Disciples of the delusional
6 Jul 2009
The Lions are heroes again after beating a Bok B-side that was a disgrace to the jersey, writes Keo in his Business Day newspaper column.
If the celebration of the supposed heroes who lost a meaningful series-deciding Test in Pretoria two Saturdays ago defied belief, it does not compare with the response to the British and Irish Lions defeat of a Springbok side in which 10 regulars were rested.
Some, among the British and Irish, called Saturday’s dead rubber a great occasion. Others called it one of the greatest victories in Lions history and pondered what may have been if the Lions had not arrived in Johannesburg with the series already lost.
It is why the British, and to a lesser degree Irish, win nothing of relevance. They are the kings of the afterthought, the masters of the dead rubber and they will forever remain disciples of the delusional.
In all of the emotional outpouring of an after the fact Test win, there was no criticism of Lions coach Ian McGeechan’s poor selections for the first two lost Tests. McGeechan picked the wrong lock combination in the first Test, selected the wrong front row combination and never got it right all tour with his back three combinations.
Not that it mattered because the Lions get on the plane heroes for winning one out of three Tests. It is the British and Irish way to applaud finishing second in a two-team race.
South Africa, in Johannesburg on Saturday, were a disgrace to the jersey a disgrace that started with a white armband protest against Bakkies Botha’s two-week suspension and ended after 80 minutes of clueless and ill-disciplined rugby.
The build-up to the Test was a shambles with Bok coach Peter de Villiers spending all week mixing his metaphors, defending eye-gouging and telling the media that he changed his mind four or five times before settling on a Springbok B team because he wanted to give every player in his squad the feeling they had made a contribution to the Lions series.
Test rugby, to De Villiers, is obviously a charity in which you hand out jerseys instead of asking players to earn the right to wear them. After all De Villiers was gifted the job in the name of transformation.
De Villiers has been riding on the coattail of the 2007 World Cup winning squad and Saturday’s team selection and approach to the game was the first example of a Peter de Villiers selected and coached team. The result was a 19-point defeat in Johannesburg; and the Boks were lucky it wasn’t close to 30.
The De Villiers philosophy of not coaching off a clipboard and just playing the situation as the players see it does not even work on the club fields of his hometown in Paarl, let alone in a Test match environment. De Villiers, on Saturday, showed us that it is not only at press conferences where he plays the part of the court jester.
De Villiers’s insecurity has meant that he has always wanted to dismantle White’s World Cup winners and on Saturday he used his chance to introduce his breed of player and ineffective style of play.
It was a disaster because of the naivety of the approach and the arrogance of believing, that at this level, a team can play laterally without getting go forward and expect to be successful. It serves no purpose to take the ball to the wingers when they get it 20m behind the gain line while back-pedaling.
The scrum and lineout are the primary phases and in the scrums De Villiers got it wrong by pairing loosehead prop Beast Mtwarira with hooker Chiliboy Ralepelle, with the latter not having the grunt or grind of Bismarck du Plessis. It was no coincidence that when Du Plessis entered the arena English tighthead prop Phil Vickery left two scrums later and Mtwarira again looked more the Beast of Durban than the Bunny of the first half in Johannesburg.
Rugby selection is about getting the combinations right, settling on a structure that works for those players and then allowing them freedom of expression within that framework. Once that has been agreed the player’s mindset must kick in.
On Saturday there was no structure, few match-winning combinations and a player mindset that confused the wearing of a white armband with the waving of a white flag to signal the end of Jake White’s World Cup winning team.
Black armbands for South African rugby lovers would have been more appropriate of an occasion that should be mourned and not celebrated.
759 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 » Show All
7 Jul 2009, 06:16 am
Much better wind-up Walla, even if not your own words…but I have to ask, where did this come from:
Botha had charged the Lions prop Adam Jones off the ball and had dislocated his shoulder.
Off the ball? I know he was clearing the ruck, a point even the B&IL were happy with and the were also a bit baffled by the ban!
And then this…
Given that eye-gouging is a “serious matter,” the eight-week ban imposed on Burger was totally inadequate and an injustice to the injured player.
Injured player? The ‘injured player’ himself said afterwards he was fine after the application of some water, he accepted it was not intentional and suggested the ban was more than adequate.
I understand the Oz journalist turning his attention to their biggest threat but I would think he should have tried to stay a little closer to the truth.
