The Springboks should maul the Lions
By Spiro Zavos, 23 Apr 2009 Spiro Zavos is a Roar Expert
117 Have your say
Related coverage
- Rugby Union news
- International Rugby Union - Six Nations, Heineken Cup, Rugby Championship news
- South Africa Springboks news

Auckland, July 9, 2005. Lions squad during the minutes silence before the British and Irish Lions v All Blacks third test at Eden Park, Auckland, New Zealand. AAP Image/Geoff Dale
The bookmakers, wealthy gentlemen who literally put their money where their mouth is, have given big odds against the British and Irish Lions averting a 3 – 0 Bokswash in the coming Test series.
It’s hard to go against the bookmakers and predict anything other than the Springboks giving the Lions a severe mauling.
But if there is any coach in the United Kingdom who can bust the odds against the Lions, it is Ian McGeechan.
McGeechan has a superb record for the Lions as a player and a coach.
He was a shrewd, smooth-running centre for the 1974 Lions when they won the series against a Springboks side that was inhibited, morally and intellectually, in a rugby sense, by the enormity of the apartheid system.
He was coach in 1989 when the Lions defeated the Wallabies, and in 1997 when an inept Springboks side, coached by an even more inept Carel du Plessis (one of the greatest Springboks as a player), was defeated.
The Lions’ victory in 1989 gives a strong clue as to the type of game McGeechan favours, and the players who he has selected for the 2009 trek through South Africa.
The Lions defeated the Wallabies at Sydney to keep the rubber open with dubiously thuggish tactics.
My colleague on The Sydney Morning Herald, Evan Whitton, described the nature of this victory in the memorable line that infuriated the British media contingent: “The scum also rises.”
There is more than a hint that these tactics will be revived in 2009 with the selection of the hard man Paul O’Connell as the captain of the side. O’Connell is a confrontational player who is not averse to belting the opposition or stomping them when his blood is up (which is most of the time).
It was his wild-eyed dive into a maul under the All Blacks posts that stopped the rampant Lions from gaining an unassailable lead in the opening minutes of the second Test at Wellington on the 2005 tour.
He is rather like the enforcer Martin Johnson, who McGeechan selected as captain in 1989, even though he’d never captained a side.
McGeechan said he wanted someone imposing to stand beside the Springboks captain when the coin was being tossed.
To my mind, this is McGeechan-talk (he can make tough things sound like apple pie wisdom with his lovely Scots accent) for warning the Springboks that the Test series will be attritional rugby rather than the flamboyant rugby played by the Lions up to the McGeechan era.
English critics like Stuart Barnes have bemoaned the fact that there is not a great deal of flair among the 37-strong squad. However, this misses the point.
The McGeechan way, going back to his successful stint as coach of Scotland, is a boots and all approach to winning. So this is likely to be a fiery series.
My reasons for going with the bookmakers and believing that that the Lions will struggle to win the Test series is based three factors.
First, South African rugby is at one of its high points. Most of the Rugby World Cup winning players are still around. And they have set themselves, according to Victor Matfield, for this Lions series.
Aside from a flaky coach, Peter de Villiers, and a lack of depth in the first five-eighths position, there are great players, especially in the loose forwards, that will enable a terrific side to be put on the field.
Second, the itinerary has been constructed in a way that difficult for the Lions to cope with. The Lions are shunted from altitude to sea level for first six matches of the tour, the first Test at Durban and a Wednesday match. Then the tour ends with two Tests at altitude at Pretoria and Johannesburg, just in case the Lions win at Durban.
Third, the Lions have a history of being notoriously factionalised.
It was the English players who rebelled against Graham Henry in Australia in 2001. Some of the Welsh players sulked under Sir Clive Woodward in 2005, something that has happened on most Lions tours.
McGeechan has tried to rein in the Welsh factionalism by having Warren Gatland as an assistant coach. But the non-selection of Ryan Jones, the captain of Wales, will not be taken well by the Welsh contingent.
One of the reasons why no fewer than ten Irish players, including O’Connell, have captained the Lions is that the Irish are generally regarded as being able to get on with the Welsh and the English, who generally can’t get on with each other, even when they are playing for the Lions.
But all this theorising.
There is history to be made one way or another by McGeechan and his squad. The first game starts at Rustenburg, in the heart of Afrikaner country, against a Royal XV on May 30.
Let the Lions roar!
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- British Lions, Ian McGeechan, International Rugby, Rugby Union, Springboks

April 23rd 2009 @ 7:31am
Knives Out said | April 23rd 2009 @ 7:31am | Report comment
There’s nothing like a stunning inaccuracy or ten to get the fingers typing, Nick. Anyhow, I do tend to ignore the work of Mr. Zavos but the Lions pulls the strings of every British rugby fan’s heart. Rugby deserves better than wild, broad stabs in the dark.
Pothale, obviously you have a different theory to me..
April 23rd 2009 @ 7:41am
pothale said | April 23rd 2009 @ 7:41am | Report comment
Yep I do. But then my heart strings aren’t being pulled. Must be a British thing – you old romantic melancholic you.
