with the exception of Richie McCaw and Dan Carter, who are two of the finest to play the game. This current generation of South African player is among the most special ever produced in this country, and that is why the expectation must be high and performances like the one against Scotland two Saturdays ago can’t be justified or tolerated.
It is the dismantling of England at Twickenham that sets a standard, much like the Boks did in Paris when they humiliated England 36-0 in a World Cup play-off match.
You can tell me England are poor and in a shambles, but only two weeks ago we were being told this is a new generation of English player, good enough to beat Australia, South Africa and New Zealand on successive weekends. The wise scribes in the United Kingdom also told us that the Boks were the weakest of the Tri nations teams. It was based on the statistical evidence of the Boks finishing third in the Tri Nations – a result that was as unacceptable as the performance against Scotland.
In assessing the year, nine Bok wins in 13 starts statistically is a very good return, but it is the two Tri Nations wins in six matches that will define the season because this was the year in which the World Cup holders should have been superior to New Zealand and Australia in belief and results.
New Zealand, this year, lost 13 of their World Cup All Blacks to Europe. Many of them will return to New Zealand in 2011 and be good enough to challenge for a World Cup squad, while Australia also entered a rebuilding phase. With the Springboks, there was no rebuilding because there was no need for a makeover of a World Cup winning squad with an average age of 25. It is why 2008 will always be the season of missed opportunity. The brilliant win against England only emphasized how much was missed in the Tri Nations.
A settled Bok team, with so much natural talent, should have whipped the All Blacks and Wallabies, home and away, and then there would have been a supporting argument to my theory that South Africa’s players are better than New Zealand’s. Instead I’ll continue to get the 19-0 defeat at Newlands thrown at me and the names of Carter and McCaw. On the latter I concede, but overall the only thing the All Blacks should be beating the Boks at is the ridiculously overhyped pre-match haka.
Take it from me, New Zealand, if they play to their potential, won’t beat England by 36 points this weekend because they are not as good a side as a Bok side in full throttle, and that is why 2008 was the year in which the Boks stumbled when they should have soared.
731 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 … 15 » Show All
27 Nov 2008, 15:00 pm
#294 Puma: Puma,
Like I said, I don’t think BP should have called Smit a pig. I think he should apologise, but who am i to force him. All i was saying is that there have been worse things said on here by people that you enjoy talking to. Just bare it in mind.
27 Nov 2008, 15:00 pm
#291 BlackPanther:
yeah but i dont think Bakkies was as bad as the great AB ever, Colin Meads was horrific?!
27 Nov 2008, 15:01 pm
#290 stodders:
agree
27 Nov 2008, 15:01 pm
#15 ziyaad: #16 ziyaad: #18 ziyaad:
Disagree with a few things in your ‘articles’. Realise it’s all opinion but thought I’d respond anyway.
First. Using individual instances in certain WC games (the ball bounced like this, or the player did that) is unfair and dishonest. You use these to try prove that the Boks were simply lucky to win the WC and the hard work put in over the previous 4 years had nothing to do with it. Frankly that disgusts me. “We won the world cup, so what?” Ha. Tell that to a Kiwi supporter mate. He’ll tell you you’re an ungrateful sod. [Actually, he'd probably back you up!!!]
All that aside, if you were trying to be truly objective and thorough you would have acknowledged that a lucky bounce of the ball helped Januarie to his try and us to an historic win. Not taking aside his opportunism or skill, but it was still a lucky bounce of the ball. That’s rugby! How much worse our 2008 3N season would have been if we’d lost that!!! There are instances in nearly every game which swing it one way or the other.
In quoting stats, you also fail to acknowledge that during 2004 and 2005, the 3 games we lost in the 3N were by 2, 4, and 4 points respectively. What a difference a “bounce of the ball” or “or players foot in touch” would have done to those results and our overall winning percentage. If you’re gonna use instances in play to prove how lucky we were in the WC, why not use the same method for the last 4 or 5 or 10 years??
My point is, if you’re analysing something to try back your argument, at least be honest and analyse everything equally. Not select games.
Second. You talk about WC players not being motivated. Citing JdV and Adi as examples. Motivating players is the job of the coaching staff. If the player doesn’t respond, you drop them. JW did that to Matfield early on – seemed to me it worked?
Third. FdP is over-rated? Really? Well it’s your opinion I guess but myself and many top journo’s and players the world over rate him very highly.
My two cents. Oh, and a couple of graphs or some 3D pie charts would have gone down well!!
27 Nov 2008, 15:01 pm
#297 stodders:
lol, have not laughed so hard in a longtime. Puma is the hell-in with BP.
better do some work.
27 Nov 2008, 15:02 pm
#296 stodders: I don’t remember ever complaining about going off the feet at the breakdown, being offside is a different matter.