7 Jul 2009, 06:28 am
#700 TheTackler: Very very funny…but please explain this bit…
“He will be the first to be fired. Coaches get fired for teams not performing, not because they are not doing their job.”
Say what?
7 Jul 2009, 06:33 am
#700 TheTackler:
O my oh my, now PdeV has really done it.
He has awaken the wrong people.
Darn!
We will now probably see the Rev. ‘Mak’ Stofile flying down to the Antipodes as well, to keep an eye on the coach, and to scrutinise and ‘vet’ his speeches during the TriNations.
HKGK.
7 Jul 2009, 06:38 am
#703 Pietman: Hoe like jy daai laaste sin…wonder wat is sy job dan…
7 Jul 2009, 06:38 am
#702 Koos:
JW got fired for winning the WC, don’t forget.
We are now in for a contest of words and metaphors and biblical proverbs between Stofile and PdeV, it seems.
Perhaps they both should start making speeches to the international rugby in Xhosa or Zulu.
I mean PdeV is ‘black’ after all, he should be able to speak one of the indigenous languages then.
7 Jul 2009, 06:41 am
#704 Koos:
Stofile kan nie juis van PdeV se taalgebruik praat nie, daai ou is erg deur die kuk wanneer dit by gesprekvoering kom.
Hy maak GLAD nie sin nie.
Ek verstaan darem nog wat PdeV se, soort van….
7 Jul 2009, 06:41 am
#701 Koos:
Burger was caught red handed and should haqve been given the 12 weeks regardless if there was no injury. He was caught one could not have been more blatant and crass.
Some get caught out by evidence ie injury and some get caught out doing the act.
I believe getting caught doing the act should be a heavier penalty as there is more proof than there is beer in a brewery.
To go and say there was no injury is just ridiculous…idiotic…he could have done permanent damage. The intention was there and in rugby laws the only thing a player can do, when on the ground off their feet, is breath. your ref said those famous words obvioulsy he did not tell his countrymen.
What the hell were burgers fingers still parked in the eye socket…it was blatantly intentional the way burger was positioned to the victim.
Dont try defend the indefensible as you will sound like PDV.
7 Jul 2009, 06:42 am
#701 Koos:
Well said Koos. The amount of propaganda on this site is so overpowering the stench is suffocating.
#702 Koos:
Oh well countered old chap. I wish I had seen it first. Just shows the snot that gets puked up by the same lame ducks week after week.
7 Jul 2009, 06:44 am
#707 wallabie.:
Forget about that now.
I am more interested in Ozzie’s chanches to win the Tri this year.
I think you guys have a slight edge, despite fielding a youtful outfit.
Your take?
7 Jul 2009, 06:47 am
I reckon burger was lying on the ground then looked over his shoulder and found his fingers parked in someones eye socket and said “fark what are my fingers doing…eight week ban for you you little midgets”.
Then went to the judicial meeting and promptly said “talk to the hand, I am not the one!”
7 Jul 2009, 06:47 am
#708 Predawn:
Saw your post on PdeV on the other thread, good one.
I believe keo has been banned from talking to Bok camp, so we will have to rely on newspapers and ‘skinderstories’ from now on.
7 Jul 2009, 06:52 am
keo has been silenced by the Helium gestapo posing as the Bok camp I would imagine.
7 Jul 2009, 06:55 am
#709 Pietman:
You know me too well!!
Very close this year…lets not write the ABs off now. Been a bit disappointed in the aus journos overrating AUS chances. I was not too impressed with Aus mid year performances but it was clinical in defense which is very important to win any tournament.
RSA looks good but I have suspicisions in the mental strength to go the distance. eg Look what happened in the Lions tour and the protest. They got a bad decision with Bakkies and all their energy went into the debacle when they should have been concentrating on the next game. let management sort that out and they play the game.
If this happens in the tri nations it may be all over for the boks…its in these situations where series are won and lost.
Having said that the Boks are a force this year…they were disappointing last year when they were clearly the strongest team going into the tri nations and then faded. This year they dont look as strong but if the first half of the first test is anything to go by…watch out Aus and NZ.
7 Jul 2009, 06:56 am
#707 wallabie.: Walla, you are rattling the wrong cage, where did I defend his action or even suggested nothing was wrong because there was no injury. I was however pointing out that the scribe suggested first of all that Bakkies charged the man off the ball and second that Burger punishment should have been more because of the ‘injured player’. I asked what injury!
