By Inky
July 7th 2008 @ 6:40am
All Blacks: Fit for the fire
As usual, from the outset in Wellington on Saturday night the Springboks tried to upset the All Blacks’ rhythm with jersey-pulling, late charges and sneaky punches. You’d have thought that they’d have learned over the last decade, failing all the while to beat the All Blacks in New Zealand, that these tactics don’t work when the crowd isn’t cheering them.
Butch James was, also as usual, the most blatant if not the worst offender. Within the first ten minutes he had flown headlong at Dan Carter three times either high or late with the obvious intention of fouling him or at least unsettling him. Carter not only proved hard to rattle but responded with some inspired touches and kicking, so the scheme backfired.
James is obviously a whack job, a dangerous thug whose horrendous tackling methods somehow always seem to escape the permanent wrath of the judiciary… perhaps (a) because his team always loses when he offends most often, (b) he seems motivated to offend most often against New Zealand teams, and (c) New Zealand teams don’t tend to bother citing when they win.
If Carter, meanwhile, was ever to mark James again he might as well kick him in the groceries first chance he gets after kick-off, and assume it was self defence.
Bakkies Botha was another with a bad attitude, flying in with late forearm shots on players such as Rodney So’oialo and Ma’a Nonu whenever the referee’s eyes followed the ball, leaving opportunities for late contact.
Brad Thorn had endured enough when Springbok captain John Smit shoved the back of his head after the whistle. He picked him up and thumped him onto the deck, like a buzzcut Kong flipping a Combi van. The humiliation to their captain brought six angry Bokke hurtling instantly to the fray, then All Blacks skipper Rodney So’oialo joined to guarantee an all-in.
From that point on it was pretty much New Zealand’s night. South Africa scored the first try, a surprise Jean de Villiers break putting Bryan Habana away, but it didn’t give the Springboks the lead because Carter had already kicked the All Blacks six points clear and James couldn’t convert. The half-time score was 9-8 to the home side.
The All Blacks scrum and lineout were both solid at this stage, which was doubly important because there was no Richie McCaw to provide ball from turnovers, and in the freezing wet conditions being able to trade such possession for territory was crucial.
Carter in particular did this very well. His territorial kicking was long and accurate, and he eschewed the touchline in favour of pure distance, leaving the Springboks to be the ones kicking for touch and giving most of the lineout throws to New Zealand.
The scrum became more clearly dominant after the break, and with the Springbok backline beginning most set piece attacks flat-footed the All Black midfield defence had an advantage. Aside from the blind side de Villiers breach for Habana’s try there were no more line breaks.
In the second half the All Blacks asserted themselves around the fringes and began to control the game more thoroughly. Few Springboks had energy left for niggle, with the fitter and faster All Blacks beating them by a yard to every breakdown.
Eventually the Africans had to crack, and predictably they did it late in a phase count after their defence had been well and truly exhausted. As Springbok backs and forwards struggled to reassemble some semblance of a defensive line, the All Black backs and forwards were combining seamlessly to send wave after attacking wave crashing into them. Carter finally worked a double round with prop Tony Woodcock then delayed a pass to set Thorn away, and Thorn drew the final tackler to put number eight Jerome Kaino crashing over.
Carter ran proceedings through to the final whistle, making grass-cutting tackles when necessary but most of the time keeping the ball in front of his pack and looking for the next chunks of territory to bite off. Another penalty gave them an unassailable 19-8 lead.
We approached this test wondering if our dam was cracked, whether having already lost Carl Hayman, Chris Jack, Jerry Collins and Aaron Mauger, now suddenly being without McCaw we were vulnerable… even at home, where we have been undefeated since 1999.
But the muscular approach of the past was not necessary. We did not need to do any more than stand up for ourselves, beat them with either pace or fitness, and keep pointing to the scoreboard. The physical tax which men like Hayman and Collins could extract was never other than extra motivation for big, hulking outfits like the Springboks. Those were always the sort of contests they relished and responded well to. It was always our pace of play that upset them most, and under the ELVs this was accentuated.
What’s more, the South African Super 14 franchises struggling with the new laws in 2008 should probably have been seen as a sign that their national side was always going to struggle. I wonder, now that we’ve seen the Springboks look so ill-suited to the new environment, if certain pundits wouldn’t like to revise their predictions of the Wallabies finishing a distant third in the Tri Nations this year.