April 23rd 2009 @ 7:59am
Nick (KIA) said | April 23rd 2009 @ 7:59am | Report comment
I haven’t done it, KO, but I suspect if I counted up all the posts to all of Spiro’s articles on Roar by different correspondents, you would score in the top few percent – your definition of ‘ignore’ is different to mine!
Having said that I enjoy your posts generally – informative and well written, keep it up!
April 23rd 2009 @ 8:16am
Knives Out said | April 23rd 2009 @ 8:16am | Report comment
Thank you, Nick. How very kind, but I have to disagree with you about my ability to ‘ignore’. I don’t recall having anything to say on recent posts of Mr. Zavos? Maybe on anything to do with the ELVs further back? You might be right, maybe I’m just chilling out in my head rather than in reality.
April 23rd 2009 @ 10:36am
sheek said | April 23rd 2009 @ 10:36am | Report comment
The Lions employed aggressive tactics in 1974 & 1989, because there was a perception the opposition at the time – Boks in 74 & Wallabies in 89 – had players who weren’t keen on the “rough stuff”. Indeed, the 89 loss to the Lions did coach Dwyer a favour.
He dropped some of his long-serving ‘peace-loving’ players for others who had an ‘edge’. In any case, it gave him the opportunity to introduce ‘fresh blood’.
The Lions of 2005 failed miserably, because everyone went batty with SCW’s theory of “mass troops”. Never before has the equivalent of a sporting army descended on a country. I truly hope it is never repeated. It was a farce. Don’t blame O’Driscoll. Chief dunce in the whole pathetic episode was SCW himself.
I don’t know why the Lions have never been more successful. Unfortunately, too often, the total sum has been lesser than the individual parts. Perhaps, getting English, Welsh, Scots & Irish to gel is more difficult than we realise. The Lions SHOULD have beaten the Wallabies in 2001, for instance.
Anyway, whatever the faults of the Lions, it is a great concept, with a grand history & tradition. I trust it will continue for many more centuries?
In the interim, it would help if the Lions could take at least one test off the Boks!
April 23rd 2009 @ 10:37am
stuff happens said | April 23rd 2009 @ 10:37am | Report comment
The real question is this. Will O’Connell belt a ‘Bok forward before or after he’s belted Gatland? Next question:Which would give him greater pleasure?
McGeechan seems a great bloke – everyone repects him and he says he’s picked the squad on form only, unlike Woodward’s appalling ’05 embarassement . For instance, I’m sure he’d love to have Ryan Jones at his best in SA but the guy’s form has been heading south for months – so he’s not there.
I suspect the Lions will get the front five and outside backs right. But the back row will be a real challenge for them and the ‘Boks are so strong there.Their halfbacks will have to stand up and be counted too. Phillips has seemed to be in neutral since his injury.I’m sorry neither Hook nor Cipriani made it to give us a little excitement, but I can’t believe the Lions will survive the tour with only two fly halves.
And yes Pothale the first match is against a ‘HIgh Veld XV’ We can guess what that’s all about. ‘Welcome to South Africa’ – BANG – and keep the ambulances on standby!
April 23rd 2009 @ 10:51am
Colin N said | April 23rd 2009 @ 10:51am | Report comment
“The real question is this. Will O’Connell belt a ‘Bok forward before or after he’s belted Gatland? Next question:Which would give him greater pleasure?”
That is indeed a great question. I don’t know if you saw the press conference upon the announcement of the Lions squad, but Gatland was asked a question regarding his relationship with O’Connell and he rather stuttered through the answer to the say the least. What was even better was O’Connell’s reaction or facial expressions during Gatland’s answer. He smiled, but it was hard to grasp whethe it was ruthful, or he just simply saw the funny side of it.
April 23rd 2009 @ 11:04am
pothale said | April 23rd 2009 @ 11:04am | Report comment
Rumour has it that O’Connell’s response to Gatland to put his ego on hold, helped confirm O’Connell as captain in Geech’s mind. Doesn’t take shit from people and happy to dish it out in response.
Stuff happens – opening matches tend to have that BANG quality. I’d say it’s unlikely any of the Heineken Cup finalists will play that day, though, seeing as how they’ll only have played 7 days previously and travelled a fair bit. But Geech has said every player will have played at least two games before the first Test.
Am now trying to figure out which games I’ll go to. The first Test which might give Lions their best opportunity for a win. Or take a punt and say it’ll be 1-1 and go to the third. Decisions, decisions – it’s all too much to take.
Any bets on whether all the original 37 will still be fit to travel by end of May, or will back-ups have to be put in place? I’m betting on at least two getting crocked and have to pull out.
April 23rd 2009 @ 11:09am
ohtani's jacket said | April 23rd 2009 @ 11:09am | Report comment
How do you gain an unassailable lead in a Test you lost 48-18?
April 23rd 2009 @ 11:21am
Keith said | April 23rd 2009 @ 11:21am | Report comment
OJ, I was thinking that as well.
This is from the article, about O’Connell’s part in the 2005 Lions massacre.
“It was his wild-eyed dive into a maul under the All Blacks posts that stopped the rampant Lions from gaining an unassailable lead in the opening minutes of the second Test at Wellington on the 2005 tour.”
The unassailable lead would also have been claimed in the opening minutes.
I’m backing the Lions in this, but more because I want the Springboks to lose than anything else.