Anyway, seeing we on this now, please explain why Heaslip was not brought to account for a shoulder charge in a ruck, from an offside position? There was no injury but he did the same, if not worse than Botha.
It does not matter how you try to spin this, the scribe tried to get a point across but in his haste to have a go missed the point with a load of hogwash. If he stayed with facts he may even have had a point.
7 Jul 2009, 07:00 am
#713 wallabie.:
Good point, the one on our ‘dubious mental strength’, especially after the BIL series.
We didn’t do too well in that one.
7 Jul 2009, 07:06 am
#580 JimT: O’Driscoll missing Habana for the try had nothing to do with his concussion. For all his greatness, BOD never mastered the rush defence, time and time again on this tour he would shoot up out of the line allowing his man through. I would not be surprised if Muir had deliberately targeted him as a weak link in defence.
7 Jul 2009, 07:08 am
#714 Koos:
Heaslip is squeky clean and does not have the same record as Bakkies.
Bakkies runs around the field with a huge sign on his forhead “PING ME!”
7 Jul 2009, 07:18 am
#717 wallabie.: So if you squeky clean it is ok to transgress the laws? His intention to hurt was also there. What kind of an argument is that?
Anyway, last word on all this, I have never had a problem with dirty players being called up. I also thought Burger came of lightly but then the judicial officer gave his reasons and so be it.
I also don’t have a problem with the two weeks for Botha but I do have a problem that some people are more equal than others in front of the law. It has been a problem since the game turned professional more than 12 years ago now, probably before, and to this day the irb has done nothing to fix the problem. A problem not that hard to fix mind you….
7 Jul 2009, 07:22 am
#408 skopskiet: yeah, the Lions would’ve beaten the current NZ side, France were unlucky not to do it and France aren’t great.
7 Jul 2009, 07:26 am
#718 Koos:
Hey mate the “squeeky clean: was tongue in cheek.
Just a wind up…apologies.
7 Jul 2009, 07:28 am
#720 wallabie.: 3N predictions Wallabie?
7 Jul 2009, 07:28 am
#720 wallabie.: Missed that one and apology accepted!
Who was the scribe in that piece you posted?
7 Jul 2009, 07:39 am
Burger should have got 12 weeks.
Wannabees play the ball not the man. We stopped 3 tries by playing the ball (ala George Smith) Steyn, Deviliers….The Wannabees undertsand marketing and claim to be a running rugby side. We need to start our PR otherwise we will always get pinged.
Martin Johnson got away with a lot more than Bakkies and was proud of it. Secondly the Lions were more dirty than us. Sheridan punched a few times and there were a lot off the ball when the Bokke scored.
When you loose a series 3-1 and claim victory you have to be a looser…LOL
7 Jul 2009, 07:41 am
3nations: Wannabees then Kiwhingers then …well it depends who rocks up and who is the ref. If Dicko is invloved it will 14-3 to Dicko
7 Jul 2009, 07:50 am
Wallabies struggle to win in both NZ and SA, so think that narrows their chances significantly… but they are looking the most dangerous, but Italy and a tired France really isnt an ideal build up…
ABs had two games against France (who never seem to win after playing the ABs), SA had the Lions… so in terms of lead in games think the Aussies may be under done…
should be a cracker series though…
7 Jul 2009, 08:32 am
#725 poppa69: Italy gave them a good workout, especially in the first test and France were competitive for an hour. The Wallabies definitely won’t be undercooked. I still don’t think they’ll win it however.
7 Jul 2009, 08:38 am
#593 munkiboi:
Gee, if you cant be objective as a neutral, youve got no chance whatsoever. Which is obvious when reading any one of your posts.
It is possible however, eg Chris H @ 79.
7 Jul 2009, 09:08 am
#719 Big Hit:
But going on your wonderfully convenient RWC logic, NZ beat the team (SA) who beat the team (Lions)…….
so on what possible premise can you say the Lions would have beaten the ABs ?
7 Jul 2009, 09:09 am
as usual the pomms think they have won something they need to wake up and climb out of bed for a change
7 Jul 2009, 10:05 am
#729 Dunx: They won a test by a record-equalling monstrous 19 point margin.
7 Jul 2009, 10:16 am
#702 Koos: I can’t explain what Stofile means any more than I know what PDV is rabbiting on about when he’s off on his black mechanic/tutus/Moses in the desert garbage in his weird falsetto capey voice.