We also found in So’oialo the perfect leader for this situation. The public will not be able to tell whether or not a captain is a good choice until they find out what the team think of him. The moment where So’oialo unquestioningly waded in to help out Thorn was pivotal. The All Blacks to a man surged to his aid, showing exactly the kind of back-up only good captains get.
Tana Umaga had it too, that follow-me quality… also a Wellingtonian and a dreadlocked Samoan. As we begin our long march to the next World Cup, and must contemplate the possibility of having to play at least occasionally without McCaw, a back-up captain of So’oialo’s type will be a great asset.
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...


(9)













Nick said | July 7th 2008 @ 9:17am | Report comment
We last lost in NZ in 2003, to England, at Cake Tin (15-13 I think).
Jerry said | July 7th 2008 @ 9:45am | Report comment
Nick, you are correct. We also lost to Australia at the same ground in 2001. It strikes me that Wellington hasn’t been a particularly happy hunting ground for the AB’s over the years.
The very first test I attended was the 1986 Bledisloe loss at Athletic Park and 4 years later I was there to see the All Blacks end their 4 year unbeaten streak, also against the Wallabies. Add the 1993 pasting by the Lions and the 1998 loss to the Boks to the losses listed above and it’s a pretty bad record comparitively (for instance they’ve not lost at Eden Park since 1994 and I think Carisbrook has only hosted 5 losses by the AB’s in its 100 year history).
However, I think Inky was meaning that since 1999 the AB’s have beaten SA every time they’ve played in NZ - the last loss to the Boks was a 13-3 loss at…gasp…Athletic Park!!!
Justin said | July 7th 2008 @ 11:38am | Report comment
Inky - alot of what you have written was spot on. Carter was the main difference between the 2 sides. He controlled the match beautifully and in defence was spot on too with some timely tackles. SA must adapt to the ELVs as they were poor in S14 and did not pick a 15 or 22 that suits the new laws. No Stankowski or Spise in their was a crucial oversight. By the way what has happened to the Cats 5/8 whose name has escaped me for now, has played numerous Tests for the Boks and has had some injuries. Is he in the NH or still injured or just out of favour? James showed his lack of consistency yet again, his kicking was atrocious as was his organisation. Steyn may have to come in, I thought he at least gave their attack some width but they need a centre with more venom than Jacobs.
Whilst I agree SA were providing some niggle (as usual BB & BJ) and late shots Thorns actions were inexcusable and a stronger ref may have put him in the bin. It was late, he lifted him up and did not bring him to ground safely as he must if he lifts. His one match ban would back this up. Lets face it the little hold down of the head was nothing, he would get that in league week in week out.
TembaVJ said | July 7th 2008 @ 2:26pm | Report comment
Inky normally you have such a great view on things, today you shock me. Both teams had plenty of off the ball niggles, the AB’s where not a bunch of angels. Their was one late tackle on Carter, the others where tackles and if he doesnt like getting tackled perhaps you need to move him to 15 or the NZ nation ballet team. Dickinson did not control the match and allow for many things to pass. Thorn wasn’t even a late tackle it was just plain wrong and that set the standard for the match.
Everything said and done, the AB’s played better and deserved to win.
Ben from Pretoria said | July 7th 2008 @ 6:21pm | Report comment
Inky
You sound like a very relieved man, typical NZ one eyed account of the game. Beautiful how you enhance every Bok indescression and airbrush the AB’s mistakes.
It was never going to be easy for the Boks to win but they have another shot at it this coming weekend. You make it sound like the Boks were just mere flies being sswotted away, I think reality might have been a bit different.
ohtani's jacket said | July 7th 2008 @ 7:14pm | Report comment
Neither side played that great & Thorn ought to have been sin-binned.
A lot of South Africans think he ought to have been sent off, but a red card would’ve been ridiculous. The one week suspension is enough. He was cited and reprimanded. He also apologised on the field. Smit trying to milk a card was humourous. He looked pretty good for a guy who could’ve died. Boks fans are pretty angry that Thorn only got one match while someone like Burger gets five, but at least he was cited.