27 Nov 2008, 15:03 pm
#268 Puma:
Piet
Van
Zyl
27 Nov 2008, 15:03 pm
#300 BlackPanther: Umaga plays with handbags, he’s hardly a tough nut
27 Nov 2008, 15:04 pm
#291 BlackPanther: Get glasses. He lifted him and dropped him head down first. Lucky John never cracked his head open. You should say sorry to all Bok supporters here for calling our captain a pig. You are a disgraceful little boy with no manners what so ever. Is going out of th 1/4 final of the world cup still having its toll on you? Jeez come on now. Their are some really great kiwis that come here and I have lots of respect for them we banter but have great chats. Never have I seen such with bad manners like you ever. Grow up.
27 Nov 2008, 15:04 pm
#295 Big Hit:
You are wrong there…it will make Fiji, samoa and japan.
The elv is not introduced to change the essence of rugby it allows a broadening of strategy/game plans for teams who have other strengths than plodding forwards.
The old laws favour heavy forwards only. The new laws can favour heavy forwards (if fit and skillfull) and backline play. It will be up to a team to stamp their tactic onto that game.
27 Nov 2008, 15:04 pm
#274 Dawn: well then i am glad i missed it dawnie.
craig joubert has floundered a few times in my experience.
#277 4man: no hussy for me
sorry i missed you man. if it wasnt me ma or my boetie it was my varsity mates i havent seen in years. and cash, she was short!
there is no wind whatsoever, the mushroom clouds are building and darkness is falling at 3 pm. the black clouds lit by lighting will be following and i will drink beer in my local as the land is lashed by sweet summer rain!
27 Nov 2008, 15:05 pm
#301 stodders: John Smit is a gentleman, it wasn’t right to call him names as many did in the summer. McCaw and Carter are gentlemen too. Thorn not so much it seems.
27 Nov 2008, 15:05 pm
#309 Puma:
nah mate, i think it was just a turn of phrase, he has alot of respect for smit, read above.
27 Nov 2008, 15:05 pm
#306 Big Hit: Now you change the point of the argument. Unbelievable
27 Nov 2008, 15:05 pm
#307 BlackPanther: Maybe he should tackle you out of here. I think a ban is coming up for you in a very short time.
27 Nov 2008, 15:06 pm
#309 Puma:
Rubbish…sorry mate. his head was nowhere near a blade of grass,
I do remember seeing a flubber ripple when smit hit the deck.
If you want to see a spear tackle check gregans or is it Lote’s spear tackle on Mcaw.
27 Nov 2008, 15:07 pm
#310 Wallabie. – The English always have an excuse after a pomp!!: I don’t think the old laws favour forwards, NZ did quite well and they were not a forwards team. It just didn’t allow teams with poor packs to be the best and rightly so. For all it helps Japan/Fiji it will hurt Georgia, Russia, Italy, Argentina, Ireland, England.. and those countries with world class packs.
27 Nov 2008, 15:07 pm
#317 Big Hit: it hurts SA too.
27 Nov 2008, 15:07 pm
#315 Puma: Shall we get pitch forks, torches and start a lynch mob?
Puma, i think BP has alot of respect for Smit. His posts seem to show this. I have to agree with cab on this one. I feel dirty now.
27 Nov 2008, 15:07 pm
#313 cab: It was on the kiwi thread yesterday he was speaking to big hit and called John a pig. go and read it. This guy is a child needs to grow up a little and maybe learn some manners. What time is it there by him now anyway 1am or 2am in the morning thats if he is in NZ and still at his computer typing tripe. No respect to him at all. Cant just come here and rubbish our captain.
27 Nov 2008, 15:08 pm
#284 Big Hit:
The ELVs were the brainchild of the Nth Hem-heavy IRB.
The rules themselves are the result of Pierre Villepreux invention. He’s French, as far as I recall.
The ELVs were trialled in Sth Africa and were known as the ‘Stellenbosch Rules’ before their ELV moniker.
But, go on, say theyre invented by Aus/NZ. Your complete lack of knowledge of this game of rugby knows no boundaries.
27 Nov 2008, 15:08 pm
#306 Big Hit: #309 Puma: #310 Wallabie. – The English always have an excuse after a pomp!!: # stodders:
Is this animal farm you talking about. Which pig is it? Napoleon, Major, Snowball or the mouthpiece of the pigs old squealer. Sounds like there are a few mouthpieces here today.
Goodday all my friends and foes
27 Nov 2008, 15:08 pm
#314 stodders: you’ll notice the breakdown reffing is not so strict on offside, or coming in from the side aka McCaw, no its aimed at physical players like Moody and Burger who come in at the right side
27 Nov 2008, 15:09 pm
#300 BlackPanther: ag, kiwis have the least humour about rugby of anyone BP.
you know it, we know it.
but its cool, i heard a fair amount of squealing in the after match interview after the 1/4 final semi in 2007.
guess who was the piggy that time
27 Nov 2008, 15:09 pm
#309 Puma:
I just checked it was lote who spear tackled Mcaw. Go and check that and compare it to Smit flubber bumper.
27 Nov 2008, 15:09 pm
#291 BlackPanther: apologised immediately – bullsh1t – he did no such thing he raised his hands to the ref. secondly he picked him up without the ball and then dropped him head first just because he didn’t drive hime into the ground doesn’t mean it wasn’t extremely dangerous.