But I am reminded of a Zimbabwean spokesman for Nomaindia Mfeketo, former mayor of Cape Town. This gentleman, with the apt name of Blackman Nkoro, said that coloureds were generally a race of drunkards and wastrels. Of course, being a black man, he shrugged off any accusations of being a racist.
Might Stofile possibly share an opinion with this Zimbo?
7 Jul 2009, 10:29 am
Are the Springboks aware of just how low their image has sunk internationaly after the Lions tour? The coaching staff are a joke and John Smit and some of the senior players now have too much power. Instead of concentrating on the sideshows (white armbands etc.) they need to realise that they are professionals and every Test in the green and gold should be played with passion and commitment. The jersey does not belong to the current players and at the moment they are dragging it through the mud. Where is the discipline, the pride and the lack of arrogance that won us the World Cup? We have become a team of thugs who cannot string a decent half of rugby together. I fear for the future of Springbok rugby under the present set-up.
7 Jul 2009, 11:44 am
625 THETACKLER
Ah! The quisling stirs again. The Boks are a dirty side?ow there’s a highly intelligent remark. Apart from the players you have clearly previously named. Who are the other dirty players of which the dirty side is composed.
Why don’t you take your little poison pen and stick it. Seems to me you are probably prone to writing on the toilet wall.
7 Jul 2009, 11:48 am
BOYCOTT THE TRY NATIONS TEST MATCHES:
SHOW SARFU WE WILL NOT STAND FOR THEIR GREED…R1 140 A LIONS TEST TICKET
EVERY-ONE DO NOT GO TO ANY TRI-NATIONS TESTS THIS YEAR!
7 Jul 2009, 13:29 pm
#731 TheTackler:
Youre not getting him confused with Winston Peters are you ?
#732 Klein:
Possibly the best thing that could come out of it for SA rugby/Boks is if the IRB banned them for 1 or 2 matches (of course, they wont), which would draw a line under it (as they should, that JUSTICE campaign was disgraceful) and allow them to pick a side completely from afresh. They would play with no expectations and 1, 2 or more players could emerge as the next stars. Then the returning, and hopefully more humble, players would know their place was now not taken for granted and the weeding-out process of aging stars could begin.
This is what happened when the Cavaliers were banned from the ABs post 1986 tour to SA, out of which the phoenix of the Baby Blacks vs France arose who then formed the nucleus of the team that won the RWC the following year.
But Smit and PdV should hang for that display of egos. In the week that 1 of their players eye-gouged, it was completely disgraceful, player power drunk on success of the previous week.
7 Jul 2009, 15:17 pm
#719 Big Hit:
yes i suppose your logic is sound, never thought of that.
7 Jul 2009, 15:56 pm
#736 cab:
Oh, BHs ‘logic’ tends to shift with the winds.
Previously, he was adamant that the RWC theory that ‘this team beat that team who beat that team, meaning this team WOULD HAVE beaten your team’
with his usual conclusion that the ABs couldnt beat the Blind Wheelchair-Rugby 2nd-XV Team from Mongolia.
So, in this case, the ABs beat the Springboks who beat the Lions 2-1.
which means the ABs would have whitewashed the Lions.
Again.
7 Jul 2009, 16:39 pm
#716 Big Hit: Ok I accept your judgement. BOD is a little hot tempered. Maybe the rush defense, which requires a cool, calm head , does not suit his temperament? I will have to look at the 2nd test again (forgot to tape the 1st test).
7 Jul 2009, 16:40 pm
#719 Big Hit: BH how do you compare this Lions side to the 2005 version?
7 Jul 2009, 16:41 pm
#737 BlackPanther: Only problem is that the AB’s lost against France, who finished 3rd in the 6 Nations.
7 Jul 2009, 17:10 pm
#740 AGTEROSKOMOOKINNIEKRAAL:
wheres the problem ?
The Boks have just lost to the Lions.
The All Blacks whitewashed the Lions. The last match was 48-18.
The Boks have lost their last 2 matches to France, the most recent match being at home @ Newlands.
But thanks for bringing this to our attention.
7 Jul 2009, 18:12 pm
Keo, u really are the delusional one. What do u expect when 10 changes have been made to a team. Was there any difference in perfomance on Sat from the Jake white Boks when he made 10 changes against Tonga? Or the Jake White Boks in 2007 away in NZ and OZ. How about the Jake White Boks who played against Connacht in 2007 b4 the world cup?