It was a stupid bit of retaliation, though it probably served its purpose in terms of the All Blacks bashing the Boks around a bit. It’s funny to hear Boks supporters outraged about foul play. In the history of SA vs. NZ, this incident rates about zilch.
Anyway, the All Blacks didn’t look unbeatable, but the Boks weren’t very good. People want them to play to their strengths, but their strengths are nullified under the ELVs & one week isn’t long enough to fix that. There’s a good chance they’ll lose to Australia on this leg.
I think they’ll be much more difficult to beat in South Africa.
Benjamins Saunders said | July 9th 2008 @ 1:36am | Report comment
It’s a relief to see Inky articulate what has long been on a lot of people’s minds. Despite the advent of profesionalism a large amount of ‘niggle’ still resides in general South African play. Wannenburg’s recent kamikaze hit on Matthew Tait is the perfect illustration. I doubt many English fans have forgotten the 40 or so incidents in the 2002 53-3 Twickenham game. Likewise I doubt many Wallaby fans would have forgotten the 2003 Kempson and Botha incidents. Having said that the All Blacks have hardly been blameless over the past few years; Ali Williams stamping on Lewsey’s head and the O’Driscoll assault specifically. However these appear to be aberrations in their game. Ultimately Thorn apologised. Surely the end of the matter? Saying he should have been sent off is clutching at straws.
Also OJ, I don’t see why you think the BOKs will struggle under the ELVs? Juan Smith and Burger have had exceptional work rates for the past four years, and Spies/Kankowski are exceptional runners in open play. Van Der Linde is tidy in the loose, Matfield and Botha also. I imagine Smit would struggle but that Du Plessis or Brits would thrive, so there is a definite balance there.
ohtani's jacket said | July 9th 2008 @ 10:57am | Report comment
They’ll struggle for the time being given that the ELVs nullify their strengths.
The Boks strengths have been the lineout, their rush defence and swarming the breakdown.
The All Blacks have had a habit of avoiding touch for awhile now, to the point where Carter often couldn’t find touch even when he needed to. Now they can avoid it altogether. The Boks have a weak front row and the 5m rule means their rush defence is ineffective. This gives the All Blacks untold room to attack. Given that the lineouts under the ELVs tend to favour the defending side, it’s not really an attacking weapon until some coach figures out the right combinations/calls. And given that no-one’s throwing straight, the All Blacks can get off scott free despite having few jumpers.
The Boks remain strong in the tackle area, but the breakdown isn’t the point of contention it was under the ELVs because the ref will call short arm penalties without second thought. If the Boks do have strong ball carriers, they need to start using them, because their number one problem is their pivot. Carter and Giteau are going to destroy the Boks under the ELVs, given room to create.
We all know the type of first five that South African rugby prefer. The only flyhalf they’d had in recent memory that would suit the ELVs is Errol Tobias. That’s at Springbok level, I’m ignorant about the Currie Cup.
It’s possible that South Africa will play better this weekend. New Zealand started like a house on fire and their fitness over 80 minutes is impressive. The fact that the Boks only scored off a well-worked turnover, deep in their own half, doesn’t bode particularly well, considering the amount of chances the All Blacks created.
South Africa’s inability to score tries is a big part of why their Tri-Nations record is worse than it ought to be. Given that the ELVs are meant to encourage try-scoring & keeping the ball in play, it requires more of a philosophical shift that a one week fix.
Benjamin said | July 9th 2008 @ 5:59pm | Report comment
OJ, for years the Springboks have scored, I would guess but cannot be sure statistically, the majority of their tries from Habana or De Villiers intercepts. Despite Jake White’s adulation it is something that he never addressed. Against Wales, although weakened, sometimes the Boks looked very comfortable on the ball, othertimes less so. I’m interested to see how the Boks will play this week. I’d rather they kept James because Steyn continues to pound these drop goals time and time again. His miss rate must be sky high. Perhaps if some teams struggle with the ELVs the 5 metre scrum defence will increase opportunitys for drop goals, and thus we get a Jannie de Beer game again.
Around the tackle area though constant Bok mediation and ‘professionalism’ will surely slow the game down relentlessly against most teams barr the All Blacks, because the short arm rewards that tactic. I suppose it is how the ref interprets the day.