27 Nov 2008, 15:09 pm
#317 Big Hit: When did you start watching rugby? NZ aren’t a forwards team
All good teams are forwards teams, only some have a backline worth using to keep the opposition guessing.
27 Nov 2008, 15:09 pm
#141 Pietman: Ex President Thabo Mbeki, told White to coach and leave politics to him,The President kept his word
27 Nov 2008, 15:10 pm
#326 gunther: At the next scrum, when the red mist had lifted, he apologised. Rarely, if ever, do you see this on the pitch. Wouldn’t you agree?
27 Nov 2008, 15:10 pm
#321 BlackPanther: Rod MacQueen was behind many of them, the trialling in SA was a red herring to disguise the fact they were a Aus/NZ ideal. These rules do not suit SA, PDV, Bryan Habana, FDP, Smit and others have already attested to that.
27 Nov 2008, 15:11 pm
#325 Wallabie. – The English always have an excuse after a pomp!!: It was Thorn. dont you start walla. You have been behaving of late!! lol.
27 Nov 2008, 15:11 pm
I would like to invite you all to Croke Park, so that we can all learn the true meaning of sportmanship. This finger pointing is doing noone any good.
27 Nov 2008, 15:11 pm
#179 fish out of water: This is the example of the kind of posts Ziyaad was talking about. Negative. negative. negative.
27 Nov 2008, 15:11 pm
#323 Big Hit: It is about players not staying on their feet at the breakdown and sealing the ball off, making it slower or unplayable. Nothing to do with being offside either. You are muddling yourself I think.
27 Nov 2008, 15:11 pm
# stodders:
“Bare” it in mind??????? And here I thought you were perfect.
27 Nov 2008, 15:12 pm
#327 stodders: they played expansive rugby under the old rules using their backs to great effect, so Wallabie’s assertion that the old rules favoured forwards is nonsense, they just meant you couldn’t get away with a poor pack. If all Aussies want to see is backs continously running around they should watch 7s.
27 Nov 2008, 15:12 pm
#316 Wallabie. – The English always have an excuse after a pomp!!: he inverted the player – whatever piece of anatomy hits the ground first is irrelevant..
27 Nov 2008, 15:13 pm
#329 stodders: unlike Umugger and Me’llspearu who didn’t even apologise after the game and blamed Woodward instead
27 Nov 2008, 15:13 pm
#304 Blah: Ziyaad wins. Your argument sucks.
27 Nov 2008, 15:13 pm
#331 Puma:
I am up late tonight for once. Just making my scarce presence felt tonight.
27 Nov 2008, 15:14 pm
#328 XhosaKid: I guess and suggest you read my post in #266…… after critisizing me early in the thread…
27 Nov 2008, 15:14 pm
#155 canafunk: we always had all of those, but we have won the Tri-Nations twice in 13 years
27 Nov 2008, 15:14 pm
#326 gunther: watch this and put on your reading glasses.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZchPz1xQII
I wonder if Smit really have his head where we usually have lower part of the back or just arse. If it’s a head, then it’s not our fault.
27 Nov 2008, 15:15 pm
#332 Irish Devil: Hi Irish Devil agree. Yes there is true sportsmanship there. We could all learn.
27 Nov 2008, 15:15 pm
#320 Puma:
read 167, for the kiwis to even compare another player to Fitzy, better known as God downunder, is a big compliment. but i did not see the ‘pig’ chirp, lol, was it as in ‘squealing like a pig’…i am surprised smit complained, but its exactly what fitzpatrick would have done and he managed the ref like a pro.
27 Nov 2008, 15:15 pm
#336 Big Hit:
I am implying that plodding forwards can get away with looking good in the old laws.
Rugby is all about forwards and backs and the best team ie AB have got the combination and balance right.
27 Nov 2008, 15:15 pm
#340 Wallabie. – The English always have an excuse after a pomp!!: Ja “Vaalseun”….. how the hell are you ??
27 Nov 2008, 15:17 pm
#320 Puma:
Am I showing you disrespect ? Or your Captain ?
Perhaps if you chose to read THIS thread, you might be aware of how much respect I HAVE for John Smit. I backed him when a multitude of Safas wouldnt “Botha is better….Brits is better….Bismarck is better”.
Dont talk about respect. The last 2 Managers and Captains to land on NZ shores – White and J.Muller; PdV and Smit – ALL called the AB Captain “a cheat”. This IN New Zealand ! I found that absolutely shocking and a complete lack of respect. Cheating is something Hansie Cronje did. McCaw pushes the boundaries of the laws, but for an opposing Captain – sorry, TWO of them – to call the opposite “a cheat”, that is completely distasteful.
Get off your pedestal, Puma. Im just a derranged rugby fan calling your Captain a whinger (ie ‘squealed like a pig’). That is not the same as your National Captains and Managers, resperesentatives of your country, landing in another country and immediately calling the home Captain “a cheat”.
27 Nov 2008, 15:17 pm
cheers all
beer time for an entrepreneur (networking i call it).
27 Nov 2008, 15:17 pm
#340 Wallabie. – The English always have an excuse after a pomp!!: lol. How long with the new name change?
Pages: « 1 … 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 … 15 » Show All
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.