The truth is the media overestimates the talents of SAfrican players. The truth is a SAfrican B team can never compete against any test nation, let alone the worst Irish provincial team
7 Jul 2009, 20:01 pm
#741 BlackPanther: The 2005 All Blacks were marginally better than the 2005 Springboks (sneaked the Tri-Nations despite the Bokke winning 3 games out of 4). Probably better than the current Springboks too, although the 2005 Lions were absolute toilet (and coached by a semi-retired English idiot) compared with the 2009 version.
The All Blacks’ problem, of course, is periodic erectile dysfunction. They can keep it up fopr three and a half years, but every four years it droops. Regular as clockwork.
7 Jul 2009, 22:38 pm
#742 mars_net: The Boks made 10 changes and the Lions made 8. Much of a muchness, really.
7 Jul 2009, 22:48 pm
#733 Bludeks: There’s a long, unbroken line of dirty players stretching back into history. Matfield, with his hard armguard cynically poleaxing Byron Kelleher, Corne the headbutter Krige, Biter Johan le Roux, Bullet Dalton, Japie Mulder, Moaner van Heerden, Jaap Bekker, Gys Pitzer…
They have a history of filthy play only matched by France. Even the Argies are cleaner and more sporting.
Face it — the Boks ARE a cheating, dirty side. Always have been, still are, always will be. The word “sporting” simply isn’t part of the yarpie psyche.
7 Jul 2009, 23:01 pm
#743 pierre:
The 2005 Lions arrived in NZ stacked full of RWC Winners and with the greatest resources ever. They were lauded a s a strong squad. The ‘semi-retired’ coach had been the England coach in 2004 and was the 1st fulltime coach of the Lions.
The 2009 Lions were devoid of World Stars – only BOD classed in that category – and landed in the country OF the RWC Winners. They had been decimated by injuries, the Boks were at full strength and had 2 Tests at altitude.
An interesting concept this, a RWC-heavy team being ‘toilet’ compared to a widely criticised team of nobodies. Perhaps theyre just overrated ?
7 Jul 2009, 23:04 pm
#745 TheTackler:
thats BS. The ABs have had their fair share of dirty players, we have no right to point fingers in that regard. But they ban players like R.Loe heavily (26weeks for eye-gouging) and they dont bleat about it on the field. Actually, neither does anyone else.
8 Jul 2009, 00:19 am
The ABs have only had the odd recidivist repeat-offender dirty player about once a decade. Loe last played in the early 90′s — almost 20 years ago. They’ve never had a reputation as a dirty team.
8 Jul 2009, 00:53 am
#748 TheTackler:
were you born yesterday ?
Jamie Joseph.
Kevin Borevich
Mark Shaw.
Robin Brooke
Troy Flavell.
In fact, I believe a small reason why we didnt win the RWC in 99 was because John Jafa Hart decided to ‘clean up’ the team of nastiness and present a new-age professional team to all the Auckland Mummys & Daddys. Cue the French props eye-gouging Kronfeld in the Semi and no AB enforcer willing to sort the problem out. I have no problems with a quick punch or knee in the head and I would happily select Bakkies in my side too. He’s an awesome player. But I would know the risks when selecting him because he has been getting away with dangerous flying-headbutts for years. And the Boks know that.
8 Jul 2009, 09:45 am
For all the delusional JWhitecheerleaders including KEO, maybe u need to look at the Boks record in the 21 matches b4 2007 RWC and then tell us how great a team they were:
AB 33 Boks 6 L
Aus 25 Boks 17 L
Boks 21 AB 26 L
Boks 22 Aus 19 W
Boks 35 Sam 8 W
Boks 55 Eng 22 W
Boks 58 Eng 10 W
W XV 7 Boks 32 W
Eng 14 Boks 25 W
Eng 23 Boks 21 L
Ire 32 Boks 15 L
Boks 24 Aus 16 W
Boks 21 AB 20 W
Boks 26 AB 45 L
Aus 20 Boks 18 L
AB 35 Boks 17 L
Aus 49 Boks 0 L
Boks 26 Fra 36 L
Boks 29 Scot 15 W
Boks 36 Scot 16 W
Boks 30 W XV 27 W
Thats 11 wins and 10 losses. Thats a 52% win ratio.
U need to stop making out JW to be such a great coach whereas the numbers tell us otherwise.
Pages: « 1 … 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 » Show All
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.